[HN Gopher] No One Wanted A&W's Third-Pound Burger (2016)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       No One Wanted A&W's Third-Pound Burger (2016)
        
       Author : ZeljkoS
       Score  : 117 points
       Date   : 2021-09-14 08:18 UTC (14 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.mentalfloss.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.mentalfloss.com)
        
       | stayfrosty420 wrote:
       | weird that people can seem to grok a half pound is bigger though
        
         | syshum wrote:
         | Can they? MC'D does the "Double 1/4 Pounder" instead of 1/2
         | Pound...
         | 
         | Hardee's does "Monster" and before that " $6 Dollar Burger"
         | instead of 1/2 pound
         | 
         | I have seen people use 8 oz in marketing
         | 
         | I have not seen anyone advertise a "1/2 Pounder"
        
           | frosted-flakes wrote:
           | The McDonalds's Double Quarter-Pounder is two 1/4 lb patties
           | though, and it matches the naming scheme of all of their
           | other two-patty burgers.
        
           | moron4hire wrote:
           | A double quarter pounder is two quarter pound patties, not
           | one half-pound patty.
           | 
           | And no, the sandwiches would not be equivalent. Two quarter
           | pound patties cook faster, even serially, than one half
           | pounder. Plus, you typically pair each patty with a slice of
           | cheese when making cheeseburgers, so the bread/meat/cheese
           | ratio is completely different.
        
       | danpalmer wrote:
       | I recently called out my bank for advertising a "0.10%" savings
       | interest rate, a similar problem I think.
       | 
       | To anyone here it's obvious that this is the same as a "0.1%"
       | rate, but I do suspect that to a not-insignificant proportion of
       | the population, they'd consider "10 > 1", and conclude that this
       | account is better for them than another one offering "0.2%"
       | interest.
       | 
       | I realise this might be a stretch, but to look at it another way,
       | should a bank be allowed to advertise their savings rate as
       | "0.100%" or "0.10000%"?
        
         | aeries wrote:
         | In the financial world we think in bps (units of 0.01%), so it
         | would be standard to write percentages with 2 decimals so you
         | can easily see it's 10bps at a glance.
        
         | frumper wrote:
         | I would suggest that this is a similar problem, but for a
         | different reason. I'm not choosing a bank because they offer a
         | 0.1%, 0.10% or 0.2% savings interest rate. That is pretty
         | inconsequential.
        
         | conistonwater wrote:
         | This might be Regulation DD, set by the Federal Reserve if
         | you're in the US, or something similar if you're elsewhere:
         | https://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/caletters/2009/0914...
         | 
         | > _It must round the annual percentage yield, the annual
         | percentage yield earned, and the interest rate to the nearest
         | one-hundredth of one percentage point (.01%) and express them
         | to two decimal places._ (p.17)
         | 
         | Personally, I don't see what the problem would be with 0.10%,
         | doesn't seem misleading in the slightest. I also love how the
         | regulation is called "Truth in Savings", like how could anybody
         | be against it?
        
           | danpalmer wrote:
           | The bank is in the UK. I don't know if there's any
           | legislation around this communication, but it doesn't seem
           | that great even if it's legal.
        
             | noir_lord wrote:
             | Probably - iirc FSA regulate that stuff and can be quite
             | pernickety about what they'll allow.
        
             | throw_away wrote:
             | You're worried about unfair competition with banks
             | advertising "0.1%" or "0.2%", but with a _must_ rule like
             | this, there wouldn 't be any of those competitors. Anyone
             | with the same rate would advertise "0.10%", and anyone who
             | wanted to beat would say "0.20%" (or more likely, "0.11%").
        
         | huehehue wrote:
         | This sounded silly until I remembered that software versioning
         | trips me up just the same.
         | 
         | I always read 1.2.11 as < 1.2.2
        
           | cardiffspaceman wrote:
           | Rock climbing's ratings with Yosemite Decimal System have
           | 5.10 harder than 5.9 [1]
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yosemite_Decimal_System
        
           | Hamuko wrote:
           | I find normal version numbers pretty simple as a software
           | developer (general population seemed to be buffled by how
           | macOS 10.9 could ever be followed by macOS 10.10) but I
           | always get confused when I see Cyberpunk 2077's version
           | numbers that go 1.22 - 1.23 - 1.3 - 1.31. It just doesn't
           | compute that you go from minor version 23 to minor version 3.
        
