In the book Made to Stick (that I highly recommend to anyone that wants to get their message across and have people talking about it the next day) the authors come up with 6 different elements that they routinely see in SUCCESsful marketing.  Did you think I emphasized one letter too few when I bolded SUCCESsful? Well, no I didn’t. For some reason, the authors were too lazy to come up with an extra S in their acronym.  Their acronym is SUCCES with the last S left out.  Each letter stands for the following:

• S -- Simple.  People have a hard time dealing with abstract ideas in short messages. Make sure the message is easy to understand.
• U -- Unexpected.  Play with the audience’s primal insticts and surprise them.  It’s very important not to use a cliché in this category. Think man on horse for the Old Spice commercial and how well that did.
• C -- Concrete. This is sort of a subcategory of simple. Make sure the audience can relate to the message.
• C -- Credibility. Make sure the audience can envision themselves in that situation.
• E -- Emotion. Make sure the audience knows why they should care about your message.
• S -- Stories. Narrative. Narrative. Narrative. Humans are wired to remember stories and connect with them.

Think about how well Aesop’s fables have done. They’ve stuck around because they’re great narratives with simple messages.  Every human can relate to them and picture themselves as the tortoise, the ant or the fox.  The unexpected may happen in some of his fables, like a hare losing to a tortoise in a race. Yeah, it sounds silly to be unexpected, but you gotta think of the time period. Back then people didn’t know what whales looked like, so they drew them with a fish body and pig head (I’m not making this up). It was easy to surprise them.

So let’s take a look at a few of Carl’s latest ads and evaluate how well they do against the SUCCES criteria:

Boring. Unfortunately, the cliched joke on snuggies is going to last for a long time. Probably as long as that Dick Cheney shooting someone joke. The message of comfort food and the snuggie was subtle and not concrete. In terms of the unexpected, I really wanted Jack in the Box to come out of nowhere, rip the snuggie off of him and strangle the mf with it.

The punchline didn’t work for two reasons. First hardly anyone orders a grilled cheese when they go to a diner or fast food restaurant so no one can relate to the main character’s predicament. Therefore it fails the two C’s. Two, the grilled cheese sangwhich (new yorker for sandwich) isn’t a grilled cheese sangwhich, it’s a fuckin burger so no one can relate to the joke.  At least it has somewhat of a narrative.

This one is a bit better. We have the unexpected burgers talking to each other. It’s simple: Carl’s gives more meat, less bread, and better value as a burger. It plays to my emotions as it’s a goddamn juicy burger. However, there’s nothing really sticky about it other than that. I’ll forget about Carl’s Jr once I see steaks advertised for $3.50/lb. in the Henry’s newspaper ad.

Plays to my emotions well and Kim Kardashian sticks in my mind for the next three minutes. After the testosterone spike subsides, I ask myself, what was the commercial for again? Salads. Girls like salads, guys hate salads. Guys like Kim Kardashian, girls hate Kim Kardashian. None of the SUCCES criteria is met with this advertisement. It’s playing to male sex emotion, but selling the sex and not the product.  This is not going to bring women running into Carl’s wanting a taste of the salad, it’s going to send boys to Google Images searching under they keywords “Kim Kardashian Playboy.” Whoever was in charge of producing this commercial would be fired the next day if I were running Carl’s. This is just more evidence that Carl’s continues to target their base instead of reaching out for newer markets (people who actually eat salad and care if they have a gut).

Western Bacon cheeseburger and Padma Lakshmi? What’s the connection. How do I relate to this other than the obvious sexual cliches (seriously how many times are they going to show a burger jizzing all over girls?).  The message is way too complex. Why am I going to eat a burger that jizzes on me for? Carl’s Jr is fast food, there’s no culinary experience needed to determine if the burger is good or not.  The story was good I guess, but it’s hard for me to believe that a culinary expert that slept with THIS GUY in a long term relationship is a total freak.  Credibility fail. To me a perfect target for this burger would’ve been old people. They love things that are gourmet, bacon and Texas (or Nebraska).  Look how well Omaha steaks have done thanks to old people loving Nebraska so much.  Stop focusing everything on horny college kids Carl’s, they have no money.

Carl’s needs to take a lesson from the way Jack in the box has rebranded itself.  Its advertisement campaigns have been extremely solid in terms of SUCCES.  The menu coincides with the quirkiness and memorable moments of its ads.  Bowl haircuts, teriyaki bowls. Mini cattle, mini cowboys, mini sirloin burgers.  Just look at how fucking catchy this fucking commercial is:

This is one of my favorite Jack commercials. Simple/Concrete -- We have a new product that offers a different and tastier cut of the cow than the competitor. Credible -- It was so believable that Carl’s Jr ended up suing Jack for making people think angus came from the anus of a cow. Don’t believe me? Here’s the link to prove. Unexpected -- we’re led to believe that angus comes from the anus of a cow. Emotion is lacking but they do mention that ’sirloin needs to be tasted to be believed.’ The narrative is that there’s a new burger that’s never been made before. I still remember this commercial after 4 years because it did so well at taking a shot at Carl’s, Burger Tang (*wink* to my hippy ice cream eating niece) and WacDonald’s angus burgers. I ate sirloin burgers literally for 3 months straight. The message still sticks with me today.

