I have family down south and since I was a little tyke my parents would take me to Chick-fil-A when we go there. Now, I'm 19. Why is it that they just now open a location in NYC yet they're the biggest chicken chain in the country? And I'll probably be like 25 by the time they open in Buffalo.
Fried chicken is a lot bigger down south.
Different corporate culture than what you find in most parts of the Northeast. I'd also guess the gay marriage controversy slowed down expansion efforts up there.
Chick-fil-A's not opening on Sundays might also hurt it less in the southern states than elsewhere.
Quote from: TXtoNJ on October 05, 2015, 08:38:57 PM
I'd also guess the gay marriage controversy slowed down expansion efforts up there.
Well, it has completely made me avoid every Chick-fil-A there is when I would actively seek them out before.
Hello! Check Connecticut. 2 new ones opened here in the course of 3 months in the Danbury area, and they seem to be wildly popular, at least from what I can tell.
Quote from: Zeffy on October 05, 2015, 08:47:04 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on October 05, 2015, 08:38:57 PM
I'd also guess the gay marriage controversy slowed down expansion efforts up there.
Well, it has completely made me avoid every Chick-fil-A there is when I would actively seek them out before.
I don't support their platforms but somehow I forgave the fiasco. Other companies I have stopped patronizing for similar reasons.
Why do Jewish delis avoid the southeast?
People in the northeast aren't baptists or methodists, which to my personal observation tends to be the overwhelming customer base for CFA.
Tons in NJ and PA?
I personally think it is due to the political blowback from the whole gay marriage fiasco and ongoing sporadic reports of it being a restaurant for homophobes.
http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/downtown/2012/07/boston_mayor_thomas_m_meninos.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/01/chick-fil-a-anti-gay-controversy-employees-speak-out_n_1729968.html
Still, it's a yummy sammich.
Popeye's, which is up here in a significant number, is a poor substitute.
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on October 05, 2015, 09:01:09 PM
Why do Jewish delis avoid the southeast?
Because Southerners can't afford the yummy goodness that is a pastrami on rye with mustard.
Combination of politics and culture. Having stuff closed on Sunday doesn't work as well up here outside of Bergen County, largely because people here are either less religious or follow a different religion. Mainline Protestants and Catholics (who make up the vast majority of Northeast religious folk) don't spend all day in church and actually want to do stuff on Sundays. I probably do
most of my shopping Sundays, especially when I'm not watching a football game. The company officially follows Christian (specifically Southern Baptist) principles, which doesn't always settle well. The same-sex marriage crap struck a chord in the northeast and many (myself included) refuse to patronize the chain because of that.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on October 05, 2015, 09:29:33 PM
Tons in NJ and PA?
PA isn't really even typical northeast, if you ask me. It's a mix of Appalachia, midwest, and mid-Atlantic.
Quote from: Rothman on October 05, 2015, 09:30:41 PM
I personally think it is due to the political blowback from the whole gay marriage fiasco and ongoing sporadic reports of it being a restaurant for homophobes.
http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/downtown/2012/07/boston_mayor_thomas_m_meninos.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/01/chick-fil-a-anti-gay-controversy-employees-speak-out_n_1729968.html
Still, it's a yummy sammich.
Popeye's, which is up here in a significant number, is a poor substitute.
Popeyes is wonderful. A hell of a lot better than KFC. I will go out of my way to eat at Popeyes and I may just go broke this spring with one being a block away from RPI.
Quote from: TravelingBethelite on October 05, 2015, 08:48:29 PM
Hello! Check Connecticut. 2 new ones opened here in the course of 3 months in the Danbury area, and they seem to be wildly popular, at least from what I can tell.
4 in CT now, all freestanding. Also in Wallingford and Enfield. Few in the Boston/Nashua area in malls. Jimmy John's, Hardee's, CiCi's, and (only one location in Springfield, MA) Golden Corral seem to be avoiding New England, yet you see and hear ads all the time. Checkers tried a location in Bristol, CT, but it failed miserably, and Sonic opened nearby anyway.
What? Part II
First, you state that there's a large concentration of "Don't Walk" signage in NYC when they were almost all converted to the hand signal over a decade ago, and now you claim there are no Chick-fil-a's in the Northeast. Just because they aren't in your region doesn't mean they're not in the Northeast. Take a look at their location guide.
As for the whole gay fiasco, try to find some actual proof that it slowed expansion. In the following article from 2014, it mentions that their business model places them in the suburbs, not cities. And they will be expanding into cities like NYC, Chicago & Los Angeles, of which 2 out of 3 are most certainly not located in the Northeast.
Another important little detail: Their stores average nearly 30% more sales per year than McDonalds. All the more impressive considering their stores are only open 6 days of the week, and typically open later and close earlier.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 05, 2015, 10:02:28 PM
What? Part II
First, you state that there's a large concentration of "Don't Walk" signage in NYC when they were almost all converted to the hand signal over a decade ago, and now you claim there are no Chick-fil-a's in the Northeast. Just because they aren't in your region doesn't mean they're not in the Northeast. Take a look at their location guide.
As for the whole gay fiasco, try to find some actual proof that it slowed expansion. In the following article from 2014, it mentions that their business model places them in the suburbs, not cities. And they will be expanding into cities like NYC, Chicago & Los Angeles, of which 2 out of 3 are most certainly not located in the Northeast.
Another important little detail: Their stores average nearly 30% more sales per year than McDonalds. All the more impressive considering their stores are only open 6 days of the week, and typically open later and close earlier.
I don't get out of Upstate NY very often, and I have no reason at all to go downstate (unless I had time and $$$ for a roadmeet). I could only assume NYC has Don't Walk signage. Secondly, this chicken chain just opened its first NYC location last week, and NYC is part of the Northeast, so AFAIK they don't have as big of a presence.
Quote from: cl94 on October 05, 2015, 09:36:39 PM
Combination of politics and culture. Having stuff closed on Sunday doesn't work as well up here outside of Bergen County, largely because people here are either less religious or follow a different religion. Mainline Protestants and Catholics (who make up the vast majority of Northeast religious folk) don't spend all day in church and actually want to do stuff on Sundays. I probably do most of my shopping Sundays, especially when I'm not watching a football game. The company officially follows Christian (specifically Southern Baptist) principles, which doesn't always settle well. The same-sex marriage crap struck a chord in the northeast and many (myself included) refuse to patronize the chain because of that.
This sums it up pretty good.
Why is any regional restaurant chain not nationwide? Growing too rapidly is a good way to kill even a successful business.
Supply chain logistics for a company the size of Chick-fil-A are incredibly difficult. Slow, steady growth is much lower risk from that standpoint. It lets them work out supply issues slowly over time without impacting a huge number of restaurants.
Look at it this way: say CFA contracts with a poultry supplier in the northeast. The supplier says they can provide chicken for 150 restaurants. CFA then opens 150 restaurants all at once. If demand is higher than expected, or the new supplier can't actually produce that much chicken, restaurants will be without food. If CFA opens a few restaurants each month, it lets them better gauge regional demand and mitigates the risk of a supplier not performing. If the supplier says 150 restaurants but can only actually supply 75, opening a few each month lets them more slowly reach that limit and when they exceed it, it only impacts a few stores.
CFA has been growing regionally. They just haven't gotten to the NE yet.
Politics has nothing to do with it. They have a successful presence in Southern California, one of the most liberal parts of the country.
I wish Chick-fil-A would avoid the rest of the country too.
I don't completely understand the not-open-on-Sunday-hurts-business-in-the-Northeast argument. Is it just a matter that more people pick Sunday to be their "let's go get fast food day" and are, therefore, less likely to go out again on the remaining weekdays?
Chick-fil-A finally opened up three permanent locations in the Seattle area this year. So far, they have been incredibly successful (it would seem, at least). And truth be told, Washington/Oregon is far less religious than even the Northeast. If CFA can succeed here, I bet it would succeed just fine in New England. There was some initial protest, but most folks seem to have backed off.
The closed-on-Sundays thing is pretty strange though. Very, very few things aren't open on Sunday around here. I have on more than one occasion (on a Sunday) driven to my local CFA and almost walked up to the doors before realizing they were closed.
Apparently theres one that opening on Long Island also in Port Jeff.
Will we please knock off the "Chick-fil-a" is not in the Northeast. Amazing how one person can mis-speak about something, and it carries like wildfire.
A quick check of their location finder reveals stores in these states
2 stores in NH
4 in MA
2 in NY
1 in RI
65 in PA
29 in NJ
Also, a quick check of the location finder reveals that they don't a presence in these non-northeast states either:
Montana
North Dakota
Hawaii
Alaska
And going back to the gay marriage thing: Yes, people may not visit the store because of that. Then again, people may not visit the store because there's no restaurants around them. When the story first came out, I remember people using their internet rage to tell others they are boycotting them.
Many even said that they would boycott them even though they've never been to one. Or, that they never heard of the restaurant. Or, that if they were traveling, they would make sure to boycott them. The makings of a successful boycott seems to be that they will most likely never pass by one anyway.
So, in the end, no one has any proof whatsoever that they haven't built a restaurant in the northeast because of the issues from several years ago.
Quote from: realjd on October 05, 2015, 10:31:13 PM
Why is any regional restaurant chain not nationwide? Growing too rapidly is a good way to kill even a successful business.
This.
Other than Five Guys I can't think of a recent chain that went from a few local places (Northern Va in their case) into full blast nationwide very quickly.
CFA has always been on a slow expansion philosophy. It wasn't that many years ago it was difficult to find one outside of a mall, even in the deep south.
I don't see the relative CFA absence in the northeast any different than Culvers being largely absent in the southeast.
Mike
Quote from: cl94 on October 05, 2015, 09:36:39 PM
Popeyes is wonderful. A hell of a lot better than KFC. I will go out of my way to eat at Popeyes and I may just go broke this spring with one being a block away from RPI.
I spent 5 years at RPI and ate at that Popeyes exactly once.
I don't follow why a place not being open on Sunday would be a reason to avoid that place on other days.
Quote from: Rothman on October 05, 2015, 09:31:41 PM
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on October 05, 2015, 09:01:09 PM
Why do Jewish delis avoid the southeast?
Because Southerners can't afford the yummy goodness that is a pastrami on rye with mustard.
There's always Noshville.
Quote from: bandit957 on October 05, 2015, 11:22:03 PM
I wish Chick-fil-A would avoid the rest of the country too.
Vote with your dollar...
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 06, 2015, 06:25:00 AM
Will we please knock off the "Chick-fil-a" is not in the Northeast. Amazing how one person can mis-speak about something, and it carries like wildfire.
A quick check of their location finder reveals stores in these states
2 stores in NH
4 in MA
2 in NY
1 in RI
Given the number of other fast food restaurants in the Northeast, the numbers are underwhelming. :D
For some reason, I'm reminded of how Dairy Queen has found it nearly impossible to enter the Pioneer Valley of MA due to fierce loyalty to local ice cream shops (which are worth it). Locals hold it as a badge of honor that Cold Stone had to close down in Northampton as well.
Of course, a Dairy Queen is opening just down the road from me. That non-ice-cream-stuff they sell is still a wonderful guilty pleasure...
Quote from: Rothman on October 06, 2015, 09:27:32 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 06, 2015, 06:25:00 AM
Will we please knock off the "Chick-fil-a" is not in the Northeast. Amazing how one person can mis-speak about something, and it carries like wildfire.
A quick check of their location finder reveals stores in these states
2 stores in NH
4 in MA
2 in NY
1 in RI
Given the number of other fast food restaurants in the Northeast, the numbers are underwhelming. :D
For some reason, I'm reminded of how Dairy Queen has found it nearly impossible to enter the Pioneer Valley of MA due to fierce loyalty to local ice cream shops (which are worth it). Locals hold it as a badge of honor that Cold Stone had to close down in Northampton as well.
Of course, a Dairy Queen is opening just down the road from me. That non-ice-cream-stuff they sell is still a wonderful guilty pleasure...
True, especially when you redefine Northeast and leave out PA & NJ. The New England numbers are very low, but there's a difference between low and "avoid the Northeast", which they haven't done, and per their location guide they have low numbers in other states and regions as well.
Speaking of Dairy Queen, there are very few in this area (NJ) as well. There's one near me that is simply a Dairy Queen "Restaurant", vs many Grill & Chills, although I really can't figure out the difference between the two.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 06, 2015, 10:03:05 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 06, 2015, 09:27:32 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 06, 2015, 06:25:00 AM
Will we please knock off the "Chick-fil-a" is not in the Northeast. Amazing how one person can mis-speak about something, and it carries like wildfire.
A quick check of their location finder reveals stores in these states
2 stores in NH
4 in MA
2 in NY
1 in RI
Given the number of other fast food restaurants in the Northeast, the numbers are underwhelming. :D
For some reason, I'm reminded of how Dairy Queen has found it nearly impossible to enter the Pioneer Valley of MA due to fierce loyalty to local ice cream shops (which are worth it). Locals hold it as a badge of honor that Cold Stone had to close down in Northampton as well.
Of course, a Dairy Queen is opening just down the road from me. That non-ice-cream-stuff they sell is still a wonderful guilty pleasure...
True, especially when you redefine Northeast and leave out PA & NJ. The New England numbers are very low, but there's a difference between low and "avoid the Northeast", which they haven't done, and per their location guide they have low numbers in other states and regions as well.
Speaking of Dairy Queen, there are very few in this area (NJ) as well. There's one near me that is simply a Dairy Queen "Restaurant", vs many Grill & Chills, although I really can't figure out the difference between the two.
The northeast has a lot of regional chains. Cumberland Farms, Stewart's, and a couple of other local establishments have limited 7 Eleven's numbers in a good portion of Upstate New York, Western Massachusetts, and northern New England. Every town in New York and New England is fiercely loyal to the local ice cream shop/Stewart's/Byrne Dairy to the point where national chains (other than Friendly's, which is local) are virtually nonexistent in much of the region. The main supermarket chains are regional. Every town has its local hot dog place/greasy spoon that everyone is insanely loyal to. For the most part, the locals just don't go to the chains and the local restaurants have become so ingrained in the culture that they are tourist destinations unto themselves.
The northeast market is pretty much saturated as it is. Any new store will likely drive something else out of business.
Chick-fil-A has some of the best quality fast food out there. Their quality is consistent. They also have very good and fast service, despite their resteraunts being very busy. Their employees are more polite and higher caliber than other fast food reseraunts.
The being closed on Sunday thing isn't just about church; it also allows people to spend time with family and friends, and is a good rebellion against the "fuck the employees, make them slave away as much as possible so we can make as much as possible" culture that most companies have.
One of the reasons other than the good food that people go there is to support the company for treating their employees better.
BTW...I cannot spell resteraunt correctly and it's not in the spell check dictionary.
I grew up in New Jersey, and I can tell you that Chick Fil A is not the only one to avoid that sector of the US. It took us a long time to get our first Pizza Hut. I believe Long John Silvers still will not cross the Delaware River into the Garden State, as they always came to cities along the river, but never being part of that area across the water like in Easton.
My aunt asked an employee of the Wilson, PA store of why Long Johns won't open a store in NJ, and was told that management refuses to pay the high taxes that New Jersey implements on businesses.
Also, in 1988, we were craving a Pizza Hut Pizza while traveling back to New Jersey from Mystic, CT along I-95 when passing through Milford, CT. Needless to say we got off of 95 and used Route 1 as if one was going to be it would be there, but however we drove all the way to Bridgeport and did not see one along the road that had everything else, but a Pizza Hut. I am to say that Pizza Hut in that time period avoided settling in Connecticut unless it was just US 1that they kept them off of. That somewhere else they did have stores located even near US 1 by even a block.
You just cannot take for granted that a store that is usually a dime a dozen in most places, will be scarce to none in some others. Like CVS and Walgreens compete with each other on street corners everyplace in Florida, but go to Dallas and Plano, and you will not find them, especially along I-635 and US 75. I needed camera batteries on my last trip through there and noticed that there were none, as usually Walgreens and CVS are the best place for me other than Wal Marts to buy batteries in a pinch.
Quote from: Brian556 on October 06, 2015, 10:26:57 AM
Chick-fil-A has some of the best quality fast food out there.
Tried them once here around Chicago. I couldn't for the life of me see what all the fuss was about. It was merely average to me, and their idea of "spicy" for their spicy chicken failed to impress. Pardon me while go down the street to Popeye's, if I want chicken.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:33:12 AM
You just cannot take for granted that a store that is usually a dime a dozen in most places, will be scarce to none in some others. Like CVS and Walgreens compete with each other on street corners everyplace in Florida, but go to Dallas and Plano, and you will not find them, especially along I-635 and US 75. I needed camera batteries on my last trip through there and noticed that there were none, as usually Walgreens and CVS are the best place for me other than Wal Marts to buy batteries in a pinch.
Walgreens has only one store in all of North Dakota, in Fargo, and it does not have a pharmacy. Why? Because North Dakota requires a pharmacy to be 51% owned by a pharmacist in that pharmacy. Hence, you will not find Walgreens, CVS, Rite Aid, or any Walmart, Target, or grocer with a pharmacy in the entire state.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:33:12 AM
I grew up in New Jersey, and I can tell you that Chick Fil A is not the only one to avoid that sector of the US. It took us a long time to get our first Pizza Hut. I believe Long John Silvers still will not cross the Delaware River into the Garden State, as they always came to cities along the river, but never being part of that area across the water like in Easton.
It seems like everyone avoids Cincinnati. Except of course Chick-fil-A, which everyone hates.
A few years ago, Chick-fil-A had a float in the Reds Opening Day parade, and everyone booed the float.
I would like to know why Wal Mart will not open many Super Centers in New Jersey? You seem to find most of them clothing and other accessories, but no super market. Wal Mart prides themselves on not just being a typical department store, but a grocery store as well and do nothing to stop at that except in New Jersey.
Obviously New Jersey has something that is able to frighten even Wal Mart and has.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:45:12 AM
I would like to know why Wal Mart will not open many Super Centers in New Jersey? You seem to find most of them clothing and other accessories, but no super market. Wal Mart prides themselves on not just being a typical department store, but a grocery store as well and do nothing to stop at that except in New Jersey.
Obviously New Jersey has something that is able to frighten even Wal Mart and has.
Could be a law that separates the grocery and department store sections. I've heard of oddball New Jersey laws like that (such as the self-service gasoline one).
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 06, 2015, 06:25:00 AM
Will we please knock off the "Chick-fil-a" is not in the Northeast. Amazing how one person can mis-speak about something, and it carries like wildfire.
A quick check of their location finder reveals stores in these states
2 stores in NH
4 in MA
2 in NY
1 in RI
65 in PA
29 in NJ
Also, a quick check of the location finder reveals that they don't a presence in these non-northeast states either:
Montana
North Dakota
Hawaii
Alaska
...
So, in the end, no one has any proof whatsoever that they haven't built a restaurant in the northeast because of the issues from several years ago.
^^This.
There's 2 near where I live; Springfield & Folsom (both in Delaware County, PA). There was a third but it was located inside the now-deceased Granite Run Mall.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 05, 2015, 08:32:57 PM
Fried chicken is a lot bigger down south.
They do offer grilled chicken choices as well. Their grilled nuggets just melt in one's mouth. They have a few good salad (w/chicken pieces) choices as well.
According to
Chik Fil-A's website; one just opened in Manhattan as of this Oct. 3 at:
37th & 6th In-Line
1000 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10018
(212) 704-9920
Although I'm not really a fan of Michael Moore, his interview with the British pharmacist comes to mind:
"I haven't been trained that many years to be selling detergent..."
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:33:12 AM
I grew up in New Jersey, and I can tell you that Chick Fil A is not the only one to avoid that sector of the US. It took us a long time to get our first Pizza Hut. I believe Long John Silvers still will not cross the Delaware River into the Garden State, as they always came to cities along the river, but never being part of that area across the water like in Easton.
My aunt asked an employee of the Wilson, PA store of why Long Johns won't open a store in NJ, and was told that management refuses to pay the high taxes that New Jersey implements on businesses.
Sigh. Seriously people. Use the fricken internet. Every fricken store has an online store locater. "Management" doesn't have to pay anything anyway - it's the corporation, franchisee, or property owner that pays, and they would be paying property taxes regardless of what restaurant was on that property. Sorry, but that's a bullshit excuse your aunt got.
https://goo.gl/maps/5B2rSTUCxyM2
https://goo.gl/maps/oFSSFgRSNSv
https://goo.gl/maps/oXPKPC3Jzrp
As far as Pizza Hut goes, I've always had one down my way in NJ. I still remember the Book It program from when I was in elementary school, 30 long years ago.
Quote from: bandit957 on October 06, 2015, 10:43:50 AM
It seems like everyone avoids Cincinnati. Except of course Chick-fil-A, which everyone hates.
So then there's a whole bunch of Chick-fil-a restaurants that get no business whatsoever, but yet they stay open??
Sorry. "Bandit957" may hate them, but "Bandit957" is not everyone.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:45:12 AM
I would like to know why Wal Mart will not open many Super Centers in New Jersey? You seem to find most of them clothing and other accessories, but no super market. Wal Mart prides themselves on not just being a typical department store, but a grocery store as well and do nothing to stop at that except in New Jersey.
Obviously New Jersey has something that is able to frighten even Wal Mart and has.
Obviously, this is wrong too, but hey, why argue with someone who hasn't lived in the state in 20 years. There are numerous supercenters throughout the state. And the 'regular' stores have all converted to Supercenters that have everything a supermarket would have, with the only exception being produce is sold by the piece, or bagged (no scales at the registers). It's amazing how wrong you can be about New Jersey, because you act as if time has stopped up here for 20 years.
Quote from: Brandon on October 06, 2015, 10:49:04 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:45:12 AM
I would like to know why Wal Mart will not open many Super Centers in New Jersey? You seem to find most of them clothing and other accessories, but no super market. Wal Mart prides themselves on not just being a typical department store, but a grocery store as well and do nothing to stop at that except in New Jersey.
Obviously New Jersey has something that is able to frighten even Wal Mart and has.
Could be a law that separates the grocery and department store sections. I've heard of oddball New Jersey laws like that (such as the self-service gasoline one).
The only law i know of is in Burlington Township NJ, requires grocery stores to be a certain distance apart, so when they converted the 1993 Walmart to a SuperCenter in 2014, they had to put the grocer section where the auto center was.
It comes down to zoning/planning boards in towns. If the permits are not issued, they cannot expand. If a United Food and Commercial Worker Union member is on said board, they would have an incentive to push to decline the permits. Just a theory, not true or false.
Quote from: Brian556 on October 06, 2015, 10:26:57 AMThe being closed on Sunday thing isn't just about church; it also allows people to spend time with family and friends, and is a good rebellion against the "f#ck the employees, make them slave away as much as possible so we can make as much as possible" culture that most companies have.
One of the reasons other than the good food that people go there is to support the company for treating their employees better.
Somethings are indeed more important than money... even for businesses.
Quote from: Brian556 on October 06, 2015, 10:26:57 AMBTW...I cannot spell resteraunt correctly and it's not in the spell check dictionary.
For future reference:
restaurantTip: if one can find a word in the Spell Check dictionary on this site, try another site (Google or Bing) or type it in a Microsoft Word document and use their Spell Check feature.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 06, 2015, 11:10:22 AM
So then there's a whole bunch of Chick-fil-a restaurants that get no business whatsoever, but yet they stay open??
Why do Kroger stores in urban areas do great business, yet they often close?
A lot of people in charge of businesses have no business sense.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on October 06, 2015, 11:13:02 AM
Quote from: Brandon on October 06, 2015, 10:49:04 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:45:12 AM
I would like to know why Wal Mart will not open many Super Centers in New Jersey? You seem to find most of them clothing and other accessories, but no super market. Wal Mart prides themselves on not just being a typical department store, but a grocery store as well and do nothing to stop at that except in New Jersey.
Obviously New Jersey has something that is able to frighten even Wal Mart and has.
Could be a law that separates the grocery and department store sections. I've heard of oddball New Jersey laws like that (such as the self-service gasoline one).
The only law i know of is in Burlington Township NJ, requires grocery stores to be a certain distance apart, so when they converted the 1993 Walmart to a SuperCenter in 2014, they had to put the grocer section where the auto center was.
