OT: Subway sandwich shop chain growing
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34574537/ns/business-small_business/
Train refs: The shops are decorated with reproductions of old NYC
subway maps and signage. The wall paper is randomly thrown together,
so it's not like one can look at a full period map.
Some years ago I visited the Subway sandwich shop near the SIRT St.
George Terminal. I was not impressed by the ambience. I wanted to
wash my hands and the counterman wouldn't let me, he even gave me a
hard time about giving me a wet paper towel. Isn't there a law that
eat-in restaurants have to provide restrooms or at least a way to wash
hands?
In Fort Washington, PA, there was a Subway sandwich shop in a former
railroad coach (whether it's still there I don't know). The
counterman there, too, was a jerk.
IMHO, sometimes the individually owned franchises of a chain aren't
run that well.
Peter T. Daniels
The Subway in the Kearny Wal-Mart is well run and pleasant. It doesn't
have the old decor of subway maps -- they haven't been installing that
wallpaper in years.
Slim
> On Dec 28, 1:52�ｿｽpm, hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> MSNBC reported that the chain is growing. �ｿｽFull article at:http://www.m
> snbc.msn.com/id/34574537/ns/business-small_business/
>>
>> Train refs: �ｿｽThe shops are decorated with reproductions of old NYC
>> subway maps and signage. �ｿｽThe wall paper is randomly thrown together,
>> so it's not like one can look at a full period map.
>>
>> Some years ago I visited the Subway sandwich shop near the SIRT St.
>> George Terminal. �ｿｽI was not impressed by the ambience. �ｿｽI wanted to
>> wash my hands and the counterman wouldn't let me, he even gave me a
>> hard time about giving me a wet paper towel. �ｿｽIsn't there a law that
>> eat-in restaurants have to provide restrooms or at least a way to wash
>> hands?
>>
>> In Fort Washington, PA, there was a Subway sandwich shop in a former
>> railroad coach (whether it's still there I don't know). �ｿｽThe
>> counterman there, too, was a jerk.
>>
>> IMHO, sometimes the individually owned franchises of a chain aren't
>> run that well.
>
> The Subway in the Kearny Wal-Mart is well run and pleasant. It doesn't
> have the old decor of subway maps -- they haven't been installing that
> wallpaper in years.
NOTHING compares the Nedick's that was tucked in under Macy's on the
corner of 34th & 7th.
--
"A nickel isn't worth a dime today." - Y. Berra
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> NOTHING compares the Nedick's that was tucked in under Macy's on the
> corner of 34th & 7th.
Nedick's has been long gone, right? There used to be one I liked in
Pennsylvania Station. They had a specialty orange drink? I think
there was one, for a short while, in the Upper Darby 69th Street
Terminal.
Peter T. Daniels
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 28, 1:52 pm, hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> >> MSNBC reported that the chain is growing. Full article at:http://www.m
> > snbc.msn.com/id/34574537/ns/business-small_business/
>
> >> Train refs: The shops are decorated with reproductions of old NYC
> >> subway maps and signage. The wall paper is randomly thrown together,
> >> so it's not like one can look at a full period map.
>
> >> Some years ago I visited the Subway sandwich shop near the SIRT St.
> >> wash my hands and the counterman wouldn't let me, he even gave me a
> >> eat-in restaurants have to provide restrooms or at least a way to wash
> >> hands?
>
> >> In Fort Washington, PA, there was a Subway sandwich shop in a former
> >> counterman there, too, was a jerk.
>
> >> IMHO, sometimes the individually owned franchises of a chain aren't
> >> run that well.
>
> > The Subway in the Kearny Wal-Mart is well run and pleasant. It doesn't
> > have the old decor of subway maps -- they haven't been installing that
> > wallpaper in years.
>
> NOTHING compares the Nedick's that was tucked in under Macy's on the
> corner of 34th & 7th.
My Nedick'ses were in other neighborhoods. But my favorite was Orange
Julius.
When I moved to Chicago in '72 there was an Orange Julius on State
Street -- right across from Marshall Field's, IIRC -- but it wasn't
the same.
