Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Tuesday June 06 2017, @02:32AM   Printer-friendly
from the employees-can't-afford-to-be-customers dept.

Casual dining is in danger — and millennials are to blame

Brands such as TGI Fridays, Ruby Tuesday, and Applebee's have faced sales slumps and dozens of restaurant closures, as casual dining chains have struggled to attract customers and grow sales.

"Casual-dining restaurants face a uniquely challenging market today," Buffalo Wild Wings CEO Sally Smith recently wrote in a letter to shareholders.

According to Smith, these sit-down restaurants' struggles can blamed on the most-frequently besmirched generation: millennials.

"Millennial consumers are more attracted than their elders to cooking at home, ordering delivery from restaurants and eating quickly, in fast-casual or quick-serve restaurants," Smith wrote.

Millenials are too focused on food ordering apps and healthy cuisine.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @03:08AM (9 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @03:08AM (#521130)

    Or it's the process by which those who have unethically gained control of resources launder and grow their wealth

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @03:20AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @03:20AM (#521138)

    Well, that's true because men are not angels. Maybe GP can help us understand how men may become angels, so we're not stuck with some violently imposed monopoly where those who have unethically gained control of resources launder them and unethically gain control of more resources at an exponential rate.

    (Until men are angels, hint to GP, read "wealth" as "unethically gained resources." Hmm, I think we have a catchphrase that's better than "if men were angels," perhaps on par with "violently imposed monopoly:" behold, "unethically gained resources." Yes/No? I like it at least, kudos.)

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @03:36AM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @03:36AM (#521148)

      As men are not angels, why would you ever entrust them with a bizarrely blessed-and-ordained monopoly on violence (e.g., the power of a "government")??? Are you insane?

      Indeed, in the world at large, there is no such thing as One World Government; governments actually must compete—despite their violent and unangelic natures, this competition keeps governments' excesses in check.

      Rather than ignore it, capitalism embraces the fact that men are not angels; capitalism not only allows, but implies the necessity of competition and consumer choice in the provision of those very services that governments often commandeer or otherwise arrogate to themselves, because that is the only way to ensure that the shapes of these services evolve in a way that is productive for society at large.

      When devils are forced to compete, the angels are free to go about the mundane business of living productive lives.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Tuesday June 06 2017, @07:51AM (1 child)

        by maxwell demon (1608) on Tuesday June 06 2017, @07:51AM (#521218) Journal

        So capitalism is fundamentally based on evil? That certainly explains a lot.

        The invisible hand is not the hand of god. It's the hand of the devil.

        --
        The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday June 07 2017, @04:19AM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday June 07 2017, @04:19AM (#521755) Journal

          So capitalism is fundamentally based on evil?

          Well, we have this infamous Machiavelli quote:

          Whoever desires to found a state and give it laws, must start with assuming that all men are bad and ever ready to display their vicious nature, whenever they may find occasion for it.

          Perhaps you ought to wonder why systems "based on evil" work better than those that aren't?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @03:22AM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @03:22AM (#521141)

    Read what I wrote; by my definition, what you wrote is not an example of capitalism.

    • (Score: 1, Troll) by maxwell demon on Tuesday June 06 2017, @07:58AM (3 children)

      by maxwell demon (1608) on Tuesday June 06 2017, @07:58AM (#521223) Journal

      So you think you are free to redefine words as you see fit? Communication is possible because words have generally agreed-upon meanings. Terminology matters.

      Otherwise I'll redefine "what" as "how" and "to write" as "to be a complete idiot", and therefore interpret

      Read what I wrote

      as "Read how I am a complete idiot" ;-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @12:48PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @12:48PM (#521284)

        That's why you should learn the other guy's definition of "capitalism"; it's the only in this entire thread is even remotely coherent.

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday June 07 2017, @04:28AM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday June 07 2017, @04:28AM (#521758) Journal

          That's why you should learn the other guy's definition of "capitalism"; it's the only in this entire thread is even remotely coherent.

          Not any point. This rapidly devolves into the argument from semantics fallacy:

          1) Define capitalism with some ridiculous negative connotation unrelated to the real world concept.
          2) Assert that the US is capitalist under your pet definition just because it's considered capitalist via the real world concept.
          3) Be another idiot on the internet. We clearly don't have enough of them!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @07:17PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @07:17PM (#521504)

        So you think you are free to redefine words as you see fit?

        Obviously (no rebuttal required) khallow posting as AC! It is his favorite ploy.