Back in 2015, McDonald’s was struggling. In Europe, sales were down 1.4% across the previous 6 years; 3.3% down in the US and almost 10% down across Africa and the Middle East. There were a myriad of challenges to overcome. Rising expectations of customer experience, new standards of convenience, weak in-store technology, a sprawling menu, a PR-bruised brand and questionable ingredients to name but a few.
McDonald’s are the original fast-food innovators; creating a level of standardisation that is quite frankly, remarkable. Buy a Big Mac in Beijing and it’ll taste the same as in Stratford-Upon Avon.
So when you’ve optimised product delivery, supply chain and flavour experience to such an incredible degree — how do you increase bottom line growth? It’s not going to come from making the Big Mac cheaper to produce — you’ve already turned those stones over (multiple times).
The answer of course, is to drive purchase frequency and increase margins through new products.
Numerous studies have shown that no matter what options are available, people tend to stick with the default options and choices they’ve made habitually. This is even more true when someone faces a broad selection of choices. We try to mitigate the risk of buyers remorse by sticking with the choices we know are ‘safe’.
McDonald’s has a uniquely pervasive presence in modern life with many of us having developed a pattern of ordering behaviour over the course of our lives (from Happy Meals to hangover cures). This creates a unique, and less cited, challenge for McDonald’s’ reinvention: how do you break people out of the default buying behaviours they’ve developed over decades?
In its simplest sense, the new format is designed to improve customer experience, which will in turn drive frequency and a shift in buying behaviour (for some) towards higher margin items. The most important shift in buying patterns is to drive reappraisal of the Signature range to make sure they maximise potential spend from those customers who can afford, and want, a more premium experience.
I hope this was helpful
Answer:
D. underwriter
Explanation:
Based on the information provided within the question it can be said that the individual being described in the question is called an underwriter. Like mentioned in the question this is an individual who guarantees sale of securities and accept the financial risk of liability arising from the guarantee on behalf of the issuer of the securities in question.
Answer:
factoring company
Explanation:
Factoring companies purchase your company's invoices (account receivables). When they do that, your company promptly receives a cash advance, instead of waiting for the usual 60, 90 day period to receive the full payment amount. Afterward, the factoring company collects the payment from your clients.
All of that is done for a fee to the factoring company (deducted from the full payment amount) and mostly with clients with whom it is normal to have longer payment periods. Factoring is an essential way to get bigger working capital.
Answer:
False
Explanation:
Variable costs are part of direct expenses incurred in the production of goods meant for sales. Variable costs have a direct and proportionate relationship with the output level. An increase in output level increases variable costs. Examples of variable costs are packaging and raw materials.
The contribution margin is the dollar amount available from the sale of each unit to cater for fixed costs and profits. It is calculated by subtracting variable costs from the selling price. The contribution margin is used in determining the break-even point and the output level required to achieve desired profits.
Answer:
...when that project will have the same level of risk as the firm's current operations
Explanation:
Weighted average cost of capital (WACC) is the company's cost of capital based on its proportion of equity and debt used in its capital structure. It can be used as the discount rate for calculating the present value of future expected cashflows of a project if the project is determined to be of similar risk to the company's operations; meaning that the estimated beta of the project is the same as the beta of the firm.
