I was fascinated by a story in the FT this morning. This does, admittedly, largely relate to the US-based Domino's Pizza, but it's still relevant. As they note:
"Let's just order a pizza.” That Friday night mealtime capitulation has become a much more common refrain these days as government stay-at-home directives keep Americans homebound.
This has positioned Domino's Pizza well to survive the fallout from the coronavirus crisis. The $14bn company dominates the US pizza delivery industry with nearly 6,000 stores. It said on Thursday that US same-store sales rose 1.6 per cent during the first quarter. That marks the slowest quarterly sales growth in nine years. But it is a more than decent performance. Especially when compared to the sales collapse forecast for chains that rely largely on dine-in customers.
It's confession time: sometimes we have a Domino's. Sometimes a dad needs a night off cooking, and can't face his sons' efforts. That's just the way it is.
But there's a curious fact in play here. Domino's is offering a vastly smaller than normal menu at present, and it's not impacting demand. Now that could just be because they're still open and people are desperate. But they are not the only takeaway functioning around here: I can assure you of that. And still they are seeing demand. Indeed, it's so big that they apparently need a smaller menu.
Now, here's the question: did they ever need the bigger menu in that case? And will they restore it after this is all over? Or have they discovered that people actually don't like that much choice and really don't want to wade through multitudinous, and often quite similar, choices?
If I was Domino's I would be giving serious thought to this. I suspect that there are lessons to be learned by them and many others after this is over. People do not like too much choice. It's why I like restaurants where I do not have to spend hours reading before the evening can begin. Just do something well please, and give me a few options, and I'm happy.
Domino's and others, please take note. This is the way the world may be going.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Hmmmmm………………..
You know, I am not sure.
Choice is used in marketing to create products which set people apart from others – a way of expressing oneself is to purchase things. But the driver of it is disposable income. There has to be something to sell choice to, to get the return.
As long as people have enough money to live – something this blog (and those who come here seem to endorse), choice will be enabled by that money at people’s disposal.
With times as they are now, there are all sorts of reasons for reduced choice – supply line problems, the inflation in prices of certain ingredients, demand gouging, coping with panic buying. It makes sense to focus on say, the simpler core products and offerings because they are easier perhaps to service.
For example I needed my haircutting so I bought some hair clippers online – they were £29.99 but the retailer selling them now has them at £49.99 – obviously with barber’s closed down there is more demand so the response is to capitalise on that but it may also mean that hair clippers are now running out.
But when Covid-19 is under control and we get back to normal, I’m sure the markets will kick in and superfluous choice will make a comeback – unless of course, the country we get back is not that which existed before – which, going by the dilatory way the Tory idiots are handling matters, is highly likely. I still see a lot of stupid advertising on TV even now that makes you think that Covid-19 never existed.
But markets will continue to aim choice at where the money is – it will not be those who are redundant forever as a result of Covid-19- it will be aimed at those who managed to the weather it and it will start all over again – no doubt helped by the artificial boosting of the economy by the availability of credit as always.
I think our species is very predictable: we will want a full resumption of things as they were, and that includes choice, which is really a mechanism for competition to be honest and perhaps nothing more?
The reason for suggesting choice is not a goods thing is that masses of research shows that it actually puts people off
The supermarkets had their best months and restricted choice
I think there is a message in this
Most choice is just advertising backed rebranding after all…
I’ve always believed that the extended choice offered by the major s/m chains was counter-productive in terms of profit return per sq. meter. The success of Aldi & Lidl would seem to endorse that.
I agree
OK – but which people are put off? Is it a class thing or a disposable income matter?
And also, I will never underestimate the power of marketing that all too often underpins choice offerings and makes them look indispensable.
Also, choice is led by the upper end of the market, with the mid and lower ends aping it somewhat.
The super market data could mean what you think it means but also it may reflect the fact that people have assumed the worst and have just logically gone for basics and supplies that enhance personal capacity to make things themselves in order to get them through – for example, look at dry pasta which disappeared from our shelves PDQ.
Now in my household we’ve been baking our own bread for years – now all of a sudden you try getting hold of some dried yeast – locally where I live it has disappeared and I’ve had to resort to buying it in bulk on line to keep making bread (we are a family of four and as you know, teenagers are always bloody hungry!!).
