SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by khallow on Tuesday June 06 2017, @11:01AM (2 children)
No. Let us look at a quote near the bottom:
Capitalism already saved us from waiting at a table for food which "millennials" apparently do not want in sufficiently high quantity to support the current oversupply of the casual dining niche. This is just a routine economic correction, like how you might shift slightly to maintain your balance while walking.
(Score: 2) by idiot_king on Tuesday June 06 2017, @05:41PM (1 child)
And my point is this: Correction isn't necessary if it is preconceived that people's use of capital needs to be regulated so as to not cause a correction.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday June 07 2017, @03:46AM
I'll note in this particular case, to prevent correction, regulation would have to suppress the preferences of millennials for food and venue choices that run counter to what everyone else eats. After all, if you keep introducing new generations of people who naturally prefer to be different from their forebears, you will get corrections as a result due to old systems not being fully adapted to the new generation's preferences. That's a nasty oppression of those who wish to be different and a recipe for stagnation.
Second, even if one were successful at the above, there would still be corrections merely due to the fact that the world isn't constant. Large scale disasters are good examples of such unavoidable corrections. So not only is regulating away correction a bad idea, it is also impossible.
And that's the virtue of such corrections. They are quick adaptations to changes in the world and one of the big ways modern society avoids stagnation.
Third, a preconceived notion is not actual. You still have a huge gap between the idea and the implementation of that idea. 18th Century Irish hunger and poverty wasn't done away with merely because Jonathan Swift proposed the idea of turning Irish children into nutritious meals. Finally, correction is a regulation of the system, just not one implemented by a central authority. It has the virtue of being created by dynamics and decision-makers closer to and more knowledgeable of the problem leading to the correction.