WHAT’S GOOD BURGER KING?! Simple/Concrete -- BK says have it your way but you can’t if its not on their menu all day every day. Credible -- Jack specifies that HIS menu is available all day every day so he’s the only one that let’s you have it your way. Unexpected -- Homeboy rips his arms off and you’re expecting some chicken arms to be behind that corporate facade. NOPE! Jack breaks out arms big enough to compete with Hogan’s twin pythons and says bring it BK. Also, that subtle airquote for “competitor” while he’s walking is da illest. BK sucks and Jack knows it. Emotional -- Fear I guess? I wouldn’t fuck with Jack. Story -- He’s just taking a casual stroll down the block and talking shit about BK, something I can totally relate to. Stuck.

THAT’s how you target to an extensive demographic. While the target is obviously the spanish speaking world, this shit hits all the sticky criteria for anglos alike. Simple -- I know the product because it’s in the jingle. Unexpected -- there’s midgets everywhere, hugging black people, and dancing with the spanish speaking game show hosts. Concrete -- Midgets are mini, like the sangwich. Hell they even call it a sangwich for a new yorker to relate. Credibility -- the midget plays the tuba. Emotion -- the whole commercial is fun and makes me want to dance at the next quincinera while eating these things. Story -- the story is weaved into the music and the dance. Even though 70% of anglo people have no idea what the lyrics translate to, let alone like mariachi music, they understand the story is about a mini buffalo ranch chix sangwich. How sticky is this fucking commercial? I bet you’ve already replayed it several times by now. Women, kids, whites, blacks, horny college students can all eat el mini buffahlow ranch ahora.

Clear winner: Jack in the box. Their commercials are far stickier and reach out to a broader audience. Reaching out to a broader audience means bigger market, bigger market means bigger growth and a better performing company over the long term.

Jack is in the lead 2-0 over Carl’s in terms of investment criteria. There’s only one more left and really the be all end all when it comes to investing in anything. Financials.

Frankly, Carl’s has focused way too much on their burger product line and has alienated their demographic to people like me (young males) that enjoy hamburgers. This is an ok strategy, but if its your M.O. to focus on burgers and ignore the rest of the fast food offerings, then focus on a small number of types of burgers and then make the selection of toppings the discriminator. In-n-out does this well by having a very limited menu and then having the customers feel special by putting together their own creations with off menu items like the a triple triple and animal style. Cold stone creamery (a/k/a white people’s ice cream) also does this well by offering their mediocre ice cream and then letting the customer choose from a set of prototypes or attempt to make the most disgusting thing possible (one again making the customer feel special). This allows them to mark up their ice cream at like 200%. In terms of selection of burgers, I counted 28 different kinds of burgers to choose off of carl’s menu. 28. This seems silly to me. Is there really a difference between the Big Hamburger and the Famous Star? All that is changing from burger to burger are the toppings and they’ve preselected those toppings for you. Jack has a total of 10. Jack use’s different kinds of meat and breads and cheeses and sizes in each one of these burger. In other words, they change more than just the sauce.

"By all means eat the left hand side one... ya stewpid" - Stylish Bay

Every few months Carl’s introduces a new burger, takes a tally of how it does, then determines to keep it as a long term menu item.  These pathfinders are pointless and wasteful because the burger is the exact same thing as everything else on the menu and people know what burgers taste like and what toppings taste like.  If they think for themselves they’ll say something like “Hmm, jalapenos? Hmm, cheese? Hmm, burger? That shit must taste bomb.  I’m going to order it.”  On the other hand if they see an advertisement for a topping of prime rib on the burger, they’ll immediately gag and say fuck that I’m not ordering that.  This poor sap actually ordered the burger, but at least the kid gives an excellent review on just how shitty the Prime Rib burger was and warned us to stay away. I should bookmark him based on pity.

Anyway, as long as Carl’s continues to try to just be “the best burger” and not offer up the gay factor (i.e. selection of your own toppings) they’ll fail to capture the kid, female and elderly market. Kid’s like sugar and toys. Give them the option to put sugary syrup on their shit. Females love pretty looking sandwhiches. Give them the option to select their own wrapper with some sparkly, shiney shit on it. Elderly like a lot for a little. Give them the option to sign up for senior citizen coupons mailed to their homes. These little things go a LONG way and no other fast food place is doing it. My girlfriend doesn’t like burgers, but doesn’t mind the teriyaki burger at Carl’s. Small facts like this should be capitalized on. Women want to eat your burgers Carls, you’re just a mysognist by ignoring their hunger for the sake of mine. Niche companies that can easily expand to new markets make bad investments.

In terms of breakfast, Carl’s and Jack’s selection is nearly identical. One difference is the Jack’s breakfast bowl. This bowl is almost like what a normal breakfast looks like. I see scrambled egg somewhere in there. The main difference between the two breakfast menus is that Jack has a 24/7 breakfast and carl’s stops at 11:30. Stylish bay thinks this is stewpid. Why the fuck are you going to stop serving breakfast @ 11 am when most male college students wake up at that time and aren’t in the mood for a burger yet. This a sign of Carl’s not being in touch with their customers. Lazy companies make bad investments.

