DOCSLIB.ORG

How Burger King Does Manage Its Bad Image? Numerous Companies Have Had to Deal with the Negative Outcomes of Inappropriate Advertising Policies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
How Burger King Does Manage Its Bad Image? Numerous Companies Have Had to Deal with the Negative Outcomes of Inappropriate Advertising Policies BUSINESS ENGLISH ESSAY How Burger King does manage its bad image? Numerous companies have had to deal with the negative outcomes of inappropriate advertising policies. Some of them had also a bad image because of their internal management system and had to invest in advertisement to bring back the customers. We could use various examples: Nike’s products manufactured by children, Coca-Cola’s violent use of managerial power in Colombia plants, Disneyland’s anti-American boycott during the opening of its French park in 1992, or McDonald’s global image, which is criticized for encouraging obesity even now, after having made different measures in order to promote nutritional awareness. We will study here the case of one of the biggest fast-food industry companies and determine how its advertising policy avoids the common traps McDonald’s fell into. Since its beginnings in 1954, Burger King has experienced an outstanding growth, as stated in High School Operations Research website (1). In order to have an advantage on its competitors, notably Wendy’s ， Kentucky Fried Chicken and McDonald’s, the company has adopted different successful tactics. As we are focussing here on its publicity campaigns, it is relevant to put the emphasis on the comparative advertisements Burger King made to benefit from its main rivals’ weaknesses, well described on a Cambridge University Press webpage (2). In these TV spots (which were shown between 1995 and 1996), the firm compared its own burgers to the opponents’ products. However, most of Burger King advertising programs made between 1980 and 2002 were unsuccessful and did not permit the brand to achieve its targets, which were attempts to build a solid identity the firm lacked of, according to Wikipedia and its annex sources (3). Moreover, these failures, which supported by a major investment, were also creating a competitive disadvantage, of which Wendy’s benefitted from in 1986. Effectively, during this time Wendy’s tried a new motto, “Where’s the beef?” which Burger King answered with: “Where’s herb?” Unfortunately for BG, it did not have the impact it was supposed to have. This specific flop leads us to analyse the current BG strategy towards McDonald’s; instead of fighting a marketing decision with another similar or even opposite marketing decision, BG has simply developed the habit not to strike back Nonetheless, there has been a noticeable exception to that, as explained in the book Marketing Strategy in 1998 (4). As Burger King copied the Big Mac creating the “Big King”, McDonald’s nastily replied with the “Big ‘n Tasty”, which directly imitates the Whopper. In the past, BG tried to expand its segmentation but lost customer awareness, which led to improper advertising campaigns. For instance, their total market share in 1993 was much lower than McDonald’s (6.1 % for BK, 15.6% for Mc Donald’s) because they forgot to put the stress on their main product – the Whopper – in their ads, whereas McDonald’s did, as explained on echeat.com (5). The situation has changed since then, as in 2007 the company produced a series of curious video clips, both for TV and Internet, called “The Whopper freak- out”. In this stylish attempt to generate a long-term relationship with the customer, we can see consumers progressively getting angry as they realize their favourite BG dish – the whopper – is no longer available (6). If Burger King’s adverts were at times detrimental to its turnover, McDonald’s campaigns were known to be controversial but successful. We might wonder: how come a company which is in a scapegoat position and has a global negative image keeps a leading place in the fast-food industry? The common ethical debate which McDonald’s still has to deal with, along with the growing crowd of its detractors, may be more strong and accurate than Burger King’s precisely because of its dominating condition. If so, we could argue BK advertising and sponsorship policies, more prudent and diplomatic, are a potentially responsible choice. However, some attacks and claims made at Mc Donald’s, such as Morgan Spurlock’s 2004 documentary Super Size Me, showing the health risks of a regular fast-food diet, or mcspotlight.org website (7), which provides a huge list of articles illustrating McDonald’s marketing mistakes, could possibly aim at any other fast-food company, Burger King included. The impact of these unsettling attempts is noticeable, as McDonald’s Super Size Option, which permitted the customer to increase the size of his meal, was withdrawn six weeks after the release of the film. Nevertheless, the fast-food giant declared it was not a consequential decision. As for Burger King, a few errors in its advertising campaigns have also been pointed out. For example, the firm has asked under-developed countries’ citizens to taste a Whopper and a Big Mac in order to make an advantageous comparison in