Question concerning chains, independents, locals..

So, the gaping hole in my education is in the realm of finance and business - basically anything having to do with money. And no, I don't balance my checkbook...

When reading the Stoney River thread, I found myself interested in the always present debate over chain v. local. I am especially interested in the terminology we use in connection with different operating options available.

What operating models are there that we tend to lump into the local v. chain debate? A (working) list would include: locally-owned single story, locally-owned more-than-one-store chain (Lou Lou, BBC, Seviche, New Albanian upcoming), locally-owned/based multi-city chain (the Tumblweed model at one point), privately-owned chain, publicly-traded corporate chain, and franchise member in corporate chain. What other options am I not aware of?

More importantly, do people notice such distinctions and/or do we react differently to restaurants based on ownership models? Are the distinctions worth something? Or, on the other hand, do we resort to the local v. chain binary? Such questions seem "extra" important with the current tough economy and the push to support "local" establishments.

FWIW, I just read up on the history of Tumbleweed and found it quite interesting to see the different operating models it worked through over the years. Not sure how such changes were reflected in business choices and quality as much of that history predates my formative years.

Interesting...

I have noticed the much heated talk of 'chains' vs 'locals'. I too question the difference. And honestly, in a time like this, shouldn't we wish everyone well? The economy is hurting. If a 'chain' goes under, they tend to lose a lot more employees. I am not saying I want a 'locals' to go under. Heck, Seviche is my favorite restaurant of all time! I am simply saying that maybe we shouldn't be so negative against people who have become successful and managed to open more than one restaurant. Maybe we just shouldn't be so negative. Our economy is hurting from greed. Not just in money. We are becoming a greedy, selfish America.

Sorry, I got a little of the subject... I just read posts on here sometimes and wonder if it is really that significant to argue between chain, local, etc. Let's just break bread and be happy we have the bread to break.

Some of my favorite restaurants are chains, while others are indies....if the food is good, the service friendly and efficient with an enjoyable environment, whether it's a chain or indie is irrelevant....

At some point, the emphasis at a multi-unit operation becomes consistency as opposed to creativity. I suppose they both have their place; the main attraction at McDonald's is that you always know what you're going to get. I think an operation loses a bit of its soul when it starts changing things in order to make them easier to duplicate. I've heard that one of the main reasons for shutting down the old Tumbleweed location on Mellwood was because the management was trying to achieve consistency across the chain, and that location just couldn't be forced into the mold.

At some point, the emphasis at a multi-unit operation becomes consistency as opposed to creativity. I suppose they both have their place; the main attraction at McDonald's is that you always know what you're going to get. I think an operation loses a bit of its soul when it starts changing things in order to make them easier to duplicate....

Richard, I think you hit the big nail on the head. Some chain restaurants have a pretty good food but it's normally fairly boring. Their menus don't change very often and what they call a special is just a regular menu item that they just write on some fancy board. Independents on the other hand usually have more creative menus that change on a regular basis. They quite often feature daily or weekly specials that take advantage of locally available ingredients. Personally creativity in menu choices is the major reason I enjoy dining out. We can cook normal items at home but we don't usually get very creative.

On the financial side the chain's have a much wider financial base so they can absorb fluctuations easier. They also in many cases have better buying power to get reduced prices on supplies and ingredients. Because of their size and assets it is also usually easier for them to obtain financing when needed. Independents do not have any of these advantages and thus are much more dependent on continued customer support to survive.

Looking at all of these points is why we're much more likely to go to an independent locally owned restraunt than we are to a chain.

What is the difference?
First and foremost you should support the locls first and more often. $45 of every $100 you spend with a local stays in the community, but only $13 of that same $100 stays in the community with the chains.
For the most part the locals are the biggest supporter of the communities, donating to the local charities and events where the chains refer you to the corporate offices.
Locals want to make you happy while achieving a modest profit, while chains are focused on profit first. Have you noticed how quickly the chains have raised their prices while the indies try to wait it out?