           | xcskier56 wrote:
           | This is so true. The other day I spent a good 10 minutes
           | trying to upgrade a gem to > 2.3 when it was already at 2.11
        
           | kelp wrote:
           | For this reason I tend to prefer the way OpenBSD versions
           | their releases.
           | 
           | They just did 6.9 and the next one will be 7.0.
           | 
           | But this really only works over long periods of time because
           | they only do two releases a year.
           | 
           | It took me a bit to get my head around Linux kernel
           | versioning where the 2nd digit just goes up until they feel
           | like it's time for a new first digit version.
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | Yes, but #.#.# is not a valid number/decimal/monetary
           | notation. You cannot enter that number into a calculator, and
           | I'm not sure you'd even be able to use that as a valid
           | numerical value in any programming language.
           | 
           | For anyone getting confused that 0.1 == 0.10, then how is
           | that the writer's fault? There are formatting requirements
           | that require a significant digit number of places (scientific
           | notation as an example). I don't know that actually applies
           | to bank marketing material, but it could be a style guide
           | type of thing to keep numbers formatted the same. Either way,
           | it does not change the value of the number. If you misread
           | it, it is not the company's fault. They have provided factual
           | information.
        
             | bmitc wrote:
             | > If you misread it, it is not the company's fault. They
             | have provided factual information.
             | 
             | That's really not a fair argument given advertising and
             | marketing theory and schemes.
             | 
             | Who knows about this particular case since we don't know if
             | the 0.10% needed to be compared to other rates like 0.08%,
             | where the formatting would maybe make more sense. But it's
             | not beyond imagination that someone could try to hook a
             | customer with numbers. It's done all the time with the
             | whole $8.99 thing.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | That's funny timing, as I just mentioned the other day on
               | here that the $.99 vs $1.00 thing was a marketing tactic.
               | However, someone countered that it is a remnant from the
               | old days of forcing the clerk to ring out the customer at
               | the register to make correct change. This was to help
               | avoid the temptation of pocketing the exact dollar
               | amount. A pricing practice that has essentially just
               | stuck around, and possibly repurposed????
               | 
               | Either way, I've learned basic maths. .1 == .10. I would
               | be willing to guess that the average public would not
               | think that .10 > .1, and that this whole confusion is
               | really only for developers that have started using
               | decimal notation in versions where .10 > .1 is true.
        
               | hermitdev wrote:
               | As an engineer, the trailing 0 is significant: it
               | indicates with what precision it was rounded to. [0.5,
               | .15) could become .1, with 1 significant digit, but not
               | .10 with 2 significant digits.
               | 
               | Doubtful it matters in this case, but that extra zero can
               | convey extra meaning.
        
         | micromacrofoot wrote:
         | I suppose someone should first study whether or not the average
         | person knows the difference between .10% and .1% - or whether
         | it has subconscious effects. The problem with the current way
         | things work is that the bank likely has done a little research
         | or focus groups themselves... and they have no incentive to
         | publicize their data in a way that informs people.
        
         | kiawe_fire wrote:
         | Oh my!
         | 
         | I've often seen rates given by banks with at least one extra
         | digit and wondered why.
         | 
         | It never occurred to me it was a marketing ploy.
        
           | danpalmer wrote:
           | I suspect this may be more attributable to ignorance/error
           | than to malice/marketing, but it's still not great that no
           | one spotted it.
        
           | jawilson2 wrote:
           | In finance we use basis points, or bps, which is %/100. This
           | isn't unusual.
        
         | paisawalla wrote:
         | How did the bank respond? Did they change anything?
        
           | danpalmer wrote:
           | "Thank you for bringing this to our attention"
           | 
           | That was maybe a month ago, still the same.
           | 
           | I'm not the most impressed, I found a bug in their iOS app
           | that would multiply monetary values by 100 when doing various
           | (normal) text editing steps as you input values. I found this
           | by nearly transferring PS1000 instead of PS10 to a friend.
           | The bug was an honest mistake with `NSNumberFormatter` in the
           | iOS SDK, but I feel like a bank can't make "honest mistakes"
           | at that sort of level.
        
         | BeFlatXIII wrote:
         | > I realise this might be a stretch, but to look at it another
         | way, should a bank be allowed to advertise their savings rate
         | as "0.100%" or "0.10000%"?
         | 
         | Yes. Lotteries still exist. What's another tax on the
         | mathematically illiterate?
        