a 2008 TV spot. This clip was judged “outrageous” by a member of the Institute of Human Nutrition, as stated on nydailynews.com (8). McDonald’s have often being criticized for its advertising policies towards children, and so did Burger King, as mentioned in a 2006 electronic article published on brandrepublic.com (9). What we might question here is the educative role hold by parents: do they have the responsibility of teaching their children the dangers of fast- foods, or is it this task reserved to the fast-food leaders? McDonald’s initial approach was subtle but clever: while kids were attracted by its outside park and its Happy Meal, their mothers were insidiously dragged to the restaurant. This policy gave the company a significant competitive advantage. Burger King keeps away from certain ethical matters when not making its children policy the centre of attention. As we studied most of all previous marketing policies, let’s turn to what happens nowadays to BK. The company recently used SpongeBob’s franchise to promote its Kids Meals on a TV advert. On one hand, the spot was condemned by specialists because it shown sexual (or, should we write, sexy) content, inappropriate in such a context. On the other hand, as stated in a topical article from the Washington Post (10), BK heads claimed that it was mainly adult-targeted. The problems get more serious when, in order to support the sales of the brand new Texican Whopper (which is, as the name suggests, a combination of Texan and Mexican food), Burger King employs Mexican’s flag in a way judged offending by officials (11). If BK’s campaigns become reprimanded by politics, the impact on sales could be dramatically negative. As a conclusion, we should consider the role played by the media (Which includes IT communications) in labelling a marketing strategy. It would be easy in this study to evaluate BK policies as being better or worse than McDonald’s or any other competitor. Yet, it is not possible to objectively do so as the general image of a given company is depicted on a subjective basis. Morals and ethics surely reflect the social representation of a brand, but these kinds of value differ depending on individuals’ opinions or cultural orientations. REFERENCES (1) Article taken from: W. SWART and D. LUCCA. “Simulation Modeling Improves Operations, Planning, and Productivity of Fast Food Restaurants.” Interfaces, 11:6 (1981), 35-47. http://www.hsor.org/case_studies.cfm?name=burger_king (2) First published on February 1997 in Advertising Age. cambridge.org/resources/0521526256/2392_Wilkinson_ADDITIONAL%20CASE %20STUDIES.pdf (3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burger_king (4) Harcourt Brace & Company, 1998. O. C. FERREL, M. D. HARLINE, G. H. LUCAS, D. LUCK, Marketing Strategy; p. 335. (5) http://www.echeat.com/essay.php?t=25843 (6) http://www.whopperfreakout.com/index.html (7) http://www.mcspotlight.org/issues/advertising/index.html (8) M. TOWNSEND and S. GASKELL, December 2 2008. http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2008/12/01/2008-12- 01_using_poor_villagers_in_burger_king_tv_s.html (9) A. DONOHUE, November 15 2006. http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/604647/Burger-King-childrens-ad-ban/ (10) S. GARFINKLE, April 16 2009 http://voices.washingtonpost.com/parenting/2009/04/what_do_you_think_of_the_bur ge.html?wprss=parenting (11) REUTERS Agency, April 14 2009 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/burger-king-ad-in-spain-angers- mexican-ambassador-1668362.html.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Will the Real Please Stand
    The meaty tale of how a rogue Alberta burger chain came to be and why its fiercely independent owners can’t agree on anything—all of WILL THE REAL which may be moot as Burger Barons dwindle in small towns and BURGER BARON fast-food tastes evolve. written by OMAR MOUALLEM across Canada—possibly the world. These faux Bar- scalding dishwasher water, and why, for most of my THE BURGER ons have suspiciously similar menus and flavours, but life, I was fat. By 17, I was 210 pounds and one of the comes to me with a sauce as grey as Campbell’s operate under different names, like Angel’s Drive-In shortest guys in my graduation photo. My vice was PLEASE STAND UP? Mushroom Soup squeezing from the bun’s outer in Calgary and Burger Palace in Olds. And they, too, the Burger Baron mushroom burger. edges, down two juicy beef patties and onto a are Lebanese-owned. Always cooked to order, the patty never spent a moat of steaming, seasoned french fries. It’s my Zouhier Kamaleddine, who runs a Carstairs second under a warmer. It was crispy on the outside, fourth today. Burger Baron drive-thru with his family, likens it to succulent in the middle, and decorated with a slice Driving down the QE II toward Calgary, I the Mafia, though that would give them the credit of real cheddar, sautéed mushrooms and the pièce de stopped in Lacombe, Sundre, Carstairs and Oko- of being organized, which they’re not. None of résistance—mushroom sauce. By my calculations, I toks to enjoy my old staple and meet the people them seem to know who the original Baron is, nor ate about 1,500 of them between teething and leav- who still make them.
