Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by smearth 1020 days ago
I see it slightly differently although his research is great. I think this could be one of those carrot problems.

I think there’s a possibility Mcdonald’s hates that they need to sell Ice-cream. There’s a probability Icecream’s an inescapaable loss leader and their lowest margin item and that it is a poor loss leader due to it’s substitution effect with probably their highest margin product - soft-drinks. Because neighbouring restaurants offer ice-cream - Mcdonald’s also needs to - because people often feel like an ice-cream. If they don’t provide ice-cream while BurgerKing does then they lose high margin Fries and Softdrink sales. By offering icecreams with the minimal tolerable 85% reliability (ice cream isn’t a deal breaker - few people cancel an order when they can’t get a sunday with it - but it is an enticer - they remember Mcdonald’s ice-cream is nicer than Burger King’s when they get it - it’s the equivalent of Wendy’s ice-cream but cheaper). So there’s a possibility they’ve figured out that 85% reliability maximises high margin sales and minimises low margin ones.

Maybe they’ve figured out how to offer low cost high-quality ice-cream just enough of the time to maximise gross profit. A second order effect of 15% reliability - is the lack of reliability also discourages ice-cream orders - because - people try to avoid disappointment and decision making in group situations under time pressure.

Markup on soft-drinks and fries are massive compared to ice-cream. As you mentioned Free flow ice-cream probably has the highest food safety management cost on top of the low gross margins. It also gives staff cold hands and melts quickly in summer. It’s not a great loss leader but an inescapable one. Their other option would be to raise ice-cream prices but wendy’s grade ice-cream is an enticer. It would possibly cost more profit than 85% reliability.

There’s potential for profiting from co-operation on the lack of machine reliability but the franchisees will also be maximising profits by offering the minimal amount of ice-cream possible to not cost big-mac + frys + soft-drink sales. Mcdonald’s could possibly be paying high machine fees for exclusivity so Burger King doesn’t get an option of higher quality Ice-cream.

The only person really missing out is someone wanting an ice-cream 15% of the time - who like the franchisee - may be disappointed in the reliability of the ice cream machine - but is also better off financially - even if they don’t realise it. A possible third order effect is it breaks food addictions to things like ordering thick shakes on the way to work - regular consumption of sugar + saturated fat is not a healthy combination. Health management is a large concern for Mcdonald’s.

I’m happy with low-cost high quality ice-cream 85% of the time. I prefer that option to more expensive Ice-cream. I think this is part of the magic of the market economy. The invisible hand.

Are carrot problems killed by their public disclosure? I hope not, I like the 85% probability of cheap delicious ice-cream.

An amazing thing would be if there was tech in the machines making failure rates non random. I wonder if they fail more in winter than summer for instance which would educate the consumer about the lack of reliability so when summer comes less ice-cream is ordered.

This just my 3 minute thought experiment (brain fart) but could be a great topic for a behavioural economist such as the freakonomics blog to cover.

1 comments

I don't think you watched the video which provides a much more simple explanation (and more importantly simple to carry out) than "ice cream is a loss leader that a bean counter discovered 85% reliability minimizes losses".

For one, franchise owners decide when to do repairs that are prohibitively expensive. Two, the failures are not "random" and likely store based (one franchise down for 2 weeks rather than 10 franchises down a day) because it's owner discretion on when to fix it. Three, there is demonstrated profit in the McDonalds <-> Taylor collusion based monopoly.

There's no need for an elaborate spreadsheet conspiracy. Taylor is using a contract which enables them to charge exorbitant amounts for labor and prevent the free market (iFixIt and Kytch) from providing equivalent labor (theoretically under equivalent liability) at a much cheaper cost.

There is very clear conflict of interest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_proble...

Mcdonalds is making a contractual obligation on behalf of the franchises and that contractual obligation benefits McDonalds at the cost of the Franchises.

My point is the franchisees also profit from selling less ice cream provided they don’t lose the trust of their customers.