Another thing that has struck me is that at times of war, the most important item for people is something as simple as bread, and I think we are seeing that sort psychology, not necessarily a rejection of choice because people now know or fear that food might not be as easy to come by as it was.
Survival instincts are kicking in, that is what I’m saying and that is maybe what we are seeing.
Maybe
And tell me about the always hungry…….. 🙂
“The reason for suggesting choice is not a good thing is that masses of research shows that it actually puts people off”
I listened to a very interesting short talk recently which suggested that one of the problems of too much choice is that the consumer is faced with the prospect of an increasing risk of making the WRONG choice and being unhappy with the purchase…….. one piece of marketing wisdom says the confused customer isn’t a customer.
Personally I don’t want a massive range of options, (who needs to walk past 37 different sorts of laundry detergent occupying an entire aisle. ..?) but it’s nice to have more than ‘take it or leave it’ !
I entirely accept that some choice is good
But we do not need to product differentiate as we do
Anita Roddick, who founded the Body Shop, once admitted you could wash your hair in almost anything – including with a bar of soap – and mostly it worked just the same. Her whole business was built on pretending otherwise
“The $14bn company dominates the US pizza delivery industry with nearly 6,000 stores.”
Fascinating that a $14bn company which dominates the US Pizza delivery market doesn’t understand its customers but you do, despite never having been involved in the industry.
“did they ever need the bigger menu…?”
Do you think they became that $14bn company by getting their menu offerings wrong? Do you think they would bother having toppings on their menu if no-one ever ordered them? Dominos was founded in 1960. 60 years of experience versus a few seconds musing by someone who has never sold a pizza. I know whose judgement I trust.
“People do not like too much choice.”
No, you do not like too much choice. That’s up to you. But don’t project your limited horizons on to others.
Wow….the lovers of free markets really hate free-thinking, don’t they?
There’s a difference between free thinking and extrapolating your opinions on the wider population. You are also confusing cause and effect, causation and correlation.
The fact is that Supermarkets had a good month due to panic buying, not due to restricted choice. Choice was restricted due to lack of availability not due to a deliberate decision by Supermarkets.
Had consumers been given the choice between supermarket A offering a very limited range of goods and supermarket B offering a much wider range of goods / choice, then it is hard to argue that Supermarket A would have been more successful.
You are wrong
Supermarkets restricted choice
And I am not projecting anything: the evidence that people resent too much choice is strong
“the lovers of free markets really hate free-thinking, don’t they?”
I sometimes find myself looking for the thumbs up button, never more than in this case.
Yes, because it is free-thinking that challenges the idiocies that they subscribe to, the first of which is the idea that unicorns like “free” markets actually exist, and the wonderous ways they are alleged to work – rather like the banking system is supposed to, but doesn’t. That is as daft as the latest musings from El Presidente on the interaction between Covid-19 and and the way one takes one’s disinfectant……….
Speaking of free markets, I was assured the climate emergency would never be a big problem as free markets driven by unimaginable profits would solve the issue if it would affect billions of people. But free markets still haven’t beaten Coronavirus and billions are in lock down now.
I wish free marketers understood lag times and that profit maximisation has no relation to general well-being.
The first great 20th century iconic product of the mass business world was the Model-T Ford. 27m of them produced. It offered no choice at all. What eventually ended both the model and the famous factory that built it, at the end of the 1920s? Choice of model, as offered by the other great iconic name – Alfred Sloan Jnr’s General Motors? No. Choice as offerd by Ford? No. What finished the Model-T was the rise of – the second-hand car. The Model-T was defeated on price.
The successs of Aldi and Lidl is not choice, the stores are small, basic and fast: they sell on price. And where do they like to place their stores? Often close to Waitrose or M&S Food. None of them offer the range of a ‘superstore’.