George
Aside from the decorations I am not impressed with the mediocre
industrial quality food they sell. I can go to any number of mom & pop
places and get a much better sandwich
Stephen Sprunk
> The Subway in the Kearny Wal-Mart is well run and pleasant. It doesn't
> have the old decor of subway maps -- they haven't been installing that
> wallpaper in years.
Most of the franchisees have been actively painting over the map
wallpaper in the last few years. It's a shame, since it was much more
interesting than what they've got up now. One near me tried to paint
over it without primer, which led to the map bleeding through, which
actually manages the best of both worlds: a soothing color overall but
no difficulty reading the map if you look directly at the wall.
S
--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
Stephen Sprunk
> On 12/28/2009 13:52, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> MSNBC reported that the chain is growing. Full article at:
>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34574537/ns/business-small_business/
"Growing" is an understatement. Most people don't realize it, but over
a decade ago, Subway already had more than twice as many stores as
McDonald's (the #2 retail operation worldwide), and they've kept growing
like gangbusters since then.
The three main factors are (a) the significantly lower cost to open a
franchise, since they are typically located in rented space and not
standalone buildings, (b) lower operating cost since a store can be
easily run by one person in the slow hours, whereas most franchises need
three or more people minimum, and (c) the much smaller franchises
granted. (In most of the US, a standard Subway franchise is for a 1mi
radius, whereas most other fast food joints are for a 2-5mi radius.
That means you will find a _lot_ more Subways packed into a given area,
and in some places it seems you can't go more than a few blocks without
tripping over one--just like Starbucks.)
>> Train refs: The shops are decorated with reproductions of old NYC
>> subway maps and signage. The wall paper is randomly thrown together,
>> so it's not like one can look at a full period map.
And that's a shame.
>> IMHO, sometimes the individually owned franchises of a chain aren't
>> run that well.
Very true. Most franchisees own several--often dozens of--stores and
staff them with minimum-wage monkeys who don't care about quality or
service. In contrast, mom&pop stores are usually run by a family where
every employee knows their family's livelihood depends on customers
coming back.
Still, I found the service at franchises in the northeast US to be
significantly worse than what you get elsewhere in the country. That's
not surprising given service in general in that region. There also seem
to be a lot more mom&pop stores to choose from in that area, relative to
the rest of the US; I suppose that's one of the indirect effects of
higher population density.
> Aside from the decorations I am not impressed with the mediocre
> industrial quality food they sell. I can go to any number of mom & pop
> places and get a much better sandwich
True. The appeal of a franchise isn't the quality; the appeal is that
you know _exactly_ what you'll get anywhere in the world, no matter
which one you go to. Near home, where you can take the time to try out
different places, that's not a big deal, but in an unfamiliar place it
makes picking somewhere to eat a lot simpler. Franchises can also
combine funds to buy TV/radio advertising, which mom&pop stores
typically can't afford.
Still, for a fast food franchise, Subway is towards the higher-quality
end. Their food is certainly better--and better for you--than a burger
joint, and in many places, they're the only alternative a non-resident
is likely to recognize.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> The three main factors are (a) the significantly lower cost to open a
> franchise, since they are typically located in rented space and not
> standalone buildings, (b) lower operating cost since a store can be
> easily run by one person in the slow hours, whereas most franchises need
> three or more people minimum, and (c) the much smaller franchises
> granted. (In most of the US, a standard Subway franchise is for a 1mi
> radius, whereas most other fast food joints are for a 2-5mi radius.
> That means you will find a _lot_ more Subways packed into a given area,
> and in some places it seems you can't go more than a few blocks without
> tripping over one--just like Starbucks.)
Yes, I've seen several of them fairly close together. (Though I've
seen McDonald's only a mile apart, and Seven-Eleven's a block apart).
But I can't help but suspect they're over-saturating the marketplace
and many will end up closing.
Yes, they're often in lower rent locations such as set back in a strip
shopping center as opposed to being right on the main highway. But I
wonder if being set back like that cuts visibility and spontaneous
traffic. Fast food outlets depend on big signs and visibility to
catch the motorist's eye and bring him in.
> >> IMHO, sometimes the individually owned franchises of a chain aren't
> >> run that well.
>
> Very true. Most franchisees own several--often dozens of--stores and
> staff them with minimum-wage monkeys who don't care about quality or
> service. In contrast, mom&pop stores are usually run by a family where
> every employee knows their family's livelihood depends on customers
> coming back.
Actually, even when the franchiser himself is running the business it
can be quite lousy. Contrary to myth and intuition, just because
someone owns a business doesn't mean they're able or willing to run it
properly. Many franchisers don't know what they're doing, especially
in terms of customer attractiveness and courtesy. Others don't care.
For example, a large food company changed its delivery trucks to be
'independent salesmen' operators instead of merely paid employees. It
was assumed they'd take better care of the end customers. It didn't
work out that way, indeed, service got worse. Many stores were left
waiting for days for the 'salesman/driver' to show up and deliver the
order. Even though they were losing money and goodwill, some drivers
just didn't care.
Another example is two convenience store chains serving an area. One
uses franchisers. The stores were dirty, the store clerks were not
very appealing (they seemed to, shall we say, ate a very great deal of
the profits and looked it), etc. The other chain is fully company
owned and the stores are far cleaner, better run, and the clerks much
nicer and helpful. (FWIW, the company itself is privately owned, not
on the stock market).
A major factor in McDonald's success is maintaining very high
standards of its franchisees, which other chains ought to emulate.
Iny my humble opinion, Subway shops have a ways to go in that area. I
like their food, but I've had bad experiences with their individual
owners (in various locations), who seem to think theyr'e doing me a
favor to serve me. As mentioned, they won't let me wash up before
eating (isn't that required by law?), let alone use a bathroom.
> > Aside from the decorations I am not impressed with the mediocre
> > industrial quality food they sell. I can go to any number of mom & pop
> > places and get a much better sandwich
>
> True. The appeal of a franchise isn't the quality; the appeal is that
> you know _exactly_ what you'll get anywhere in the world, no matter
> which one you go to. Near home, where you can take the time to try out
> different places, that's not a big deal, but in an unfamiliar place it
> makes picking somewhere to eat a lot simpler. Franchises can also
> combine funds to buy TV/radio advertising, which mom&pop stores
> typically can't afford.
But many franchise chains fail to enforce quality and the experience
is not pleasant.
A mom 'n pop can be better, but there's just as much chance it could
be worse. I was in Raritan NJ taking pictures and skipped a chain to
eat in a local luncheonette. Big mistake.
Some "mom 'n pop's" are really the n'er do well 'junior', set up in
business by his parents and struggling along.
> Still, for a fast food franchise, Subway is towards the higher-quality
> end. Their food is certainly better--and better for you--than a burger
> joint, and in many places, they're the only alternative a non-resident
> is likely to recognize.
I like their food better than a burger place. However, I do not like
their ambience at all.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> NOTHING compares the Nedick's that was tucked in under Macy's on the
> corner of 34th & 7th.
For fans of the old Roy Roger's chain, there's one directly across
from Pennsylvania Station on Seventh Avenue at 32nd Street. Good to
stop if you're headed to the Sixth Ave Subway.
The Roy's chain has been sold a bunch of times and today it is much
smaller than in its heydey. There are still several on the NJ Tpk
service plazas and a few other free standing locations. For fast
food, I think their food is good. I like their roast beef.
(There used to be one next to the entrance to Grand Central on 42nd
St, but I don't know if it's still there.)
Peter T. Daniels
> Still, I found the service at franchises in the northeast US to be
> significantly worse than what you get elsewhere in the country. That's
> not surprising given service in general in that region.
There you go again (as your hero was once heard to remark).
Peter T. Daniels
> Another example is two convenience store chains serving an area. One
> uses franchisers. The stores were dirty, the store clerks were not
> very appealing (they seemed to, shall we say, ate a very great deal of
> the profits and looked it), etc. The other chain is fully company
> owned and the stores are far cleaner, better run, and the clerks much
> nicer and helpful. (FWIW, the company itself is privately owned, not
> on the stock market).
I've just about given up on Burger King. Last week they were
advertising "funnel cake," and I thought I'd try it. The BK I went to
said they couldn't sell it -- their cash register computer hadn't been
programmed for it. They also said they "don't participate" in national
campaigns like the Dollar Menu Double Cheeseburger of the week before.
I wonder why there are significantly fewer BKs than McDonald'ses
around here -- it's obvious that the corporation doesn't enforce
standards of housekeeping and courtesy, so it's not like it's more
stressful ...
But it may be moot. Only a few months ago I discovered the Chipotle
Mexican Grill chain, which (except in Manhattan, where every item is
more than a dollar more than in NJ) seems to be the best value for
money in the genre. (And countermen seem to serve larger portions than
counterwomen.)
Every one except one that I've been to has a line to or out the door
at lunchtime (even West Hanover, NJ). The exception is in Paramus, on
4 westbound just east of 17.
Stephen Sprunk
> On Dec 29, 10:26 am, Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org> wrote:
>> (In most of the US, a standard Subway franchise is for a 1mi radius,
>> whereas most other fast food joints are for a 2-5mi radius. That means
>> you will find a _lot_ more Subways packed into a given area, and in
>> some places it seems you can't go more than a few blocks without
>> tripping over one--just like Starbucks.)
>
> Yes, I've seen several of them fairly close together. (Though I've
> seen McDonald's only a mile apart, and Seven-Eleven's a block apart).
Keep in mind there is a difference between "franchise" and "store". A
_franchise_ means the exclusive right to operate within a given area;
the owner of the franchise can put as many _stores_ in that area as they
want. In low-traffic areas, i.e. ones that can only support a single
store, the entrepreneur generally picks a single store location and buys
the (relatively cheap) franchise for a radius around that location.
Some franchises in high-traffic areas can support more than one store,
though, which justifies a much higher price. Or, you may find that two
franchisees put stores near their boundaries, rather than the center,
which can result in two of the same store across the street from each
other in perverse cases. Or an owner may buy out a competitor from a
different chain within his franchise area and convert the store to his
preferred chain, despite them being close together. Or two chains may
do some M&A (e.g. when Stop 'n Go bought all of 7-Eleven's business in
Houston, or the mergers of Exxon and Mobil or Chevron and Texaco),
resulting in the forced conversion of one chain--and some messy
franchise conflicts.
> But I can't help but suspect they're over-saturating the marketplace
> and many will end up closing.
I've _never_ seen a Subway close; every single one I've seen is flooded
with customers at lunch time. They're also relatively cheap to keep
open the rest of the day, since a single employee can cover the place
for most of the day. I've talked to a few folks that own them, and they
say the stores practically print money--if you can manage to find a
location that isn't already franchised. That's why Starbucks exploded
on the national scene: the early players were rushing to get all the
good locations franchised before someone else grabbed them.
It's likely that some individual owners occasionally go under due to
poor management, but in such a case there's a long waiting list of
people willing to buy the franchise/stores and take over, which is
mostly invisible to customers, other than a possible "under new
management" sign.
> Yes, they're often in lower rent locations such as set back in a strip
> shopping center as opposed to being right on the main highway. But I
> wonder if being set back like that cuts visibility and spontaneous
> traffic. Fast food outlets depend on big signs and visibility to
> catch the motorist's eye and bring him in.
Subway's main customer base is daily repeat customers from nearby
businesses; anyone else who happens to wander in is gravy. They don't
need much in the way of street-side advertising; their main customer
base already knows where they are, and TV/radio advertising is used to
tell them about the latest specials and try to get them in more often.
>> Very true. Most franchisees own several--often dozens of--stores and
>> staff them with minimum-wage monkeys who don't care about quality or
>> service. In contrast, mom&pop stores are usually run by a family where
>> every employee knows their family's livelihood depends on customers
>> coming back.
>
> Actually, even when the franchiser himself is running the business it
> can be quite lousy. Contrary to myth and intuition, just because
> someone owns a business doesn't mean they're able or willing to run it
> properly. Many franchisers don't know what they're doing, especially
> in terms of customer attractiveness and courtesy. Others don't care.
True. The better chains have training (a few even make such mandatory)
and enforcement programs to work on those issues.
> A major factor in McDonald's success is maintaining very high
> standards of its franchisees, which other chains ought to emulate.
... which costs them a lot of money, and that in turn is paid for with
higher franchise fees and makes McDonald's stores very expensive to own
and operate.
> Iny my humble opinion, Subway shops have a ways to go in that area. I
> like their food, but I've had bad experiences with their individual
> owners (in various locations), who seem to think theyr'e doing me a
> favor to serve me. As mentioned, they won't let me wash up before
> eating (isn't that required by law?), let alone use a bathroom.
I've never had any bad experiences at a Subway, but it could be a
regional thing.
>> True. The appeal of a franchise isn't the quality; the appeal is that
>> you know _exactly_ what you'll get anywhere in the world, no matter
>> which one you go to. Near home, where you can take the time to try out
>> different places, that's not a big deal, but in an unfamiliar place it
>> makes picking somewhere to eat a lot simpler. Franchises can also
>> combine funds to buy TV/radio advertising, which mom&pop stores
>> typically can't afford.
>
> But many franchise chains fail to enforce quality and the experience
> is not pleasant.
In such a case, though, the poor quality and experience (as opposed to
merely poor food) also tends to be universal. However, predictability
seems to be more important to a large segment of customers than the
actual quality. Taco Bell's food is horrible, but it's the _exact same_
horrible food everywhere at roughly the same price, which some may
consider a better (or at least simpler) choice than food of unknown
quality, price, and variety from a no-name competitor next door.
> A mom 'n pop can be better, but there's just as much chance it could
> be worse. I was in Raritan NJ taking pictures and skipped a chain to
> eat in a local luncheonette. Big mistake.
Indeed. The bad ones usually don't last very long, unless they have a
captive customer base, because they don't have the major brand marketing
power that guarantees them a steady stream of new customers to disappoint.
The restaurant biz is _very_ competitive. Even if you have a good menu
and run it perfectly, it usually takes 5+ years to turn a profit as an
independent. Most fold within a year or two. That's why franchises are
so popular: someone else has already developed the menu and business
practices, built a customer base for you, etc., virtually guaranteeing a
profit in the first year if you follow the manual.
> Some "mom 'n pop's" are really the n'er do well 'junior', set up in
> business by his parents and struggling along.
... or a long-time family business inherited by Junior, who is either
stealing from the till, running the place into the ground through
incompetence, or using it as a front for something else. (Every now and
then a pizza place gets busted for delivering drugs, usually because a
driver accidentally gave someone the wrong box. Oops.)
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> I wonder why there are significantly fewer BKs than McDonald'ses
> around here -- it's obvious that the corporation doesn't enforce
> standards of housekeeping and courtesy, so it's not like it's more
> stressful ...
Are there still BK's at the #1 terminal in the Bronx and the E/F
terminal (179 St) in Queens?
Some of the BK's in New York City were franchised by H&H. H&H closed
its own restaurants down and got into the franchisee business
instead. But I don't think they're involved anymore.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> Keep in mind there is a difference between "franchise" and "store". A
> _franchise_ means the exclusive right to operate within a given area;
> the owner of the franchise can put as many _stores_ in that area as they
> want.
That all depends on the individual contract between the franchisee and
the company. Some companies naturally want to limit over saturation.
Also, some outlets are owned by the company.
I knew a McD's frachiseee who had several locations and none of his
were near each other while there were other McD's not far away. He
did pretty well out of it.
In contrast, working as a manager in a fast food outlet is a lousy low
paying job.
> I've _never_ seen a Subway close; every single one I've seen is flooded
> with customers at lunch time. They're also relatively cheap to keep
> open the rest of the day, since a single employee can cover the place
> for most of the day. I've talked to a few folks that own them, and they
> say the stores practically print money--if you can manage to find a
> location that isn't already franchised. That's why Starbucks exploded
> on the national scene: the early players were rushing to get all the
> good locations franchised before someone else grabbed them.
Starbucks also had to close many locations; it got stretched too thin.
I know of several Subways close together in a dumpy area in dumpy
strip centers. There isn't much business activity there to generate a
lunch or dinner business and the little business has to be shared with
other joints. I'll be surprised if they last for a while, unless
they got a great deal on rent and overhead.
> It's likely that some individual owners occasionally go under due to
> poor management, but in such a case there's a long waiting list of
> people willing to buy the franchise/stores and take over, which is
> mostly invisible to customers, other than a possible "under new
> management" sign.
It's not "invisible" to customers. If an owner does a lousy job,
he'll alienate numerous customers who won't come back. I know this is
just personal experience, but I don't know anyone will go there.
> > A major factor in McDonald's success is maintaining very high
> > standards of its franchisees, which other chains ought to emulate.
>
> ... which costs them a lot of money, and that in turn is paid for with
> higher franchise fees and makes McDonald's stores very expensive to own
> and operate.
But profitable. I do know what I can expect at any McD's (reasonably
good), and I can't say that for Subway. Burger King is tricky,
sometimes good, but not always (I like their chicken sandwiches).
McD's higher-end model probably eliminates marginal owners.
Peter T. Daniels
The one at 243rd St. is still there.
After I went to college (1968), my parents moved to the first
apartment house north of there.
Peter T. Daniels
> I've _never_ seen a Subway close; every single one I've seen is flooded
> with customers at lunch time. They're also relatively cheap to keep
> open the rest of the day, since a single employee can cover the place
> for most of the day.
Subway is a national imitation of the NY chain Blimpie's.
zzyzxroad
RE: McD's I know for the last 10 yrs or so, the corporation has been
buying out the franchisees.
Since the corp owns the locations outright, they can do what they want
in terms of putting restaurants closer together.
One other aspect you might think about is this.
If McD's does not build a restaurant at a certain location, someoe
else will. It is a way of stopping the competition.
Stephen Sprunk
Blimpie is an international chain, in fact the #3 sandwich chain with
2000 stores in 47 US states and 15 countries, and is based in Arizona.
The first store opened was in NJ, not NY.
Subway was founded a year later, about the time Blimpie opened its
second store. While it's theoretically possible the 17yo founder had
gotten the idea when seeing a Blimpie on a trip to Hoboken, what are the
odds of that compared to the thousands of other sub shops in the region
he might have been imitating? It was hardly a new idea.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> If McD's does not build a restaurant at a certain location, someoe
> else will. It is a way of stopping the competition.
If McD's is not an interested in a particular location, then it is
likely a poor one for a fast food outlet. If a competitor chooses to
build there they won't do very well.
Like them or not, McD's is the gold standard in the fast food
business. Overall, they offer better food, service, environment, and
marketing than does their competitors. I cannot believe how screwed
up some of their competitors--big national chains--can be in their
operations or in their marketing.
A major competitor sells onion rings and chicken sandwiches, which I
don't think McD's sells. But inevitably the competitor's food is cold
and the dining room in need of cleaning--this is at multiple outlets
in different states. I've given up on that competitor.
There is a Roy Roger's across from Pennsylvania Station (IIRC, NE cor
7th Ave and 33rd) and I like them. Also some on the NJ Tpk. There
was a Roy's near Grand Central on 42nd St but I don't know if they're
still there.
In NYC, I've learned for causal food it's best to go on the side
streets, the restaurants on the main avenues tend to be much pricier,
unless one can find a nice coffee shop or diner.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> streets, the restaurants on the main avenues tend to be much pricier,
> unless one can find a nice coffee shop or diner.
P.S.
My old subway pictures show more food counters in the subway system--
within the paid areas--than there seem to be now. There was one or
more in the concourse connecting the Shuttle to Lex but I think
they're gone now.
Anyone know of good food counters in the paid areas of the NYC subway
system?
Remember the Seinfeld where they rushed out to get food during the
dwell time of the subway train station stop?
rsh...@gmail.com
> > In NYC, I've learned for causal food it's best to go on the side
> > streets, the restaurants on the main avenues tend to be much pricier,
> > unless one can find a nice coffee shop or diner.
>
those main aves, are where the traffic is. location, location,
location, and they charge accordingly
of course that is where the rents are the highest
> P.S.
>
> My old subway pictures show more food counters in the subway system--
> within the paid areas--than there seem to be now. There was one or
> more in the concourse connecting the Shuttle to Lex but I think
> they're gone now.
>
>
I don't remember any longer, but what was the rationale for removing
the tenants, renters, from Times Sq when they redid the station what
30 yrs ago
rsh...@gmail.com
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Dec 29, 8:02 pm, Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org> wrote:
> >> I've _never_ seen a Subway close; every single one I've seen is flooded
> >> with customers at lunch time. They're also relatively cheap to keep
> >> open the rest of the day, since a single employee can cover the place
> >> for most of the day.
>
> > Subway is a national imitation of the NY chain Blimpie's.
>
> Blimpie is an international chain, in fact the #3 sandwich chain with
> 2000 stores in 47 US states and 15 countries, and is based in Arizona.
> The first store opened was in NJ, not NY.
>
> Subway was founded a year later, about the time Blimpie opened its
> second store. While it's theoretically possible the 17yo founder had
> gotten the idea when seeing a Blimpie on a trip to Hoboken, what are the
> odds of that compared to the thousands of other sub shops in the region
> he might have been imitating? It was hardly a new idea.
I was living in NYC in the mid 70's and there were Blimpy's all over
NYC and the northeast.
The only place I ever saw Subway was in FL in those days
My theory was that Subway got its legs where everything was very cheap
and of course, you could buy a Subway franchise very cheap
>
Peter T. Daniels
> > streets, the restaurants on the main avenues tend to be much pricier,
> > unless one can find a nice coffee shop or diner.
>
> P.S.
>
> My old subway pictures show more food counters in the subway system--
> within the paid areas--than there seem to be now. There was one or
> more in the concourse connecting the Shuttle to Lex but I think
> they're gone now.
>
> Anyone know of good food counters in the paid areas of the NYC subway
> system?
If eating isn't allowed on the trains, why would they make it easier?
> Remember the Seinfeld where they rushed out to get food during the
> dwell time of the subway train station stop?
It wasn't credible when it first aired. Larry David had probably been
an Angeleno for decades already when he came up with the episode.
rsh...@gmail.com
> On Jan 4, 9:08 pm, zzyzxroad <samm...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>
> > If McD's does not build a restaurant at a certain location, someoe
> > else will. It is a way of stopping the competition.
>
> If McD's is not an interested in a particular location, then it is
> likely a poor one for a fast food outlet. If a competitor chooses to
> build there they won't do very well.
>
> Like them or not, McD's is the gold standard in the fast food
> business. Overall, they offer better food, service, environment, and
> marketing than does their competitors.
Ray Kroc invented modern day franchising. I know the concept was
around long before him, but he created the standard.
He was responsible for an extremely tight franchise agreement,
detailing the franchisees duties and responsibilities.
Of course in those days, any franchise was dirt cheap.
Of course one if the best parts of the franchise agreement was the
franchisee's exclusive for a certain area (no compete).
I will give you a specific.
US 1-9 from Woodbridge to Elizabeth.
For many years, there was one in Rahway, and one in Elizabeth and that
was the extent of McD's on that section of road.
Also there was no other McD in Rahway, and none in Linden, which is a
city of 40,000 and has substantial industry.
With the corporation buying up the franchisees, and expanding their
locations, they built one on US 1-9 in Linden and one on St Georges
(NJ 27).
Believe me, if McD's had not built those, someone else would have
I cannot believe how screwed
> up some of their competitors--big national chains--can be in their
> operations or in their marketing.
>
> A major competitor sells onion rings and chicken sandwiches, which I
> don't think McD's sells. But inevitably the competitor's food is cold
> and the dining room in need of cleaning--this is at multiple outlets
> in different states. I've given up on that competitor.