    [Show full text]
  • Super Size Me and the Conundrum of Race/Ethnicity, Gender, and Class for the Contemporary Law-Genre Documentary Filmmaker
    Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review Volume 40 Number 2 Symposium—Access to Justice: Law Article 7 and Popular Culture 1-1-2007 Super Size Me and the Conundrum of Race/Ethnicity, Gender, and Class for the Contemporary Law-Genre Documentary Filmmaker Regina Austin Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/llr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Regina Austin, Super Size Me and the Conundrum of Race/Ethnicity, Gender, and Class for the Contemporary Law-Genre Documentary Filmmaker, 40 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 687 (2007). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/llr/vol40/iss2/7 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SUPER SIZE ME AND THE CONUNDRUM OF RACE/ETHNICITY, GENDER, AND CLASS FOR THE CONTEMPORARY LAW-GENRE DOCUMENTARY FILMMAKER Regina Austin * I. THE INGREDIENTS OF A SUPERSIZED SUCCESS More than other genres of popular culture, documentaries are favorably disposed to what passes as a liberal perspective on social issues, including civil litigation. Newspaper headlines proclaim it, conservatives lament it, and documentarians do not dispute it. Indeed, the premise for Super Size Me,' one of the most popular documentaries of the first half decade of the 21st century, actually originated with the fast-food obesity case Pelman v. McDonald's Corp.2 According to Daily Variety, the idea for the documentary * William A.
    [Show full text]
  • Tell Me What You Eat, and I Will Tell Whom to Sue: Big Trouble Ahead for “Big Food"?
    University of Kentucky UKnowledge Law Faculty Scholarly Articles Law Faculty Publications 2005 Tell Me What You Eat, and I Will Tell Whom to Sue: Big Trouble Ahead for “Big Food"? Richard C. Ausness University of Kentucky College of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/law_facpub Part of the Torts Commons Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Richard C. Ausness, Tell Me What You Eat, and I Will Tell Whom to Sue: Big Trouble Ahead for “Big Food"?, 39 Ga. L. Rev. 839 (2005). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Faculty Publications at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Faculty Scholarly Articles by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Tell Me What You Eat, and I Will Tell Whom to Sue: Big Trouble Ahead for “Big Food"? Notes/Citation Information Georgia Law Review, Vol. 39, No. 3 (2005), pp. 839-893 This article is available at UKnowledge: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/law_facpub/83 TELL ME WHAT YOU EAT, AND I WILL TELL YOU WHOM TO SUE: BIG PROBLEMS AHEAD FOR "BIG FOOD"? Richard C. Ausness* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ................................. 841 II. PELMAN v. McDONALD'S CORP. ................... 844 III. LIABILITY THEORIES ............................. 850 A. THE DEFECT REQUIREMENT ...................... 851 B. DEFECTIVE DESIGN ............................ 852 1. The Consumer Expectation Test ....... 852 2. The Risk-Utility Test . ....................... 855 C. PRODUCT CATEGORY LIABILITY .............
    [Show full text]
  • CASE STUDY Burger King
    CASE STUDY Burger King / This article appeared in Contagous issue Eighteen. Contagous is an intelligence resource for the global marketing communiy focusing on non-tradiional media and emergng technologes www.contagiousmagazine.com For more information please contac Harry Gayner on +44 (0) 20 7575 1822 or [email protected] 1st Page Case Study.indd 1 5/3/09 14:56:57 case study / burger king / RENAISSANCE MAN BK.indd 2 8/3/09 15:45:39 contagious 70 / 71 CASE STUDY / BURGER KING / RENAISSANCE MAN / YOU DON’T HAVE TO BE A BABY BOOMER TO REMEMBER A TIME WHEN MCDONALD’S NOT ONLY DOMINATED THE FAST FOOD MARKET IN REVENUE, BUT ALSO IN MARKETING. RARE FOR A CHALLENGER BRAND, BURGER KING STRUGGLED WITH THE BURDEN OF BEING MORE KNOWN THAN LOVED. FAST FORWARD TO THE PRESENT, AND THE LANDSCAPE IS VERY DIFFERENT INDEED. THROUGH A CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH AGENCIES INCLUDING CRISPIN PORTER + BOGUSKY, THE PERENNIAL SECOND PLACE FINISHER IS FINALLY HAVING THINGS ITS OWN WAY / BY JESS GREENWOOD / BK.indd 3 8/3/09 15:45:41 case study / burger king / ‘We bore all the hallmark signs of a troubled company,’ reflects Burger King’s chief marketing officer Russ Klein as he reluctantly recalls 2003. Back then, the Burger King Corporation was struggling following seven straight years of sales decline, having been sold anthropological research. ‘The science of how we got off by parent company Diageo the previous year to a there is sound,’ says Klein. ‘There’s a more potent set triumvirate of private equity firms. Footfall had dropped of imagery around our brand identity than other names by 22%, yet the fast food industry as a whole was in our space.