People who oversell free-markets rarely seem to think businessmen make big mistakes or benefit from anything other than the urge to compete (which is much less prevalent than the ideologues believe, especially in big corporations); or the world changes when they least expect it, or the cutting-edge of scale or supposed choice becomes a mere feature of the dinosaur facing extinction. The huge greenfield supermarkets destroyed town centres and retailing only secondarily because of the ‘choice’ they chose to emphasise in their marketing; they actually succeeded because they offered a one-stop shop, with free parking. They didn’t so much defeat the town centre through competition as eliminate them through advantages in greenfield planning permission. Some demonstration of the triumph of ‘choice’. In the 1990s it was more like shooting fish in a barrel.
When dining out in the past I have found there is a clear inverse correlation between the length of the menu and the quality of the food.
More than a page and I am out off
I actually like three choices for each course and regularly changing menus
Absolutely Richard; too much choice in a restaurant drives me crazy. Alright, I will admit to being one of life’s procrastinators, but a few things done really well is always better than an immense list of different dishes, some of which may be pretty similar. Chinese and Indian restaurants being especially bad in this respect.
We’re getting in an Indian takeaway tonight (Friday night takeaway has become a lockdown ritual) so I shall be forced to choose…..if I go with the House specialities I should retain my sanity!
🙂
My wife’s shop took steps, against the grain, to reduce the number of items they stocked and it made no difference to sales.
Counter-intuitive perhaps. But my wife would agree with you. Small is beautiful?
The reduced menu may also be something to do with efficiency. With increased demand the company don’t want people dithering on the phone (my family are experts at this!) when other customers are waiting.
If there’s a “big bang” return from lockdown, expect lots of binging and a demand for everything to return to how it was before.
Its much more likely to be a gradual release, with restaurants among the last places to reopen, so the reduced menu may last for a long time to come. People may see the virtue of simplicity and become habituated to it. We’re already seeing some of that attitude with people’s reactions to cleaner air and water etc. Hopefully that will continue.
I’ve not used Domino’s for a while now. Previously I’ve generally found their website difficult to use quite possibly because of too much choice? Is it too much choice or too much website?
Choice
It’s weird, even now
I am a fan of Gordon Ramsay’s TV show “Kitchen Nightmares”, for sure he is not a particularly loveable character, but he knows how to run a successful restaurant. He has the same basic blue print for nearly every failing restaurant he visits. The first thing he invariably does is throw the restaurant menu out,most of them are far too long, long menu’s cause problems for both the diner (who wants to spend 30 mins reading 5 pages of choices?)and crucially the chef who has to have all options ready and fresh.
Ramsay then focuses on what the restaurant is about…maybe with one signature dish and cuts the menu down to one page. Message seems to be do it simple but more importantly….. do it well.
Precisely
True for most businesses
Why should the punter have to work out what it’s about?
Don’t likle Domonis though, way overpriced of you ask me. I use my local pizzeria,this keeps money local too….I don’t like my money going to the big corps…no doubt registered in an off shore tax haven : )
I am afraid this is teenagers
The local Indian is more my style
Agree about sons taking a long time cooking, at least 2 or 3 times the time I can do it in. Mind you the product is usually a lot more exotic than my banger and mash type menus. Perhaps Domino Pizza should be put on your list for wealth tax reforms
🙂
And I am the exotic one around here
You can have any pizza you like, so long as it is pepperoni?
I suspect Dominos know what they are doing, but other delivery pizza providers are available if you find their menu overwhelming. Most of them provide a relatively limited menu with relatively a few choices (given the huge number of potential topping combinations) – Margherita, Hawaiian, pepperoni, cheese, etc – with the ability to customise at will – extra olives or mushroom or whatever. For good reason. There is the impression that you can have whatever you want, but most people will just pick one of the ones they know (that they know they will like).
What Dominos don’t want is for their potential customers to get into analysis paralysis/decision fatigue/information and/or choice overload, and pick fish and chips, or Chinese or Indian, instead. (Buyer’s remorse or indigestion may follow anyway.)
This is why I suggest that in putting forward economic ideas, it is better to have a smaller menu. It should contain something familiar, something with a new twist and some novelty. This can then appeal to the many and have a bigger impact.
Also FWIW (not a lot..) – most organisations do not know what makes them successful and often what they think is their best ‘thing’ is probably not what makes them thrive.
Very, very true
I have written on that theme
I think you have mentioned that your sons are still teenagers.
