JUNE Discussion - O'Naturals vs. McDonald's < Back
A recent article in the Chicago Tribune discusses the changes in fast food menus and new chains that are attempting to capitalize on this trend. Many fast food retailers such as Chipotle are focusing on where their ingredients come from and using organic or healthier options.
Alyson -
I disagree with their comparison of O'Naturals potential success to McDonald's and the McLean burger failure. These restaurants have completely different target groups as well as different price points and a different product. People don't want a healthy burger when they go to McDonald’s, they want fast and cheap. Additionally, the majority of the McDonald's customers are not inquiring as to how the food was made, or if it has organic roots? It is also completely different traffic flows. O'Naturals isn't planning to locate on every highway....but more upscale locations like Davis Square in Somerville, MA.
While I do agree that this trend will have implications that change the fast food restaurant industry, I don't believe that this comparison and McDonald's past failure with products in this area has much value. However, O'Naturals has other problems in regards to service, layout and explanation of their products and concept, which if they don't fix will cause them to fail.
* * * *
Mike -
McLean Deluxe? McDonald's vs. O’Naturals? Wow! Chicago is a hotbed of progressive retailing and includes a lot of people in the know, but obviously none of them are writing for the Tribune. Yes, health is happening and when packaged properly sells, 
but comparing a four location operation with Mickey D's does not even merit comment…they so clearly are irrelevant to each other and not just in size. Yogurt, non-corporate, New Hampshire, counter culture, authentic but with poor presentation and confusing set-up vs. corporate, streamlined, franchised, homogenized, minimum-wage, generic?? McDonald's has totally distanced itself and avoided any connection that consumers would see with Chipotle, which is in a unique space that does not relate to O’Naturals or McDonald’s (other than common ownership.) Selling healthy or healthier food does not create instant competitors any more than selling sox makes Neiman Marcus, Wal-Mart, and a new four store regional men's chain, competitors who need be overly concerned with each other's existence (well everyone has to be aware of Wal-Mart, but…)
Retail allows for varied opinion and approaches and there is no single right answer or way to do things. However, in order for opinions to merit consideration they need to show some basic understanding of what is going on "at retail." In my opinion the Tribune failed to show that understanding by comparing unrelated stores and seeing healthy eating as a recent phenomenon rather than a trend that has been developing gradually and building momentum over many years.
* * * *
Tina-
"While Hoffman is optimistic that the new healthy fast-food restaurants will succeed, a history of spectacular health-food failures suggests otherwise. Remember the McLean Deluxe? The burger was lower in fat thanks to a seaweed derivative mixed with the meat, but when McDonald's offered the sandwich to consumers in the early 1990s, few were interested."
The McLean Deluxe was not health food. It was a healthy version of a McDonald's favorite: the Big Mac. McDonald's began as, and will 
always be at its core, a burger joint. They've franchised it and streamlined production, but that is what it is. People who go there to order healthy options are not the core customer. The person who goes to McDonald's to find a healthy option is the person who stops eating carbs to lose weight. To be healthy you need to fundamentally change the way you eat. McDonald's offering healthier options is supplementing its menu with less fatty foods but not overhauling what it sells. A chain that is fundamentally organic or healthy is a complete different animal. So, I do agree, the comparison is not a good one.