- Chick fil-A has decided to feature two knew sophisticated menu items —
- “Spatchcock de franchisés” and “filet d’employés” (both come with a bitter customer sauce until supplies run out
- It’s too bad most franchisees will “share” in the fallout from the PR fiasco the company leadership brought down on them
- We don’t say all as no doubt some franchisees don’t give a twink about gay marriage or Christianity — they just wanted a lucrative franchise
- However, they will probably all “care” as their revenue drops
- Nothing leaves as bitter a taste as betrayal
- Latest: (James Dobson related organization) Family Research Council Calls For Boycott of Chick-fil-A
If corporate change at Chick-fil-A is to happen rather than a process of collapse of its growth, it is primarily up to franchisees to promptly transmit any dissatisfaction from betrayed customers. Those customers are under no obligation to continue to support them and won’t bother ‘messaging’ to corporate directly (although they will transmit a vibe to friends and family). The growth corporate desired from their poorly analyzed move (see previous posts) will be adversely affected. The dependable customer base of any new store opening they might have expected will not happen. Those customers will be more inclined toward other fast-food vendors as Chick-fil-A is now tainted with a chicken-shit reputation.
The for-profit corporation and the related foundation directly or indirectly get their revenue by way of selling what is not unique — no meaningful patent applies. It is an easily substitutable product and /or style in an industry where brand loyalty means money. Any credible financial health department would have advised the corporate and foundation leadership to guard that very carefully. Maybe they think their brand is the cows associated with their advertising but that means nothing to what was the loyal Christian base.
Or maybe “corporate” thought they had such a great chicken sandwich that the only thing standing in the way of being number one in fast-food were the LGBTQ antagonists not buying their product or causing location problems. All of which could be alternatively substituted or gotten around if they applied themselves apart from the PC route.
The corporate hubris about their product and customer base is astounding. Again, the sandwich isn’t that good, unique or a value leader – their growth was fueled more by brand loyalty, something they just stepped all over, than sandwich loyalty. The brand loyalty was built on a wholesome cultural image now seriously obscured in a large field of fast-food and other restaurants where all the majors offer chicken sandwiches, where chicken-only places are a dime a dozen, and there is no barrier to any local mom-and-pop restaurant to exploit the problems Chick-fil-A caused for itself. If people have no choice but to go to indifferent or bend-over for liberals sandwich suppliers, they can go anywhere, and will.
And the corporate leadership cannot blame the foundation – they both issued dense and offensive statements. Chick-fil-A President and Chief Operating Officer Tim Tassopoulos said to the publication Bisnow :
“As Chick-fil-A expands globally and into more liberal parts of the U.S., the chicken chain plans to change which charities it donates to after years of bad press and protests from the LGBT community,” . . . “Beginning next year, Chick-fil-A will move away from its current philanthropic structure, Bisnow has learned. After donating to more than 300 charitable organizations this year, the Atlanta-based fast-food chain will instead focus on three initiatives with one accompanying charity each: education, homelessness and hunger. ”
After much backlash from that statement and the direct result that they were cutting out the Salvation Army and Fellowship of Christian Athletes from their giving as those two organizations y maintain a Christian view of marriage they issued this statement:
“There’s no question we know that, as we go into new markets, we need to be clear about who we are,” Tassopoulos told Bisnow. “There are lots of articles and newscasts about Chick-fil-A, and we thought we needed to be clear about our message.”
So both statements confirm they were caving to LGBTQ bluster even though their growth was spurred by cultural conservative / Christian loyalty.
Rodney Bullard, VP of ‘Corporate Responsibility’ and Executive Director of the Chick-fil-A Foundation, “explained” their funding decisions:
“We don’t want our intent and our work to be encumbered by someone else’s politics or cultural war. If something gets in the way of our mission, that is something that we are mindful of and cognizant of.”
And what does that translate to? — the foundation giving to the likes of conservative Christian antagonist – the Southern Poverty Law Center (unbeknownst to their conservative Christian brand followers) while they were basking in the revenue from those same brand loyalists.
Bullard personally is also a Hillary Clinton and Obama donor. Fine, its a free country, but it says something about his understanding of the cultural war and the chicken war interplay. Zilch
There are many links available from conservative publications such as LifeSite News, Townhall, RedState and others documenting the Chick-fil-A matter. Here are some of those. Note that each contains other links as further reference. Note especially that several of the articles extend back before the most recent controversy and highlight how conservative interests supported Chick-fil-A.