Few brands have the loyal following of In-N-Out Burger. If you live outside of California, it’s hard to really understand just how beIoved the brand is among its fans. If you live in California, it’s just a part of the experience. Until you leave, that is.
Most of that love comes from the fact that, as far as fast food goes, In-N-Out is about as good as it gets. Of course, a lot of its appeal also comes from the fact that the company’s 385 locations are located almost entirely in California and its neighboring states.
If, however, you live any further east of the Rockies, you’ve been out of luck. If that’s you, your only opportunity has been to find one when you travel west. Well, until now.
Last week, the company announced that it would be opening a corporate hub in Franklin, Tennessee, which will allow it to expand further east. In-N-Out also says it will be opening its first stores in the Nashville area by 2026.
If you’re a fan of animal-style fries, you understand that this is a big deal. It’s also a huge risk for the company and its brand. Here’s why:
This is a company that is fiercely opposed to change. It hasn’t added a menu item since 2018 (hot chocolate). It still sells just burgers, fries, soft drinks, and milkshakes. As a result, the restaurant is known for both fresh, great-tasting food and incredible customer service. I can think of only one other restaurant where you can get in a drive-thru line 30 cars deep and still have hot food in just a few minutes, and that one isn’t open on Sundays.
There is clearly a lot of demand for new locations. That seems like an argument for expanding to new states, but it’s also why the move is risky.
You see, over the past 75 years, In-N-Out has jeaIously guarded its brand. A big part of that has meant recognizing that fast growth isn’t everything if it means compromising quality. After all, quality is its brand.
In-N-Out only uses fresh, never-frozen ingredients–including its beef. That makes its burgers and fries taste better, but it also means the restaurant is limited in the areas it can serve.
The company also doesn’t franchise its locations. That has allowed it to maintain far more control over the level of service its restaurants provide, but has also meant it kept things close to home.
“You put us in every state and it takes away some of its luster,” said In-N-Out president Lynsi Snyder in a 2018 interview. She was right. Part of the reason the company’s burgers have such a loyal following is because they’re hard to get–especially if you live east of the Rocky Mountains.
It takes a lot of courage–if you think about it–to resist the temptation to grow at all costs. The thing is, most companies don’t consider that those costs are real, even if they aren’t immediately obvious. If the quaIity of your product gets worse the more customers you serve, you’re doing it wrong.
If, suddenly, there are In-N-Out Burger locations everywhere, it’s not as special. If you’re used to swinging by the Sepulvida location when you land at Los Angeles International Airport, and eating a Double-Double while watching planes land, it’s not quite as special an experience if you can get one on your way home from work.
On the other hand, there is value in meeting your customers where they are. In-N-Out is a restaurant, after all, not an amusement park. Sure, people look forward to eating there when they travel, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t room to grow–even if that means cautiously.
“Our Customers are our most important asset at In-N-Out, and we very much look forward to serving them in years to come, and becoming part of the wonderfuI communities in The Volunteer State,” said Synder in a statement. That’s an important acknowledgment–the part about customers being the company’s most important asset.
The interesting lesson here is that there is a balance between exclusivity and meeting your customers where they are. For a variety of reasons, In-N-Out has erred on the side of sticking close to home, even if that means it can’t serve all of its customers. That’s been a winning strategy so far, and I don’t think that will change just because it’s sIowly starting to open more locations farther east.
Melissa Sue Anderson, star of ‘Little House on the Prairie,’ speaks of her decision to leave Hollywood for Canada
How many times has it happened that you think of an old show you used to love watching and wonder what the actors are doing after so many years? I guess many of you that have seen “Little House on the Prairie” and were eager to see each new adventure of the family living on the farm in Plum Creek near Walnut Grove, Minnesota, would love to know what the actors are up to these days.
Those fans who were fond of the actress playing Mary Ingalls, beautiful Melissa Sue Anderson, were convinced she would continue being part of their life through the small screens, but she had other plans.
Today, she speaks of her decision to leave Hollywood behind and move to Canada.
This actress started her acting career playing guest roles, and had her way into the showbiz when she became one of the central figures of “Little House on the Prairie.” Her acting brought her several nominations for Best Lead Actress in a Drama Series, and her fans knew she deserved it.
Speaking of her experience filming this drama that made her famous, back in 2010, Anderson told Pop Entertainment, “I’m lucky that there even was a character to play, because in the book, there isn’t much of one. Laura [Ingalls, author of the Little House novels upon which the series was based and the story was centered] was a quite older woman when she wrote the books. She was remembering the best of her life. The characters of Ma and Mary didn’t factor in a lot. There was a lot of Laura and Pa and Laura and Jack the dog and Laura and Mr. Edwards, but there wasn’t a lot of Mary. I’m fortunate that they discovered that I could act.”
She tried herself in other minor roles after Mary Ingalls, but then in 1990 she got married to television producer Michael Sloan and moved to Montreal in 2002 with her husband and their two children, daughter Piper and son Griffin.
In 2007, the family became Canadian citizens and with the new life came new commitments, so Anderson decided to let go of the showbiz because she wanted to spend more time with her kids and didn’t want them to feel pressured to pursue acting careers themselves.
In an interview with E-Talk, Anderson said, “I really stepped away for a long time. That was really for the kids so they would have their own sense of who they were as opposed to being with me.”
However, Anderson didn’t step back from acting completely, but took small roles over the recent years. Her life-changing experience of being part in a series like “Little House on the Prairie” encouraged her to write a memoir titled The Way I See It: A Look Back at My Life on Little House.
Leave a Reply