Why Are There No European Franchises?

[Josquius]

Is Wimpie's still around? Weinerwald (who had franchises in USA at one point)?

Wiki says it is.
I remember seeing one in Wembley about 6 years ago.

[Neil]

I've been in a McDonalds in London, as well as one in Genoa.  In London, the menu was totally identical IIRC, but I think the drink sizes were noticably smaller.

Pop is decanted in smaller amounts all over Europe.

[Admiral Yi]

Is there perhaps less of a tradition of small business lending in Europe than in the US?  That would be a partial explanation.

[Oexmelin]

Is there perhaps less of a tradition of small business lending in Europe than in the US?  That would be a partial explanation.

How could that be an explanation ? Restaurants - at least in France - are extremely local. So are many other shops, and artisan business is greatly valued. It is about getting something quite specific rather than getting the exact same experience replicated elsewhere. I know restaurants in France who take pains *not* to advertise, because they feel they have enough clients as it is.

Franchises, which do exist in Europe, are dependant on integrated publicity strategies which are, because of cultural differences, difficult to superimpose easily on a great number of different countries with different sensibilities. Brands are able to do so. American restaurants were able to do so in the rest of the world because they are associated much less with the kind of food they offer than because they are brands representing «America». Just like Paul bakeries sell the image of French bread in Europe. Which means you will get few franchises that can traverse boundaries and a number of national franchises, which can sustain themselves (for the French: Zara, Petit Bateau, Carrefour, Tesco, Total, etc.)

[The Brain]

Tell me more about the IKEA franchise model.

[Ed Anger]

Tell me more about the IKEA franchise model.

It is based on leftover screws.

[alfred russel]

Is there perhaps less of a tradition of small business lending in Europe than in the US?  That would be a partial explanation.

How could that be an explanation ? Restaurants - at least in France - are extremely local. So are many other shops, and artisan business is greatly valued. It is about getting something quite specific rather than getting the exact same experience replicated elsewhere. I know restaurants in France who take pains *not* to advertise, because they feel they have enough clients as it is.

Franchises, which do exist in Europe, are dependant on integrated publicity strategies which are, because of cultural differences, difficult to superimpose easily on a great number of different countries with different sensibilities. Brands are able to do so. American restaurants were able to do so in the rest of the world because they are associated much less with the kind of food they offer than because they are brands representing «America». Just like Paul bakeries sell the image of French bread in Europe. Which means you will get few franchises that can traverse boundaries and a number of national franchises, which can sustain themselves (for the French: Zara, Petit Bateau, Carrefour, Tesco, Total, etc.)

Oex, I'm not sure that your list of french franchises are all franchises. Are you sure?

Anyway, I don't think that there is anything distinctly american about a lot of our franchises. The food was basically invented by the chains to get out an edible product quickly, consistently, and cheaply. Think of some of the most successful fast food franchises: McDonald's, Pizza Hut, and KFC. Possibly excluding KFC, I don't think any of those would have been identified as American types of food before the franchise movement took off in this country after WWII.

Also, there have been franchised brands that were originated outside the US that have done very well. Fanta, for example, was invented in Europe and spread worldwide. But it did so as part of an American company.

I don't think it is a shock that American franchises would dominate. Go back to the three companies I mentioned: Pizza Hut and KFC both went global under the Pepsi umbrella, and McDonald's didn't go global until it was large in the US. Unless you have a lot of financing behind you, it is hard to go worldwide, and in the post WWII world there was a lot more money in the US. It was also much easier to build a domestic base for a worldwide launch in the US, and arguably that wasn't possible in Europe at all until the trade barriers came down.

[Martinus]

Besides, Marty acted as though regional variety (and thus less franchise-like) was a euro thing...whereas Americans were happy with their static chains that were boring and lacked creativity.  I wonder what he would make of the McDonald's in an old box car or the one in a victorian style home that I encountered in....America!

I was basing my post on this post by PRC:

The selling point of a franchise is that you go into an establishment and receive the exact same product regardless of the location.  A Big Mac is a Big Mac is a Big Mac and a Grande Americano is a Grande Americano is a Grande Americano.

North America likes that safety net of knowing what they are going to get when they buy.  Europe is more comfortable going for food, ordering off a menu, and possibly having an unknown crap meal that they didn't originally bargain for.

My post is pretty much saying what he said, but in different words. Seeing how PRC is an American, I took his assertions about the US as true. So why do you flame me for just repeating something he said?

Seriously, go fuck yourself.

[Martinus]

I struggled to think of any European franchises at first, but then I realised that most of our food stores are franchises. Pret a Manger, Eat, Wasabi, Itsu, Costa Coffee, Cafe Nero, Upper Crust, Pain Quotidien, Paul, Patisserie Valerie, and so on.

I guess these stores have struggled to penetrate the USA because of market saturation or cultural differences, if they have tried at all.

I don't think many of them are international, not to mention continent-spanning, the way American franchises are, though.

[garbon]

My post is pretty much saying what he said, but in different words. Seeing how PRC is an American, I took his assertions about the US as true. So why do you flame me for just repeating something he said?

Seriously, go fuck yourself.

Ah, so even better, you just repackage others' opinions as though they are your own.

Anyway, calm down.  Sure it isn't fun to be called out on your crap, but you can take it.

[garbon]

Also, I believe PRC is a Canadian (just to be clear that while "American" he's of the Canada variety).

[Martinus]

McDonalds and KFC are horrendous even by fast food standards.  I have no idea why they are successful, but I suspect it is simply that they have been around forever and people know them.

I think their success is that they are cheap, and in the price range they offer, you would be likely to find some really low-quality, low-hygenic food outside of a franchise.

[The Brain]

Cheap? Maybe in Polackville.

[garbon]

I think their success is that they are cheap, and in the price range they offer, you would be likely to find some really low-quality, low-hygenic food outside of a franchise.

I don't think so.  Unless one orders only a few items off of the dollar menu, McD's (/fast food for that matter) really isn't all that cheap. I think familiarity has to play a big role as there is a lot better stuff out there for similar pricing (at least here in the bay area).  (Even though always thought of as rather pricey, one wouldn't need to spend that much more - if any - at Whole Foods for a much healthier meal.)

[Martinus]

Well, a Big Mac Menu here is about the equivalent of $3. A lunch in a restaurant or a diner costs from $8 up and it does not include drinks.

Remember also that Poland (and a lot of Europe) do not really have a concept of "free refills" and dishes served in our restaurants are significantly smaller.