![]() ![]() So you could still argue the chain was underpriced versus the field, paving the way for potential margin expansion, assuming traffic proved resistant to higher prices. QDOBA was 10.1 percent Moe’s about 3.1 percent. But the second fits snugger into today’s view: Chipotle, historically, was exceptionally delicate with value.Įven after the price climb, according to BTIG data, Chipotle’s national Mexican competitors were priced a sizable 6.6 percent higher on popular entrée items. Firstly, it marked Chipotle’s first price change since mid-2014-before its E. At the time, the decision was meaningful for a couple of reasons. The lift extended to the remaining 45 percent of Chipotle’s system soon after the 2018 New Year. In April and November of 2017, the brand took a 5–7 percent hike in select markets-a turn that made national news. ![]() Takeout traffic was up 22.1 percent and delivery traffic 15.9 percent above 2021.Ĭhipotle’s journey with price stretches back. But it has trended downward through recent months. Simply, it’s higher than it was in 2019, but not where it was during 20 when other channels evaporated.ĭine-in traffic, for instance, rose 31.1 percent, year-over-year, in the period. Like recent quarters, this wasn’t an alarming spin as much as a stabilization. Just 30 percent of Boomers claimed a weekly delivery order, compared to 74 percent of Gen Z, 78 percent of millennials, and 64 percent of Gen X.īy the figures, drive-thru year-over-year traffic was down 12.2 percent in Q4. RMS observed the most significant age difference in the delivery channel. ![]() Gen Z and millennials reported heavier restaurant users across all channels. Urban dwellers were likelier to order delivery versus suburban and rural dwellers. The “high rollers” were also likelier to dine in (92 percent) and order takeout (83 percent) and delivery (73 percent) at least once a week.Įighty-one percent of households with children noted at least one weekly delivery order, compared to just 48 percent with no children. Higher-income consumers proved more likely to visit a drive-thru (85 percent) than average and lower-income counterparts. Additionally, when measuring cohorts, the majority of respondents reported at least one weekly drive-thru visit, with Gen Z claiming the heaviest usage (85 percent said they visit at least once a week) and Boomers the least (69 percent). consumers, RMS asked which segment consumers were using “more or much more.” More than 40 percent tapped quick service compared to coffee shops, breakfast spots, and full service. To a degree, this was beneficial to quick service. And, more generally, they came to restaurants less often as trips cost more. In sum, continued price hikes led to more guests trading down and reducing the number of items they purchased. Quantity per transaction decreased 4.8 percent. Net sales were 6.1 percent higher, yet on the shoulders of average price rising 16.2 percent. In Q4 2022, according to Revenue Management Solutions, traffic across the quick-service industry declined 4.2 percent versus the prior-year period. More than anything, though, prices appear to have approached a ceiling in terms of consumer kickback. The numbers were 6.6 and 8.2 percent higher, year-over-year, but a visible crawl compared to 2021’s month-to-month surges. Limited-service menus rose 0.5 percent in December, while full service ticked up 0.1 percent. Recent data suggests the pace of restaurant pricing has begun to calm. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |