Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If that's true, why does the CEO's bonus check keep going up? That eats up profit too, but nobody appears to complain about that.
The CEO's job could be easily automated.
All they need is an AI with subroutines for layoffs and golf, and that's all is needed.
Of course, they NEVER talk about that. Only the working stiffs get their jobs automated.
Said by someone who clearly has no idea how a corporation truly works. Or what a CEO does. Or how easy it is to replace an order taker, as opposed to a CEO.
I went back to school 2 times and got 2 degrees. Economics. Finance. Accounting. I think I know about business enough to make good judgments about bad business practices - such as short term thinking. Apparently not good enough for you. You want and demand CEOs who watch ticker symbols every minute of every day, holding up their finger to see which way the wind is blowing, instead of sitting down and drawing out a 10 year plan for long term business sustainability.
There's a reason Warren Buffet only invests in certain companies. He won't invest in companies that have a short term focus.
My role in consulting is to fix the messes caused by short term thinking. Not all consultants are Dogbert Consultants.
How much money do you make at your consulting job?
Have you ever worked in the field of economics, finance or accounting? Or has it never been tested in a real job. Why did you keep going back to school for more degrees? Couldn't find a job? Couldn't exist in the real world?
As for short-term thinking, I don't have a degree in "business", but I do know that the fact McDonalds has been at the top of their game for 70 years is hardly "short term".
In addition "no matter what" means that they don't have to have results. They get the big bucks no matter what. Positive results are optional.
Why are they entitled to big salaries while the rank and file are not?
No exec would run a company in dire straits because that's a setup for failure.
They bore full responsibility for not turning around the company. In other words, they failed.
Rank and file got laid off. That's 100% risk of not getting paid. Executives got $16 million golden parachute while rank and file got nothing.
So explain why the execs are not responsible for anything but get rewarded for everything?
If you don't like Toy's R Us situation as a good example of top brass not bringing in value, what about
Yahoo! - Marissa Meyer ran the company into the ground. Spent $2 billion of company funds buying companies owned by her ex-Google cronies, which promptly failed and six tons of layoffs resulted. At least her cronies got 2 billion dollars richer! She got rewarded for reducing the value of the company 80%, a bonus check of many millions of dollars. What value did she and her executives bring?
Pay close attention: If executives take a long term view, take a company and make it very wealthy, they deserve bonuses (and so do the rank and file who helped them make the company rich. I've seen many companies go private and take this long term view. Those tend to be run very well by very competent management who deserve their big checks.
On the other hand, someone who spends their days watching ticker symbols and doing ridiculous short term gambles to juice the stock price - at the expense of long term profitability - i.e. killing the golden goose - these don't deserve any bonuses.
Perhaps you should read about the Gervais Principle to see where I'm coming from?
Hmmmm, maybe you should have gotten a degree that would help you understand contracts, negotiation and return on investment.
Hmmmm, maybe you should have gotten a degree that would help you understand contracts, negotiation and return on investment.
Perhaps you should have posted something in your last 3 posts that addresses my point. I strongly suspect you're just trolling instead of actually adding to the discussion.
Here are your steps to success McDonald's. I'll be waiting for my check:
1. Improve the quality of the food. They have been increasingly taking shortcuts and using fillers or whatnot and the food just sucks now.
2. Cut back on your menu. Go back to what made you; burgers, fries, soft drinks, shakes.
I agree, and would like to add, reformat menu's! I have had difficulty reading the menu since they revamped them approx. 5 years ago. Full of pictures, but it is hard to find individual items and they are laid out in such a way that it is impossible to find singular items you want on the menu. It highlights value meals, but makes other things hard to find. I suspect because they make the most money off their meals.
I agree, and would like to add, reformat menu's! I have had difficulty reading the menu since they revamped them approx. 5 years ago. Full of pictures, but it is hard to find individual items and they are laid out in such a way that it is impossible to find singular items you want on the menu. It highlights value meals, but makes other things hard to find. I suspect because they make the most money off their meals.
I agree with you about the menus. I am not sure they even offer this anymore but last year they had this "burger" you could order. So I pointed to the menu and said I'll have one of those. She's like one of what? What bun? What meat? Apparently you just order the burger then order every single thing on it separately including the meat.
The problem with McDonald's is their food, not their employees. The sandwiches and other food portions are too small. When you order a meal at McDonald's you get a message by the size of the portion that says "I don't care about my reputation, I just want to save money by giving you the smallest amount of food that I can get away with."
For a long time this has been the case. I avoid going to this "restaurant" because of these small food portions that seem to be meant for little children rather than adults.
McDonald's can restructure all it wants, but if it doesn't improve the size of their food portions then they will continue to be buffeted around by their competitors
I have found that to be the case as well. Three bucks for about 40 to 50 fries, called "large." Ha...
I get the Chicken Tenders, at least six. Six dollars, that fills me up. Sometimes more...
I hadn't eaten at a McDonalds in years - decades actually - until a couple of years ago when I moved to a place where the nearest grocery is miles and miles away. So exactly THREE times in the last 2 years I have stopped at McDonalds.
The first time I just got a regular cheeseburger and specified "Pickles and onions only".
When I got it home it had mustard all over it. OMG how disgusting mustard is! (To my tastebuds, I know tons of people love mustard but it tastes like sour and that's all to me)
So I couldn't actually taste the burger itself while I gagged it down.
Second time I got a Quarter Pounder with cheese, which is apparently the only way you can get them any more. I live about 1.5 miles from the McDs and it was stone cold by the time I got home with it. STONE cold, could not possibly have been even lukewarm when I picked it up. So I figured it tasted bad because it was cold.
Last time, I got a Quarter Pounder and it was still warm (not hot) 5 minutes later when I opened it up at home.
Still tasted super nasty. I will not be giving them another shot.
I don't know what they are putting in their so-called "hamburgers" these days, but it doesn't taste like anything that ought to be considered fit for human consumption. As I understand it, "pink slime" has been banned for human consumption, but whatever they are making those "burgers" out of, it must be as near to pink slime as they can legally skate.
McDs is losing money because they are pushing a vastly inferior product. Not because they have too many employees or are paying them "too much".
Yep, their problem is the food. They have allowed the nut and berry eating vegetarians that don't even eat at their restaurants, pressure them into trying to make their food more healthy. In the process they ruined the food. The fries used to be awesome but now they aren't so good. If you don't eat them immediately while they are still warm, they suck.
So the moral of the story is that if you change your food to satisfy the few, the many quit coming. McDonald's has lost sight of who is their customer base. Their customers want good tasting, burgers and fries quickly with no regard to the healthiness. This is why smaller restaurant chains and local burger joints are so busy at lunch these days. Their customers also do not care about fancy coffee drinks or a dining area that looks like something a snowflake on hgtv designed. I despise the new look and the terrible seating arrangements.
I don't mind the new McDonald's look. That said I much rather go to Carl, Whataburger, or perhaps In and Out (gotta try the one that opened by me as I have a mixed record), even Wendy's. I really only goto and that is if I am in a Walmart.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