    [Show full text]
  • Tim Hortons and Burger King Worldwide Provide Transaction Update and Set Election Deadlines
    Tim Hortons and Burger King Worldwide Provide Transaction Update and Set Election Deadlines Oakville, Ontario and Miami, Florida; December 5, 2014: Tim Hortons Inc. (TSX, NYSE: THI) and Burger King Worldwide Inc. (NYSE: BKW) today confirmed that the proposed transaction to create a new global quick service restaurant leader operating two iconic, independent brands has been approved by the Minister of Industry under the Investment Canada Act (“ICA”). In connection with this announcement, the companies are providing the following further updates regarding the transaction. The companies have set the deadline for registered shareholders of Tim Hortons or Burger King Worldwide to make an election with respect to the form of consideration they wish to receive, subject to pro-ration, as of December 9, 2014, prior to 5:00 p.m. (EST), which is based on the current expectation that the transaction will be completed on December 12, 2014. Registered shareholders are reminded that if they wish to make an election, they must complete, sign and return a Letter of Transmittal and Election Form to Computershare Trust Company, as exchange agent, by the election deadline. Shareholders holding shares through a broker, investment dealer or other intermediary should carefully follow the instructions provided by such broker, investment dealer or other intermediary if they wish to make an election. Shareholders with questions should contact DF King at 866-828-6934 (English) or 866-796-1285 (French). Tim Hortons and Burger King Worldwide also confirmed today that the transaction has previously received regulatory clearance under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act (USA), the Competition Act (Canada) and the Canada Transportation Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility of Prominent Fast Food Establishments by University Students
    Journal of Food Distribution Research Volume 47 Issue 3 Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility of Prominent Fast Food Establishments by University Students Carissa J. Morgan a, S. R. Dominick b, Nicole J. Olynk Widmarc, Elizabeth A. Yeager d and Candace C. Croney e a, b c Graduate Research Assistant, Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, 403 West State Street West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA Phone: +1 765-494-2567. Email: [email protected] d Department of Agricultural Economics, Kansas State University, 342 Waters Hall, Manhattan, KS, 66506, USA e Associate Professor, Department of Comparative Pathobiology, Purdue University, 625 Harrison Street, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA Abstract Corporate social responsibility (CSR) can affect the way customers perceive a company and can influence product differentiation. This study assesses university students’ perceptions of CSR across eleven prominent fast food restaurants. A total of 550 students responded to in-person surveys administered on the campus of Purdue University. Chipotle and Panera Bread were perceived to be the most socially responsible out of the fast food restaurants studied, receiving mean preference shares of 31% and 30%, respectively. Keywords: consumer behavior, consumption patterns, corporate social responsibility, fast food perceptions Corresponding author November 2016 Volume 47 Issue 3 18 Morgan et al. Journal of Food Distribution Research Introduction Food expenditures by consumers away from home are increasing in the United States (BLS 2016; USDA 2016). At the same time, consumers are increasingly demanding more (attributes) from their food, and fast food restaurants have been moving to meet growing demand for social responsibility (Morgan et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Carrols Restaurant Group, Inc. 2017 Annual Report
    Carrols Restaurant Group, Inc. 2017 Annual Report April 27, 2018 Dear Fellow Stockholders: 2017 was a year of continued progress at Carrols Restaurant Group, Inc. and we were pleased with our accomplishments, which included crossing the $1 billion mark in restaurant sales and increasing our unit count to more than 800 restaurants. We are proud to reach these milestones and intend to build upon them as we further position the Company for continued groowth. Total revenues in 2017 were $1.09 billion, an increase of 15.4% over the prior year, including $210.3 million in restaurant sales from the 175 restaurants acquired from 2015 to 2017. Comparable restaurant sales growth in 2017 of 5.2% yielded a strong 7.5% two-yyear trend, which outpaced most of our quick- service restaurant peers. Despite higher beef costs and wwage inflation, we also increased Adjusted EBITDA in 2017 to $91.4 million from $89.5 million in the prior year. BURGER KING®’s marketing strategy continues to effectively balance premium, value, and limited time product offerings to drive sales, average check, and customer traffic in a highly competitive environment. Premium offerings during the year included a number of products built around our new King™ sandwich platform and our new Crispy Chicken Sandwich. Notable value oofferings included the 2 for $6 WHOPPER® promotion, 2 cheeseburgers with small fries and a drink for $3.49, and 2 for $4 Mix and Match breakfast sandwiches, among others. In 2017, we acquired 64 BURGER KING restaurants in three separate transactions, consisting of 43 in Ohio (Cincinnati market), 17 in Maryland (Baltimore - Washington, DC market), and four in Maine.