It comes down to zoning/planning boards in towns. If the permits are not issued, they cannot expand. If a United Food and Commercial Worker Union member is on said board, they would have an incentive to push to decline the permits. Just a theory, not true or false.
We have two new Walmarts in Deptford, which operate just like every other Supercenter around the country. And many other Walmarts I've been in seem to operate just like I would expect to find in a Walmart throughout the country. If there are exceptions, they are very rare.
Quote from: bandit957 on October 06, 2015, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 06, 2015, 11:10:22 AM
So then there's a whole bunch of Chick-fil-a restaurants that get no business whatsoever, but yet they stay open??
Why do Kroger stores in urban areas do great business, yet they often close?
A lot of people in charge of businesses have no business sense.
Um, ok. Not sure what this has to do with Chick-fil-a store in Cincinnati though.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 06, 2015, 11:10:22 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:33:12 AM
I grew up in New Jersey, and I can tell you that Chick Fil A is not the only one to avoid that sector of the US. It took us a long time to get our first Pizza Hut. I believe Long John Silvers still will not cross the Delaware River into the Garden State, as they always came to cities along the river, but never being part of that area across the water like in Easton.
My aunt asked an employee of the Wilson, PA store of why Long Johns won't open a store in NJ, and was told that management refuses to pay the high taxes that New Jersey implements on businesses.
Sigh. Seriously people. Use the fricken internet. Every fricken store has an online store locater. "Management" doesn't have to pay anything anyway - it's the corporation, franchisee, or property owner that pays, and they would be paying property taxes regardless of what restaurant was on that property. Sorry, but that's a bullshit excuse your aunt got.
https://goo.gl/maps/5B2rSTUCxyM2
https://goo.gl/maps/oFSSFgRSNSv
https://goo.gl/maps/oXPKPC3Jzrp
As far as Pizza Hut goes, I've always had one down my way in NJ. I still remember the Book It program from when I was in elementary school, 30 long years ago.
Quote from: bandit957 on October 06, 2015, 10:43:50 AM
It seems like everyone avoids Cincinnati. Except of course Chick-fil-A, which everyone hates.
So then there's a whole bunch of Chick-fil-a restaurants that get no business whatsoever, but yet they stay open??
Sorry. "Bandit957" may hate them, but "Bandit957" is not everyone.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:45:12 AM
I would like to know why Wal Mart will not open many Super Centers in New Jersey? You seem to find most of them clothing and other accessories, but no super market. Wal Mart prides themselves on not just being a typical department store, but a grocery store as well and do nothing to stop at that except in New Jersey.
Obviously New Jersey has something that is able to frighten even Wal Mart and has.
Obviously, this is wrong too, but hey, why argue with someone who hasn't lived in the state in 20 years. There are numerous supercenters throughout the state. And the 'regular' stores have all converted to Supercenters that have everything a supermarket would have, with the only exception being produce is sold by the piece, or bagged (no scales at the registers). It's amazing how wrong you can be about New Jersey, because you act as if time has stopped up here for 20 years.
First of all when I left New Jersey in 1990 there were no Wal Marts! Secondly, all the times I visited the state since then, I have found all the stores I patronized were clothing only and other accessories. Even in 2012, the one in Readington, NJ and also the one on US 22 in Watchung both lacked supermarkets.
Finally, if you ever owned a Rand McNally from Wal Mart, it list all and I mean ALL of their locations. So I can see which ones have Super Centers and which ones do not! New Jersey lacked them while the 49 other states had them! Plus my relatives and friends still live there and they noticed all of this too!
As far as my aunt, goes I did not say I agree with that statement considering that Taco Bell is owned by the same company and they, first in South Jersey, and then finally in North Jersey opened stores up. You would figure one opens the other should too, but anyway that is what she was told at the time. Yes, times have changed and maybe now it might be different. Who knows if they opened one since! I am hoping they did as I like Long Johns.
End rant.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:33:12 AM
....
Also, in 1988, we were craving a Pizza Hut Pizza while traveling back to New Jersey from Mystic, CT along I-95 when passing through Milford, CT. Needless to say we got off of 95 and used Route 1 as if one was going to be it would be there, but however we drove all the way to Bridgeport and did not see one along the road that had everything else, but a Pizza Hut. I am to say that Pizza Hut in that time period avoided settling in Connecticut unless it was just US 1that they kept them off of. That somewhere else they did have stores located even near US 1 by even a block.
....
I'm pretty sure Pizza Hut operated in at least some parts of Connecticut, though not necessarily everywhere, at around that timeframe. Reason is, in July 1989 I went on a Boy Scout trip up to PEI for the Canadian Jamboree. We drove up from Virginia in two cars, my father (who was the Scoutmaster) driving one and another father driving the other. On the way back, we stopped for the night in Southington, Connecticut, and I distinctly remember we had dinner at a Pizza Hut because my father started a small food fight and we almost got thrown out of the restaurant. (Funny the sorts of things that will cause you to remember having been somewhere, huh?!!!!)
I have not been on that particular segment of I-84 since August 1990, so I have no idea whether the Pizza Hut is still there.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 06, 2015, 06:25:00 AMAnd going back to the gay marriage thing: Yes, people may not visit the store because of that. Then again, people may not visit the store because there's no restaurants around them. When the story first came out, I remember people using their internet rage to tell others they are boycotting them.
Many even said that they would boycott them even though they've never been to one. Or, that they never heard of the restaurant. Or, that if they were traveling, they would make sure to boycott them. The makings of a successful boycott seems to be that they will most likely never pass by one anyway.
So, in the end, no one has any proof whatsoever that they haven't built a restaurant in the northeast because of the issues from several years ago.
I wouldn't expect to see much evidence that management's anti-gay attitudes have had an effect on expansion, for these reasons:
* At the local level, the calls for a boycott often had an antipersuasive effect. Wichita opened one of its Chick-fil-A outlets at the height of the controversy and did roaring business from counterprotesters. There are places even in blue states where overtly bigoted businesses can expect to do well.
* The chain almost immediately laundered its reputation by publicly disclaiming contributions to anti-gay causes. The giving still continues, but under the table.
* People invariably choose how far they wish to inconvenience themselves in the service of a cause they support. I am still boycotting Chick-fil-A, for example, but I still buy Barilla pasta because I have no other convenient source for fettuccine. (At the height of the Barilla controversy, some were even suggesting that those wishing to show solidarity with gays should throw out boxes of Barilla they had already bought. Why? It harms the buyer's pocketbook and is lousy for the environment, but doesn't do anything to the company.)
For a company so many people supposedly hate and boycott, it's amazing that I've never been to a CFA that wasn't packed. I've been to the Chicopee, MA, location several times since it opened and it's always been overflowing. The other I go to most is in Naples, FL, and you can barely get near it at peak times.
For the Popeye's comparison: I don't see them as direct competitors in the sense that KFC is a direct competitor to Popeye's or a Zaxby's or Raising Cane's is a direct competitor to CFA.
Lots of companies expanding go last to the Northeast.. I think it has to do with cost of real estate being higher.. I would imagine California is similar
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 11:56:07 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 06, 2015, 11:10:22 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:33:12 AM
I grew up in New Jersey, and I can tell you that Chick Fil A is not the only one to avoid that sector of the US. It took us a long time to get our first Pizza Hut. I believe Long John Silvers still will not cross the Delaware River into the Garden State, as they always came to cities along the river, but never being part of that area across the water like in Easton.
My aunt asked an employee of the Wilson, PA store of why Long Johns won't open a store in NJ, and was told that management refuses to pay the high taxes that New Jersey implements on businesses.
Sigh. Seriously people. Use the fricken internet. Every fricken store has an online store locater. "Management" doesn't have to pay anything anyway - it's the corporation, franchisee, or property owner that pays, and they would be paying property taxes regardless of what restaurant was on that property. Sorry, but that's a bullshit excuse your aunt got.
https://goo.gl/maps/5B2rSTUCxyM2
https://goo.gl/maps/oFSSFgRSNSv
https://goo.gl/maps/oXPKPC3Jzrp
As far as Pizza Hut goes, I've always had one down my way in NJ. I still remember the Book It program from when I was in elementary school, 30 long years ago.
Quote from: bandit957 on October 06, 2015, 10:43:50 AM
It seems like everyone avoids Cincinnati. Except of course Chick-fil-A, which everyone hates.
So then there's a whole bunch of Chick-fil-a restaurants that get no business whatsoever, but yet they stay open??
Sorry. "Bandit957" may hate them, but "Bandit957" is not everyone.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:45:12 AM
I would like to know why Wal Mart will not open many Super Centers in New Jersey? You seem to find most of them clothing and other accessories, but no super market. Wal Mart prides themselves on not just being a typical department store, but a grocery store as well and do nothing to stop at that except in New Jersey.
Obviously New Jersey has something that is able to frighten even Wal Mart and has.
Obviously, this is wrong too, but hey, why argue with someone who hasn't lived in the state in 20 years. There are numerous supercenters throughout the state. And the 'regular' stores have all converted to Supercenters that have everything a supermarket would have, with the only exception being produce is sold by the piece, or bagged (no scales at the registers). It's amazing how wrong you can be about New Jersey, because you act as if time has stopped up here for 20 years.
First of all when I left New Jersey in 1990 there were no Wal Marts! Secondly, all the times I visited the state since then, I have found all the stores I patronized were clothing only and other accessories. Even in 2012, the one in Readington, NJ and also the one on US 22 in Watchung both lacked supermarkets.
Finally, if you ever owned a Rand McNally from Wal Mart, it list all and I mean ALL of their locations. So I can see which ones have Super Centers and which ones do not! New Jersey lacked them while the 49 other states had them! Plus my relatives and friends still live there and they noticed all of this too!
As far as my aunt, goes I did not say I agree with that statement considering that Taco Bell is owned by the same company and they, first in South Jersey, and then finally in North Jersey opened stores up. You would figure one opens the other should too, but anyway that is what she was told at the time. Yes, times have changed and maybe now it might be different. Who knows if they opened one since! I am hoping they did as I like Long Johns.
End rant.
My brother lives in Maryland near DC. His wife is from Georgia and she bitches about not having super Walmart only a "small mart".. She said it's because of grocery store unions and County zoning
Why is it that I always get a craving for Chick-fil-A on Sunday?
You know a lot has to do with local and regional issues. Also, I did hear rumors to the Union thing being the cause of supermarket expansion. I cannot prove its a fact, but they were in part why NJ never went Self Serve when many other states did. The unions lobbied, for Trenton not to make the law for self service to protect the job of those already pumping gas. It sounds reasonable, but it may not be the case for actually being why. Although many old timers seem to brag about how the unions have always prevailed in New Jersey especially during FDR, again that thinking can be only by one groups perception of what they saw at the time as well.
Quote from: Jim on October 06, 2015, 12:56:17 PM
For a company so many people supposedly hate and boycott, it's amazing that I've never been to a CFA that wasn't packed. I've been to the Chicopee, MA, location several times since it opened and it's always been overflowing. The other I go to most is in Naples, FL, and you can barely get near it at peak times.
....
I suspect it's more a case that the boycotters just happen to be noisy about it so they get media coverage, making them seem like a much bigger group than they actually are. When the homosexual "marriage" issue was in the news and people started calling for demonstrations in the stores, I recall there being a day either a few days before or a few days after when people who disagreed with the protestors showed up to make a point of giving Chick-Fil-A some business. The lines were utterly insane to the point where traffic on nearby streets was disrupted due to cars lined up to find parking.
They're opening an NYC location soon and they have a few scattered throughout the Northeast. This thread could have existed about even Wal-Mart just 20 years ago.
Give it time, they're still expanding.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 06, 2015, 03:08:30 PM
They're opening an NYC location soon
See Page 2, Reply #36 of this thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16602.25); one in NYC just opened last Saturday.
Popeye's is just nasty. One opened in Winchester when we lived there. We tried it once. Since neither of us care for spicy or Cajun style food, we never ate there again. And the location didn't stay open too terribly long before it closed.
I consider Chick-Fil-A to be in a category by itself when it comes to fast food. It doesn't really compete with KFC, since KFC serves on-the-bone fried chicken and other items like chicken pot pies. I also don't think it really competes with Zaxby's or Raising Cane's, which are direct competitors, because they mostly have chicken strips. (Although Zaxby's is promoting their grilled chicken salads pretty heavily).
I love CFA. And the waffle fries are a pretty unique offering. Those who won't eat there because the corporate owners believe in the original definition of marriage are missing out on some really good food.
Quote from roadman 65:
Quote
You just cannot take for granted that a store that is usually a dime a dozen in most places, will be scarce to none in some others. Like CVS and Walgreens compete with each other on street corners everyplace in Florida, but go to Dallas and Plano, and you will not find them, especially along I-635 and US 75. I needed camera batteries on my last trip through there and noticed that there were none, as usually Walgreens and CVS are the best place for me other than Wal Marts to buy batteries in a pinch.
I live in the Dallas area and I can tell you we have just as many Walgreen's and CVS's as Florida does. They are more commonly located on urban arterials than freeways.
If you want to get a feel for an area, you really have to get off the freeway.
Quote from: Brian556 on October 06, 2015, 06:39:04 PM
Quote from roadman 65:
Quote
You just cannot take for granted that a store that is usually a dime a dozen in most places, will be scarce to none in some others. Like CVS and Walgreens compete with each other on street corners everyplace in Florida, but go to Dallas and Plano, and you will not find them, especially along I-635 and US 75. I needed camera batteries on my last trip through there and noticed that there were none, as usually Walgreens and CVS are the best place for me other than Wal Marts to buy batteries in a pinch.
I live in the Dallas area and I can tell you we have just as many Walgreen's and CVS's as Florida does. They are more commonly located on urban arterials than freeways.
If you want to get a feel for an area, you really have to get off the freeway.
Thanks I will remember that one next time in Texas.
Quote from: J N Winkler on October 06, 2015, 12:48:13 PM
* At the local level, the calls for a boycott often had an antipersuasive effect. Wichita opened one of its Chick-fil-A outlets at the height of the controversy and did roaring business from counterprotesters. There are places even in blue states where overtly bigoted businesses can expect to do well.
Not only that, but mildly bad press tends to serve as highly effective free advertising. How many people prior to that controversy breaking had never heard of Chick-fil-A, but now recognize it well? Or never paid it much mind, but now notice it every time they pass one? Probably quite a few. That story has likely helped Chick-fil-A far more than it has hurt them simply because the benefit of it increasing their brand name recognition factor has outweighed any bad blood it has caused. Especially when you consider that people will tend to recognize a name for far longer than they will hold a grudge against it.
As for where they are located, there are a few in the northeast but not too many. The one opening in New York City that everyone's talking about is actually the second NYC location - there has been one in Weinstein Hall at NYU since 2004. A somewhat well kept secret, since it's within a university-owned building and therefore invisible to anyone walking by on the street, but it IS open to the public.
I highly doubt this has much to do with politics, though. Hardees/Carl's Jr only recently opened their first locations in New Jersey and there are none in New York or New England. Jack In The Box used to be fairly common in New York back in the 1970s but they have since pulled out of the northeast entirely and they now only exist in a few select areas east of the Mississippi. Sheetz has yet to expand its reach into New York despite there likely being good demand for it.
As has been said upthread, businesses don't grow from local to national overnight, expansion is always a slow and gradual process. Even aside from that, though, the northeast can be a difficult market for a nationwide chain to profit in for many reasons. The different culture often creates less relative demand for certain types of business (fast food is one of them). High taxes and high land values may make it difficult for a service or retail business to be profitable even if business is good. Generally tight and/or quirky regulations may force businesses to modify their usual way of doing things in order to operate legally. And the relative geographic isolation of New England from the rest of the continental US creates challenges in supply chain management if your primary base of operations is elsewhere.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 06, 2015, 12:10:09 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2015, 10:33:12 AM
....
Also, in 1988, we were craving a Pizza Hut Pizza while traveling back to New Jersey from Mystic, CT along I-95 when passing through Milford, CT. Needless to say we got off of 95 and used Route 1 as if one was going to be it would be there, but however we drove all the way to Bridgeport and did not see one along the road that had everything else, but a Pizza Hut. I am to say that Pizza Hut in that time period avoided settling in Connecticut unless it was just US 1that they kept them off of. That somewhere else they did have stores located even near US 1 by even a block.
....
I'm pretty sure Pizza Hut operated in at least some parts of Connecticut, though not necessarily everywhere, at around that timeframe. Reason is, in July 1989 I went on a Boy Scout trip up to PEI for the Canadian Jamboree. We drove up from Virginia in two cars, my father (who was the Scoutmaster) driving one and another father driving the other. On the way back, we stopped for the night in Southington, Connecticut, and I distinctly remember we had dinner at a Pizza Hut because my father started a small food fight and we almost got thrown out of the restaurant. (Funny the sorts of things that will cause you to remember having been somewhere, huh?!!!!)
I have not been on that particular segment of I-84 since August 1990, so I have no idea whether the Pizza Hut is still there.
Nope. Closed shortly thereafter. It's now an Outback Steakhouse. There is a delivery Pizza Hut down the street.
Quote from: Duke87 on October 06, 2015, 08:08:42 PMThat story has likely helped Chick-fil-A far more than it has hurt them simply because the benefit of it increasing their brand name recognition factor has outweighed any bad blood it has caused.
Plus also it was bad press for supporting a view that a good 20% of the population would vigorously agree with, and probably 40% would share those views. And more since 5 members of the Supreme Court ballsed it up without bothering to make anything sound like rule of law, instead going for the "suck it u bigotz!!!1!!!" approach that not only wouldn't win hearts and minds, but lose some as well (OK the other 4 didn't come up with anything much either).
Surely the prize for the biggest Pharisaical bigot in the whole Chick-fil-A saga was Rahm Emmanuel trying to ban the chain from Chicago because of their views. Not only was it attempting to start a new McCarthyism (only this time against traditionalists) but, hypocritically, it was expressing a view that the Mayor (who ran Obama's campaign) had got the winning Presidential candidate to explicitly say was his view less than 4 years previously. Oh, and what did Rahm do for the gay marriage cause when he was Chief of Staff for the President, with a congress that wasn't hostile. Sod all, that's what. And it's not like Obama and his other staff didn't want it: within weeks of Emmanuel resigning to run for Mayor of Chicago, the White House officially came out in favour.
Quote from: Duke87 on October 06, 2015, 08:08:42 PMAs for where they are located, there are a few in the northeast but not too many. The one opening in New York City that everyone's talking about is actually the second NYC location - there has been one in Weinstein Hall at NYU since 2004. A somewhat well kept secret, since it's within a university-owned building and therefore invisible to anyone walking by on the street, but it IS open to the public.
One of Wichita's four Chick-fil-A locations is at the student union at Wichita State. Two others are free-standing units while the fourth is a concession at the airport, reachable only through the security checkpoint. I have a hard time understanding how they justify claiming one of the food service slots there given that their Sunday closure policy restricts the options for passengers arriving or departing on that day of the week.
Edit: With the exception of the airport, whose new terminal did not open until earlier this summer, all four locations opened in 2012. The gay marriage controversy erupted on June 16, 2012, and by the end of that following July, the Wichita
Eagle was reporting that petitions had been circulated to shut down Chick-fil-A at its two locations on university campuses in Kansas, the other being at KU in Lawrence. The one at WSU received about 500 signatures, while the one at KU got 1600, but both outlets are still in business.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 06, 2015, 03:06:36 PMI suspect it's more a case that the boycotters just happen to be noisy about it so they get media coverage, making them seem like a much bigger group than they actually are. When the homosexual "marriage" issue was in the news and people started calling for demonstrations in the stores, I recall there being a day either a few days before or a few days after when people who disagreed with the protestors showed up to make a point of giving Chick-Fil-A some business. The lines were utterly insane to the point where traffic on nearby streets was disrupted due to cars lined up to find parking.
The thing is, you don't see the boycotters in the media because they are not there at the Chick-fil-A outlets for the reporters to interview or the TV cameras to shoot. Plus there are some unwilling customers, e.g. an old high school friend of mine who went to a PTA-like gathering at Chick-fil-A because that was where the other parents had decided to go and she didn't want to make waves and thereby cause trouble for her own children.
Quote from: J N Winkler on October 06, 2015, 08:58:58 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on October 06, 2015, 08:08:42 PMAs for where they are located, there are a few in the northeast but not too many. The one opening in New York City that everyone's talking about is actually the second NYC location - there has been one in Weinstein Hall at NYU since 2004. A somewhat well kept secret, since it's within a university-owned building and therefore invisible to anyone walking by on the street, but it IS open to the public.
One of Wichita's four Chick-fil-A locations is at the student union at Wichita State. Two others are free-standing units while the fourth is a concession at the airport, reachable only through the security checkpoint. I have a hard time understanding how they justify claiming one of the food service slots there given that their Sunday closure policy restricts the options for passengers arriving or departing on that day of the week.
Some of those are open on Sundays. They have at least one mall location in Columbus that is open on Sundays.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 06, 2015, 06:38:24 PM
I love CFA. And the waffle fries are a pretty unique offering. Those who won't eat there because the corporate owners believe in the original definition of marriage are missing out on some really good food.
I'm a vegetarian and still like to go to Chick-fil-A occasionally just for an order of waffle fries and honey mustard. I don't agree with the company's stance on gay marriage, but I'm more concerned by the "silence all who disagree" mentality that seems prevalent today.
I wouldn't be surprised if most of those that protest things people said that they don't agree with would also be protesting when they feel their first amendment rights are being suffocated.
Quote from: J N Winkler on October 06, 2015, 08:58:58 PM
The one at WSU received about 500 signatures, while the one at KU got 1600, but both outlets are still in business.
Mainly because these are very small numbers, and chances are the majority of the signers never visited the restaurant anyway. Considering many people will sign a petition that's in front of them (or facebooked to them) regardless of what it says, I don't think Chick-fil-a was very worried.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 07, 2015, 08:20:47 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if most of those that protest things people said that they don't agree with would also be protesting when they feel their first amendment rights are being suffocated.
I should hope so. Dissenting with the statements of others requires those First Amendment protections. They go hand-in-hand.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 07, 2015, 09:31:28 AMI should hope so. Dissenting with the statements of others requires those First Amendment protections. They go hand-in-hand.
Absolutely - but there's a difference between an opposition to someone's view expressed through a boycott of a company, and opposition to someone's view expressed through trying to get the company banned in an area.
Quote from: briantroutman on October 06, 2015, 10:22:56 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 06, 2015, 06:38:24 PM
I love CFA. And the waffle fries are a pretty unique offering. Those who won't eat there because the corporate owners believe in the original definition of marriage are missing out on some really good food.
I'm a vegetarian and still like to go to Chick-fil-A occasionally just for an order of waffle fries and honey mustard. I don't agree with the company's stance on gay marriage, but I'm more concerned by the "silence all who disagree" mentality that seems prevalent today.
People do have the right to their opinion. To me personally I think people who are going through the trouble of avoiding Chick Fil A are just making more work for themselves. Now I am not saying they are wrong, just that they are making a little more work for themselves. Just like those who still boycott Citgo for a statement made by Chavez several years ago, were also doing the same.
Now that maybe a personal choice too that should be respected in which I do, but if the president of a company, any company, publicly states that they are for something I am against politically, I would not boycott his products or services. That is just me!
I believe strongly in the blue laws that used to be, however you will not see me trying to get a campaign launched against lawmakers to get those re-implemented.
Back on the subject, there maybe some that do not go in or anywhere near a Chick Fil A because of the latest controversy, but to me (at least the one by my house) it seems like they are making out real well despite the nationwide boycotts. I personally think that Chick Fil A is way overpriced which is why they do not interest me in eating at. I think I only ate at them twice in my life.
I avoid Chick-fil-A based on the opinions of the owners, but it's not like I changed my buying patterns. I didn't eat at Chick-fil-A anyway. Give me McDonald's or something.
I typically get gas based on price and franchise, regardless of brand. If I don't like a franchise, I won't buy there. Simple as that.
Quote from: cl94 on October 07, 2015, 10:08:21 AM
I avoid Chick-fil-A based on the opinions of the owners, but it's not like I changed my buying patterns. I didn't eat at Chick-fil-A anyway.