My stock staple in my student days was Chilli con carne/Spaghetti Bolognese/Curry which was virtually identical in each case except for the pasta or rice. To be honest it hasn’t changed much either in the 40 years since graduation, except to develop a vegetarian option which is still a work in progress.
Now is the time for your sons to learn to cook what they will be eating for the next few years or longer.
They are
But as you say, it all tastes the same and is very boring…
And mighty messy
I enjoy cooking – at the end of the day it’s a contrast from tax
Kedgeree tonight….
I agree that too many choices turns me off…… but that may say more about me than anything else. Some contributors have made that point (rather rudely, I think).
So, how does Domino’s make these decision? One of chains key selling points is that wherever you are then they offering will be the same – customers prize familiarity highly…. and this makes experimentation difficult. So, the whole company relies on the views of the centre which can get it wrong.
I prefer a different model where local stores get to choose what they offer. This is within centrally determined parameters but let the person on the spot make judgements. with 6,000 experiments going on in 6,000 restaurants it will be easy to see common themes of success (and let the whole community know what is going on).
Oddly enough, I think the Scout Movement shows the value of this approach. Within central rules, each group “does its own thing”; good troops grow, bad ones wither. Good practice gets spread through training (or over a glass or two of beer). The result? An organisation that is continually renewing from the grassroots and has survived over 100 years.
It is much rarer in commercial organisations…. which probably says a lot about CEOs’ controlling characteristics.
Think the key isn’t choice but having the things people want. I’m going to order my pizza from whoever will do it with tuna and peppers and send some stuffed jalapenos along with it.
It isn’t that I want choice, it’s that I want that thing in particular, and if they don’t offer it I’d go to someone who does.
And people might not want choice, but they don’t all want the same thing, so if you want everyone to be able to be your customer then you need to offer many things.
Not what Domino’s are finding…..
I think it is quite well established that too many choices tend to mean people become unable to make a decision. In my student days in Cape Town I worked holidays and weekends in the ‘gents ready-mades’ department of Garlicks Dept Store in central Cape Town. When somebody was buying a suit then as soon as the client identified something as ‘this is quite nice’ then you would never then introduce another suit as a possibility. If you did you would almost invariably then lose the sale as the guy would end up with ‘I will have to think about it – I will come back later’. They almost never did come back. So there was a happy medium – only one suit to choose from (as happened with e.g. very big sizes) would put them off as there was ‘no choice’, four or five possibilities was generally ideal (as in trying on), but a whole fitting room full of stuff just led to ‘I will have to think about it’.
In a restaurant 5 pages of choices would just lead me to conclude it was all in the freezer and getting microwaved. I like cooking but it is just not practical to have all the ingredients for that number of dishes and the ability to get them ready in a short time (unless it is just a minor difference like with or without garlic).
I always think about microwaves in cafes with the most staggering menu lists..
And opt for bacon and eggs
They will be fresh
Talking about choice I came across this article about Warren Mosler a founder of MMT. Reading between the lines he presents a choice in very simple terms which is what kind of monopoly do you want in your lives a public or private currency (money) monopoly! In the case of the former you could get at cost government loans for your house (or subsidised affordable rented homes), for your car (or subsidised affordable public transport) and student loans (or free student grants). In the case of the latter you lay yourself open to as much debt as the finance sector or even a government can lay on your shoulders!
http://www00.unibg.it/dati/corsi/910003/64338-Warren%20Mosler%20Bergamo%20paper%20March%2010.pdf
That’s about right
To be clear, I know what it is you are getting at, we’ve discussed it before here.
Firstly, as soon as Covid-19 is over, markets will want a resumption asap of ‘before’. ‘Choice’ will be once more launched at the population.
But having said that, you and others here make a valid point and I know it is valid because I am suffering ‘choice anxiety’ myself.
My problem revolves around a Telecaster electric guitar that I am putting together from a mix of old and new parts I’ve had lying around. My son has recently started to play, so we need more guitars in the house (honest). The choice anxiety is over (I kid you not) what pickups I put into it!!! It’s been a nightmare!!
Should I put in new pick ups built to sound like old ones right down to the old fashioned wire they used?
Should I go for an Alnico 2 or Alnico 5 magnet?