There are some good chains out there and I was a Corporate chef for several of them, but they will never give you the same local flavor you get with an independent.

Lastly our independents are what set us apart and makes us unique. Everyone has chains.

When you go on vacation do you seek the chains or where the locals eat?

What is the difference?
....When you go on vacation do you seek the chains or where the locals eat?

This brings out an interesting point. I'm sure most of us who participate in this forum would seek out the local mom and pop restaurants so we could get the local flavor. That's mainly because we love food and are constantly seeking new experiences. Unfortunately many people would go to the chain because they fear the unknown. The one thing most chains are good at is consistency, they have the same quality and menu from place to place. That's probably the main reason they survive, people don't want to take a risk when dining out.

There is one other "operating model" that has been ignored: corporate owned versus franchise.

In most cases (over-generalizing here) franchise owners have some degree of slack to add/subtract items to fit local tastes, more leeway to use local purveyors, and even the ability to tweak the menu and recipes (albeit not to a large degree). Additionally, in a franchise operation more of the money tends to stay local.

For the most part we hit restaurants where we like the food, service, et al, regardless of chain/non-chain aspects. However, if we're at Hurstbourne Taylorsville area, for example, and in the mood for BBQ, we'll normally go to Famous Dave's (a franchise) versus Smokey Bones (a Darden-owned branch).

There is one other "operating model" that has been ignored: corporate owned versus franchise.

In most cases (over-generalizing here) franchise owners have some degree of slack to add/subtract items to fit local tastes, more leeway to use local purveyors, and even the ability to tweak the menu and recipes (albeit not to a large degree). Additionally, in a franchise operation more of the money tends to stay local.

For the most part we hit restaurants where we like the food, service, et al, regardless of chain/non-chain aspects. However, if we're at Hurstbourne Taylorsville area, for example, and in the mood for BBQ, we'll normally go to Famous Dave's (a franchise) versus Smokey Bones (a Darden-owned branch).

Depends on the franchise -
Most quick service provides no flexibility on purveyors or menu changes

Famous Daves and Smokey Bones - DO have flexibility in this area

Others like Cheescake Factory, O'Charley's and Applebee's have no flexibiity

We can all agree there are some good chains out there, but supporting the locals benefits us all.

Unfortunately, the fear of the unknown, IMHO, is the plankton on which the great blue whale chains feed. Now don't get me wrong, I will hit the chain every now and then, if they have something I like, but the majority of my discretionary income goes to locals partly due to the variance they provide. When my husband first moved here, he was very impressed with the number of ethnic restaurants here and I attribute that to our city and the people willing to try different kinds of foods. Nothing made me more embarrased than when a group of us went to Sapporo for dinner a while back and an acquaintance at the table brought Arby's because she was unwilling to try Japanese. With that said, after week long trips to Spain and Greece in the past year, the first thing my husband and I did when we got back was eat a Quarter Pounder with cheese.

Depends on the franchise -
Most quick service provides no flexibility on purveyors or menu changes

Famous Daves and Smokey Bones - DO have flexibility in this area

Others like Cheescake Factory, O'Charley's and Applebee's have no flexibiity

We can all agree there are some good chains out there, but supporting the locals benefits us all.

Some agreement, one or two nits: QSR's have no flexibility, I agree.

Famous Dave's is a franchise, and does have flexibility. Smokey Bones is Darden owned and managed, and has absolutely no flexibility.

Cheesecake Factory has the menu, but local chefs are encouraged to come up with specials that truly are, and can introduce these nationally for chain-wide introduction. O'Charley's and Applebee's none.

It's funny. When I was in my early 20's and traveling for work a lot I prefered chains. Simply because we looked at them as "safe" food. You knew what you were going to get and knew you probably were not going to get sick. Yes, we would occassionally go on the recomendation of a local but when we had a chance for a real meal (as compared to scarfing something down really fast) we would opt for a chain. Now, traveling again for work, I will go out of my way to find the local gem. And you know, usually it proves to have been the right way to go.