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.
Neighbor’s Envy Leads to Destruction of Our Cherished 200-Year-Old Tree During Our Vacation
After returning from their holiday, Ronald’s family was heartbroken to find their cherished 200-year-old sequoia tree had been mysteriously cut down. This shocking discovery led them on a quest for answers, unraveling unexpected events that disturbed the peace in their neighborhood. Ronald, a 45-year-old man, has enjoyed a fulfilling life with his wife, Irene. They have been happily married for over twenty years and have two wonderful teenage daughters, Stella, 18, and Jill, 15. The girls bring immense joy to their lives, with Stella being independent and Jill known for her kindness.
The family lives in a charming manor divided into three units, surrounded by five magnificent sequoias, each about 200 years old. These trees are not just beautiful; they are a significant part of their family history and home. Things began to change when Barbara moved into the neighboring unit after inheriting her home from her late parents. At first, she seemed friendly, but her behavior took a turn for the worse two years ago after a storm knocked down one of her own sequoias. Since then, she became bitter and envious of Ronald’s family’s trees.
Irene often wondered if Barbara would ever move on from her anger. Ronald noticed Barbara’s agitation as she frequently complained that their trees overshadowed her home, claiming they blocked sunlight and were a danger. One day, while working in the garden, Barbara expressed her frustration, insisting that their trees had to go. Ronald tried to reassure her that the trees posed no threat, but Barbara was unyielding, declaring that they would regret not listening to her.
Despite dismissing her threats as mere complaints, everything changed when they returned from a lovely vacation in France. They were devastated to find their beloved sequoia chopped down, leaving behind a massive stump and two crushed oak trees. Irene was heartbroken, unable to understand how such an act could happen. Their daughters, Stella and Jill, were equally upset, shedding tears over the loss. Although they had no concrete proof, they suspected Barbara was involved.
When confronted, Barbara suggested that a storm might have caused the damage and even demanded $8,000 from them for the destruction and removal of the tree. Ronald was furious, pointing out that no storm had occurred recently. Barbara shrugged off their concerns and walked away, leaving them feeling defeated. However, Ronald remembered he had installed a wildlife camera and hurried to check the footage. He called for his family to come and see what he had found.
Gathered around the computer, they watched in disbelief as the video showed Barbara and two men using a chainsaw to cut down their sequoia. Irene was elated, realizing they finally had the proof they needed. The girls were resolute; Barbara would have to face the consequences of her actions. They quickly contacted their lawyer, and the next day, brought in a tree expert to assess the damage. His findings shocked them. The tree had been planted in 1860 and was one of only 60 remaining of its kind in the country. He warned them that the rotting roots could cause serious issues for their home’s foundation.
Irene was determined not to let Barbara get away with this and insisted they take action. Armed with video evidence, they filed a lawsuit against Barbara. Their attorney was confident that the proof would ensure their victory. The lawsuit demanded compensation for the extensive damages, totaling nearly $700,000, which included the cost to replace the sequoia and repair their property. In court, Barbara initially appeared self-assured, but her confidence crumbled when the video was shown.
The attorney argued that Barbara’s actions were intentional vandalism. Despite her lawyer’s attempts to argue otherwise, the judge ruled decisively in favor of Ronald’s family. Barbara was found guilty and ordered to pay $700,000 in damages. With no choice left, Barbara had to sell her home and leave the neighborhood. As she packed, Ronald and Irene watched from their porch, feeling a sense of justice and closure.
The financial compensation allowed them to pay off their mortgage and make improvements to their home, including a loft conversion and a modern kitchen. They even planted a new 60-year-old sequoia in their garden as a symbol of new beginnings and resilience. Using wood from the felled sequoia, they crafted a kitchen table, which served as a daily reminder of their family’s strength and unity.
When the Andersons moved into Barbara’s old home, they brought new energy to the neighborhood. They loved nature and quickly became friends with Ronald’s family. One morning, Mr. Anderson excitedly showed Ronald their new backyard setup with chickens, ducks, and pygmy goats. Life gradually settled back into a peaceful rhythm, filled with communal barbecues and joyful moments. Ronald and Irene often reflected on their ordeal, thankful for the outcome and the lessons learned.
They decided to start a neighborhood watch program to protect their local environment, bringing the community together. Ronald encouraged everyone to work together to prevent such tragedies in the future. Their home, once marked by conflict, became a symbol of resilience and community spirit. As Ronald looked around, he felt a deep sense of contentment. They had transformed a nightmare into a dream, showcasing the power of love, support, and determination.
Leave a Reply