    [Show full text]
  • Burger King Retail; Qsr | St
    OFFERING MEMORANDUM TRADE NET LEASE WITH CONFIDENCE BURGER KING RETAIL; QSR | ST. AUGUSTINE, FL NEW YORK | CHICAGO | ATLANTA | TAMPA | DENVER | SAN FRANCISCO BENETLEASE.COM DISCLOSURE All materials and information received or derived from B financial advisor to any party regarding any proposed Plus E LLC, its directors, officers, agents, advisors, affiliates, transaction. All data and assumptions regarding financial and/or any third-party sources are provided without performance, including that used for financial modeling representation or warranty as to completeness, veracity, purposes, may differ from actual data or performance. Any or accuracy; condition of the property; compliance or lack estimates of market rents and/or projected rents that may of compliance with applicable governmental requirements; be provided to a party do not necessarily mean that rents developability or suitability; financial performance of the can be established at or increased to that level. Parties must property; or projected financial performance of the property evaluate any applicable contractual and governmental for any party’s intended use or any and all other matters. limitations as well as market conditions, vacancy factors, and other issues in order to determine rents from or for the Neither B Plus E LLC, its directors, officers, agents, advisors, property. nor affiliates makes any representation or warranty, express or implied, as to accuracy or completeness of the any Legal questions should be discussed by the party with an materials or information provided, derived, or received. attorney. Tax questions should be discussed by the party Materials and information from any source, whether with a certified public accountant or tax attorney.
    [Show full text]
  • BURGER KING 101 Farm to Market 306 New Braunfels, TX 78130 TABLE of CONTENTS
    NET LEASE INVESTMENT OFFERING BURGER KING 101 Farm to Market 306 New Braunfels, TX 78130 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Profile II. Location Overview III. Market & Tenant Overview Executive Summary Photographs Demographic Report Investment Highlights Aerials Market Overview Property Overview Site Plan Tenant Overview Map NET LEASE INVESTMENT OFFERING DISCLAIMER STATEMENT DISCLAIMER The information contained in the following Offering Memorandum is proprietary and strictly confidential. STATEMENT: It is intended to be reviewed only by the party receiving it from The Boulder Group and should not be made available to any other person or entity without the written consent of The Boulder Group. This Offering Memorandum has been prepared to provide summary, unverified information to prospective purchasers, and to establish only a preliminary level of interest in the subject property. The information contained herein is not a substitute for a thorough due diligence investigation. The Boulder Group has not made any investigation, and makes no warranty or representation. The information contained in this Offering Memorandum has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable; however, The Boulder Group has not verified, and will not verify, any of the information contained herein, nor has The Boulder Group conducted any investigation regarding these matters and makes no warranty or representation whatsoever regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information provided. All potential buyers must take appropriate measures to verify all of the information set forth herein. NET LEASE INVESTMENT OFFERING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE The Boulder Group is pleased to exclusively market for sale a single tenant net lease Burger King located in New SUMMARY: Braunfels, Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Approaches to Resource Conflicts
    Vanclay, J.K., 2005. Gunns, Greens and Silk: alternative approaches to resource conflicts. Paper to “Burning Issues in Forestry ”, 22 nd biennial conference of the Institute of Foresters of Australia, 10-14 April 2005, Mount Gambier S.A. Gunns, Greens and Silk: alternative approaches to resource conflicts Jerome K. Vanclay Southern Cross University, PO Box 157, Lismore NSW 2480 Summary Many Australian foresters remain unaware of the McLibel case, a 15-year public relations disaster that followed a litigation attempt by the McDonald’s hamburger chain. Recent litigation by Gunns Limited against 20 environmental activists appears to ignore the lessons from that case. The McLibel litigation led to a costly lose-lose