Is it unrealistic to expect a company (like McDonald's) to care about its consumers?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Stuck on October 8, 2009 at 9:03am

How about people start taking care of themselves and quit making excuses like the one being proposed above. Don't go to McDonald's and expect them to cater to your diet needs.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul Waltz on October 21, 2009 at 11:19am

I completely agree with you Steve. It's not McDonald's responsibility to make sure its patrons eat healthy. I believe McDonald's needs to have healthier menu options for those who do take their personal well being seriously, but in the end it is up to you, the consumer, whether you eat healthy or not.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Steve Stuck on October 22, 2009 at 10:33am

Markets are everything. McDonalds just posted solid profits. Net income rose 6% and sales in the US increased 3.2%. Globally their sales rose 5.1%. Consumers are looking for value over anything else.

Their sale increases were said to be due to their Angus burger and espresso-based coffees. (Starbucks is looking worse as an investment)

Thus proving that the "social responsibility" of offering healthier choices is that of a few and consumers are voting they have no integrity issues.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by PK Koduri on October 8, 2009 at 9:06am

Kristen - Thanks for bringing attention to this issue. I don't think it is entirely unrealistic for us to expect companies to care about customers. If they don't it will only hurt their bottom line. Having said that companies also have a responsibility towards their investors, sometimes these two objectives counter each other. I have a friend that is currently working on his PhD at Penn State investigating ethics in marketing. He is looking into whether companies are actually doing more harm than good to the society through their aggressive marketing and promotion tactics.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Linda J Ranger on October 8, 2009 at 2:13pm

I think it should be based on the price of the item whether it has a game piece or not but it is not my money paying for the Monopoly pieces.

I am sure it is based on the most popular items sold based on statistics during a time period. They want the prize packaging with the labels to actually be won during the game/contest. Thus they do not want to waste their money putting monopoly pieces on all containers when it is more important to have the container actually chosen during the game's time period.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Nicki Laycoax on October 8, 2009 at 3:23pm

I was just thinking that they needed a healthier breakfast menu... Hoping that they take the cue and remain my breakfast spot of choice and provide healthier items on their menu!

As for Monopoly, I don't plan to win, so that's not a stopper for me, but the menu does..

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Tod Esquivel on October 8, 2009 at 5:01pm

Wow, wow ,wow!

McDonalds!

The pros of what they are good at:

they have a freakin fast business systeme of getting customers what they want at quick time (ever seen their cup revolver, sets up the next cup under the certain beverage choice)! Amazing

they have cleaned up their menu for more healthier choices but it still comes down to the consumer making a choice (don't be blaming MDs that you are out of shape and crap like that)

the cons what they are not good at:

customer service; they are not in the business of spending that "extra" time talking with you about your life, family, business,etc. now go to Steak n Shake and the waiters start to get to know your first name, kids names.

their is nothing wrong with being big. Home Depot vs Ace Hardware? The guys/gals at Ace will spend that extra time because they are not some much big on sales as customer service from my opinion.

But the big boys like Home Depot, MDS, etc. are great when we have a natural disaster or need volunteers. they have the resources, know some big names and of course have money to pull some great things off!

Tod Esquivel

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kirk Booher on October 8, 2009 at 9:58pm

McD's has made some progress but people vote with their dollars. I prefer Paradise and Panera usually. It costs twice as much but is probably three times as healthy. Nobody cares more about me than me so it is up to me to make the right choices, not McD's.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Keri Sackowski on October 9, 2009 at 10:24am

The consumers will ultimately be the ones that determine what McDonald's offers. If we look back at the menu from twenty years ago, we'll see that the food choices didn't offer salads, apple slices or milk. As the years have passed the menu has changed for the better AND worst. Better with offering some what healthier food choices, worse in the size portions.

If we, the consumer, want to see change then we need to stop eating the high-fat items and putting more of our dollars toward the Subways of America. Eventually, and this may be a LONG time, McDonald's will be forced to offer healthier alternatives to their menu. No more fried, high fat food. It's up to us to make that change and stick to it.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Harvey Mover on October 9, 2009 at 3:12pm

Not a lot different than other industries like the Auto Industry and they weigh the cost of the loss against that of the gain. Obviously they fully understand that making these changes wouldn't be good for their long term bottom line.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kendal R. Miller on October 9, 2009 at 7:30pm

Hi Kristin. I, too, was once "addicted" to the Monopoly game at McDonalds. I remember having all the pieces except one—and of course I never did get the “winning” piece.

I know this is going to sound cynical, but I feel most companies think about their consumer only as much as how much profit they can make from them. I’ve often wondered about the “better” food choices of foods that come in a can—“no salt added” products are normally higher priced then their salted counterparts. It’s less of an ingredient, why is it more expensive to purchase the healthier option? If it wasn't “added” wouldn’t that be less people/equipment used to not put the salt in there?

I’m also wondering about something else. What happened to the “no purchase necessary” notices that used to accompany most contests—do they still doing that so that you can still play the game and purchase nothing at all? That used to be the norm.

If a place doesn’t offer me something healthier and it is my goal to eat better, I just wouldn’t eat there.

I’ll never forget going to a marketing class when I worked in the banking industry and the teacher asked us what was Disney World’s main priority. We had all kinds of answers—making us the “happiest people on earth”, “making sure people had fun”, etc. We were all wrong--Disney’s top priority is to “make money” we were told. I don't know why I was shocked by that. That’s why they research everything--the distance you walk with your food and about how long it will take you to eat it--just so they know where to place their trash cans. We were told that everything was made so convenient for their guests so that it’s easier for them to spend money there. (Of course, from what I was told nothing is cheap there anyway.)

I realize that businesses are there to make money, not worry about my family or me. I would like to “think” that they care about me, but they would have to do something extraordinary to prove it to me. Like my little hometown ma/pop restaurants-- when I walk in the door they’re already pouring my cup of unsweet ice tea in a to-go cup with lid and more than likely know what I’m going to order--or remember that I may have one of a couple of different items. I even had one business that forgot my ketchup in my to-go order and walked all the way down to my workplace to bring me some.

How cool is that?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kristen Horton on October 10, 2009 at 8:14am

Kendal,
Thanks for your response! I too love ma/pop restaurants; I think they survive because they really do care about their customers.

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last