Before I invest in Carl’s I want to see them targetting the female market. One way is by focusing more on their fish and chicken menu. Their sandwhiches taste great, but everything is charbroiled (most women I know don’t like this flavor -- again it’s anti-shiney/glittery), and once again nothing interesting to choose from. The only sub-interesting item on the chix/fish menu is the chicken stars, but I’ve never once heard of anyone ordering them. Jack has the chicken teriyaki bowl, chicken fajita pita (which is effing gross by the way), mini buffalo ranch chix. Three very interesting and different items that girls I eat with here usually want me to order for them.

Both will put you back $3, yet only one includes jello shots.

Finally the sides menu is a major discriminator between the menus. When I go to Carl’s it usually works like this:

TRI: Two big carls.
Carl’s Jr. Cashier: K, will that be all?
*TRI scans the sides menu and done after a 3 item scan*
TRI: Yes.
Carl’s Jr. Cashier: Ok, that’s a total $5.00.
TRI: Can you make that one big carl?
Carl’s Jr. Cashier: Ok, that’s a total $2.50.

When I step into a Jack things work out a bit different:

TRI: One Jumbo Jack and two tacos.
Jack-in-the-box Cashier: K, will that be all?
*TRI scans the sides menu*
TRI: Large curly fries.
Jack-in-the-box Cashier: K, anything to drink?
TRI: Nah.
Jack-in-the-box Cashier: Total of $4.50.
TRI: Can you throw in another two tacos?
Jack-in-the-box Cashier: Alright, that’s a total of $5.50.

Carl’s sides are non existent. Their fries are good, but boring. The criss cut fries are never enough and leave me wanting more but I won’t since it’s ~$2.50 and their fried zucchini is overpriced. Nearly all Jack’s sides are interesting and of good value. Stuffed jalapenos (bomb), egg rolls (bomb), tacos (bomb), curly fries (bomb), bacon/cheddar potato wedges (never had because I don’t eat pork, but if its a puerto rican pig they use then bomb). I usually don’t mind paying $5+ dollars just for me because I feel like I’m getting so many different things. Companies with sub-par products (weak sides in this case) make bad investments.

Winner in Menu selection: Jack’s by a long shot. More extensive menu, better values and I didn’t mention it because I’m a goddamned objectivist, but I still like their sirloin burger better than all of Carl’s 28 burgers. Carl’s menu doesn’t appeal to kids, women and the elderly with exception to a few items.

Next part of the Carl’s Jr. series will be on advertisements where I’ll expose how unbelievably crap Carl’s ad campaigns are in comparison to Jack’s.

My childhood memories eating at Wendy’s live with me, but they are somewhat forgotten. Why? Because their burgers plain suck now. Soggy, flavorless, and the burger patty size of a DVD.  When I bite into these burgers I should be brought back to my childhood.  The same way the food critic in Ratatouille was reacted when he tasted the rat’s ratatouille dish, I should react when biting into a Wendy’s burger today. Instead my reaction is one of guilt and regret. One that says I should have spent my money at Jack in the box.

Since Wendy’s has no idea how to fix itself and continues to sit like a bunch of trapped dolphin being massacred in Tajiti Japan, its going to attempt to buy Carl’s Jr.’s parent company to escape this red ocean.  Coincidentally, the day they announced interest is the same day the lady that said she found a finger in her chili admitted she actually cooked the finger before she dropped it into the chili.  Despite what Wendy’s and many of you might think, Carl’s is actually a poorly managed business.  Their burgers are the best in business, but their fast food, marketing and management are not.  Right now, it seems the only fast food companies managing their changes strategically and that are worth considering any kind of investment are McDonald’s and Jack in the box.

Like Wendy’s, Carl’s is slowly becoming a dead franchise.  Their target demographic is much too focused.  No targets for kids (i.e. a mascot like ronald or even partnerships to bring toys into the restaurant), no targets for women (i.e. parfaits, pita alternatives), no targets for the morning person (i.e. coffee to compete with starbucks like mcdonalds did), no targets for the health conscious (they introduced salads wow, great idea (back in 1990)), no targets for dessert lovers (the most interesting dessert on their menu is the oreo cookie shake). They never offer anything new in terms of products unless they’re in burger or chicken sandwich form.  They introduced the energy drinks and vitamin water, but once again this only targets the young male demographic.

Wendy’s is out of their minds to buy Carl’s Jr. Not only because Wendy’s itself is mismanaged, but because Carl’s is not a good value right now, is not a growth business and does not have a management that has the interests of the shareholders in mind.  Since McDonald’s is in a league of its own let’s compare an investment in Carl’s with an investment in Jack in the box. I think Jack in the box is a much more rational buy for an investor. To prove this point, over the next three posts, I’ll look at both restaurant’s menu selections, their ad campaigns, and their financials.