outcome, whereas reforms by McDonald’s following a critical movie created a win-win situation in which McDonald’s improved their reputation and their customers gained better food. Parallels that may contribute to such win-win outcomes in forestry are examined. Adaptive collaborative management informed by participatory modelling may be a more productive approach than litigation, and should produce a more durable outcome. Keywords: litigation, negotiation, adaptive collaborative management, McLibel, Gunns20 Introduction In his best-selling book ‘Guns, germs and steel’, Jared Diamond (1997) examined a question posed by one of his PNG colleagues: “Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo ... ?”. Diamond argued that the underlying reason for the good fortune enjoyed by some cultures was geography, because large land masses facilitated the development of societies better able share technologies and learn from their experiences. The title of this paper is a parody of Diamond’s title, because I explore “Why is it that Gunns have initiated so many lawsuits?”, referring to the litigation initiated recently by the forestry company Gunns (White 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • Brief of Amicus Curiae United States of America in Support of Neither Party
    USCA11 Case: 20-13561 Date Filed: 12/07/2020 Page: 1 of 45 No. 20-13561 IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit JARVIS ARRINGTON et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BURGER KING WORLDWIDE, INC. et al., Defendants-Appellees. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida No. 1:18-cv-24128 (Hon. Jose E. Martinez) BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN SUPPORT OF NEITHER PARTY MAKAN DELRAHIM Assistant Attorney General MICHAEL F. MURRAY Deputy Assistant Attorney General DANIEL E. HAAR MARY HELEN WIMBERLY Attorneys U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ANTITRUST DIVISION 950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Room 3224 Washington, D.C. 20530-0001 (202) 514-4510 [email protected] Counsel for the United States USCA11 Case: 20-13561 Date Filed: 12/07/2020 Page: 2 of 45 Arrington v. Burger King Worldwide, Inc., 20-13561 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS AND CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT C-1 of 3 Pursuant to Eleventh Circuit Rules 26.1-1 to 26.1-3, 28-1(b), and 29-2, the undersigned certifies that, in addition to those persons and entities set forth in the Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement in Appellants’ brief, the persons and entities listed below are known to her to have an interest in the outcome of this case or to have participated as attorneys or judges in the adjudication of this case. Counsel notes that the stock symbol for Restaurant Brands International Inc., a publicly traded entity listed in Appellants’ brief, is QSR.
    [Show full text]
  • Kids' Meal Menu Items
    Kids' meal menu items Energy density Healthy beverages NPI Artifical Part of Serving Serving Total calories Energy density (% sugar by Total Saturated Trans Sugar Sodium Fiber Protein NPI score sweetenersa Restaurant Meal name kids' meal Individual item size (g) size (oz) (Kcal) (kcal/g) weight) fat (g) fat (g) fat (g) (g) (mg) (g) (g) Score McDonald's Happy Meal Main Dish Hamburger 100 - 250 2.5 - 9 3.5 0.5 6 520 2 12 50 McDonald's Happy Meal Main Dish Cheeseburger 114 - 300 2.6 - 12 6 0.5 6 750 2 15 40 Chicken McNuggets (4 piece) McDonald's Happy Meal Main Dish with hot mustard sauce 92 - 250 2.7 - 14.5 2 0 6 650 2 11 70 Chicken McNuggets (4 piece) McDonald's Happy Meal Main Dish with barbeque sauce 92 - 240 2.6 - 12 2 0 10 660 0 10 70 Apple dippers (without low fat ● McDonald's Happy Meal Side Dish caramel dip) 68 - 35 0.5 - 0 0 0 6 - 0 0 78 Apple dippers with low fat ● McDonald's Happy Meal Side Dish caramel dip 89 - 105 1.2 - 0.5 0 0 15 35 0 0 66 ● McDonald's Happy Meal Side Dish French fries- small 71 - 230 3.2 - 11 1.5 0 0 160 3 3 66 ● McDonald's Happy Meal Beverage 1% low fat milk jug 236 8 100 0.4 5% 2.5 1.5 0 12 125 0 8 72 ● McDonald's Happy Meal Beverage 1% low fat chocolate milk jug 236 8 170 0.7 11% 3 1.5 0 25 150 1 9 70 ● McDonald's Happy Meal Beverage Minute Maid apple juice box 200 6.8 100 0.5 11% 0 0 0 22 15 0 0 76 McDonald's Happy Meal Beverage Coca-Cola Classic 355 12 110 0.3 8% 0 0 0 29 5 0 0 68 ● McDonald's Happy Meal Beverage Diet Coke 355 12 0 0.0 0% 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 70 McDonald's Happy Meal Beverage Sprite 355 12 110
    [Show full text]