And this is probably the main reason why Chick-fil-a never really suffered...and if anything, received a substantial boost in sales. Most people weren't boycotting the place; they were just finding another reason not to go there. It's like me boycotting Iran, or farming tractors.
Quote from: cl94 on October 06, 2015, 09:13:31 PMSome of those are open on Sundays. They have at least one mall location in Columbus that is open on Sundays.
Really? Such seems to contradict CFA's overall corporate policy of not opening
any CFAs on Sundays; including ones located in shopping malls and airport terminals/concourses where all other stores are typically open on Sundays. I'm curious to know how the Columbus, Ohio area pulled such off.
From my own observations, the ones in the North Shore Mall (Peabody, MA), Granite Run Mall (Lima, PA prior to the whole mall closing), the Gallery Mall (Philadelphia, prior to the mall's entire food court closing down) and at Philadelphia International Airport (Terminal B/C Marketplace) aren't/weren't open on Sundays.
I heard that even franchises are not even open on Sundays especially Mall food courts.
Anyway, Jeff is right as I am sure you have some that purposely eat at Chick Fil A because of their views as well. Some may eat the other 6 days just because they believe in Sunday's off as well.
I know the Chick-Fil-A location at Fair Oaks Mall in Fairfax isn't open on Sundays because I've walked past it en route to the barber shop and found it closed; they also have a sign up explaining why. Every time I've seen a Chick-Fil-A logo on a blue sign on the highway, it has "CLOSED SUNDAYS" beneath it so that motorists unfamiliar with the policy won't waste time exiting the highway only to find a closed restaurant.
Out of curiosity I just looked to see on what dates the Peach Bowl has been played since Chick-Fil-A started sponsoring it in 1997. I was curious whether it's ever been played on a Sunday. It has not, although I suppose it's also fair to recognize that most of the major college bowl games avoid Sundays so as not to compete with the NFL for viewers' attention, so I don't know whether the sponsorship deal requires the bowl organizers to avoid Sunday or whether they do it for the more common reason. The only college sports issue I know of with avoiding Sundays for religious reasons is BYU's refusal to allow its teams to play on Sunday (the NCAA works with them on that by scheduling them in Thursday/Saturday brackets when they qualify for the NCAA basketball tournament, though I wonder what would happen if the BYU women ever made it to the Final Four since the semifinals are played on Sunday).
Quote from: cl94 on October 06, 2015, 09:13:31 PMSome of those are open on Sundays. They have at least one mall location in Columbus that is open on Sundays.
I checked and the concession at the Wichita airport is not one of them--it is open Monday-Saturday only. It appears that the airport concession managers get around the Sunday closure problem by having another restaurant, a locally based microbrewery chain (River City Brewing), that is open on Saturdays and Sundays only.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 07, 2015, 08:20:47 AMQuote from: J N Winkler on October 06, 2015, 08:58:58 PMThe one at WSU received about 500 signatures, while the one at KU got 1600, but both outlets are still in business.
Mainly because these are very small numbers, and chances are the majority of the signers never visited the restaurant anyway. Considering many people will sign a petition that's in front of them (or facebooked to them) regardless of what it says, I don't think Chick-fil-a was very worried.
Another factor is that getting Chick-fil-A out of either place would have entailed action on the part of university administrators, who are typically very old hands at defusing student protests. Student protesters' attention spans tend to be limited because there is always some new cause turning up on the horizon and students typically do not have the life experience to realize that successful advocacy requires sustained attention to a single issue.
Chick-fil-A corporate made things easier by promising to stop the giving to anti-gay causes and by mouthing the standard rhetoric about diversity and inclusion. Make no mistake: senior management has not undergone a change of heart, but is now donating to the same kinds of groups in ways that are more difficult to discover and document.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 07, 2015, 10:16:32 AMAnd this is probably the main reason why Chick-fil-a never really suffered...and if anything, received a substantial boost in sales. Most people weren't boycotting the place; they were just finding another reason not to go there. It's like me boycotting Iran, or farming tractors.
Chicken restaurants do not receive many cents on my eating-out dollar in general, since I prefer Middle Eastern eateries for the standard dishes (such as shawarma and fattoush salad) that are light, high in vegetables and meat, and low in refined carbohydrates. I am happy to stick with Popeye's or KFC rather than try to explain to my LGBT friends why I am funding a restaurant chain whose management believes in their continued civil disability.
Are Chick-fil-A employees allowed to marry the ketchup?
iPhone
If there is one successful way for restaurants to lose business, it's by killing your customers.
(Hi, Chi-Chi's!)
In an ironic way, this isn't true for all lines of business. Amusement parks are very good at weathering deaths. And skydiving companies. :-)
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 07, 2015, 12:49:34 PM
If there is one successful way for restaurants to lose business, it's by killing your customers.
(Hi, Chi-Chi's!)
In an ironic way, this isn't true for all lines of business. Amusement parks are very good at weathering deaths. And skydiving companies. :-)
Though Jack in the Box survived, and to a lesser extent there are still Sizzler restaurants.
I wish there were more Chick-fil-As in the upper great plains area... the closest one's 6 hours from me. Heck, they'd have a very strong customer base up here.
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 07, 2015, 10:17:06 AM
Quote from: cl94 on October 06, 2015, 09:13:31 PMSome of those are open on Sundays. They have at least one mall location in Columbus that is open on Sundays.
Really? Such seems to contradict CFA's overall corporate policy of not opening any CFAs on Sundays; including ones located in shopping malls and airport terminals/concourses where all other stores are typically open on Sundays. I'm curious to know how the Columbus, Ohio area pulled such off.
From my own observations, the ones in the North Shore Mall (Peabody, MA), Granite Run Mall (Lima, PA prior to the whole mall closing), the Gallery Mall (Philadelphia, prior to the mall's entire food court closing down) and at Philadelphia International Airport (Terminal B/C Marketplace) aren't/weren't open on Sundays.
I can't vouch for this mall example in Columbus, either way, but it's possible the Mall has some sort of penalties for stores / businesses not being open at certain times.
I remember reading that some of the malls (or at least one) around here were looking to penalize some stores (I forget the method how, penalties, possible eviction, etc) who weren't gonna join in the recent trend of opening earlier and earlier into Thanksgiving (the Black Friday creep into T-Giving) and stay closed that day. (This is an overall observation, nothing related directly to Chick-Fil-A, but a mall may have some sway)
Quote from: Mr_Northside on October 07, 2015, 05:14:45 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 07, 2015, 10:17:06 AM
Quote from: cl94 on October 06, 2015, 09:13:31 PMSome of those are open on Sundays. They have at least one mall location in Columbus that is open on Sundays.
Really? Such seems to contradict CFA's overall corporate policy of not opening any CFAs on Sundays; including ones located in shopping malls and airport terminals/concourses where all other stores are typically open on Sundays. I'm curious to know how the Columbus, Ohio area pulled such off.
From my own observations, the ones in the North Shore Mall (Peabody, MA), Granite Run Mall (Lima, PA prior to the whole mall closing), the Gallery Mall (Philadelphia, prior to the mall's entire food court closing down) and at Philadelphia International Airport (Terminal B/C Marketplace) aren't/weren't open on Sundays.
I can't vouch for this mall example in Columbus, either way, but it's possible the Mall has some sort of penalties for stores / businesses not being open at certain times.
I remember reading that some of the malls (or at least one) around here were looking to penalize some stores (I forget the method how, penalties, possible eviction, etc) who weren't gonna join in the recent trend of opening earlier and earlier into Thanksgiving (the Black Friday creep into T-Giving) and stay closed that day. (This is an overall observation, nothing related directly to Chick-Fil-A, but a mall may have some sway)
I would expect that a business, like Chick-Fil-A, whose management feels very strongly about not being open on certain days would insist on their right to observe their preferred hours being included in their lease.
Quote from: Mr_Northside on October 07, 2015, 05:14:45 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 07, 2015, 10:17:06 AM
Quote from: cl94 on October 06, 2015, 09:13:31 PMSome of those are open on Sundays. They have at least one mall location in Columbus that is open on Sundays.
Really? Such seems to contradict CFA's overall corporate policy of not opening any CFAs on Sundays; including ones located in shopping malls and airport terminals/concourses where all other stores are typically open on Sundays. I'm curious to know how the Columbus, Ohio area pulled such off.
From my own observations, the ones in the North Shore Mall (Peabody, MA), Granite Run Mall (Lima, PA prior to the whole mall closing), the Gallery Mall (Philadelphia, prior to the mall's entire food court closing down) and at Philadelphia International Airport (Terminal B/C Marketplace) aren't/weren't open on Sundays.
I can't vouch for this mall example in Columbus, either way, but it's possible the Mall has some sort of penalties for stores / businesses not being open at certain times.
I remember reading that some of the malls (or at least one) around here were looking to penalize some stores (I forget the method how, penalties, possible eviction, etc) who weren't gonna join in the recent trend of opening earlier and earlier into Thanksgiving (the Black Friday creep into T-Giving) and stay closed that day. (This is an overall observation, nothing related directly to Chick-Fil-A, but a mall may have some sway)
Confirmed (http://www.polarisfashionplace.com/store/Chick-fil-A/2138766922/). One of their other area mall locations is closed Sundays, but not this one.
Quote from: cl94 on October 07, 2015, 07:04:04 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on October 07, 2015, 05:14:45 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 07, 2015, 10:17:06 AM
Quote from: cl94 on October 06, 2015, 09:13:31 PMSome of those are open on Sundays. They have at least one mall location in Columbus that is open on Sundays.
Really? Such seems to contradict CFA's overall corporate policy of not opening any CFAs on Sundays; including ones located in shopping malls and airport terminals/concourses where all other stores are typically open on Sundays. I'm curious to know how the Columbus, Ohio area pulled such off.
From my own observations, the ones in the North Shore Mall (Peabody, MA), Granite Run Mall (Lima, PA prior to the whole mall closing), the Gallery Mall (Philadelphia, prior to the mall's entire food court closing down) and at Philadelphia International Airport (Terminal B/C Marketplace) aren't/weren't open on Sundays.
I can't vouch for this mall example in Columbus, either way, but it's possible the Mall has some sort of penalties for stores / businesses not being open at certain times.
I remember reading that some of the malls (or at least one) around here were looking to penalize some stores (I forget the method how, penalties, possible eviction, etc) who weren't gonna join in the recent trend of opening earlier and earlier into Thanksgiving (the Black Friday creep into T-Giving) and stay closed that day. (This is an overall observation, nothing related directly to Chick-Fil-A, but a mall may have some sway)
Confirmed (http://www.polarisfashionplace.com/store/Chick-fil-A/2138766922/). One of their other area mall locations is closed Sundays, but not this one.
Well, that's not right. Let's all protest and boycott them.
Quote from: Brian556 on October 06, 2015, 10:26:57 AM
Chick-fil-A has some of the best quality fast food out there. Their quality is consistent. They also have very good and fast service, despite their resteraunts being very busy. Their employees are more polite and higher caliber than other fast food reseraunts.
If forcing their employees to operate on script is your idea of polite, then sure. Personally it creeps me out whenever I say "Thank you" and invariably get back "My pleasure" from every single employee. It's very Stepford. I always start wondering what their training must be like and feel sorry for them that they can't even be trusted to choose their own response to customers.
I can't eat there anymore since the big gay marriage controversy anyway. It is tasty food but once I start eating it I think about what my money is funding and begin to feel uncomfortable. So I eat elsewhere. Norman has a Chicken Express, a couple Raising Cane's, and just got a Zaxby's, so there's no end to good chicken restaurants in town.
Quote from: cl94 on October 07, 2015, 07:04:04 PM
Confirmed (http://www.polarisfashionplace.com/store/Chick-fil-A/2138766922/). One of their other area mall locations is closed Sundays, but not this one.
I wonder if the mall just listed default hours absent any other information. Chick-fil-A's own website seems to omit hours for locations in other shopping centers in the Columbus area. This would probably be something which would need visual confirmation.
Quote from: rawmustard on October 08, 2015, 09:39:21 AM
Quote from: cl94 on October 07, 2015, 07:04:04 PM
Confirmed (http://www.polarisfashionplace.com/store/Chick-fil-A/2138766922/). One of their other area mall locations is closed Sundays, but not this one.
I wonder if the mall just listed default hours absent any other information. Chick-fil-A's own website seems to omit hours for locations in other shopping centers in the Columbus area. This would probably be something which would need visual confirmation.
Other restaurants in that food court do have different hours listed (e.g. Cheesecake Factory) from those stated in the Chick Fil A listing...
Mike
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 08, 2015, 07:59:49 AM
Quote from: Brian556 on October 06, 2015, 10:26:57 AM
Chick-fil-A has some of the best quality fast food out there. Their quality is consistent. They also have very good and fast service, despite their resteraunts being very busy. Their employees are more polite and higher caliber than other fast food reseraunts.
If forcing their employees to operate on script is your idea of polite, then sure. Personally it creeps me out whenever I say "Thank you" and invariably get back "My pleasure" from every single employee. It's very Stepford. I always start wondering what their training must be like and feel sorry for them that they can't even be trusted to choose their own response to customers.
I can't eat there anymore since the big gay marriage controversy anyway. It is tasty food but once I start eating it I think about what my money is funding and begin to feel uncomfortable. So I eat elsewhere. Norman has a Chicken Express, a couple Raising Cane's, and just got a Zaxby's, so there's no end to good chicken restaurants in town.
The times are that you are told to say "Welcome to X" instead of your own "Good Morning, Good Afternoon, etc" like in the past. Yes we live under scrutiny where the president, CEO, and Executive VP's now see what the low paying hourly employees do via camera and paperwork that the supervisors must log to give to their bosses, who give it to their bosses, and so on. Plus with computer entries, you have the big guys looking in as they now have access to all computer files associated with their companies at all levels.
As far as boycotting I think you are going to far, but if you feel that you do not want to be part of funding programs that go against your beliefs you have that right. However, how many businesses I patronize give money to causes I hate or go against my personal, religious, and political beliefs.
The way I look at it I am not giving money to that cause, I am paying for a service. What that person does after with my money is their transgression and not mine. Believe it or not Scott, I have people from Church tell me to boycott certain places, but I do not. I have them tell me to not buy music cd's because the artist supports a specific charity or group they do not believe in which I do buy. In fact I know a lot of people who tell me that they won't buy a Linda Ronstadt album because of her political views, feeling that they are supporting the political party they feel is not for them. I could care less what a person believes, if I like their music unless they state in advance, that all proceeds generated go to this charity then I will not give.
That is my take on this whole thing.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 07, 2015, 12:49:34 PM
If there is one successful way for restaurants to lose business, it's by killing your customers.
(Hi, Chi-Chi's!)
In an ironic way, this isn't true for all lines of business. Amusement parks are very good at weathering deaths. And skydiving companies. :-)
Umm, tell that to the owners of Action Park
Quote from: rawmustard on October 08, 2015, 09:39:21 AM
Quote from: cl94 on October 07, 2015, 07:04:04 PM
Confirmed (http://www.polarisfashionplace.com/store/Chick-fil-A/2138766922/). One of their other area mall locations is closed Sundays, but not this one.
I wonder if the mall just listed default hours absent any other information. Chick-fil-A's own website seems to omit hours for locations in other shopping centers in the Columbus area. This would probably be something which would need visual confirmation.
Agreed. Given
Chik Fil-A's long, well-known &
publicized stance of not being open on Sundays at
any location; if such were the case, the news would have spread like wildfire... especially on the internet.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 08, 2015, 10:36:07 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 07, 2015, 12:49:34 PM
If there is one successful way for restaurants to lose business, it's by killing your customers.
(Hi, Chi-Chi's!)
In an ironic way, this isn't true for all lines of business. Amusement parks are very good at weathering deaths. And skydiving companies. :-)
Umm, tell that to the owners of Action Park
That was actually part of the appeal. I think insurance costs and lawsuits is what did them in.
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 08, 2015, 10:39:10 AM
Quote from: rawmustard on October 08, 2015, 09:39:21 AM
Quote from: cl94 on October 07, 2015, 07:04:04 PM
Confirmed (http://www.polarisfashionplace.com/store/Chick-fil-A/2138766922/). One of their other area mall locations is closed Sundays, but not this one.
I wonder if the mall just listed default hours absent any other information. Chick-fil-A's own website seems to omit hours for locations in other shopping centers in the Columbus area. This would probably be something which would need visual confirmation.
Agreed. Given Chik Fil-A's long, well-known & publicized stance of not being open on Sundays at any location; if such were the case, the news would have spread like wildfire... especially on the internet.
There are the occasional one-offs that don't fit the normal operations of a company. Sometimes it's known; other times the reaction is 'eh'. Wawa advertises their fee-free ATMs in every store. However, I worked at the ONE store in the entire multi-hundred chain that did not have an ATM, due to a shopping-center/landlord agreement that a bank within that shopping center was permitted to have the only ATM in that shopping center. Wawa never advertised "almost every location" had an ATM though.
Banks, especially those that open on Sundays, tend to have this issue too, because even though they advertise they are open on Sundays, they are some - usually found in cities - that aren't.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 08, 2015, 10:18:03 AM
....
The way I look at it I am not giving money to that cause, I am paying for a service. What that person does after with my money is their transgression and not mine. Believe it or not Scott, I have people from Church tell me to boycott certain places, but I do not. I have them tell me to not buy music cd's because the artist supports a specific charity or group they do not believe in which I do buy. In fact I know a lot of people who tell me that they won't buy a Linda Ronstadt album because of her political views, feeling that they are supporting the political party they feel is not for them. I could care less what a person believes, if I like their music unless they state in advance, that all proceeds generated go to this charity then I will not give.
....
I think that's a reasonable outlook. While I'm generally conservative, I'm a huge Bruce Springsteen fan and I don't let his generally liberal politics deter me from attending his concerts–except in 2004, when he participated in a tour that was explicitly stated in advance to be in support of the so-called "MoveOn" PAC and the John Kerry campaign. I didn't agree with that and didn't want to support it (especially after multiple media reports about MoveOn members slashing tires on cars displaying Bush/Cheney stickers in Pennsylvania....I think that sort of thing is a disgrace no matter which side does it!), so I didn't go the concert that time. Springsteen usually isn't in-your-face too much and recognizes that his fanbase spans the political spectrum. There are other musicians who are fairly obnoxious or condescending about their politics and I'm a lot less likely to attend their shows even if I like their music (I've been told Jackson Browne is an example, although I do think it's pretty cool how he's managed to take his ranch off the electrical grid with wind turbines).
The thing about corporations is that the vast majority of them are, at some point, going to give money to various organizations such that someone's always going to have some basis for complaint. It's a fact of doing business in this country that it's going to be almost impossible to be 100% consistently ideologically pure. I suppose this risks going off on a political tangent, but I think that's often true for individuals voting on Election Day as well–I don't think there's anything "wrong" with voting for a candidate with whom you disagree strongly on one particular issue (say, the candidate is very vocal about being pro-abortion and you are strongly pro-life) if that candidate's positions on other issues that also matter to you are more in line with your views than the opponent (say, the candidate also has far more experience and has a better transportation plan than his opponent). I think voting strictly on party lines is one of the most idiotic and uneducated ways to vote unless you're a political appointee whose career depends on it. But to go back to the music example, I find Neil Young to be one of the musicians who's extremely obnoxious about his political views, and frankly I don't like most of his music anyway, but that would not deter me from buying a PonoPlayer if/when my iPod gives up the ghost. I agree with him about wanting to see high-rez music become more widespread instead of crappy lossy-compressed .mp3 nonsense, and I'd view the money spent on the device as going to that cause even if he might use some of it in support of some sort of political crusade.
To make this road-related, I think the only political issue on which I'd truly be a stickler would be that I will always vote against any candidate who makes a statement in favor of returning to the old 55-mph national speed limit, regardless of any other position(s) said candidate might espouse. (It so happens the current presidential candidate who's made statements favoring a return to 55 mph is someone for whom I'd never vote anyway due to a whole host of other issues, but the 55-mph issue alone is enough for me.)
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 08, 2015, 10:58:33 AM
I suppose this risks going off on a political tangent, but I think that's often true for individuals voting on Election Day as well–I don't think there's anything "wrong" with voting for a candidate with whom you disagree strongly on one particular issue (say, the candidate is very vocal about being pro-abortion and you are strongly pro-life) if that candidate's positions on other issues that also matter to you are more in line with your views than the opponent (say, the candidate also has far more experience and has a better transportation plan than his opponent).
For some of us, it depends what that said issue is.
I do also think people have a right to not buy a product if they don't agree with something about it, just like how I try to avoid shopping in Sioux City because I don't want my sales tax supporting Sioux City.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 08, 2015, 10:52:40 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 08, 2015, 10:39:10 AMGiven Chik Fil-A's long, well-known & publicized stance of not being open on Sundays at any location; if such were the case, the news would have spread like wildfire... especially on the internet.
There are the occasional one-offs that don't fit the normal operations of a company. Sometimes it's known; other times the reaction is 'eh'. Wawa advertises their fee-free ATMs in every store. However, I worked at the ONE store in the entire multi-hundred chain that did not have an ATM, due to a shopping-center/landlord agreement that a bank within that shopping center was permitted to have the only ATM in that shopping center. Wawa never advertised "almost every location" had an ATM though.
I have to wonder if there's either a small asterisks or very fine print that reads
where applicable/available for such.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 08, 2015, 10:52:40 AMBanks, especially those that open on Sundays, tend to have this issue too, because even though they advertise they are open on Sundays, they are some - usually found in cities - that aren't.
Again, those usually have some type of small-print disclaimer listed somewhere in their advertising.
FWIW, here's
Chik Fil-A's current Sunday Policy (http://www.chick-fil-a.com/Media/PDF/ClosedonSundaypolicy.pdf). Do note that there's no asterisks or fine print stating otherwise.
Given that
Chik-Fil-A's founder, S. Truett Cathy, died just over a year ago; I, personally, do not believe that even a special-case exception for select store either existed or was even in the works since his passing.
An actual visit (from someone in the area) to one of the Columbus area CFAs in question would verify or disprove the above.
Quote from: SD Mapman on October 08, 2015, 11:10:51 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 08, 2015, 10:58:33 AM
I suppose this risks going off on a political tangent, but I think that's often true for individuals voting on Election Day as well–I don't think there's anything "wrong" with voting for a candidate with whom you disagree strongly on one particular issue (say, the candidate is very vocal about being pro-abortion and you are strongly pro-life) if that candidate's positions on other issues that also matter to you are more in line with your views than the opponent (say, the candidate also has far more experience and has a better transportation plan than his opponent).
For some of us, it depends what that said issue is.
Some people may feel that way. As you may have noticed, at the end of my prior comment I stated the one issue on which I would be a single-issue voter. But as I said, for the most part there is nothing wrong with deciding that a candidate's positives outweigh that candidate's negatives unless the one issue is simply too important for you. Most of the time I'd say that's going to be the sort of thing you're going to have to weigh as to
every candidate in
every election because I highly doubt there is ever any one "perfect" candidate out there for any voter, other than the automatons who vote strictly based on party.
But, just as there is nothing wrong with someone feeling that one particular issue trumps all others when voting, and just as that person should not be condemned for that, it's equally valid for other people to say, "I disagree with this candidate on issue X, but I'm going to hold my nose on that and vote for him anyway because I think issues Y and Z are important too and he's better on those." It's wrong to condemn people who decide to vote that way.
Just in case there's any doubt, I've voted for members of both major parties and for third-party candidates. I think the only office for which I've never voted for a Democrat is US president, though I did vote for an independent candidate once. For governor I've voted for Republicans, Democrats, and one time a third-party candidate. I cannot think of any candidate in any of those elections with whom I agreed on every single issue.
Quote from: SD Mapman on October 08, 2015, 11:10:51 AM
I do also think people have a right to not buy a product if they don't agree with something about it, just like how I try to avoid shopping in Sioux City because I don't want my sales tax supporting Sioux City.