Should I buy some more modern sounding and higher output pickups?
Should I put pickups in that look like Telecaster pickups but sound more like a Strat, or a Gibson?
Should I buy a black bobbin for the bridge pickup or a different colour for it or the neck pick up which usually has a chrome cover on it?
Should I wire the pickups in series or parallel?
All these choices are available from a multitude of pickup manufacturers here and abroad. Mulling them over, I think I have met myself coming backwards!!! (my son and I have agreed that we should keep the pick ups as traditional as possible so that he knows what a real Tele should sound like as part of his musical education).
Choice – yep – it’s a pain in the arse!
If you’re refurbing a tele, make it sound as close to a tele as possible. I’d possibly advocate for newer higher output pickups, but aim for as close to the original tone as possible.
Beautiful guitar, and I personally wouldn’t want to play one which sounded like a Gibson — all kinds of wrong.
(I’m still after a telecaster btw, after nearly 2 decades, but that comes after I’ve got my Gibson SG fettled properly)
The Gibson SG is a great guitar – one their most versatile – trouble is that long neck – I tend to play my guitars rather ‘passionately’ shall we say and I used to make mine go out of tune which is why I prefer Fender bolt on guitars.
My SG – an extremely nice Tokai copy – ended it’s life when the guitar stand it was on toppled over and the head stock just sheared off. Had that not happened I’d still have it today. You can play anything on an SG, blues, funk, jazz, rock – you name it. We talk a lot about the 1950′ designed Strat and how revolutionary it was but the SG is an extremely well designed instrument and equally ahead of it’s time in many ways.
Now I have a 1992 Gordon Smith GS1 (a Les Paul shaped one) made in Manchester and 1986 Wilkes BG (looks like a Les Paul TV, made in Stoke on Trent of all places) – both English made guitars as my ‘Gibson’ line up. My Telecaster however is an original Tokai from Japan – every bit as good as real Fender but even these early ‘replica’s are going for hundreds of pounds these days. Yes, vintage pickups will be used!
Oops sorry – getting carried away – this is not a guitar blog, I know.
I am bemused and fascinated
I just about know three chords…
But suspect the muscle memory would need to be revived
Oh man, so jealous of your GS. Again, absolutely beautiful guitars. I don’t play enough at the moment to justify buying one, but bikes and guitars I am a sucker for. Tokais are also excellent for anyone lurking and after a guitar. Japanese made and easily of comparably quality to their American counterparts. (Didn’t Fender file a lawsuit against Tokai because Tokai we’re making strats of comparable or better quality and stylising their brand to look very close to Fender?)
My SG almost suffered the same headstock fate as yours. It started cracking at the angle between the head and the neck but fortunately we caught it before it became a critical issue (phew). But now I’ve got issues with most of the low frets and I can’t get the action just right, so I’m saving up to get it to a luthier and get it fixed properly.
If you want some real guitar porn check out Fylde guitars. I’ll never own one but a man can dream…
I feel I must also apologise to the readership for the guitar-y tangent. It’s nice to discuss guitars with an enthusiast, albeit over distance. I hope we can be forgiven 🙂
You are
But only in the unusual times 🙂
I have long believed this.
I was an early adopter of buying organic only. At that point, the supermarkets kettled all the organic items in a single place, to keep clean law-abiding pesticide-loving people safe from freaks. They also had only one or two choices in any line. As a result, shopping took ten minutes, sometimes less: non-perishable shelf, dairy shelf, meat shelf, fruit and veg shelf.
These days you have to trawl through the aisles with all the non-organic crap in it and it takes much longer. At least there is still only one option in most lines.
I so agree with your assessment, Richard. I used to work in the pizza industry, albeit for two single owner-operated businesses, and not for any chain. I, too, am put off by extensive menus at restaurants and takeaways. You do think …how can they possibly be doing ALL that stuff well?
Better to concentrate on a few reasonable choices, but make them to a high standard. Become known for outstanding food quality (whatever level product you’re serving, from simple food to cheffy perfection.) And offer great service every time. That’s how to build a lasting good reputation for your restaurant or takeaway/delivery.
Simplicity makes it easier to train staff as well.
The last is especially true