       | namelessoracle wrote:
       | A&W's third pounder just didnt taste that good, and the fries
       | were mediocre things that reminded me of school cafeteria fries.
       | When I wanted a bigger burger Wendey's had better offerings, and
       | when i wanted a cheaper burger McDonalds had better offerings.
       | 
       | Also the store locations tend to be in not so great spots
       | compared to their competitors, and their food offerings aren't
       | good enough for me to go out of my way. I've also never seen a
       | coupon book for A&W in my mail so that doesnt help.
       | 
       | Cherry to top it all off is the last time i went to one. The root
       | beer tasted bad. (pretty sure the machine was running out of
       | syrup)
        
       | 8K832d7tNmiQ wrote:
       | Alternative archive page, since the site is somehow broken in my
       | device, even with add-on disabled:
       | 
       | https://archive.is/fSrs5
        
         | thedrbrian wrote:
         | It did some weird redirects on my iPad
         | https://i.imgur.com/QUwApxZ.jpg
        
       | causi wrote:
       | Yeah, nah. It was about the quality, not the amount. McDonald's
       | successfully offered a 1/3 pound burger for over a decade until
       | price increases and health culture made it uneconomical.
        
       | system2 wrote:
       | Knowing how basic American people want their words to be, just
       | call it double-quarter pounder to compete. See, you doubled the
       | word, I know it is not exactly double but who cares.
        
         | jonny_eh wrote:
         | or "Quarter+ Pounder"
        
       | killion wrote:
       | As you scroll down the page the article starts filling your
       | browser history. If you scroll all the way down there will be at
       | least 12 items in your history with variations of the page title.
       | It appears to have something to do with how they populate the
       | content below the article.
        
       | mig39 wrote:
       | What's always interesting to me is that in Canada, A&W is almost
       | "premium" fast food. More expensive than the competition, and
       | generally better quality.
       | 
       | They also advertise a lot of "no hormones, grass-fed, cruelty-
       | free, local farmers" etc in their advertising. And they were the
       | first big company to sell the "Beyond Burger."
       | 
       | Seems really different than the American version.
        
         | ecf wrote:
         | I don't know of a single A&W around where I live that isn't an
         | addon to a more popular chain like KFC. It almost seems like
         | corporate wants it to be an afterthought in America with cheap
         | vibes attached to the brand.
         | 
         | Whatever their plan is, as you mentioned the brand doesn't
         | resonate well with Americans.
        
       | toolslive wrote:
       | There's this famous (in Belgium anyway) meme of a Belgian
       | football player that goes "What? 1/3th bonus? that's not enough!
       | I want 1/4th!" (Brilliant keeper though)
        
       | hellbannedguy wrote:
       | A & W needs to check-in on their franchises.
       | 
       | They have gone down hill in terms of quality, or at least tye one
       | near me.
       | 
       | I'm not a fast person food guy, but recently was hungry enough to
       | go into my local store.
       | 
       | $6 for a terrible burger. It was lunch so I guess they made a lot
       | expecting a rush, but this is the first time I thought about
       | returning food.
        
         | smolder wrote:
         | Someone opened an A&W in my hometown (in northeastern US) at
         | some point and it did terribly and closed. Pardon my highly
         | subjective rant, here, but I don't really understand what the
         | appeal is supposed to be. It seems like just another fast food
         | burger franchise, and one that's gone out of style decades ago.
         | It makes me think of root beer, possibly the least interesting
         | (but most sugary[0]) soft drink. I don't think third pound
         | burgers were their only marketing misstep.
         | 
         | [0] https://cdn1.sph.harvard.edu/wp-
         | content/uploads/sites/30/201...
        
           | rileymat2 wrote:
           | There are craft brewers doing terrific things with root beer,
           | it is certainly not the least interesting soft drink.
        
             | Geezus_42 wrote:
             | No, just the worst tasting...
        
             | smolder wrote:
             | Perhaps I should have called out A&W's version
             | specifically.
        
             | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
             | You're not seriously comparing craft root beer with the
             | HFCS-laden crap that comes in a 2-liter plastic bottle, are
             | you?
        
         | tylermac1 wrote:
         | Apparently there's a drastic difference in the quality of A&W
         | between the US and Canada.
         | 
         | From what I've heard A&W in Canada is a top-tier fast food
         | chain while it's barely hanging on in the States.
        
