Few brands have the loyal following of In-N-Out Burger. If you live outside of California, it’s hard to really understand just how beIoved the brand is among its fans. If you live in California, it’s just a part of the experience. Until you leave, that is.
Most of that love comes from the fact that, as far as fast food goes, In-N-Out is about as good as it gets. Of course, a lot of its appeal also comes from the fact that the company’s 385 locations are located almost entirely in California and its neighboring states.
If, however, you live any further east of the Rockies, you’ve been out of luck. If that’s you, your only opportunity has been to find one when you travel west. Well, until now.
Last week, the company announced that it would be opening a corporate hub in Franklin, Tennessee, which will allow it to expand further east. In-N-Out also says it will be opening its first stores in the Nashville area by 2026.
If you’re a fan of animal-style fries, you understand that this is a big deal. It’s also a huge risk for the company and its brand. Here’s why:
This is a company that is fiercely opposed to change. It hasn’t added a menu item since 2018 (hot chocolate). It still sells just burgers, fries, soft drinks, and milkshakes. As a result, the restaurant is known for both fresh, great-tasting food and incredible customer service. I can think of only one other restaurant where you can get in a drive-thru line 30 cars deep and still have hot food in just a few minutes, and that one isn’t open on Sundays.
There is clearly a lot of demand for new locations. That seems like an argument for expanding to new states, but it’s also why the move is risky.
You see, over the past 75 years, In-N-Out has jeaIously guarded its brand. A big part of that has meant recognizing that fast growth isn’t everything if it means compromising quality. After all, quality is its brand.
In-N-Out only uses fresh, never-frozen ingredients–including its beef. That makes its burgers and fries taste better, but it also means the restaurant is limited in the areas it can serve.
The company also doesn’t franchise its locations. That has allowed it to maintain far more control over the level of service its restaurants provide, but has also meant it kept things close to home.
“You put us in every state and it takes away some of its luster,” said In-N-Out president Lynsi Snyder in a 2018 interview. She was right. Part of the reason the company’s burgers have such a loyal following is because they’re hard to get–especially if you live east of the Rocky Mountains.
It takes a lot of courage–if you think about it–to resist the temptation to grow at all costs. The thing is, most companies don’t consider that those costs are real, even if they aren’t immediately obvious. If the quaIity of your product gets worse the more customers you serve, you’re doing it wrong.
If, suddenly, there are In-N-Out Burger locations everywhere, it’s not as special. If you’re used to swinging by the Sepulvida location when you land at Los Angeles International Airport, and eating a Double-Double while watching planes land, it’s not quite as special an experience if you can get one on your way home from work.
On the other hand, there is value in meeting your customers where they are. In-N-Out is a restaurant, after all, not an amusement park. Sure, people look forward to eating there when they travel, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t room to grow–even if that means cautiously.
“Our Customers are our most important asset at In-N-Out, and we very much look forward to serving them in years to come, and becoming part of the wonderfuI communities in The Volunteer State,” said Synder in a statement. That’s an important acknowledgment–the part about customers being the company’s most important asset.
The interesting lesson here is that there is a balance between exclusivity and meeting your customers where they are. For a variety of reasons, In-N-Out has erred on the side of sticking close to home, even if that means it can’t serve all of its customers. That’s been a winning strategy so far, and I don’t think that will change just because it’s sIowly starting to open more locations farther east.
Woman tries to take her seat on a plane – but she refuses, and what happens next has the internet is divided
Flying is not a pleasant experience for everyone. Some people make sure that before they set off on their trip, they take measures to ensure their comfort. But not everyone is mindful of the same thing.
This woman knew what she required when traveling and did exactly that. However, there were others who did not see it that way…
A woman found herself in a very uncomfortable position both literally and figuratively. She was torn between prioritizing her own comfort over societal expectations. She was faced with a decision; she could either be generous or stand up for her personal space.
She was headed across the country to spend Christmas with her family. She knew when she flew, she needed to be comfortable. Considering her size, she always books an extra seat on a flight. She makes sure to pay extra to ensure her comfort.
Everything went smoothly during the check-in, and she flew by through security and boarding. It was only when she was sitting in her seat that the unpleasant experience began. A woman with her 18-month-old child was sitting next to her. She saw that there was one seat empty and promptly requested that the woman squeeze herself onto one seat so that her toddler could occupy the other one. But seeing as the original occupant had paid for both seats, she refused.
The interaction was gaining attention, and a flight attendant noticed and came by to see what was going on. When the situation was explained to the flight attendant, she asked the woman on whether she could make room for the child, but she politely declined and asserted one again that she had paid in full for both seats.
The flight attendant thankfully understood and instructed the mother to hold her child in her lap as most children that age usually do. But, throughout the journey, the mother made sure to make the woman uncomfortable with dirty looks and passive-aggressive remarks.
Later, the woman wondered whether she had been unfair in this interaction and should have relented and given up her extra seat. She took to Reddit to ask the community on whether she had been wrong.
One person, who was a mother herself and had been in a similar situation wrote, “I’ve taken 9-hour flights with an infant in my arms and shorter flights with a toddler in my lap, who was capable of sitting in his own seat and very much did not want me to hold him. Did it suck? Yes. But it was my problem alone, and as long as my child was under 24 months and I didn’t have to pay for his seat, I chose to hold him. I swear, not all of us parents are this entitled!”
Another person added, “She’s wrong for not buying a seat for her son and assuming someone else would give up a seat they paid for. Odds are she was hoping there’d be extra seats on the flight so she didn’t have to pay and used the lap thing as a loophole.”
“I’d go so far as making a complaint to the airline about their employee supporting another passenger harassing you,” another outraged Redditor wrote.
Another annoyed user said, “You should always do what you can to be as healthy as you can, but being fat isn’t a character flaw or a moral failing. We all have our own challenges in life, and you deserve not to be ashamed of your body and yourself, even if you aren’t currently meeting your goals. If the mom wants an extra seat for her kids, she should have purchased one. She’s not entitled to a seat you purchased, and you don’t need to feel bad for her bad behavior.”
While, some people could also perhaps see the mother’s side in wanting to have a comfortable flight as well. However, had that been important for her, she would have made sure to prioritize getting a seat for her child.
Who do you think is right in this conversation? Let us know in the comments! Share this with others so they can also give their two cents on the topic.
Leave a Reply