Of course. I don't believe I ever said a person doesn't have that right. Obviously, each person has the right to spend his money, or not to spend his money, as he sees fit. What I object to is the current attitude displayed by people who think it's acceptable for them to demonize anyone who patronizes the businesses, or buys the products, or listens to the music, to which those people object. If someone chooses not to patronize Chick-Fil-A because the company's COO made statements opposing homosexual "marriage," that's his prerogative, but it's equally other people's prerogative to choose to patronize Chick-Fil-A for whatever reason they choose, whether it be a desire to support the COO's position, simply enjoying the food there, the location being convenient, or whatever. The "either/or" attitude many people seem to have these days is tiresome. Just because someone chooses to eat at Chick-Fil-A doesn't make that person some kind of "bigot" who wants to apply that verse from Leviticus that calls for execution by stoning for all homosexuals, and just because someone chooses not to eat there doesn't mean that person is doing so out of some desire to "support" homosexual "marriage," yet with the way people act these days, you'd think those are the only two possible positions (well, I suppose there are two more that would reverse the descriptions to portray the person eating there as a devout person and the boycotter as a pederast, right?). An example of a person who doesn't eat there for independent reasons might be a vegetarian who couldn't care less about the political issues and simply doesn't eat chicken.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 08, 2015, 11:31:20 AMWhat I object to is the current attitude displayed by people who think it's acceptable for them to demonize anyone who patronizes the businesses, or buys the products, or listens to the music, to which those people object. If someone chooses not to patronize Chick-Fil-A because the company's COO made statements opposing homosexual "marriage," that's his prerogative, but it's equally other people's prerogative to choose to patronize Chick-Fil-A for whatever reason they choose, whether it be a desire to support the COO's position, simply enjoying the food there, the location being convenient, or whatever. The "either/or" attitude many people seem to have these days is tiresome. Just because someone chooses to eat at Chick-Fil-A doesn't make that person some kind of "bigot" who wants to apply that verse from Leviticus that calls for execution by stoning for all homosexuals, and just because someone chooses not to eat there doesn't mean that person is doing so out of some desire to "support" homosexual "marriage," yet with the way people act these days, you'd think those are the only two possible positions (well, I suppose there are two more that would reverse the descriptions to portray the person eating there as a devout person and the boycotter as a pederast, right?). An example of a person who doesn't eat there for independent reasons might be a vegetarian who couldn't care less about the political issues and simply doesn't eat chicken.
I confess to some perplexity as to why you are bringing the word
pederast into this discussion. The gay people I know have shown interest only in other consenting adults of the same sexual orientation. (They are not uniformly in favor of marriage equality, by the way.)
I have been careful not to use the word
bigot in relation to the Chick-fil-A counterprotesters. I did refer to "overtly bigoted businesses" in a context in which it was clear that Chick-fil-A was intended as one example of such. I acknowledge that it has to be a matter of personal conscience whether an individual participates in a boycott and that people will weigh the various factors involved--the chain's stance on a political issue, the quality of its food and service, etc.--differently. I have already noted that I continue to buy Barilla products despite its CEO's very questionable statements on gay marriage.
However, I decline to apologize for characterizing Chick-fil-A's management as bigoted. They are not donating to anti-gay causes privately and on their own account; they have linked their chain to that stance. This is why I feel more of a personal imperative to boycott Chick-fil-A than I did when I was living in Britain and avoided taking Stagecoach buses whenever I reasonably could because Brian Souter, a very conservative Catholic who funded anti-abortion and anti-gay causes out of his own pocket, had a substantial ownership interest.
You all do know that it's possible to be opposed to the redefinition of marriage and not be a bigot, don't you?
It's a pretty big leap to assume that Mr. Cathy and the Chick-Fil-A ownership are/were bigots because they opposed the redefinition of marriage. I oppose it, and if you call me a bigot, you're a liar.
Quote from: J N Winkler on October 08, 2015, 02:33:30 PM
....
I have been careful not to use the word bigot in relation to the Chick-fil-A counterprotesters. I did refer to "overtly bigoted businesses" in a context in which it was clear that Chick-fil-A was intended as one example of such. I acknowledge that it has to be a matter of personal conscience whether an individual participates in a boycott and that people will weigh the various factors involved--the chain's stance on a political issue, the quality of its food and service, etc.--differently. I have already noted that I continue to buy Barilla products despite its CEO's very questionable statements on gay marriage.
....
I wasn't intending to refer to anyone on this forum nor to the debate here (although I will admit that one of the more cantankerous forum members, who shall remain nameless, did cross my mind while I was typing). I was referring to overall societal discussion in general, the tenor of which has declined badly in recent years for a whole host of reasons. Sorry if that wasn't clear from my comments.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 08, 2015, 03:02:56 PMYou all do know that it's possible to be opposed to the redefinition of marriage and not be a bigot, don't you?
It's a pretty big leap to assume that Mr. Cathy and the Chick-Fil-A ownership are/were bigots because they opposed the redefinition of marriage. I oppose it, and if you call me a bigot, you're a liar.
Let me put it this way: if I learned that Mr. Cathy (or one of his senior managers) was a participant on this forum, I would not air my views about Chick-fil-A here. Commenting on a public figure is one thing; starting a personal quarrel on a Web forum is another.
There are many ways to bring about social change. A boycott is one way: sometimes it is effective, and sometimes it is not, but either way it relieves the boycotter of the burden on his or her conscience of financially supporting a cause he or she disagrees with. Another is to keep up gentle sales pressure in hopes that hearts and minds change as people's experience expands.
I know the forum's policy on political discussions so I won't veer off this road to that place.
Ben & Jerry's IMO exemplifies the separation of a company and its executives. The company isn't in support of any one politician or political party (i.e. they don't donate their money), but the executives are (Ben and Jerry and Bernie Sanders supporters) politically aligned.
Chick-fil-A, AFAIK, in the past did the opposite. I don't know if they still do this however.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 08, 2015, 11:31:20 AM
Quote from: SD Mapman on October 08, 2015, 11:10:51 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 08, 2015, 10:58:33 AM
I suppose this risks going off on a political tangent, but I think that's often true for individuals voting on Election Day as well—I don't think there's anything "wrong" with voting for a candidate with whom you disagree strongly on one particular issue (say, the candidate is very vocal about being pro-abortion and you are strongly pro-life) if that candidate's positions on other issues that also matter to you are more in line with your views than the opponent (say, the candidate also has far more experience and has a better transportation plan than his opponent).
For some of us, it depends what that said issue is.
Some people may feel that way. As you may have noticed, at the end of my prior comment I stated the one issue on which I would be a single-issue voter. But as I said, for the most part there is nothing wrong with deciding that a candidate's positives outweigh that candidate's negatives unless the one issue is simply too important for you. Most of the time I'd say that's going to be the sort of thing you're going to have to weigh as to every candidate in every election because I highly doubt there is ever any one "perfect" candidate out there for any voter, other than the automatons who vote strictly based on party.
But, just as there is nothing wrong with someone feeling that one particular issue trumps all others when voting, and just as that person should not be condemned for that, it's equally valid for other people to say, "I disagree with this candidate on issue X, but I'm going to hold my nose on that and vote for him anyway because I think issues Y and Z are important too and he's better on those." It's wrong to condemn people who decide to vote that way.
Just in case there's any doubt, I've voted for members of both major parties and for third-party candidates. I think the only office for which I've never voted for a Democrat is US president, though I did vote for an independent candidate once. For governor I've voted for Republicans, Democrats, and one time a third-party candidate. I cannot think of any candidate in any of those elections with whom I agreed on every single issue.
Quote from: SD Mapman on October 08, 2015, 11:10:51 AM
I do also think people have a right to not buy a product if they don't agree with something about it, just like how I try to avoid shopping in Sioux City because I don't want my sales tax supporting Sioux City.
Of course. I don't believe I ever said a person doesn't have that right. Obviously, each person has the right to spend his money, or not to spend his money, as he sees fit. What I object to is the current attitude displayed by people who think it's acceptable for them to demonize anyone who patronizes the businesses, or buys the products, or listens to the music, to which those people object. If someone chooses not to patronize Chick-Fil-A because the company's COO made statements opposing homosexual "marriage," that's his prerogative, but it's equally other people's prerogative to choose to patronize Chick-Fil-A for whatever reason they choose, whether it be a desire to support the COO's position, simply enjoying the food there, the location being convenient, or whatever. The "either/or" attitude many people seem to have these days is tiresome. Just because someone chooses to eat at Chick-Fil-A doesn't make that person some kind of "bigot" who wants to apply that verse from Leviticus that calls for execution by stoning for all homosexuals, and just because someone chooses not to eat there doesn't mean that person is doing so out of some desire to "support" homosexual "marriage," yet with the way people act these days, you'd think those are the only two possible positions (well, I suppose there are two more that would reverse the descriptions to portray the person eating there as a devout person and the boycotter as a pederast, right?). An example of a person who doesn't eat there for independent reasons might be a vegetarian who couldn't care less about the political issues and simply doesn't eat chicken.
Here's my interpretation of this.
Wegmans is the grocery store (along with Tops to a lesser extent) I've been going to since before I was born. When Whole Foods opens in Amherst, NY in the coming months, if I lived in that area it would be another, competitive option. If I were the one in my house getting the groceries (I'm not), I would shop at Whole Foods in tandem with Wegmans if their CEO and company did not donate money to Conservative and Tea Party causes. I'm not saying I'll
never shop at Whole Foods, but this has always been in the back of my mind when I walk in. The same can be said for Papa John's – I will call Domino's for a delivery over PJ's because their CEO has, on numerous occasions, made statements that I feel would be (personally) counterintuitive to how I view life, and that I would not want to feed my earned money into this system.
I understand my guilty affection for CFA maybe ironic as I don't support their views, but it doesn't bother me
as much as other issues.
On a side note, this is an interesting conversation.
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 08, 2015, 04:14:08 PM
The same can be said for Papa John's — I will call Domino's for a delivery over PJ's because their CEO has, on numerous occasions, made statements that I feel would be (personally) counterintuitive to how I view life, and that I would not want to feed my earned money into this system.
If you don't believe in conservative values and vote with your pocketbook, Domino's may not be a better choice than Papa John's.
Ownership is another consideration. Of the examples cited, Whole Foods is publicly traded, while both Wegmans and Chick-fil-A are privately held.
Senior management at Whole Foods has come under fire for questionable labor practices (including an English-only policy at one point), greenwashing, overcharging, Proposition 65 violations, editorializing against the Affordable Care Act, etc. In principle all of these are amenable to shareholder activism. Compensation is also controlled by the board of directors and that is one way to limit the resources available to support causes that alienate the customer base or embarrass the company.
But because Chick-fil-A is privately held, there is no way to gain leverage simply by buying stock on the open exchange. This leaves boycotts and open public criticism as the obvious viable approaches.
Quote from: Big John on October 08, 2015, 05:09:12 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 08, 2015, 04:14:08 PM
The same can be said for Papa John's — I will call Domino's for a delivery over PJ's because their CEO has, on numerous occasions, made statements that I feel would be (personally) counterintuitive to how I view life, and that I would not want to feed my earned money into this system.
If you don't believe in conservative values and vote with your pocketbook, Domino's may not be a better choice than Papa John's.
In business, there aren't many other choices. I won't ask "why" as this isn't the forum for that. It's just the "what" that people want to avoid.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 08, 2015, 03:02:56 PM
You all do know that it's possible to be opposed to the redefinition of marriage and not be a bigot, don't you?
It's a pretty big leap to assume that Mr. Cathy and the Chick-Fil-A ownership are/were bigots because they opposed the redefinition of marriage. I oppose it, and if you call me a bigot, you're a liar.
Exactly.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 08, 2015, 10:44:35 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 08, 2015, 10:36:07 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 07, 2015, 12:49:34 PM
If there is one successful way for restaurants to lose business, it's by killing your customers.
(Hi, Chi-Chi's!)
In an ironic way, this isn't true for all lines of business. Amusement parks are very good at weathering deaths. And skydiving companies. :-)
Umm, tell that to the owners of Action Park
That was actually part of the appeal. I think insurance costs and lawsuits is what did them in.
Indeed. Action Park should have closed 15 or more years before it did if deaths alone were inimical to its business. Action Park's reputation was one of risk, a free-for-all. Multiple people did die as a result, but this made the rides themselves legendary.
iPhone
Quote from: J N Winkler on October 08, 2015, 03:31:27 PM
Let me put it this way: if I learned that Mr. Cathy (or one of his senior managers) was a participant on this forum, I would not air my views about Chick-fil-A here. Commenting on a public figure is one thing; starting a personal quarrel on a Web forum is another.
There are many ways to bring about social change. A boycott is one way: sometimes it is effective, and sometimes it is not, but either way it relieves the boycotter of the burden on his or her conscience of financially supporting a cause he or she disagrees with. Another is to keep up gentle sales pressure in hopes that hearts and minds change as people's experience expands.
You may have missed my point. I'm not speaking about personal quarrels with anyone on this forum. Would the fact that there are DOT personnel on this forum dissuade you from speaking your mind about their agencies if you had a negative opinion?
My point is that there are those who have said here and elsewhere, basically, that they don't patronize CFA because of the bigoted owners. Those people don't know what's in Truett Cathy's heart. There seems to be this common perception among those of a certain persuasion on moral/cultural issues that if you oppose the redefinition of marriage, you hate gays. That's a big leap to make and in many -- I daresay, most -- cases just is simply not true.
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 08, 2015, 04:14:08 PM
Ben & Jerry's IMO exemplifies the separation of a company and its executives. The company isn't in support of any one politician or political party (i.e. they don't donate their money), but the executives are (Ben and Jerry and Bernie Sanders supporters) politically aligned.
Chick-fil-A, AFAIK, in the past did the opposite. I don't know if they still do this however.
Corporate donations to political candidates are prohibited.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 08, 2015, 09:56:07 PMYou may have missed my point. I'm not speaking about personal quarrels with anyone on this forum. Would the fact that there are DOT personnel on this forum dissuade you from speaking your mind about their agencies if you had a negative opinion?
It has not. There are KDOT employees on this forum and I have been very critical of some of KDOT's policies. The difference is that DOT employees tend to avoid arguments about what their agencies do. It is not really part of their job to defend their employers on their own leisure time, and they tend to operate under an expectation that they will coordinate with the DOT's public relations personnel in presenting the agency's side of any debate. This is why I have never directed my criticisms at any specific employee, or asked him or her to justify his or her agency's policies.
Another consideration is that the agency personnel who choose to be openly identified as DOT employees on this forum tend to be relatively junior. We don't have anyone at or above bureau head/district engineer level, unless he or she is U-boating.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 08, 2015, 09:56:07 PMMy point is that there are those who have said here and elsewhere, basically, that they don't patronize CFA because of the bigoted owners. Those people don't know what's in Truett Cathy's heart. There seems to be this common perception among those of a certain persuasion on moral/cultural issues that if you oppose the redefinition of marriage, you hate gays. That's a big leap to make and in many -- I daresay, most -- cases just is simply not true.
I haven't spoken of specific bigoted owners. I don't know Dan Cathy (it was actually he who was implicated in the donation controversy), nor do I know who moves in his circle. For all I know, he may have an army of friends who are gay, just like Ian Smith (premier of Rhodesia 1964-1979) claimed to have many black friends; he may even sincerely believe conversion therapy works.
I do characterize Chick-fil-A's senior management as bigoted because it is a collective (consisting of people who make decisions for the company) that is known by its actions. It gives money to anti-gay causes, including groups that conflate religious marriage with civil marriage and use that to argue a civil disability that uniquely affects gays should persist.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 08, 2015, 03:02:56 PM
You all do know that it's possible to be opposed to the redefinition of marriage and not be a bigot, don't you?
It's a pretty big leap to assume that Mr. Cathy and the Chick-Fil-A ownership are/were bigots because they opposed the redefinition of marriage. I oppose it, and if you call me a bigot, you're a liar.
I don't support the redefinition of marriage either, as I don't believe governments should be in the dictionary business. However, I do support expanding the range of couples to whom it's available.
But what nobody's stated yet is their position on ketchup. Restaurants generally favor marrying ketchup since it can save a buck, but ketchup manufacturers and public health agencies have come out against it. Still, since Chick-fil-A is a restaurant, but has also expressed concerns over who and what specifically may be married, I'm not certain which side of the debate they'd fall on. For that matter, do they even use ketchup bottles, or is it only packets? :hmmm:
Chick-fil-A uses Heinz Dip & Squeeze (TM) (http://www.heinzfoodservice.com/products-and-brands/portion-control/condiments-and-sauces/ketchup/dip-and-squeeze) packets, where you can dip your fries in a little tub, or squeeze it out onto your fries.
It's two things in one, and frankly, it's an abomination. You look at it, and you think to yourself, "That just ain't right." :)
(CFA does just fine in this section of blue state land. Their chicken's pretty good. Their fries--- well, good fries IMHO are skinny and hot. CFA just has different taste.)
Quote from: kurumi on October 08, 2015, 11:34:24 PM
Chick-fil-A uses Heinz Dip & Squeeze (TM) (http://www.heinzfoodservice.com/products-and-brands/portion-control/condiments-and-sauces/ketchup/dip-and-squeeze) packets, where you can dip your fries in a little tub, or squeeze it out onto your fries.
It's two things in one, and frankly, it's an abomination. You look at it, and you think to yourself, "That just ain't right." :)
(CFA does just fine in this section of blue state land. Their chicken's pretty good. Their fries--- well, good fries IMHO are skinny and hot. CFA just has different taste.)
I, for one, oppose the unholy unification of a bottle and a squeeze packet. The two condiment paradigms shall remain separate, as God intended.
Is this joke tired yet? I can keep going.
I believe that people who think straights should get special privileges that gays can't have are indeed bigots.
Quote from: berberry on October 09, 2015, 04:03:32 AMI believe that people who think straights should get special privileges that gays can't have are indeed bigots.
There never has been a period of American history when homosexual people couldn't get married.
What recent years have done is to have created another right, specifically for gays (though I cannot see how 'straights' are excluded). These 'bigots' feel that gay people weren't excluded from marriage in the first place, and so didn't need the privilege of rewriting the definition of what 'marriage' is.
Oh sure, gays could have had marriage based on a lie. You know, the christian lifestyle.
Quote from: berberry on October 09, 2015, 07:16:12 AMOh sure, gays could have had marriage based on a lie.
No, not really - you are imposing a very time-bound and culturally-conditioned view of marriage - that marriage is only about satisfying your own desires - onto every marriage on a group of people that have a wide cultural and temporal range: people living in the USA since 1776.
Just as you shouldn't have to conform to other's view of what marriage is, you shouldn't impose your view on them.
And certainly I know
openly gay men in loving marriages with women today (and oh the abuse they get from the 'you are living a lie' crowd). They (rightly) view it as very homophobic to suggest that their marriage is a sham one just because of their sexual orientation!
QuoteYou know, the christian lifestyle.
Ah, as well as homophobia, you are going to double down on the sweeping assumptions and attacks on people who think differently to you.
Who is imposing their views on whom, si? The people who simply want to be able to marry and live peaceful lives, or those who actively campaign to stop them?
And I have never known any openly gay men married to women, although I have known many closeted gay men married to women. I suppose that's okay with you too? That sounds very suspicious to me. Kinda like the lie christians always tell: I have lots of gay friends...
And christians are not just people who think differently than me. The only christian in my family is my dad, and he's the one who could never keep his dick in his pants when I was growing up. He's the one who broke up the family. So that has been my experience, right here in the christian hell-hole of Mississippi. You can pass judgement all you want, that's the only thing you christians ever do except break promises and try to screw over anyone who doesn't subscribe to your crap. I know you people and I know what you're like. Not one word you've written is the least bit surprising.
People should be able to live their own lives however they want, so long as they aren't hurting anyone. If a woman wants six husbands, why is it your concern? Beyond specifying only one as legal next-of-kin (and that only because, in case of accident, one can't very well expect the authorities to convene a conference of spouses to make medical decisions) there should be no restriction, because it isn't hurting anyone. Neither is gay marriage hurting anyone. Nobody is being forced into it and nobody is forcing their views on anyone else. That's just more christian bullshit!
Try to stick to facts, k?
Quote from: Thing 342 on October 08, 2015, 11:55:34 PM
Quote from: kurumi on October 08, 2015, 11:34:24 PM
Chick-fil-A uses Heinz Dip & Squeeze (TM) (http://www.heinzfoodservice.com/products-and-brands/portion-control/condiments-and-sauces/ketchup/dip-and-squeeze) packets, where you can dip your fries in a little tub, or squeeze it out onto your fries.
It's two things in one, and frankly, it's an abomination. You look at it, and you think to yourself, "That just ain't right." :)
(CFA does just fine in this section of blue state land. Their chicken's pretty good. Their fries--- well, good fries IMHO are skinny and hot. CFA just has different taste.)
I, for one, oppose the unholy unification of a bottle and a squeeze packet. The two condiment paradigms shall remain separate, as God intended.
Is this joke tired yet? I can keep going.
Humorous, but not a joke to me. I actually use the ketchup analogy quite seriously to point up the foibles of the "redefinition" argument. Since "marriage" is already defined to mean such things as "man + woman", "car body + chassis", "piece of theatrical rigging + other piece of theatrical rigging", and "ketchup bottle + other ketchup bottle", I can't see how including "man + man" or "woman + woman" amounts to a redefinition. If anything, it would require redefinition to limit marriage to just one of the various things it already means.
But in any event, "redefinition" is a problematic argument because it only appears on one side of the debate, the opposing side. Nobody on the supporting side discusses the issue in lexicographical terms, so there isn't any meaningful discourse to be had, and thus resolution hoped for, by framing the issue in those terms.
Of course, since we're not supposed to be talking about that here, I kept my remarks confined to inoffensive condiments. But, since the lid seems to have blown off and the thread's days are clearly numbered, might as well at least explain myself. :-)
Quote from: english si on October 09, 2015, 06:07:10 AM
Quote from: berberry on October 09, 2015, 04:03:32 AMI believe that people who think straights should get special privileges that gays can't have are indeed bigots.
There never has been a period of American history when homosexual people couldn't get married.
Exactly. No state has ever had this a condition of entry. Now, that said, one state did have marriage come up as a condition of entry, Utah. Utah was told to specifically make polygamy illegal as a condition for entry into the Union.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1890_Manifesto
http://www.ilovehistory.utah.gov/topics/statehood/index.html
Hmmm. On the previous page of this thread I bemoaned the "either/or" attitude and the "if you don't support homosexual 'marriage,' you're a bigot"/"if you support homosexual 'marriage,' you're a pervert*" style of discourse. That sort of sniping accomplishes nothing. Too bad reply #112 engages in exactly that sort of thing. I don't like to attack other posters, but I have to say reply #112 contains one of the single most irrational juxtapositions I've ever seen in this forum in the post's ranting and raving about so-called "christian [sic, should be an uppercase "C"] bullshit" followed by the utterly incongruous request "Try to stick to facts, k?" A person who calls the other side's opinions "bullshit" is in no position to demand that other people refrain from expressing their opinions, though one would hope the other people would do so in a more reasonable and polite fashion–as, indeed, everyone else in this thread has done!
*In my previous comment I used the word "pederast" and one reply objected to it. My point was not to call anyone a pederast, but rather to make a generalized comment on the tenor of "debate" epitomized by reply #112, that is to suggest that some of the more animated "debaters" on this topic would equate support for homosexual "marriage" with support for outfits like NAMBLA–in other words, I was trying to make a caricature of sorts of the more extreme elements of the discussion: "If you support homosexual 'marriage,' you obviously also support the rights of adults to have sex with children or farm animals or [fill in the blank with any particular form not generally accepted by society]." Clearly there are plenty of people who don't feel that way, but my point was simply to note the useless aspects of the "either/or" conversation that seems to have taken over American politics.
Agreed that an "either/or" approach to any argument will, in almost all cases, lead to a wrong conclusion (and not just in politics). That, of course, doesn't apply to concrete, verifiable facts–we very often make the mistake of giving equal weight to erroneous assertions as we do to factual ones.
The other biggest obstacle to reasonable discourse, as I've said, is that we often don't even agree on the identity of the argument, let alone its merits.
iPhone
Quote from: berberry on October 09, 2015, 09:08:09 AMYou can pass judgement all you want,
After beginning in this thread by passing judgement on those who think differently to you as 'bigots', it is nice that you give others permission to judge too.