If you are speaking about Burger King, the parent corporation has had
serious problems, and those problems have filtered down to the
franchisees.
I know there have been a host of lawsuits between the franchisees and
the corporation. At one point the franchisees wanted to buy pout the
corporation
I also believe the corporation has been sold several times.
all in all, not a good way to run a business
>
Peter T. Daniels
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Dec 29, 8:02 pm, Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org> wrote:
> >> I've _never_ seen a Subway close; every single one I've seen is flooded
> >> with customers at lunch time. They're also relatively cheap to keep
> >> open the rest of the day, since a single employee can cover the place
> >> for most of the day.
>
> > Subway is a national imitation of the NY chain Blimpie's.
>
> Blimpie is an international chain, in fact the #3 sandwich chain with
> 2000 stores in 47 US states and 15 countries, and is based in Arizona.
> The first store opened was in NJ, not NY.
Uh, where do you think Hoboken is? It's one of the two suburbs most
convenient to Midtown Manhattan.
The Blimpie's website says nothing about their expansion, but
wikipedia notes that it was gradual, and began in New York City (if
you knew anything about transit in NYC, you'd know that the original
Blimpie Base is a short walk from a subway that's one stop from
Manhattan.)
What's "based in Arizona" is the holding company that bought it out.
> Subway was founded a year later, about the time Blimpie opened its
> second store. While it's theoretically possible the 17yo founder had
> gotten the idea when seeing a Blimpie on a trip to Hoboken, what are the
> odds of that compared to the thousands of other sub shops in the region
> he might have been imitating? It was hardly a new idea.
What's your evidence for "thousands of other sub shops"? If the
Blimpie's website is to be believed, the submarine sandwich was
completely unknown in the New York area.
Stephen Sprunk
> On Jan 5, 2:17 am, Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org> wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> On Dec 29, 8:02 pm, Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org> wrote:
>>>> I've _never_ seen a Subway close; every single one I've seen is flooded
>>>> with customers at lunch time. They're also relatively cheap to keep
>>>> open the rest of the day, since a single employee can cover the place
>>>> for most of the day.
>>>
>>> Subway is a national imitation of the NY chain Blimpie's.
>>
>> Blimpie is an international chain, in fact the #3 sandwich chain with
>> 2000 stores in 47 US states and 15 countries, and is based in Arizona.
>> The first store opened was in NJ, not NY.
>>
>> Subway was founded a year later, about the time Blimpie opened its
>> second store. While it's theoretically possible the 17yo founder had
>> gotten the idea when seeing a Blimpie on a trip to Hoboken, what are the
>> odds of that compared to the thousands of other sub shops in the region
>> he might have been imitating? It was hardly a new idea.
>
> I was living in NYC in the mid 70's and there were Blimpy's all over
> NYC and the northeast.
>
> The only place I ever saw Subway was in FL in those days
I wasn't alive then, so I can't comment on the situation at that time.
However, by the mid 80s (my earliest consistent memories), there were
over a dozen Subway stores within a few miles of my home in Houston, and
exactly _one_ Blimpie store. Blimpie had better food, but it was more
expensive and less convenient (we'd have to pass at least three Subway
stores on the way), so we rarely ate there; their advertising was also
usually in print and for individual stores, whereas Subway advertised on
radio and TV for the entire chain.
I can't say I've ever noticed a single Blimpie store in Dallas in the 12
years I've been here, though there are apparently ~260 of them, but it's
hard to miss the ~1500 Subway stores--and that annoying Jared guy on TV
is nearly as well-known as Ronald McDonald these days.
> My theory was that Subway got its legs where everything was very cheap
>
> and of course, you could buy a Subway franchise very cheap
That is the crux of it: Subway handled their franchising much better.
Blimpie sold permanent franchises for entire regions, leaving the parent
company with almost no revenue stream. Subway, in contrast, sold small
individual franchises with recurring license fees, which guaranteed them
a large and growing revenue stream they poured into more effective
advertising and making it even easier to open _more_ franchises, which
were available at much lower prices to more entrepreneurs.
In short, Subway copied McDonald's, not Blimpie.