Quotethat's the only thing you christians ever do except break promises
Oh, OK, that was just preamble to another bit of sweeping prejudiced judgement based on your blinkered view of the world.
I'm sorry that your father was an asshole that made you an asshole, but Christians are not all like that. You do seem to love defining the world into groups and then assuming that they all behave according to your own narrow experiences - eg you not knowing any out gays that are married means that they don't exist and that I'm lying because of it.
PS - while I am a Christian, I don't know how you could have come to that view without sweeping generalisations, etc. In fact, on this forum, I believe I am 'coming out' now, so to speak.
Quoteand try to screw over anyone who doesn't subscribe to your crap.
It's your hate campaign against those who don't subscribe to your crap that I'm attacking. I would have done the same if it was someone from the other side doing it.
I'm personally fine with people holding whatever view of marriage they want. What I'm not fine with is sweeping accusations about those holding differing opinions and an outright refusal to attempt to understand. Nor am I fine with the hypocrisy of the bigotry of calling people bigots for disagreeing with you.
The trouble with using pederast to illustrate an extreme position is that it looks like an attempt to resurrect the tired, incorrect, and homophobic assumption that gays (especially gay men) are looking to have sexual relations with children. This impression is only reinforced by using marriage in scare quotes in relation to gay people in the straight text, i.e. that which is not represented as coming out of the mouths of extremists.
It is certainly true (as Empirestate notes) that how a person frames a debate is often revealed by the terms he or she chooses to use. It also seems to me that it has gotten harder to choose terminology for any given debate that does not disclose a person's stance on a particular issue and therefore allows him or her to try to function as a honest broker.
It is commonplace that political debate is more polarized than it used to be, and relies more on demonization of the motives of the other side than it used to. I don't really disagree with either assertion, though as a person with scientific training I am somewhat troubled by the fact that neither is readily amenable to objective testing. Further, I don't see an easy way out of either circumstance. Media silos are well-established now since the prevalence of Internet and cable news means that there are no large, hegemonic media organizations that establish a common basis of understood facts for political discourse, the way the Big Three TV networks used to. We now live in a political landscape where single-issue lobbies duke it out with slick operators who wait for their opponents to defeat themselves by coming out with over-the-top rhetoric that has an antipersuasive effect. To cite just one example: does anyone on either side of the gun-control debate think it will be resolved on a technocratic basis?
To me, marriage has always been about mutual love. I don't understand other views (especially since my spiritual views don't match any human religion or set of beliefs).
To make this more fun, I'm gonna throw in the element of romantic orientation. A gay male could theoretically be in a mutual love marriage with a woman if he's bi/panromantic.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 08, 2015, 10:18:03 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 08, 2015, 07:59:49 AM
Quote from: Brian556 on October 06, 2015, 10:26:57 AM
Chick-fil-A has some of the best quality fast food out there. Their quality is consistent. They also have very good and fast service, despite their resteraunts being very busy. Their employees are more polite and higher caliber than other fast food reseraunts.
If forcing their employees to operate on script is your idea of polite, then sure. Personally it creeps me out whenever I say "Thank you" and invariably get back "My pleasure" from every single employee. It's very Stepford. I always start wondering what their training must be like and feel sorry for them that they can't even be trusted to choose their own response to customers.
I can't eat there anymore since the big gay marriage controversy anyway. It is tasty food but once I start eating it I think about what my money is funding and begin to feel uncomfortable. So I eat elsewhere. Norman has a Chicken Express, a couple Raising Cane's, and just got a Zaxby's, so there's no end to good chicken restaurants in town.
The times are that you are told to say "Welcome to X" instead of your own "Good Morning, Good Afternoon, etc" like in the past. Yes we live under scrutiny where the president, CEO, and Executive VP's now see what the low paying hourly employees do via camera and paperwork that the supervisors must log to give to their bosses, who give it to their bosses, and so on. Plus with computer entries, you have the big guys looking in as they now have access to all computer files associated with their companies at all levels.
As far as boycotting I think you are going to far, but if you feel that you do not want to be part of funding programs that go against your beliefs you have that right. However, how many businesses I patronize give money to causes I hate or go against my personal, religious, and political beliefs.
The way I look at it I am not giving money to that cause, I am paying for a service. What that person does after with my money is their transgression and not mine. Believe it or not Scott, I have people from Church tell me to boycott certain places, but I do not. I have them tell me to not buy music cd's because the artist supports a specific charity or group they do not believe in which I do buy. In fact I know a lot of people who tell me that they won't buy a Linda Ronstadt album because of her political views, feeling that they are supporting the political party they feel is not for them. I could care less what a person believes, if I like their music unless they state in advance, that all proceeds generated go to this charity then I will not give.
That is my take on this whole thing.
I work a customer-facing job in a casino and we have no such stipulation on us. I am free to say "Hello ma'am" to an older lady and "Hey, what's up" to the younger man in line behind her if I feel that's appropriate. I think that's much better service than having a uniform "Hi, Welcome to X Casino" because it acknowledges there are differences between the customers. Likewise, if either of them said "Thank you" I would say "You're welcome" to the older lady and "No problem" to the younger guy because those age groups respond better to each of those responses.
Part of the thing that makes the "My pleasure" thing so obvious is because that's not a response most people will give naturally. It is very obviously forced and comes off as the employee having been programmed rather than naturally interacting with me as a human and thus makes the whole encounter feel a little off. It would be like if you went to Walmart and the cashier said the sentence "Use PIN pad to complete transaction"; it's perfectly fine for the self-checkout to say and communicates the thought well enough, but it's not worded in the way an actual human would phrase it in casual speech.
As for the choice to not eat there, that's no one's choice but mine. I don't go to a church and nobody is telling me I have to boycott it (although my fiancee is like-minded and will comment if I do eat there). Chick-Fil-A is the furthest west of the available options in town anyway, so it's more of an inconvenience to go there than any of the other options.
That being said, the subject of this thread is Chick-Fil-A, not the politics or religion thereof, so let's return to that topic, if you guys don't mind.
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 09, 2015, 01:41:19 PM
That being said, the subject of this thread is Chick-Fil-A, not the politics or religion thereof, so let's return to that topic, if you guys don't mind.
Sounds good to me.
To answer a question posed in the very first post in this thread, I seem to recall reading somewhere that it took a relatively long time for McDonald's to open their first New York City location–I believe the first one in Manhattan opened in 1973, but I don't know about the other boroughs. My parents said neither of them had eaten at a McDonald's until they moved to Virginia after getting married in 1969. Perhaps it's not so much anything to do with any individual chain so much as it is with the cost of doing business and the need to plan expansion carefully.
One could just as easily ask why Tim Hortons hasn't expanded south of a few northern-tier states.
The chain whose rapid expansion I found surprising was Five Guys, simply because I've seen them grow from a tiny local chain in Northern Virginia as recently as 15 years ago.
Often changes in the rate of expansion reflect alterations of corporate growth strategy. There is a chain based in my city (Freddy's Frozen Custard) which has expanded very aggressively in the last couple of years and now has locations in southern California. I actually wonder if they are overextending themselves.
And we all remember what happened to Krispy Kreme...
iPhone
Quote from: vdeane on October 09, 2015, 01:07:20 PM
To me, marriage has always been about mutual love. I don't understand other views (especially since my spiritual views don't match any human religion or set of beliefs).
To make this more fun, I'm gonna throw in the element of romantic orientation. A gay male could theoretically be in a mutual love marriage with a woman if he's bi/panromantic.
If he is bisexual/pansexual he is not gay.
All of us fall somewhere on the Kinsey scale. 0 totally straight and 6 totally gay
But to keep on topic. Like them or not Chick-fil-a is very successful.
Quote from: jwolfer on October 09, 2015, 04:20:46 PMIf he is bisexual/pansexual he is not gay.
Read what vdeane actually wrote...
Quote from: english si on October 09, 2015, 04:37:46 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 09, 2015, 04:20:46 PMIf he is bisexual/pansexual he is not gay.
Read what vdeane actually wrote...
I did thus the response.. " if a gay male... If he were bi" . a gay person is the the same as a bisesual
Quote from: jwolfer on October 09, 2015, 04:40:13 PM
Quote from: english si on October 09, 2015, 04:37:46 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 09, 2015, 04:20:46 PMIf he is bisexual/pansexual he is not gay.
Read what vdeane actually wrote...
I did thus the response.. " if a gay male... If he were bi" . a gay person is the the same as a bisesual
The distinction here is that vdeane was talking about
romantic attraction, not sexual. Not quite the same thing. (Also, the Kinsey scale starts at 0, not 1.)
Quote from: ModernDayWarrior on October 09, 2015, 04:57:12 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 09, 2015, 04:40:13 PM
Quote from: english si on October 09, 2015, 04:37:46 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 09, 2015, 04:20:46 PMIf he is bisexual/pansexual he is not gay.
Read what vdeane actually wrote...
I did thus the response.. " if a gay male... If he were bi" . a gay person is the the same as a bisesual
The distinction here is that vdeane was talking about romantic attraction, not sexual. Not quite the same thing. (Also, the Kinsey scale starts at 0, not 1.)
Thanks for pointing out my error.. I have corrected my original post.
I understand what vdean is saying. But if a person is bisexual that person is bisexual not gay.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 08, 2015, 03:02:56 PM
You all do know that it's possible to be opposed to the redefinition of marriage and not be a bigot, don't you?
It's a pretty big leap to assume that Mr. Cathy and the Chick-Fil-A ownership are/were bigots because they opposed the redefinition of marriage. I oppose it, and if you call me a bigot, you're a liar.
So which definition of marriage is being redefined -- the definition that included polygamy, or the definition that excluded interracial couples?
Quote from: english si on October 09, 2015, 06:07:10 AM
There never has been a period of American history when homosexual people couldn't get married.
Much like
QuoteIn its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.
(Anatole France)
Quote from: jwolfer on October 09, 2015, 05:01:56 PM
Quote from: ModernDayWarrior on October 09, 2015, 04:57:12 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 09, 2015, 04:40:13 PM
Quote from: english si on October 09, 2015, 04:37:46 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 09, 2015, 04:20:46 PMIf he is bisexual/pansexual he is not gay.
Read what vdeane actually wrote...
I did thus the response.. " if a gay male... If he were bi" . a gay person is the the same as a bisesual
The distinction here is that vdeane was talking about romantic attraction, not sexual. Not quite the same thing. (Also, the Kinsey scale starts at 0, not 1.)
Thanks for pointing out my error.. I have corrected my original post.
I understand what vdean is saying. But if a person is bisexual that person is bisexual not gay.
Believe it or not, but it's possible to be romantically attracted to someone but not sexually attracted to them. I've experienced it.
Quote from: jwolfer on October 09, 2015, 05:01:56 PMBut if a person is bisexual that person is bisexual not gay.
Andrew Dice Clay expressed a different opinion about 25 years ago. :bigass:
Holy ignoring the demand to get on topic.
Part of the problem with entering any new market is extending the marketing envelope out. The way large-scale retailing works, you need to build broad familiarity, which costs a lot of money. In the northeast, with a pittance of outlets, Chik-fil-A does very little mass marketing. I recall "Eat more Chikn" billboards with a cow some years ago, but can't remember any of their advertising since then.
Yuengling re-entered Massachusetts last year with an enormous budget for advertising and for discounting kegs. Yuengling was in every bar. Once that push ended, it retreated to being a minor player in the market. With another adjustment of the marketing plan (supposedly involving wholesale price cuts, called "payola" by some) it has made a bit of a comeback. Even as legendary unobtanium, it still had to invest heavily to compete for a slice of a finite pie.
It's a Chik-Fil-A-and-egg scenario, in other words. Building business requires demand. Demand requires marketing. Marketing requires money. Money requires building business. Or something like that.
And yes, the controversy has famously been a big marketing obstacle here. It's a lot of people's first exposure to the brand.
This has surprisingly produced an interesting conversation that I didn't expect. The Tim Hortons example is a good one, and for relevancy to this topic and to stoke the flames, I will add in a 2014 map of where their locations were:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthedailybanter.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F09%2Fchick-fil-a-map.png&hash=d2697e99d3f7cd194683c22e26b821ed7be37143)
It should be noted that they now apparently have three WA restaurants, which opened this year. Also it should be noted that they have indicated they want to expand into the Albany, NY metro area.
Since Pete is from Boston, he (and others) are probably familiar with the 99 Restaurant chain. What he just said in the post above applies very much to 99: They tried to enter the Philadelphia Market. They had 4 stores in PA near Philly, and 1 in NJ near Philly. They advertised a good deal, both on TV and elsewhere. There was a simple 99 Restaurant logo at Citizens Bank Park, for example.
While I did enjoy the food a lot, especially their variety, they didn't survive in the Philly market. Much of that may have been due to what appeared to be a failure to accept the Philly market. In my local 99, the manager was from the New York area. Loved the Football Giants; disliked the Football Eagles. No problem there...except the majority of the people going to the bar area are Eagles fans. You're going to have to cater to Eagles fans if you want football fans in your bar on Sundays. In other words, don't turn over half the TVs on to the Giants game.
99 just had too hard of a time accepting the Philly market for what it is, and kept trying to shove the New York/New England way of things onto their customers. Eventually, they closed 1 of their PA stores, then shut down the other 4 stores at a later date.
They continue to thrive in the New England area; they just failed at appreciating the Philly market and what people want.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2015, 11:15:19 PM
Since Pete is from Boston, he (and others) are probably familiar with the 99 Restaurant chain. What he just said in the post above applies very much to 99: They tried to enter the Philadelphia Market. They had 4 stores in PA near Philly, and 1 in NJ near Philly. They advertised a good deal, both on TV and elsewhere. There was a simple 99 Restaurant logo at Citizens Bank Park, for example.
While I did enjoy the food a lot, especially their variety, they didn't survive in the Philly market. Much of that may have been due to what appeared to be a failure to accept the Philly market. In my local 99, the manager was from the New York area. Loved the Football Giants; disliked the Football Eagles. No problem there...except the majority of the people going to the bar area are Eagles fans. You're going to have to cater to Eagles fans if you want football fans in your bar on Sundays. In other words, don't turn over half the TVs on to the Giants game.
99 just had too hard of a time accepting the Philly market for what it is, and kept trying to shove the New York/New England way of things onto their customers. Eventually, they closed 1 of their PA stores, then shut down the other 4 stores at a later date.
They continue to thrive in the New England area; they just failed at appreciating the Philly market and what people want.
I thought 99 was a Boston/Cape Cod thing until I found one outside of Utica in New Hartford, NY. I've been there a few times. They make a decent lobster roll.
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 09, 2015, 01:41:19 PM
That being said, the subject of this thread is Chick-Fil-A, not the politics or religion thereof, so let's return to that topic, if you guys don't mind.
But the expansion has, arguably, been limited because of said politics and religion in the past. It's discussion here, if kept civil, could be relevant. Or do you disagree?
Quote from: jakeroot on October 10, 2015, 12:05:31 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 09, 2015, 01:41:19 PM
That being said, the subject of this thread is Chick-Fil-A, not the politics or religion thereof, so let's return to that topic, if you guys don't mind.
But the expansion has, arguably, been limited because of said politics and religion in the past. It's discussion here, if kept civil, could be relevant. Or do you disagree?
Politics/religion are simply not acceptable topics under the rules of the board because it is too easy for a civil discussion to go south very quickly.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2015, 11:15:19 PM
Since Pete is from Boston, he (and others) are probably familiar with the 99 Restaurant chain. What he just said in the post above applies very much to 99: They tried to enter the Philadelphia Market. They had 4 stores in PA near Philly, and 1 in NJ near Philly. They advertised a good deal, both on TV and elsewhere. There was a simple 99 Restaurant logo at Citizens Bank Park, for example.
While I did enjoy the food a lot, especially their variety, they didn't survive in the Philly market. Much of that may have been due to what appeared to be a failure to accept the Philly market. In my local 99, the manager was from the New York area. Loved the Football Giants; disliked the Football Eagles. No problem there...except the majority of the people going to the bar area are Eagles fans. You're going to have to cater to Eagles fans if you want football fans in your bar on Sundays. In other words, don't turn over half the TVs on to the Giants game.
99 just had too hard of a time accepting the Philly market for what it is, and kept trying to shove the New York/New England way of things onto their customers. Eventually, they closed 1 of their PA stores, then shut down the other 4 stores at a later date.
They continue to thrive in the New England area; they just failed at appreciating the Philly market and what people want.
I didn't know that the 99 attempted such a reach. They face an uphill battle in that they are not really very distinguishable on the surface from other generic-American chain casual restaurants (or below the surface–I think I've been to one only twice). They seem to have grown slowly based on local name recognition here, not so much on being an exciting new concept. Their experience in attempting to enter Pennsylvania shows the danger of outrunning your name-recognition "supply lines" when that is what you trade on.
One local outfit here that has successfully penetrated the metropolitan Northeast, on the other hand, is Bertucci's. They were a local joint in Davis Square, Somerville, Mass. in the 1980s (this tiny storefront location, complete with bocce court in the basement, lasted until about ten years ago). Bertucci's, as contrasted to the 99, offered a new concept that was growing in popularity at the same time it was expanding, namely brick-oven thin-crust pizza. This, combined with offering distinctly better food and presentation than the Olive Gardens of the world, gave it something distinct to sell.
iPhone
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 10, 2015, 07:18:57 AM
One local outfit here that has successfully penetrated the metropolitan Northeast, on the other hand, is Bertucci's. They were a local joint in Davis Square, Somerville, Mass. in the 1980s (this tiny storefront location, complete with bocce court in the basement, lasted until about ten years ago). Bertucci's, as contrasted to the 99, offered a new concept that was growing in popularity at the same time it was expanding, namely brick-oven thin-crust pizza. This, combined with offering distinctly better food and presentation than the Olive Gardens of the world, gave it something distinct to sell.
The weird thing about Bertucci's is that, if they have built any sort of brand, have done so quite stealthily. I remember going to a Bertucci's in Connecticut when I was a bit younger and I had no idea it was a chain. There was only one in the area and it looked and felt like a local establishment. It almost seems like that's exactly what they're going for, duping people into thinking they've discovered some great new place when actually there are plenty of others just like it.
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 09, 2015, 11:13:53 PM
This has surprisingly produced an interesting conversation that I didn't expect. The Tim Hortons example is a good one, and for relevancy to this topic and to stoke the flames, I will add in a 2014 map of where their locations were:
There's a lot more than that in Michigan. I did a quick search, and found 16 in 4 counties around Grand Rapids, and a lot in Wayne and Macomb Counties. I'm pretty sure they weren't all opened this year.
Sometimes, chains fail when they go outside of their market too quickly. I can think of Ames Department Stores as an example. They were pretty much New England regional, then I remember going down to Maryland and going into one. Soon thereafter, they bought out Hills Department Stores, and I even saw an Ames billboard in the background during an interview on TV after a game at the old RCA Dome in Indy. Soon thereafter, little by little, the chain failed, closing stores from the outskirts right down to its Connecticut base. As for restaurants, Quizno's is another example of too much expansion too fast. There used to be about 20 of them in CT about 10 years ago; now there may be 1 or 2 left, as they couldn't catch on on Subway's home turf. Tim Horton's pulled out of most of Southern New England as well; they took over the old Bess Eaton locations, but substitute Dunkin for Subway in this scenario. I did see 99 ads at Citizens Bank Park during a couple of games I watched from there; it's alive and well here in CT.
Quote from: GaryV on October 10, 2015, 09:27:27 AM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 09, 2015, 11:13:53 PM
This has surprisingly produced an interesting conversation that I didn't expect. The Tim Hortons example is a good one, and for relevancy to this topic and to stoke the flames, I will add in a 2014 map of where their locations were:
There's a lot more than that in Michigan. I did a quick search, and found 16 in 4 counties around Grand Rapids, and a lot in Wayne and Macomb Counties. I'm pretty sure they weren't all opened this year.
And there was one in Fulton County, NY, in 2014 (since closed). I was also under the impression that Tim Horton's has an extensive presence in western NY. I don't know what that map shows, but it clearly doesn't appear to be a map of 2014 locations of Tim Hortons. Is it new Tim Hortons location openings in 2014?
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 10, 2015, 09:30:37 AM
Sometimes, chains fail when they go outside of their market too quickly. I can think of Ames Department Stores as an example. They were pretty much New England regional, then I remember going down to Maryland and going into one. Soon thereafter, they bought out Hills Department Stores, and I even saw an Ames billboard in the background during an interview on TV after a game at the old RCA Dome in Indy. Soon thereafter, little by little, the chain failed, closing stores from the outskirts right down to its Connecticut base.
You're leaving out one important detail: Ames purchased Zayre, which was a trojan horse of a basket-case company, and it never recovered.*
QuoteAs for restaurants, Quizno's is another example of too much expansion too fast. There used to be about 20 of them in CT about 10 years ago; now there may be 1 or 2 left, as they couldn't catch on on Subway's home turf.
Quizno's was the first non-regional sub chain I recall arriving here (following your assertion that Subway is ostenibly local). There are tons of them now, as belabored in other threads. If they have faded it may be because they were once the only "new and different," and now there's a new one of those every week.
* An excellent look at the rot within Zayre:
http://www.yake.com/article_shrinkage.html
"At Zayre Corporation, business abuse was not only an accepted practice, it was an integral part of the company's operating procedures and blatantly included in employee training. Store managers were methodically taught these practices throughout the chain. Their eligibility for promotion, or in some cases, for continued employment, was contingent upon their compliance with these practices.
"To a great extent, the store managers' job performance was evaluated according to their ability to manipulate the shrink figure. Some were so successful that stores actually showed large overages in merchandise - a 'positive shrink' - at year end!
...
"It's no wonder that when Ames purchased Zayre Corporation they got both more and less than they bargained for. They acquired a retail operation with seriously depleted financial resources, along with a corporate culture that not only condoned but promoted business abuse."
Quote
Tim Hortons
I'm surprised to see so many counties in the Philly area shaded red or pink on that map, being that I don't recall ever passing one. Even more surprising when Tim Horton's own website doesn't list locations in that area.
Turns out their 2 locations anywhere near Philly in PA are both in "Stadiums", one in South Philly and one in Allentown. Yet, the map is colored as if to say "We have a presence in the Delaware Valley...as long as you are going to a ballgame and paying $4 for a small cup". The next closest locations: Dover Army/Airforce Base, and 2 locations at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds.
Quote
Quiznos
They didn't last long in most of the Philly/New Jersey area, due to the saturation of various hoagie places around here. Calling it a Sub pretty much guarantees failure in this market. There are some Subways around, but not a whole lot.
Quote
99 Restaurants
They did well for a while in the Philly area, but never expanded from the original 5, then they stopped advertising.
My wife got me a 99 gift card for them just before they pulled out of the area. Their website had instructions on how to get your money back, and we received a check for the value of the cards surprisingly quick after we submitted our info.
Are we sure that's a Tim Hortons map and not a Chick-Fil-A map? I'm not aware of Tim Hortons having any locations in Northern Virginia, although some grocery stores sell their K-Cups. TimHortons.com said there are no locations within 50 miles of where I live. There are several Chick-Fil-A locations, though.
Could be: "they" in the post with the map could refer to "CFA" in the thread rather than "Tim Hortons" earlier in the sentence.
It does make a lot more sense as a CFA location map.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 10, 2015, 11:36:35 AM
Are we sure that's a Tim Hortons map and not a Chick-Fil-A map? I'm not aware of Tim Hortons having any locations in Northern Virginia, although some grocery stores sell their K-Cups. TimHortons.com said there are no locations within 50 miles of where I live. There are several Chick-Fil-A locations, though.
Quote from: Jim on October 10, 2015, 11:38:44 AM
Could be: "they" in the post with the map could refer to "CFA" in the thread rather than "Tim Hortons" earlier in the sentence.
It does make a lot more sense as a CFA location map.
Nope. Many counties in New Jersey aren't highlighted that have Chick-fil-a's. My county has at least 4 CFA locations, but yet it's not highlighted. Same holds true with the adjoining counties.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2015, 11:15:19 PM
Since Pete is from Boston, he (and others) are probably familiar with the 99 Restaurant chain. What he just said in the post above applies very much to 99: They tried to enter the Philadelphia Market. They had 4 stores in PA near Philly, and 1 in NJ near Philly. They advertised a good deal, both on TV and elsewhere. There was a simple 99 Restaurant logo at Citizens Bank Park, for example.
While I did enjoy the food a lot, especially their variety, they didn't survive in the Philly market. Much of that may have been due to what appeared to be a failure to accept the Philly market. In my local 99, the manager was from the New York area. Loved the Football Giants; disliked the Football Eagles. No problem there...except the majority of the people going to the bar area are Eagles fans. You're going to have to cater to Eagles fans if you want football fans in your bar on Sundays. In other words, don't turn over half the TVs on to the Giants game.
99 just had too hard of a time accepting the Philly market for what it is, and kept trying to shove the New York/New England way of things onto their customers. Eventually, they closed 1 of their PA stores, then shut down the other 4 stores at a later date.
They continue to thrive in the New England area; they just failed at appreciating the Philly market and what people want.
A chain has to make some tweaks for each market... In the South brewed, sweet, iced tea is necessary
Sometimes a failure of a national chain has to do with franchisee failing in business. We had a fresh salad type restaurant near us that we liked. ( cant remember name)
It closed but the location across town stayed open. The guy who owned the franchise for our area failed according to manager if other location
Quote from: hbelkins on October 09, 2015, 10:08:29 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 09, 2015, 05:01:56 PMBut if a person is bisexual that person is bisexual not gay.
Andrew Dice Clay expressed a different opinion about 25 years ago. :bigass:
The "one drop rule" adapted for sexual orientation
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 09, 2015, 11:13:53 PM
This has surprisingly produced an interesting conversation that I didn't expect. The Tim Hortons example is a good one, and for relevancy to this topic and to stoke the flames, I will add in a 2014 map of where their locations were:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthedailybanter.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F09%2Fchick-fil-a-map.png&hash=d2697e99d3f7cd194683c22e26b821ed7be37143)
It should be noted that they now apparently have three WA restaurants, which opened this year. Also it should be noted that they have indicated they want to expand into the Albany, NY metro area.
Another thing to point out.. CFA is concentrated to the Southeast. They began in Atlanta, a company will expand from their home base.
The bigger question is why did Jack In The Box move out of the north-east as they were in New Jersey back in the 1970's and before. For some reason they yanked them away.
I do not know how far in the Northeast they were, whether New England and Upstate NY had them or not, but here is a major chain located all over Texas, California, and many places in between those two, yet they stopped marketing in New Jersey for sure, and probably NY and PA as well. I did hear from native Floridians that we used to have them in Orlando at one time, but like the Garden State, the company closed their stores all together.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 10, 2015, 12:50:00 PM
The bigger question is why did Jack In The Box move out of the north-east as they were in New Jersey back in the 1970's and before. For some reason they yanked them away.
I do not know how far in the Northeast they were, whether New England and Upstate NY had them or not, but here is a major chain located all over Texas, California, and many places in between those two, yet they stopped marketing in New Jersey for sure, and probably NY and PA as well. I did hear from native Floridians that we used to have them in Orlando at one time, but like the Garden State, the company closed their stores all together.
I saw one in Nashville recently. I had no idea they were that far east.
Actually Charlotte, NC has one off an I-77 interchange near Carowinds Amusement Park.
If you right click and check the URL link, it's a Chick fil A map. ;)
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 10, 2015, 01:35:24 PM
If you right click and check the URL link, it's a Chick fil A map. ;)
Actually, the link starts with 'www.thedailybanter.com'. What this has to do with Chick-fil-a, I don't know. Its clearly not correct...Not by a long shot. Hell, check Chick-fil-a's actual website...I think they know where their stores are. Again, talking about my county (Gloucester County, NJ): My mall has had a Chick-fil-a in it since the mid-90's, when the food court was built! And in the same county, my father-in-law use to visit one quite often...and he passed away 3 years ago!
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2015, 11:15:19 PM
Since Pete is from Boston, he (and others) are probably familiar with the 99 Restaurant chain. What he just said in the post above applies very much to 99: They tried to enter the Philadelphia Market. They had 4 stores in PA near Philly, and 1 in NJ near Philly. They advertised a good deal, both on TV and elsewhere. There was a simple 99 Restaurant logo at Citizens Bank Park, for example.
While I did enjoy the food a lot, especially their variety, they didn't survive in the Philly market. Much of that may have been due to what appeared to be a failure to accept the Philly market. In my local 99, the manager was from the New York area. Loved the Football Giants; disliked the Football Eagles. No problem there...except the majority of the people going to the bar area are Eagles fans. You're going to have to cater to Eagles fans if you want football fans in your bar on Sundays. In other words, don't turn over half the TVs on to the Giants game.
99 just had too hard of a time accepting the Philly market for what it is, and kept trying to shove the New York/New England way of things onto their customers. Eventually, they closed 1 of their PA stores, then shut down the other 4 stores at a later date.
They continue to thrive in the New England area; they just failed at appreciating the Philly market and what people want.
The only
99 Restaurant I personally recall seeing (in southeastern PA) was the one that was along PA 363 in the Oaks/Trooper area several years ago. I thought that one just closed due to it was literally surrounded by more-familiar/known (to the locals) competition (example:
Applebees).
Ironically, I didn't start eating at 99s until
years after I moved out of the North Shore/Greater Boston area; I would eat at one when visiting my family (most of whom are still in the Bay State). Having two of them open reasonably close to where my mother lives (Salem & Revere, both along MA 1A) since I moved away 25 years ago has helped... especially the Salem location.
Wow. I've read almost every post on this thread. That took quite a while. I've been impressed at how civil and reasonable people have been in their comments.
I would like to correct Jonathan Winkler's comment that all CFA locations in Wichita were opened very recently: the one on campus at the university has been open for years, but few people knew it existed. The one closest to my house (Rock Road) opened a bit before the controversy, and so I can share my experience with the protests.
For ideological reasons contrary to those of most members here, I am happy that my money goes to CFA, and we eat there often. On the protest day, our family specifically chose to eat there in order to show our support with our pocketbook. I also picked lunch up to go a couple of weeks later on the "support CFA" day, which was the counter-protest mentioned far upthread. On protest day, I saw anywhere from three to twelve protesters out at the curb, depending on the time of day we drove by; not much protest, but it did seem to encourage regulars to just avoid going that day to avoid the drama. On the counter-protest day, however, I had to park in the grocery store lot and spend more than an hour in line to order my food, there were THAT many people.
And so, even if the protest hurt business (and I know it did moreso in other locations such as Springfield (MO), where they actually had to close down for the day), I'd say it's reasonable to assume they more than made up the lost revenue later. For our family and for others we know, the issue has caused us to choose CFA over other establishments, in support of their organization, and there is always a line at our local CFA until at least 7:00.
Understanding that the Northeast is a different culture than Kansas, I still doubt that this whole controversy plays much of a role in CFA's slow entry into the region. Other things are likely much more at play, and many have been suggested here. But all we're doing is guessing. Unless an upper-crust executive at CFA gets involved in this thread, I doubt we'll ever know the real reason(s).
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 10, 2015, 12:51:58 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 10, 2015, 12:50:00 PM
The bigger question is why did Jack In The Box move out of the north-east as they were in New Jersey back in the 1970's and before. For some reason they yanked them away.
I saw one in Nashville recently. I had no idea they were that far east.
Actually, they're even further east: Greenville, SC and Charlotte, NC.
I seem to recall my dad talking about going to Jack in the Box as an adolescent in southern NJ during the late '60s.
Jack in the Box was founded in San Diego and is still headquartered there. Apparently, the big eastward push was the result of Ralston Purina's investment in the company in the '60s. (There was a rash of huge food manufacturers buying into fast food chains at the time: Pillsbury bought Burger King in 1967 and General Foods acquired Burger Chef.)
As with some other fast food chains, Jack in the Box struggled with over saturation of the burger market in the 1980s, changed hands several times, and retreated from many of their more distant markets.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2015, 02:46:47 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 10, 2015, 01:35:24 PM
If you right click and check the URL link, it's a Chick fil A map. ;)
Actually, the link starts with 'www.thedailybanter.com'. What this has to do with Chick-fil-a, I don't know. Its clearly not correct...Not by a long shot. Hell, check Chick-fil-a's actual website...I think they know where their stores are. Again, talking about my county (Gloucester County, NJ): My mall has had a Chick-fil-a in it since the mid-90's, when the food court was built! And in the same county, my father-in-law use to visit one quite often...and he passed away 3 years ago!
The map link
http://thedailybanter.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/
chick-fil-a-map.png
It literally says "chick fil a map" Whether it's accurate or not is another story.
Quote from: english si on October 09, 2015, 12:20:30 PM
PS - while I am a Christian, I don't know how you could have come to that view without sweeping generalisations, etc. In fact, on this forum, I believe I am 'coming out' now, so to speak.
For what it's worth, english si (if that is your real name), I've known you were a Christian since 2012, but your secret has remained safe with me this whole time. Nobody but a faithful churchgoer could possibly have quite so many opinions about Advent and Christmas songs as you shared on this very forum three years ago. You might feel that you're coming out now, but you can rest assured (or uneasily exposed) that some of us have known all along. What I appreciate most about your contributions to this forum is that you offer a conservative viewpoint to social issues from a rather un-American perspective. Especially when it comes to the religious right, American Christians are so often some of the stupidest-sounding parties in the debate; a fresh voice of intelligence that doesn't spout out the usual script is (or should be) refreshing to all who listen.
[/offtopic]
If that's a CFA map, I'm not sure it's accurate. It shows locations in Rowan and Franklin counties in Kentucky. Unless they have locations on the campuses (campii?) of Morehead State and Kentucky State universities, I'm not aware of CFA locations in Morehead or Frankfort.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 10, 2015, 09:17:38 PM
If that's a CFA map, I'm not sure it's accurate. It shows locations in Rowan and Franklin counties in Kentucky. Unless they have locations on the campuses (campii?) of Morehead State and Kentucky State universities, I'm not aware of CFA locations in Morehead or Frankfort.
According to Google, both of those places have a Chick fil A. They also count the Oakland University Chick fil A in Michigan as a Chick fil A for Oakland County.
I don't think that it's an "if" at this point. It may be inaccurate but it's indisputable that the author of the map meant for it to represent Chick fil A locations.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 10, 2015, 07:40:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2015, 02:46:47 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 10, 2015, 01:35:24 PM
If you right click and check the URL link, it's a Chick fil A map. ;)
Actually, the link starts with 'www.thedailybanter.com'. What this has to do with Chick-fil-a, I don't know. Its clearly not correct...Not by a long shot. Hell, check Chick-fil-a's actual website...I think they know where their stores are. Again, talking about my county (Gloucester County, NJ): My mall has had a Chick-fil-a in it since the mid-90's, when the food court was built! And in the same county, my father-in-law use to visit one quite often...and he passed away 3 years ago!
The map link
http://thedailybanter.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/chick-fil-a-map.png
It literally says "chick fil a map" Whether it's accurate or not is another story.
Actually, there's nothing indicating it's even a location map. And since there's no accompanying story, who knows what the purpose of the map is.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 10, 2015, 09:31:23 PM
I don't think that it's an "if" at this point. It may be inaccurate but it's indisputable that the author of the map meant for it to represent Chick fil A locations.
You can't be serious. How the fuck do you know that?
How about next time, you try this link: http://www.chick-fil-a.com/Locations/Locator . OMG...It's Chick-fil-a's very own website!
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 10, 2015, 09:31:23 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 10, 2015, 09:17:38 PM
If that's a CFA map, I'm not sure it's accurate. It shows locations in Rowan and Franklin counties in Kentucky. Unless they have locations on the campuses (campii?) of Morehead State and Kentucky State universities, I'm not aware of CFA locations in Morehead or Frankfort.
According to Google, both of those places have a Chick fil A.
Google's wrong, then. CFA's site shows there's one at MSU, but not at KSU. I'm surprised there hasn't been a protest about the one at MSU, given that Morehead's the county seat of Rowan County, home of County Clerk Kim Davis.
Let's take a step back guys, this map was also on Wikipedia, and is current as of 2012: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chickfila_location_distribution.svg
The location finder is OK, but I like graphical representations of data.
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 10, 2015, 11:21:53 PM
Let's take a step back guys, this map was also on Wikipedia, and is current as of 2012: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chickfila_location_distribution.svg
The location finder is OK, but I like graphical representations of data.
Bang head against wall: :banghead:
Bang head against wall: :banghead:
Bang head against wall: :banghead:
Bang head against wall: :banghead:
Bang head against wall: :banghead:
One last time people. The map is wrong. I live in a county where we've had no fewer than 3 in 2012, and a 4th was open around that time (with at least 1 or 2 locations going back to the 1990's).
I live next to a county where a Chick-fil-a existed in at least 3 locations prior to 2012 (with at least 1 or 2 locations going back to the 1990's).
Yet, both the locations show as 'No Chick-fil-a" on the map. And these are just the locations I have direct knowledge of, without diving into all the other states.
Honestly, this entire thread has been wrong since it was titled 'Why does Chick-fil-A avoid the Northeast".
Stop using the fucking map. What more proof do you want...should I pull up notarized zoning permits?
Quote from: kphoger on October 10, 2015, 09:11:58 PMFor what it's worth, english si (if that is your real name), I've known you were a Christian since 2012, but your secret has remained safe with me this whole time. Nobody but a faithful churchgoer could possibly have quite so many opinions about Advent and Christmas songs as you shared on this very forum three years ago. You might feel that you're coming out now, but you can rest assured (or uneasily exposed) that some of us have known all along.
Thanks
QuoteWhat I appreciate most about your contributions to this forum is that you offer a conservative viewpoint to social issues from a rather un-American perspective.
Only 'rather' un-American? As an un-American, I would hope it was an un-American perspective! ;)
QuoteEspecially when it comes to the religious right, American Christians are so often some of the stupidest-sounding parties in the debate;
Oh, indeed. It doesn't help that the cultural 'Christianity'
* in the Bible Belt - what I would term 'evanjellycalism' - is some sort of anti-intellectual triumphalist "moralistic therapeutic deism". It's little wonder that those actual evangelicals
**, especially outside places where that's culturally cool, that can label themselves something else (eg Confessional Reformed) are doing so in increased numbers to distance themselves from the nonsense and baggage that the term has picked up.
There are intellectual and nuanced voices in the US cultural right, but they get ignored as the cultural right is dominated by the anti-intellectual element. Plus also, as such voices don't chime with the cultural left's view of the cultural right, they get ignored as they challenge the "they're all small town biggitz" viewpoint (maybe those towns should get a SoPaSoDo in order to get a Whole Foods, to show the rest of the country that they aren't hicks? :-D).
I guess I need to bring this back on topic - there has been an assumption in this thread that CFA will only set up shop, and get customers, in places with hicks. More than half the country (it crossed the 50% line after the nation's top judges couldn't come up with a decent argument for it) hold the view on the state's recognition of marriage that CFA backed financially, and probably the middle 30-40% won't care enough to boycott/go out of their way to support such a restaurant. As others have pointed out, the controversy probably increased their business.
Interestingly, I don't think many in the South boycotted Coca Cola for sponsoring Planned Parenthood (they've since stopped doing so), but virtue signalling by boycotting businesses seems to be far more of a culturally left trait.
*There's a reason why Joel Osteen-like megachurches would do poorly in Europe: there's not a culture of churchgoing any more, so Osteen's fluff wouldn't attract people who feel a cultural pressure to go to church, but don't really want any Christian content, because they don't really exist here. Osteen is picked on here as he's a big name 'Christian' who's head seems to be an empty box (which is probably just a carefully crafted image to 'sell' himself to make people like him) for displaying a haircut and smile that spouts platitudes and nothing else. There are worse out there, but he's just obvious.
**In the general theological sense of theologically-conservative Protestants. So I would include myself, whereas culturally and/or in a narrower theological sense (eg hermetically), I wouldn't count myself.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2015, 09:44:37 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 10, 2015, 07:40:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2015, 02:46:47 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 10, 2015, 01:35:24 PM
If you right click and check the URL link, it's a Chick fil A map. ;)
Actually, the link starts with 'www.thedailybanter.com'. What this has to do with Chick-fil-a, I don't know. Its clearly not correct...Not by a long shot. Hell, check Chick-fil-a's actual website...I think they know where their stores are. Again, talking about my county (Gloucester County, NJ): My mall has had a Chick-fil-a in it since the mid-90's, when the food court was built! And in the same county, my father-in-law use to visit one quite often...and he passed away 3 years ago!
The map link
http://thedailybanter.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/chick-fil-a-map.png
It literally says "chick fil a map" Whether it's accurate or not is another story.
Actually, there's nothing indicating it's even a location map. And since there's no accompanying story, who knows what the purpose of the map is.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 10, 2015, 09:31:23 PM
I don't think that it's an "if" at this point. It may be inaccurate but it's indisputable that the author of the map meant for it to represent Chick fil A locations.
You can't be serious. How the fuck do you know that?
How about next time, you try this link: http://www.chick-fil-a.com/Locations/Locator . OMG...It's Chick-fil-a's very own website!
First of all, the fact that the URL itself includes the words "chick fil a map" is a give away to the author's intent. As I said, it may be inaccurate and the author may have done a terrible job but there's no disputing his intent. I don't know what else a Chick fil A map could represent. He does nail some of the locations outside of the core area (the Oakland U location, the Nashua, NH location and the Peabody, MA location) so based on those context clues alone, I can tell what it was trying to do.
How about showing some decorum next time? Using swear words and attacking people over someone else's bad job is not warranted.
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 10, 2015, 11:21:53 PM
this map was also on Wikipedia
Even more reason to doubt its validity. :bigass:
Quote from: hbelkins on October 11, 2015, 05:45:01 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 10, 2015, 11:21:53 PM
this map was also on Wikipedia
Even more reason to doubt its validity. :bigass:
But it does have a source for its data:
http://find.mapmuse.com/map/chick-fil-a
Feel free to debate
mapmuse's validity.
It's clearly been established that the dataset is not 100% accurate as there are locations missing from it. Based on MapMuse's FAQ (http://find.mapmuse.com/re1/mmFAQ.htm) it appears their data is at least in part crowdsourced, i.e. it was scraped by script from somewhere and there is no internal QC but they will gladly consider corrections and additions if submitted by users. So naturally their list of Chick-fil-A locations is going to be missing some and is also probably going to have a few false positives.
Nonetheless, while one cannot use the resulting map for detailed local analyses, it does still sorta show how Chick-fil-A is more concentrated in their home turf (the South) than anywhere else.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 10, 2015, 09:31:23 PM
How about showing some decorum next time? Using swear words and attacking people over someone else's bad job is not warranted.
Nope. I used decorum the first time when I indicated the map was wrong. When someone who is not familiar with CFAs locations tries to argue with someone who is greatly familiar with CFAs locations that the map is wrong, and yet that person who has no clue of their locations keeps returning to some incorrect map from some Wikipedia website that is incredibly wrong and has been given the exact website to go to for the correct info, then any fucking decorum goes out the window
Hint: I am trying to inform you where to go for the correct info, and you insist on using an incorrect map. Get a fucking clue.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 11, 2015, 09:02:59 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 10, 2015, 09:31:23 PM
How about showing some decorum next time? Using swear words and attacking people over someone else's bad job is not warranted.
Nope. I used decorum the first time when I indicated the map was wrong. When someone who is not familiar with CFAs locations tries to argue with someone who is greatly familiar with CFAs locations that the map is wrong, and yet that person who has no clue of their locations keeps returning to some incorrect map from some Wikipedia website that is incredibly wrong and has been given the exact website to go to for the correct info, then any fucking decorum goes out the window
Hint: I am trying to inform you where to go for the correct info, and you insist on using an incorrect map. Get a fucking clue.
I didn't use the map once. I just pointed out that it did not represent a Tim Horton's map, something that should have been obvious.
My nearest Chick fil As are in Nashua, New Hampshire and Peabody, Massachusetts and I don't need a map to know that.
It was pretty obvious to me that it wasn't a Tim Horton's map, since it didn't show one in Ashland, Ky. Unless there are locations in the Northern Kentucky Cincinnati suburbs, the only one I know of is in Ashland.
Are there any south of Ashland, KY? They seem most common in border states so I'm surprised that it goes that far south.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 12, 2015, 02:41:23 PM
Are there any south of Ashland, KY? They seem most common in border states so I'm surprised that it goes that far south.
As far as I know, the presence of Tim Horton's in Ohio (and by association, a few locations in closely neighboring parts of Kentucky) is owed to Wendy's former ownership of the chain. Being based in Dublin, Wendy's saw Columbus as a test market for further US expansion and saturated the market with hybrid Wendy's/Tim's locations as well as standalone Tim Horton's shops. I was aware of Tim's ubiquity around Columbus and in Dayton, but I didn't know that they were in the small towns dotting the US routes between Columbus and the Ohio Valley
Quote from: hbelkins on October 12, 2015, 01:34:38 PM
Unless there are locations in the Northern Kentucky Cincinnati suburbs...
Interestingly enough, the Cincinnati metro appears to be a giant "no Tim's" zone.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 12, 2015, 02:41:23 PM
Are there any [Tims] south of Ashland, KY? They seem most common in border states so I'm surprised that it goes that far south.
Searches in Tampa and Miami brought up locations within their respective NHL arenas. But those are likely only open during events at said arenas.
First Tim Horton's I can remember seeing was in downtown Portsmouth, Ohio, several years ago. Didn't know there was one in Ashland until I was downtown scouting a few weeks prior to the spring 2013 meet there. I didn't stop and still haven't ever been to a Tim Horton's.
Now that Tim Horton's and Burger King are owned by the same company, I wonder if Burger King will eventually phase in Tim Horton's coffee instead of Seattle's Best, and offer Timbits on their breakfast menu.
Quote from: rawmustard on October 12, 2015, 03:52:35 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on October 12, 2015, 02:41:23 PM
Are there any [Tims] south of Ashland, KY? They seem most common in border states so I'm surprised that it goes that far south.
Searches in Tampa and Miami brought up locations within their respective NHL arenas. But those are likely only open during events at said arenas.
Are they relatively new? Burger King is based in Miami so I wouldn't be surprised if they just threw a Tim Horton's into the local hockey arenas.
I haven't been to one in a while myself. This is making me crave some Tim Bits.
I'm still surprised Timmies hasn't expanded down into Seattle. Maybe the market's too saturated with other coffee houses?
I think so. There are coffee places on at least three corners of every business district intersection.
Quote from: kphoger on October 10, 2015, 06:24:10 PM
And so, even if the protest hurt business (and I know it did moreso in other locations such as Springfield (MO), where they actually had to close down for the day), I'd say it's reasonable to assume they more than made up the lost revenue later.
That's really interesting to hear. Springfield is a college town, but in the year I spent there, I never felt like it was all that different culture-wise from decidedly conservative Oklahoma. (In fact, it seemed more so; in Springfield I saw a truck flying Nazi flags that I believed had some sort of affiliation with the KKK, but I tried to avoid looking at it too closely as I was a lone pedestrian crossing the street in front of it and felt somewhat threatened by its presence. I've never seen any such thing in Oklahoma City.) The only Chick-Fil-A I know of in Springfield is pretty far away from both MSU and Drury, in a more suburban area (it is near to a Best Buy, a Walmart, and a Target) so I wouldn't think they'd rely too much on college students for business.
I happened to be in Springfield on the counter-protest day and all the Chick-Fil-A traffic managed to fuck up Glenstone Avenue even more than normal, which is pretty impressive because Glenstone usually manages that just fine on its own.
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 13, 2015, 07:37:38 AM
That's really interesting to hear. Springfield is a college town, but in the year I spent there, I never felt like it was all that different culture-wise from decidedly conservative Oklahoma. (In fact, it seemed more so; in Springfield I saw a truck flying Nazi flags that I believed had some sort of affiliation with the KKK, but I tried to avoid looking at it too closely as I was a lone pedestrian crossing the street in front of it and felt somewhat threatened by its presence. I've never seen any such thing in Oklahoma City.)
Springfield is known as being the whitest major city in the U.S., due to a lynching having driven out the entire black population in the early 1900s. The effects are still apparent today.
iPhone
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 13, 2015, 07:37:38 AM
Quote from: kphoger on October 10, 2015, 06:24:10 PM
And so, even if the protest hurt business (and I know it did moreso in other locations such as Springfield (MO), where they actually had to close down for the day), I'd say it's reasonable to assume they more than made up the lost revenue later.
That's really interesting to hear. Springfield is a college town, but in the year I spent there, I never felt like it was all that different culture-wise from decidedly conservative Oklahoma. (In fact, it seemed more so; in Springfield I saw a truck flying Nazi flags that I believed had some sort of affiliation with the KKK, but I tried to avoid looking at it too closely as I was a lone pedestrian crossing the street in front of it and felt somewhat threatened by its presence. I've never seen any such thing in Oklahoma City.) The only Chick-Fil-A I know of in Springfield is pretty far away from both MSU and Drury, in a more suburban area (it is near to a Best Buy, a Walmart, and a Target) so I wouldn't think they'd rely too much on college students for business.
I happened to be in Springfield on the counter-protest day and all the Chick-Fil-A traffic managed to fuck up Glenstone Avenue even more than normal, which is pretty impressive because Glenstone usually manages that just fine on its own.
There is also a Chick-fil-A on the MSU campus. I have no idea which location was shut down by the protests, though.
I don't know if I would call Springfield "decidedly conservative," but it certainly isn't
liberal - the city did vote against Obama in both elections, but only narrowly. The non-Springfield parts of Greene County are what makes it look so red. Fun fact: Springfield's mayor is actually a member of the Libertarian Party - the largest city in America for which that is the case.
And yes, Glenstone traffic is always miserable, though slightly less so now that the construction there is finally finished.
Why did Dunkin Donuts avoid California for years? Yes we have political issues that due effect businesses from time to time, but we also have marketing issues too. Remember to be nationwide costs a lot of money. I am for the regional chains, like with Braum's Ice Cream in OK, KS, TX, and NW AR for example. Of course their reason to stay within 300 miles of OKC is for product freshness as their main dairy is outside of OKC, and they want the freshest products sold in their stores with being over 300 miles away compromising that ideal. However, it gives me a reason to want to go to the southern mid-west more so.
Even with White Castle, it gives me the reason to want to eat at them more being that Florida has none of them like NJ, NYC, Columbus, Detroit, Chicago, The Twin Cities, and maybe still St. Louis as they did close Kansas City area stores, so it might be the same across the state.
Bottom line, is you cannot expect every chain to be in your own back yard. Just because Home Depot and Wal Mart has made it everywhere as they got billions to spend on opening new stores in sprawl regions and in every major market available known to the US does not mean Chick Fil A has.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 13, 2015, 02:04:19 PM
Why did Dunkin Donuts avoid California for years?
Maybe because Dunkin' Donuts is based in Massachusetts, and the Northeast is their core area of operations?
Quote from: Brandon on October 13, 2015, 02:35:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 13, 2015, 02:04:19 PM
Why did Dunkin Donuts avoid California for years?
Maybe because Dunkin' Donuts is based in Massachusetts, and the Northeast is their core area of operations?
I loved how there was a Dunkin' both within and above the Downtown Crossing station at City Hall in Boston.
Quote from: Brandon on October 13, 2015, 02:35:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 13, 2015, 02:04:19 PM
Why did Dunkin Donuts avoid California for years?
Maybe because Dunkin' Donuts is based in Massachusetts, and the Northeast is their core area of operations?
You missed my point. If Dunkin took a long time to get over to the other side of the continent, then Chick Fil A could very well take their time too if that is the reason.
Quote from: Rothman on October 13, 2015, 02:42:59 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 13, 2015, 02:35:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 13, 2015, 02:04:19 PM
Why did Dunkin Donuts avoid California for years?
Maybe because Dunkin' Donuts is based in Massachusetts, and the Northeast is their core area of operations?
I loved how there was a Dunkin' both within and above the Downtown Crossing station at City Hall in Boston.
You think that's bad.North Station commuter rail waiting area (in the TD Garden) has two Dunks located within about 100 yards of each other.
Quote from: roadman on October 13, 2015, 04:00:16 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 13, 2015, 02:42:59 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 13, 2015, 02:35:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 13, 2015, 02:04:19 PM
Why did Dunkin Donuts avoid California for years?
Maybe because Dunkin' Donuts is based in Massachusetts, and the Northeast is their core area of operations?
I loved how there was a Dunkin' both within and above the Downtown Crossing station at City Hall in Boston.
You think that's bad.North Station commuter rail waiting area (in the TD Garden) has two Dunks located within about 100 yards of each other.
Oh, I don't consider it a bad thing at all. Although some people disparage the quality of Dunkin Donuts' donuts, they do not offend my palate.
Quote from: roadman on October 13, 2015, 04:00:16 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 13, 2015, 02:42:59 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 13, 2015, 02:35:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 13, 2015, 02:04:19 PM
Why did Dunkin Donuts avoid California for years?
Maybe because Dunkin' Donuts is based in Massachusetts, and the Northeast is their core area of operations?
I loved how there was a Dunkin' both within and above the Downtown Crossing station at City Hall in Boston.
You think that's bad.North Station commuter rail waiting area (in the TD Garden) has two Dunks located within about 100 yards of each other.
Some large shopping malls have 2 of the same store within the same mall.
The key: If they are busy, it's a good thing. I'd rather have 2 Dunkins near each other than 1 big one with a long line.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 14, 2015, 10:11:58 AM
Quote from: roadman on October 13, 2015, 04:00:16 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 13, 2015, 02:42:59 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 13, 2015, 02:35:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 13, 2015, 02:04:19 PM
Why did Dunkin Donuts avoid California for years?
Maybe because Dunkin' Donuts is based in Massachusetts, and the Northeast is their core area of operations?
I loved how there was a Dunkin' both within and above the Downtown Crossing station at City Hall in Boston.
You think that's bad.North Station commuter rail waiting area (in the TD Garden) has two Dunks located within about 100 yards of each other.
Some large shopping malls have 2 of the same store within the same mall.
The key: If they are busy, it's a good thing. I'd rather have 2 Dunkins near each other than 1 big one with a long line.
Sometimes "busy" isn't even the reason. Fair Oaks Mall near Fairfax has two Macy's stores. It's a result of when Macy's bought Hecht's in the mid-2000s. The mall previously had a Hecht's and a (much newer) Macy's. Macy's management decided they preferred to operate two stores at the same mall, despite the inherent duplication and waste of resources, because they didn't want to give up either space to a competitor. Oddly, they've never adjusted the inventories to make, say, one store focused on clothing and the other on other merchandise, or doing what Saks did on Wisconsin Avenue and making one store focused on women's items and the other focused on men's. I assume the concern there is that people will be less willing to walk through the mall to the other store and might instead go to one of the other anchors, though they're not really the same sort of store (Sears and Lord & Taylor).
Dunkin' Donuts are so ubiquitous that it's no longer surprising how close they are. What surprises me much more is the level of demand for their mediocrity.
Starbucks is almost as bad in places. There are four in a three-block stretch of Harvard Square.
Harvard Square also has two CVSes separated by a crosswalk.
Salem, New Hampshire, has two Market Basket supermarkets half a mile from one another on the same side of the same street.
You know this Dunkin Donut and Macy's thing needs to be followed by Costco. As they do not like to have 2 stores even within the same side of a city's metro area.
The one on Orange Blossom Trail in Orlando will now be closing so they can "move" to another area of Orlando, that is the Millenia Mall area. For those of you who do not know O Town, the Millenia is near Universal Studios about eight miles from where it is now. Now to me if they want to market in the Universal area they can still keep their store open where it is presently and just built another one where they want to move it to later this year.
Right now Costco is too crowded as it is, as you only have that one for several miles. Just as Jeff says about Dunkin Donuts, the same could be for Costco. I would rather have two stores than the one that is so overcrowded and makes shopping a daytime nightmare. Especially, with careless people who walk slow down the main aisles and stop abruptly in front of you, or large families who take all the free samples given out in one shot, another location in another spot of town in addition to, not replacing this one would cause a much friendlier environment for shoppers. Of course making the customer happy makes a customer buy more and more sales for them means more profit.
As far as Macy's goes, they did the same in Woodbridge- Edison, NJ. For years Bambergers was in Menlo Park Mall, which in the mid 80's became Macy's. Then later on sometime in the last 25 years Stern's closed their Woodbridge Mall store and became another Macy's despite having Menlo Park's Macy's just up the street. Yet when Woodbridge Mall expanded back in the circa 1980, JC Penney, which was an anchor at Menlo Park Mall, moved into Woodbridge Mall and actually closed their Menlo Park Store because the two were so close.
Macy's does not see it that way, but I can tell you after working for them, they use the Draw verses commission sales technique to cover the red operating that they are currently in. Draw verses commission means that the minimum wage they pay you needs to be paid back with the first fruits of you commissions, so if the labor cost are high for them, the fact that they get it back from a percentage of the merchandise sold justifies the loss as they can claim that it is temporary. Basically a salesperson in Macy's can only make more than minimum wage if they sell more in commission than the hourly rate of pay for the total of hours worked. Your wage is basically an advance, and you actually work harder for your money than you really should be.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 14, 2015, 10:54:38 AM
Dunkin' Donuts are so ubiquitous that it's no longer surprising how close they are. What surprises me much more is the level of demand for their mediocrity.
Starbucks is almost as bad in places. There are four in a three-block stretch of Harvard Square.
Harvard Square also has two CVSes separated by a crosswalk.
Salem, New Hampshire, has two Market Basket supermarkets half a mile from one another on the same side of the same street.
And in some parts of the south, if you are at one Waffle House, you are able to see another one down the street.
New England loves to duplicate its local chains. Dunkin, CVS and Market Basket have been mentioned but Shaw's (a grocery chain) is another. West Lebanon, NH literally has two within a mile of each other in the same commercial cluster.
I suspect it's a regional pride thing.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 14, 2015, 11:08:09 AM
Basically a salesperson in Macy's can only make more than minimum wage if they sell more in commission than the hourly rate of pay for the total of hours worked. Your wage is basically an advance, and you actually work harder for your money than you really should be.
Wow. You'd think labor at Macy's would therefore be a race-to-the-bottom, unless other like retailers run the same commission scheme. In other words, you'd think the good salespeople would actually head off to work at places with better pay schemes than one where your salary is a commission advance, leaving only less-skilled salespeople to work at Macy's.
Wow.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 14, 2015, 10:11:58 AMSome large shopping malls have 2 of the same store within the same mall.
West Quay in Southampton used to have 3 Costa Coffees, with another 3 on the main shopping street just outside. None was more than 100yds from another, though there was only one pair where you could (just about) see both.
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 12:11:31 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 14, 2015, 11:08:09 AM
Basically a salesperson in Macy's can only make more than minimum wage if they sell more in commission than the hourly rate of pay for the total of hours worked. Your wage is basically an advance, and you actually work harder for your money than you really should be.
Wow. You'd think labor at Macy's would therefore be a race-to-the-bottom, unless other like retailers run the same commission scheme. In other words, you'd think the good salespeople would actually head off to work at places with better pay schemes than one where your salary is a commission advance, leaving only less-skilled salespeople to work at Macy's.
Wow.
I suspect the better salespeople do okay at Macy's. It's the beginning salespeople that aren't good at sales yet and the ones stuck on slow shifts that are hurt.
Quote from: kkt on October 14, 2015, 12:28:40 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 12:11:31 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 14, 2015, 11:08:09 AM
Basically a salesperson in Macy's can only make more than minimum wage if they sell more in commission than the hourly rate of pay for the total of hours worked. Your wage is basically an advance, and you actually work harder for your money than you really should be.
Wow. You'd think labor at Macy's would therefore be a race-to-the-bottom, unless other like retailers run the same commission scheme. In other words, you'd think the good salespeople would actually head off to work at places with better pay schemes than one where your salary is a commission advance, leaving only less-skilled salespeople to work at Macy's.
Wow.
I suspect the better salespeople do okay at Macy's. It's the beginning salespeople that aren't good at sales yet and the ones stuck on slow shifts that are hurt.
Ok. All I've got now is that I have no idea where that second "Wow" came from.
Quote from: empirestate on October 13, 2015, 08:35:44 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 13, 2015, 07:37:38 AM
That's really interesting to hear. Springfield is a college town, but in the year I spent there, I never felt like it was all that different culture-wise from decidedly conservative Oklahoma. (In fact, it seemed more so; in Springfield I saw a truck flying Nazi flags that I believed had some sort of affiliation with the KKK, but I tried to avoid looking at it too closely as I was a lone pedestrian crossing the street in front of it and felt somewhat threatened by its presence. I've never seen any such thing in Oklahoma City.)
Springfield is known as being the whitest major city in the U.S., due to a lynching having driven out the entire black population in the early 1900s. The effects are still apparent today.
iPhone
I thoguht that was either Salt Lake City or Phoenix.
On a side note, I wonder if confederate flags are flown out there? It wouldn't make sense because they were never part of the confederacy, but at the same time the flag is seen differently from different perspectives. Personally, I loathe its presence and see it as hatred, but this is just my opinion.
Back to the OT, I think it could also have something to do with economics.
Quote from: Rothman on October 13, 2015, 02:42:59 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 13, 2015, 02:35:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 13, 2015, 02:04:19 PM
Why did Dunkin Donuts avoid California for years?
Maybe because Dunkin' Donuts is based in Massachusetts, and the Northeast is their core area of operations?
I loved how there was a Dunkin' both within and above the Downtown Crossing station at City Hall in Boston.
This is pretty much how Tim Hortons operates in the Buffalo area. In some areas there'll be a Tim Hortons in a grocery store or sports place and then a standalone outside of it as well. The running joke is that "there's a Tim Hortons on every corner."
The store that takes the cake as the slowest to expand but widely-known could potentially be Wegmans, which opens something like 1-2 stores per year in uber-wealthy areas, but still operates what some would consider "run down" stores in areas like East Syracuse.
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 14, 2015, 01:01:51 PM
Quote from: empirestate on October 13, 2015, 08:35:44 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 13, 2015, 07:37:38 AM
That's really interesting to hear. Springfield is a college town, but in the year I spent there, I never felt like it was all that different culture-wise from decidedly conservative Oklahoma. (In fact, it seemed more so; in Springfield I saw a truck flying Nazi flags that I believed had some sort of affiliation with the KKK, but I tried to avoid looking at it too closely as I was a lone pedestrian crossing the street in front of it and felt somewhat threatened by its presence. I've never seen any such thing in Oklahoma City.)
Springfield is known as being the whitest major city in the U.S., due to a lynching having driven out the entire black population in the early 1900s. The effects are still apparent today.
iPhone
I thoguht that was either Salt Lake City or Phoenix.
On a side note, I wonder if confederate flags are flown out there? It wouldn't make sense because they were never part of the confederacy, but at the same time the flag is seen differently from different perspectives. Personally, I loathe its presence and see it as hatred, but this is just my opinion.
Back to the OT, I think it could also have something to do with economics.
I would have guessed someplace like Burlington VT as the whitest city
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 14, 2015, 01:01:51 PM
On a side note, I wonder if confederate flags are flown out there?
There are idiots flying Confederate Battle Flags here in the Capital Region of NY. Somehow, that flag has become a symbol of just general...rebellion, I suppose (which means...shouldn't we throw them in jail?), and by "rebellion" I mean "stupidity." At least MO was essentially a border state. Flying it in NY? That should qualify you for sitting in the corner with a dunce cap on.
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 01:19:20 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 14, 2015, 01:01:51 PM
On a side note, I wonder if confederate flags are flown out there?
There are idiots flying Confederate Battle Flags here in the Capital Region of NY. Somehow, that flag has become a symbol of just general...rebellion, I suppose (which means...shouldn't we throw them in jail?), and by "rebellion" I mean "stupidity." At least MO was essentially a border state. Flying it in NY? That should qualify you for sitting in the corner with a dunce cap on.
When I see people in NY and PA I think racist white supremacists types. In FL, VA or any other former Confederate state I think heritage and history. ( no comments on FL is not the South. My ancestors fought for confederacy with Florida Company)
The Civic Center Mall in Hartford used to have two Wendy's: one on the same level as the Coliseum entrance, and one upstairs. The upstairs one was call Wendy's Too. Meanwhile today, I live in a town of just over 40,000 with 8 Dunkins, 6 Subways, 2 each of McDonald's, Burger King, Taco Bell, and Starbucks, and even 2 Home Depots. Even had 2 Arby's and there were 2 Friendly's for a while within a half mile of each other. Another city near me has 3 Stop & Shops.
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 01:41:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 01:19:20 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 14, 2015, 01:01:51 PM
On a side note, I wonder if confederate flags are flown out there?
There are idiots flying Confederate Battle Flags here in the Capital Region of NY. Somehow, that flag has become a symbol of just general...rebellion, I suppose (which means...shouldn't we throw them in jail?), and by "rebellion" I mean "stupidity." At least MO was essentially a border state. Flying it in NY? That should qualify you for sitting in the corner with a dunce cap on.
When I see people in NY and PA I think racist white supremacists types. In FL, VA or any other former Confederate state I think heritage and history. ( no comments on FL is not the South. My ancestors fought for confederacy with Florida Company)
I dunno. When I see it flown in the South, I suppose I just see it as being flown out of -- for lack of a better word -- ignorance. People flying it out of a sense of some sort of generic "Southern Pride" without thinking about the actual values that were being fought for under that flag.
I also have ancestors that fought for the CSA. I like to give them the credit of them being smart enough for knowing what they were actually fighting for given how smart their descendants are. :D
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 02:09:33 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 01:41:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 01:19:20 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 14, 2015, 01:01:51 PM
On a side note, I wonder if confederate flags are flown out there?
There are idiots flying Confederate Battle Flags here in the Capital Region of NY. Somehow, that flag has become a symbol of just general...rebellion, I suppose (which means...shouldn't we throw them in jail?), and by "rebellion" I mean "stupidity." At least MO was essentially a border state. Flying it in NY? That should qualify you for sitting in the corner with a dunce cap on.
When I see people in NY and PA I think racist white supremacists types. In FL, VA or any other former Confederate state I think heritage and history. ( no comments on FL is not the South. My ancestors fought for confederacy with Florida Company)
I dunno. When I see it flown in the South, I suppose I just see it as being flown out of -- for lack of a better word -- ignorance. People flying it out of a sense of some sort of generic "Southern Pride" without thinking about the actual values that were being fought for under that flag.
I also have ancestors that fought for the CSA. I like to give them the credit of them being smart enough for knowing what they were actually fighting for given how smart their descendants are. :D
You can't say ignorance.. It's hard to judge 150+ years ago with today's outlook on the world.. The victors write the history.. People like to think the union fought on the noble cause.. But look at the writings of Lincoln, grant etc.. They were downright racist. Like any war there was many factors. Slavery being one..
And if you want to judge the South for having slaves, then you have to judge New England for actually running the ships from Africa to the Americas.
People are wanting to erase the Confederacy from history.
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 01:07:00 PM
I would have guessed someplace like Burlington VT as the whitest city
Judging solely on my week-long visit and by the side comments spouted (from the personnel I was training) each time they saw a non-white person, I'd say...yes.
Also, perhaps chicken sandwiches aren't really as popular in the Northeast? Maybe CFA actually did a little research and field testing? On the other hand, it's kind of average food, but they're friendly and courteous. It's rare to get that in fast-food places.
I could list hundreds of reasons most national, regional, or local places do things to lose my dollar, but then I'd have nothing to buy.
I see this thread being locked soon. However I am amazed with the fact a major flame war has not yet started within the first 50 posts. Now its getting here. Just like the Denali thread its getting into political waters.
Most of all I think this thread is getting too old already.
Quote from: formulanone on October 14, 2015, 02:34:44 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 01:07:00 PM
I would have guessed someplace like Burlington VT as the whitest city
Judging solely on my week-long visit and by the side comments spouted (from the personnel I was training) each time they saw a non-white person, I'd say...yes.
Springfield's demographics are finally recovering, and it appears they did surpass Burlington in the last census for black population. Burlington's also a rather smaller city; certainly, below a certain size threshold, you're likely to find many places whose black population is negligible.
iPhone
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 02:09:33 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 01:41:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 01:19:20 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 14, 2015, 01:01:51 PM
On a side note, I wonder if confederate flags are flown out there?
There are idiots flying Confederate Battle Flags here in the Capital Region of NY. Somehow, that flag has become a symbol of just general...rebellion, I suppose (which means...shouldn't we throw them in jail?), and by "rebellion" I mean "stupidity." At least MO was essentially a border state. Flying it in NY? That should qualify you for sitting in the corner with a dunce cap on.
When I see people in NY and PA I think racist white supremacists types. In FL, VA or any other former Confederate state I think heritage and history. ( no comments on FL is not the South. My ancestors fought for confederacy with Florida Company)
I dunno. When I see it flown in the South, I suppose I just see it as being flown out of -- for lack of a better word -- ignorance. People flying it out of a sense of some sort of generic "Southern Pride" without thinking about the actual values that were being fought for under that flag.
I also have ancestors that fought for the CSA. I like to give them the credit of them being smart enough for knowing what they were actually fighting for given how smart their descendants are. :D
I'm a minority (don't care to specify but I would be most offended by the flag), so when I see it, I take into consideration that they could be just remembering their ancestors, but at the same time, I can't get over seeing it in movies like Glory or something, along with the hoods and the other stuff.
Actually back to the topic as this is a good segway, I once read this http://newsone.com/2780635/black-urban-legends-chick-fil-a-racist-against-blacks/ and thought it was real, but it wasn't. That would've been the last straw.
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 02:26:22 PM
People are wanting to erase the Confederacy from history.
Anything but. In fact, people are wanting to keep it in history so we don't forget the racism and slavery it condoned.
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 03:27:25 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 02:26:22 PM
People are wanting to erase the Confederacy from history.
Anything but. In fact, people are wanting to keep it in history so we don't forget the racism and slavery it condoned.
Racism is not only in the South.. Bussing in Boston? Levitttown NY did not allow black people to buy homes. Some of the most horribly racist people I have met are from the Northeast
Again the victors write the history. Don't imply the rest of the US has no racism.
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 02:26:22 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 02:09:33 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 01:41:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 01:19:20 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 14, 2015, 01:01:51 PM
On a side note, I wonder if confederate flags are flown out there?
There are idiots flying Confederate Battle Flags here in the Capital Region of NY. Somehow, that flag has become a symbol of just general...rebellion, I suppose (which means...shouldn't we throw them in jail?), and by "rebellion" I mean "stupidity." At least MO was essentially a border state. Flying it in NY? That should qualify you for sitting in the corner with a dunce cap on.
When I see people in NY and PA I think racist white supremacists types. In FL, VA or any other former Confederate state I think heritage and history. ( no comments on FL is not the South. My ancestors fought for confederacy with Florida Company)
I dunno. When I see it flown in the South, I suppose I just see it as being flown out of -- for lack of a better word -- ignorance. People flying it out of a sense of some sort of generic "Southern Pride" without thinking about the actual values that were being fought for under that flag.
I also have ancestors that fought for the CSA. I like to give them the credit of them being smart enough for knowing what they were actually fighting for given how smart their descendants are. :D
You can't say ignorance.. It's hard to judge 150+ years ago with today's outlook on the world.. The victors write the history.. People like to think the union fought on the noble cause.. But look at the writings of Lincoln, grant etc.. They were downright racist. Like any war there was many factors. Slavery being one..
And if you want to judge the South for having slaves, then you have to judge New England for actually running the ships from Africa to the Americas.
Why not? Many of us in New England have little problem casting a critical eye on the manipulative behavior of the early European adventurers and settlers toward the native population here. I don't know anyone that would in the same breath defend the slave trade.
QuotePeople are wanting to erase the Confederacy from history.
Nonsense. People are wanting to stop celebrating a government that existed to preserve the use of human beings as livestock and a subsequent century of codified second-class citizenship for those same people.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 14, 2015, 04:04:00 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 02:26:22 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 02:09:33 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 01:41:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 01:19:20 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 14, 2015, 01:01:51 PM
On a side note, I wonder if confederate flags are flown out there?
There are idiots flying Confederate Battle Flags here in the Capital Region of NY. Somehow, that flag has become a symbol of just general...rebellion, I suppose (which means...shouldn't we throw them in jail?), and by "rebellion" I mean "stupidity." At least MO was essentially a border state. Flying it in NY? That should qualify you for sitting in the corner with a dunce cap on.
When I see people in NY and PA I think racist white supremacists types. In FL, VA or any other former Confederate state I think heritage and history. ( no comments on FL is not the South. My ancestors fought for confederacy with Florida Company)
I dunno. When I see it flown in the South, I suppose I just see it as being flown out of -- for lack of a better word -- ignorance. People flying it out of a sense of some sort of generic "Southern Pride" without thinking about the actual values that were being fought for under that flag.
I also have ancestors that fought for the CSA. I like to give them the credit of them being smart enough for knowing what they were actually fighting for given how smart their descendants are. :D
You can't say ignorance.. It's hard to judge 150+ years ago with today's outlook on the world.. The victors write the history.. People like to think the union fought on the noble cause.. But look at the writings of Lincoln, grant etc.. They were downright racist. Like any war there was many factors. Slavery being one..
And if you want to judge the South for having slaves, then you have to judge New England for actually running the ships from Africa to the Americas.
Why not? Many of us in New England have little problem casting a critical eye on the manipulative behavior of the early European adventurers and settlers toward the native population here. I don't know anyone that would in the same breath defend the slave trade.
QuotePeople are wanting to erase the Confederacy from history.
Nonsense. People are wanting to stop celebrating a government that existed to preserve the use of human beings as livestock and a subsequent century of codified second-class citizenship for those same people.
The ships that brought the slaves were from places like New Bedford. Not just early exlplorers. New Englanders have this smug attitude about the South and race relations and everything else for that matter. We get lectures about lack of diversity from people living lilly white Vermont.
No one defends slavery it is the "original sin" ifyou will of this country. But the reasons behind the civil war are more nuanced that a bunch of evil southern white folks wanting their slaves and the noble people from up north wanting equality for all... It much more complex. The New England textile mills had no problem with using cheap cotton from slave labor to make cloth and clothing to sell to give an example. The entire country bears blame for slavery.
But what do I know I am just some backwards hayseed I don't have no sophistication like Boston folks do.. Come down here and learn us somethin'
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 03:52:06 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 03:27:25 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 02:26:22 PM
People are wanting to erase the Confederacy from history.
Anything but. In fact, people are wanting to keep it in history so we don't forget the racism and slavery it condoned.
Racism is not only in the South.. Bussing in Boston? Levitttown NY did not allow black people to buy homes. Some of the most horribly racist people I have met are from the Northeast
Again the victors write the history. Don't imply the rest of the US has no racism.
How about the parade of tweets from Boston Bruins fans after Joel Ward scored in overtime of Game 7 to eliminate them in 2012? Don't open the link at work due to a certain impolite word sometimes used to refer to black people.
http://blacksportsonline.com/home/2012/04/capitals-joel-ward-scores-game-7-overtime-winner-bruins-fans-unleash-n-word-barrage-on-twitter/
We're just gonna hit all the hot buttons in this one, aren't we?
(It's true, though...I always say the worst thing to happen to Boston's image was the desegregation of the South, because it brought into focus the more veiled form of racism that was present there.)
iPhone
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 04:13:50 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 14, 2015, 04:04:00 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 02:26:22 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 02:09:33 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 01:41:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 01:19:20 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 14, 2015, 01:01:51 PM
On a side note, I wonder if confederate flags are flown out there?
There are idiots flying Confederate Battle Flags here in the Capital Region of NY. Somehow, that flag has become a symbol of just general...rebellion, I suppose (which means...shouldn't we throw them in jail?), and by "rebellion" I mean "stupidity." At least MO was essentially a border state. Flying it in NY? That should qualify you for sitting in the corner with a dunce cap on.
When I see people in NY and PA I think racist white supremacists types. In FL, VA or any other former Confederate state I think heritage and history. ( no comments on FL is not the South. My ancestors fought for confederacy with Florida Company)
I dunno. When I see it flown in the South, I suppose I just see it as being flown out of -- for lack of a better word -- ignorance. People flying it out of a sense of some sort of generic "Southern Pride" without thinking about the actual values that were being fought for under that flag.
I also have ancestors that fought for the CSA. I like to give them the credit of them being smart enough for knowing what they were actually fighting for given how smart their descendants are. :D
You can't say ignorance.. It's hard to judge 150+ years ago with today's outlook on the world.. The victors write the history.. People like to think the union fought on the noble cause.. But look at the writings of Lincoln, grant etc.. They were downright racist. Like any war there was many factors. Slavery being one..
And if you want to judge the South for having slaves, then you have to judge New England for actually running the ships from Africa to the Americas.
Why not? Many of us in New England have little problem casting a critical eye on the manipulative behavior of the early European adventurers and settlers toward the native population here. I don't know anyone that would in the same breath defend the slave trade.
QuotePeople are wanting to erase the Confederacy from history.
Nonsense. People are wanting to stop celebrating a government that existed to preserve the use of human beings as livestock and a subsequent century of codified second-class citizenship for those same people.
The ships that brought the slaves were from places like New Bedford. Not just early exlplorers. New Englanders have this smug attitude about the South and race relations and everything else for that matter. We get lectures about lack of diversity from people living lilly white Vermont.
No one defends slavery it is the "original sin" ifyou will of this country. But the reasons behind the civil war are more nuanced that a bunch of evil southern white folks wanting their slaves and the noble people from up north wanting equality for all... It much more complex. The New England textile mills had no problem with using cheap cotton from slave labor to make cloth and clothing to sell to give an example. The entire country bears blame for slavery.
But what do I know I am just some backwards hayseed I don't have no sophistication like Boston folks do.. Come down here and learn us somethin'
You seem to be approaching this with a chip on your shoulder already, and I can't help you there. Nobody is calling you a hayseed. You are the one that is turning this personal.
You don't want to believe me when I say that just as there are people here that acknowledge the New England role in the depredations against natives, we are also well aware of the triangle trade and are not attempting to rewrite that history. Please at least note that in another thread about the acceptance of refugee migrants in Europe, I was careful to note that most Northerners did not want emancipated blacks here, if at all. The Emancipation Proclamation was not the product of overwhelming popular sentiment in the North. It was the result of careful political calculation by President Lincoln despite its unpopularity.
This does not change what the Confederacy and its flag mean to the descendants of slaves, nor does the assertion, even if true, that the entire country bears responsibility for slavery.
What I do not understand is why people take personally attacks on a flag that represented stealing the basic human rights of generations of slaves, while simultaneously questioning why others take that ugly association personally.
Why do I have to take the blame for spawning this potential mess :ded:.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 14, 2015, 06:06:50 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 04:13:50 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 14, 2015, 04:04:00 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 02:26:22 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 02:09:33 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 01:41:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 01:19:20 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 14, 2015, 01:01:51 PM
On a side note, I wonder if confederate flags are flown out there?
There are idiots flying Confederate Battle Flags here in the Capital Region of NY. Somehow, that flag has become a symbol of just general...rebellion, I suppose (which means...shouldn't we throw them in jail?), and by "rebellion" I mean "stupidity." At least MO was essentially a border state. Flying it in NY? That should qualify you for sitting in the corner with a dunce cap on.
When I see people in NY and PA I think racist white supremacists types. In FL, VA or any other former Confederate state I think heritage and history. ( no comments on FL is not the South. My ancestors fought for confederacy with Florida Company)
I dunno. When I see it flown in the South, I suppose I just see it as being flown out of -- for lack of a better word -- ignorance. People flying it out of a sense of some sort of generic "Southern Pride" without thinking about the actual values that were being fought for under that flag.
I also have ancestors that fought for the CSA. I like to give them the credit of them being smart enough for knowing what they were actually fighting for given how smart their descendants are. :D
You can't say ignorance.. It's hard to judge 150+ years ago with today's outlook on the world.. The victors write the history.. People like to think the union fought on the noble cause.. But look at the writings of Lincoln, grant etc.. They were downright racist. Like any war there was many factors. Slavery being one..
And if you want to judge the South for having slaves, then you have to judge New England for actually running the ships from Africa to the Americas.
Why not? Many of us in New England have little problem casting a critical eye on the manipulative behavior of the early European adventurers and settlers toward the native population here. I don't know anyone that would in the same breath defend the slave trade.
QuotePeople are wanting to erase the Confederacy from history.
Nonsense. People are wanting to stop celebrating a government that existed to preserve the use of human beings as livestock and a subsequent century of codified second-class citizenship for those same people.
The ships that brought the slaves were from places like New Bedford. Not just early exlplorers. New Englanders have this smug attitude about the South and race relations and everything else for that matter. We get lectures about lack of diversity from people living lilly white Vermont.
No one defends slavery it is the "original sin" ifyou will of this country. But the reasons behind the civil war are more nuanced that a bunch of evil southern white folks wanting their slaves and the noble people from up north wanting equality for all... It much more complex. The New England textile mills had no problem with using cheap cotton from slave labor to make cloth and clothing to sell to give an example. The entire country bears blame for slavery.
But what do I know I am just some backwards hayseed I don't have no sophistication like Boston folks do.. Come down here and learn us somethin'
You seem to be approaching this with a chip on your shoulder already, and I can't help you there. Nobody is calling you a hayseed. You are the one that is turning this personal.
You don't want to believe me when I say that just as there are people here that acknowledge the New England role in the depredations against natives, we are also well aware of the triangle trade and are not attempting to rewrite that history. Please at least note that in another thread about the acceptance of refugee migrants in Europe, I was careful to note that most Northerners did not want emancipated blacks here, if at all. The Emancipation Proclamation was not the product of overwhelming popular sentiment in the North. It was the result of careful political calculation by President Lincoln despite its unpopularity.
This does not change what the Confederacy and its flag mean to the descendants of slaves, nor does the assertion, even if true, that the entire country bears responsibility for slavery.
What I do not understand is why people take personally attacks on a flag that represented stealing the basic human rights of generations of slaves, while simultaneously questioning why others take that ugly association personally.
No chip on my shoulder, and I don't take it as a personal insult. But as an insult on the entire region. Many up north hear a southern accent and automatically think stupid.. The uneducated dolt from Brooklyn thinks he is superior to the PhD physicist from NC. And this stereotype is promulgated they the media. Dumb characters, closed minded characters even is movie is set in Seattle always have a southern accent.
You need to read up on slavery in the north.. The abolitionists rewrote history of New England to absolve them of any guilt in slavery, while there may not have been legal slavery in 1860 in the North, free blacks had no rights for the most part..And at the time slavery was legal in all colonies. They certainly did not want black citizens. There were laws against blacks owning property, serving on juries, having relations with whites etc.
While slavery was opposed in the abstract they certainly did not want black people living among them, because in their view whites were the superior race.. The very definition of racist.
So don't lecture on how horrible the South is or was, and don't whitewash.. no pun intended.. the role that New England had in slavery in this country.
Some of the more interesting passages in Frederick Douglass' autobiography My Bondage and My Freedom (which has had a honored place on my shelf for over 25 years) have to do with segregation in Massachusetts and New England abolitionists' discomfort with the concept of living cheek by jowl with free blacks.
Quote from: Buffaboy on October 14, 2015, 06:23:40 PM
Why do I have to take the blame for spawning this potential mess :ded:.
Well, ya gotta admit a thread called "Why does Chick-fil-A avoid the Northeast" could hardly have been expected to turn out otherwise. ;-)
iPhone
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 07:01:16 PMNo chip on my shoulder, and I don't take it as a personal insult. But as an insult on the entire region. Many up north hear a southern accent and automatically think stupid.
I guess this is where I'm detecting that you're arriving at this conversation with pre-existing insult, because what you're describing isn't happening in this conversation.
QuoteWhile slavery was opposed in the abstract they certainly did not want black people living among them, because in their view whites were the superior race.. The very definition of racist.
You're repeating my words back to me, paraphrased.
QuoteSo don't lecture on how horrible the South is or was, and don't whitewash.. no pun intended.. the role that New England had in slavery in this country.
Never lectured. Acknowledged New England's role. I'll even acknowledge Old England's complicity while we're at it. I even went further and said folks up here showed wanton disregard for the rights and dignity of other races long before Southern slavery took root. But none of this means a person descended from owned humans should not feel resentment about the Confederate flag.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 14, 2015, 07:44:44 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 07:01:16 PMNo chip on my shoulder, and I don't take it as a personal insult. But as an insult on the entire region. Many up north hear a southern accent and automatically think stupid.
I guess this is where I'm detecting that you're arriving at this conversation with pre-existing insult, because what you're describing isn't happening in this conversation.
QuoteWhile slavery was opposed in the abstract they certainly did not want black people living among them, because in their view whites were the superior race.. The very definition of racist.
You're repeating my words back to me, paraphrased.
QuoteSo don't lecture on how horrible the South is or was, and don't whitewash.. no pun intended.. the role that New England had in slavery in this country.
Never lectured. Acknowledged New England's role. I'll even acknowledge Old England's complicity while we're at it. I even went further and said folks up here showed wanton disregard for the rights and dignity of other races long before Southern slavery took root. But none of this means a person descended from owned humans should not feel resentment about the Confederate flag.
Erasing the Confederate flag and having it removed from any official capacity will not change history. And honoring a flag that your ancestors fought under does not mean that that you support slavery or that your ancestors even held slaves.
I understand why descendants of slaves would be upset. Just as I don't like neighborhoods called "__ Plantation". If I were black, especially descended from slaves .. I would not want to live there.
I am actually enjoying the discussion of the matter but way off subject.. No hard feelings on my end. I will stop
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 08:01:54 PM
And honoring a flag that your ancestors fought under does not mean that that they support slavery or that their ancestors even held slaves
Have to disagree here. Like I said, I give my ancestors that fought with the South more credit than just some superficial blind loyalty to a nifty colorful flag. They knew what they were going to war for and knew what "southern values" really meant when it came to race relations.
Frankly, I trust the head of the Department of History at West Point on the matter. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcy7qV-BGF4)
I still maintain a lot of the answer comes down to fried chicken being much more deeply rooted in the south. But what I don't know is, why?
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 08:01:54 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 14, 2015, 07:44:44 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 07:01:16 PMNo chip on my shoulder, and I don't take it as a personal insult. But as an insult on the entire region. Many up north hear a southern accent and automatically think stupid.
I guess this is where I'm detecting that you're arriving at this conversation with pre-existing insult, because what you're describing isn't happening in this conversation.
QuoteWhile slavery was opposed in the abstract they certainly did not want black people living among them, because in their view whites were the superior race.. The very definition of racist.
You're repeating my words back to me, paraphrased.
QuoteSo don't lecture on how horrible the South is or was, and don't whitewash.. no pun intended.. the role that New England had in slavery in this country.
Never lectured. Acknowledged New England's role. I'll even acknowledge Old England's complicity while we're at it. I even went further and said folks up here showed wanton disregard for the rights and dignity of other races long before Southern slavery took root. But none of this means a person descended from owned humans should not feel resentment about the Confederate flag.
Erasing the Confederate flag and having it removed from any official capacity will not change history. And honoring a flag that your ancestors fought under does not mean that that you support slavery or that your ancestors even held slaves.
I understand why descendants of slaves would be upset. Just as I don't like neighborhoods called "__ Plantation". If I were black, especially descended from slaves .. I would not want to live there.
I am actually enjoying the discussion of the matter but way off subject.. No hard feelings on my end. I will stop
I have a non-Caucasian relative who lives in Plantation, FL. She like the weather there, but I don't know what she thinks about the town name.
Honestly, I wouldn't have a problem living down south in a place like Charlotte, D.C. or the Research Triangle, given I've lived up north my whole life and that my grandparents grew up there. The cultural transition would likely be tough to handle though, and there are several states and areas I would avoid for political reasons.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 14, 2015, 08:59:32 PM
I still maintain a lot of the answer comes down to fried chicken being much more deeply rooted in the south. But what I don't know is, why?
I don't know either. Fried chicken is so awesome that I don't see why everyone isn't into it. Screw health reasons; you don't have to eat it every day.
Well, to bring things full circle, Wikipedia says fried chicken arrived with Scots and West Africans but spread around the South as a foodstuff of slaves:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fried_chicken
I haven't bothered to find a more reputable source yet, but it at least corroborates that fried chicken is a primarily Southern staple (we all know this already), which goes a long way toward answering the initial question.
And on the topic of fried chicken, does anyone else observe racist undertones–or at least insensitive ones–in Popeye's' advertising?
Quote from: empirestate on October 15, 2015, 09:32:16 AM
And on the topic of fried chicken, does anyone else observe racist undertones–or at least insensitive ones–in Popeye's' advertising?
Uncle Ben's, Aunt Jemima, etc etc
Quote from: empirestate on October 15, 2015, 09:32:16 AM
And on the topic of fried chicken, does anyone else observe racist undertones–or at least insensitive ones–in Popeye's' advertising?
I never see their ads. Are they racist, or demographically targeted?
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on October 15, 2015, 09:56:41 AM
Quote from: empirestate on October 15, 2015, 09:32:16 AM
And on the topic of fried chicken, does anyone else observe racist undertones–or at least insensitive ones–in Popeye's' advertising?
Uncle Ben's, Aunt Jemima, etc etc
Sambos a now defunct restaurant chain in Florida. I do not know the whole story, but it had something to do with racism and the store was pressured to close it doors. Something about the character that the restaurant was named for, who was supposed to be a young black kid, got some people upset, which I never fully understood given that Aunt Jemimah, and even in Tom & Jerry where you have that house owner that was always whipping Tom in some earlier cartoons, was depicted as a Southern Black Woman, never got pressured into non existence.
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 08:01:54 PM
I understand why descendants of slaves would be upset. Just as I don't like neighborhoods called "__ Plantation". If I were black, especially descended from slaves .. I would not want to live there.
So what about the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations?
Yes, that's the state's actual full name. Providence Plantations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Providence_Plantations) was the area founded by Roger Williams (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Williams).
Quote from: roadman65 on October 15, 2015, 10:19:27 AM
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on October 15, 2015, 09:56:41 AM
Quote from: empirestate on October 15, 2015, 09:32:16 AM
And on the topic of fried chicken, does anyone else observe racist undertones–or at least insensitive ones–in Popeye's' advertising?
Uncle Ben's, Aunt Jemima, etc etc
Sambos a now defunct restaurant chain in Florida. I do not know the whole story, but it had something to do with racism and the store was pressured to close it doors. Something about the character that the restaurant was named for, who was supposed to be a young black kid, got some people upset, which I never fully understood given that Aunt Jemimah, and even in Tom & Jerry where you have that house owner that was always whipping Tom in some earlier cartoons, was depicted as a Southern Black Woman, never got pressured into non existence.
A Google search with "Sambo" will give a firm definition on the term.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 15, 2015, 07:38:03 AM
Well, to bring things full circle, Wikipedia says fried chicken arrived with Scots and West Africans but spread around the South as a foodstuff of slaves:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fried_chicken
I haven't bothered to find a more reputable source yet, but it at least corroborates that fried chicken is a primarily Southern staple (we all know this already), which goes a long way toward answering the initial question.
That article has suffered from some disturbing edits.
Quote from: Brandon on October 15, 2015, 10:34:32 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 08:01:54 PM
I understand why descendants of slaves would be upset. Just as I don't like neighborhoods called "__ Plantation". If I were black, especially descended from slaves .. I would not want to live there.
So what about the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations?
Yes, that's the state's actual full name. Providence Plantations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Providence_Plantations) was the area founded by Roger Williams (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Williams).
I recall there was a stupid referendum a few years ago about dropping "and Providence Plantations" from the name. It lost overwhelmingly with something like more than 75% voting against the proposal.
Quote from: Brandon on October 15, 2015, 10:34:32 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on October 14, 2015, 08:01:54 PM
I understand why descendants of slaves would be upset. Just as I don't like neighborhoods called "__ Plantation". If I were black, especially descended from slaves .. I would not want to live there.
So what about the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations?
Yes, that's the state's actual full name. Providence Plantations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Providence_Plantations) was the area founded by Roger Williams (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Williams).
Language change over time. At the time RI was named plantation was a large commercial farm dedicated to one primary crop to make money, nor necessarily with slavery.
It's always interesting to see how language changes with time, word meanings shift, change or become specified. I.e. apple at one point was generic for fruit, like the tree in garden of eden when originally translated to English apple just meant fruit
Quote from: jwolfer on October 15, 2015, 11:19:17 AMIt's always interesting to see how language changes with time, word meanings shift, change or become specified. I.e. apple at one point was generic for fruit, like the tree in garden of eden when originally translated to English apple just meant fruit
"Corn" is similarly specific here and generic to grain elsewhere.
I am surprised yet the Republicans have not forced the City of Liberal, KS to change their name yet.
Or that some group should change the name of Intercourse, PA because it is the proper name for sex.
How about lets change Washington, DC name because its named after a man who kept slaves in his plantation called Mount Vernon.
While at it we can:
Change the name of Dixie Highway or the FL County named "Dixie."
Change the name of John F. Kennedy because of the controversy surrounding him.
Change the logo on Nabisco Cream of Wheat that features the creole chef in it.
Bottom line is everything named can be offensive in some way as we all are not perfect. Nor have ideals in the past either that were.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 15, 2015, 11:34:53 AMI am surprised yet the Republicans have not forced the City of Liberal, KS to change their name yet.
Or that some group should change the name of Intercourse, PA because it is the proper name for sex.
In both cases, the cities get their names from older and innocuous meanings of the words
liberal and
intercourse respectively, so they are not good candidates for renaming on the basis of controversy. A much better example is the actual town of White Settlement in Texas (a distant suburb of Fort Worth), which was named in contradistinction to a neighboring community that consisted primarily of Native Americans. A vote to rename it failed in 2005 by a 10-to-1 margin.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on October 15, 2015, 10:04:27 AM
Quote from: empirestate on October 15, 2015, 09:32:16 AM
And on the topic of fried chicken, does anyone else observe racist undertones–or at least insensitive ones–in Popeye's' advertising?
I never see their ads. Are they racist, or demographically targeted?
I'm sure they intend to be the latter. I don't find them overtly offensive myself, but I am stuck by their aesthetic as it recalls outmoded things like Song of the South or the Dumbo crows, which we have been advised are stereotypes to be avoided.
iPhone
Song of the South is an excellent movie that's misunderstood by way too many people. (I saw it in the theatre as a kid and nowadays I have a copy purchased abroad.) Disney WILL eventually re-release it, regardless of their current corporate position, because they'll want to make more money off it before the copyright expires.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 15, 2015, 12:57:19 PM
Song of the South is an excellent movie that's misunderstood by way too many people. (I saw it in the theatre as a kid and nowadays I have a copy purchased abroad.) Disney WILL eventually re-release it, regardless of their current corporate position, because they'll want to make more money off it before the copyright expires.
Don't expect the copyright to EVER expire. Disney is a major driver of copyright term extensions; it happens like clockwork every time Micky Mouse is slated to go public domain (which it would have decades ago under the rules that were in place when it was produced).
Quote from: vdeane on October 15, 2015, 01:20:09 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 15, 2015, 12:57:19 PM
Song of the South is an excellent movie that's misunderstood by way too many people. (I saw it in the theatre as a kid and nowadays I have a copy purchased abroad.) Disney WILL eventually re-release it, regardless of their current corporate position, because they'll want to make more money off it before the copyright expires.
Don't expect the copyright to EVER expire. Disney is a major driver of copyright term extensions; it happens like clockwork every time Micky Mouse is slated to go public domain (which it would have decades ago under the rules that were in place when it was produced).
It's not quite that simple with respect to Mickey Mouse. Mickey is both copyrighted and trademarked, as are many other major Disney characters, and the trademark doesn't expire unless they abandon it. That means they can still protect the character even if a particular cartoon isn't protected by copyright.
I believe the copyright period on their earliest cartoons is due to expire within the next few years. Guess we'll see what happens then. Issues of this sort are all the more complicated these days due to global commerce and communications. Not all countries provide the same copyright duration–Japanese law, for example, provides a notably shorter period and I believe Song of the South is in the public domain there.