           | FractalParadigm wrote:
           | Here in Canada I would go so far to argue that A&W is on-par
           | with a lot of the 'fancier' burger joints, if not _better_.
           | It 's a burger I can't eat while driving because it's so
           | juicy it ends up ruining clothes. Their breakfast gives
           | diners a run for their money too imo, I can go in and order
           | the same kind of breakfast (eggs, home fries, bacon, sausage,
           | toast, coffee), all cooked with the same freshness with
           | generally the same ingredients, and be sitting down eating
           | within 5 minutes, where a diner you might be waiting 5
           | minutes for a waitress to bring you coffee and take an order
           | for your food to come out ~15-20 minutes later.
           | 
           | If A&W US took a few ideas from their sister company here up
           | north, they could seriously find themselves in contention for
           | the best fast food in the country
        
           | yissp wrote:
           | Yeah I was surprised by the above comment as a Canadian. I'd
           | definitely say A&W is one of the better quality fast-food
           | chains here.
        
             | tonyarkles wrote:
             | Me too! If I'm on a road trip and looking for a fast food
             | burger, I'm definitely looking for an A&W. McDonalds,
             | Burger King, and Wendy's can barely compete with how good
             | the food is at A&W.
             | 
             | Good to know that I shouldn't have the same expectation if
             | I try an A&W in the US!
        
           | stewx wrote:
           | A&W has the best fast-food burger in Canada, IMO, with the
           | Teen Burger.
        
           | hdhjebebeb wrote:
           | A&W Canada is kicking ass with plant-based offerings - their
           | veggie burger is delicious, and they're in every rest stop on
           | the highway so I end up eating at least one every road trip
        
         | dec0dedab0de wrote:
         | I have fond memories of flirting with the girls who worked at
         | the A&W at my local mall, and getting free hotdogs, in the 90s.
         | I didn't even realize they still existed let alone sold
         | burgers.
        
       | jefftk wrote:
       | A&W used two 3oz patties, and when McDonald's gave the "third
       | pounder" a try they used one 6oz patty. Both of these are 3/8lb,
       | which is 12% more than 1/3lb!
        
         | dtwest wrote:
         | Important to note that that is the weight before cooking, a
         | frozen patty will lose a lot of water weight in the cooking
         | process, so what you end up getting is not a full 6oz.
        
           | jefftk wrote:
           | Sure, but that applies equally to the quarter pounder, which
           | is 4oz before cookie.
        
       | lmilcin wrote:
       | I pretty much think it has nothing to do with americans sucking
       | at fractions.
       | 
       | Let's face it. Quarter-pounder sounds way better. What does even
       | third-pound mean? When I read the article title I haven't even
       | immediately recognized it as meaning one-third of a pound.
       | 
       | I am sure A&W would fare much better if they introduced "bigger
       | quarter-pounder".
        
         | drdec wrote:
         | But does quarter-pounder really sound better, or is it that
         | that has always been the name of a burger for us?
         | 
         | The same way The Beatles has always been the name of a band and
         | seems like a great name until you think about it and realize it
         | is the same quality pun name as is common to use for hair
         | salons.
        
       | racl101 wrote:
       | That's some Idiocracy shit right here.
       | 
       | Hollywood writers couldn't make this stuff up.
        
       | S_A_P wrote:
       | My last 2 years of high school my parents moved to an affluent
       | area where 70% of the kids had a 3.0 or better. I was an
       | uninterested student who admittedly didn't try very hard. However
       | I did take advanced math in high school. As a result I had to go
       | to community college and transfer into my alma mater in college.
       | (TAMU) when I got there I met a friend group from a rural border
       | town of Texas. Not only did they get academic scholarships they
       | were accepted as first year freshman. However they had little to
       | no grasp of pre-algebra and especially fractions. All of them
       | across the board had no idea how to add/subtract or find LCM.
       | 
       | I don't think these were dumb people. It did open my eyes to the
       | difference in education quality in the US. I say all of that to
       | say that while anecdotal seems plausible. One very distinct error
       | they made was to see a high number denominator as being bigger
       | than a lower number denominator.
        
         | mywittyname wrote:
         | Math is easy to forget because it often goes unused for years.
         | Pre-algebra was likely taught to these people early, maybe at
         | the age of 11 or 12. It isn't crazy to think they largely
         | forgot about this six years on.
         | 
         | Of course, it doesn't help that mathematics is treated as
         | second-class in standardized testing. You can hand-wave away a
         | low math score as long as you're avoiding a technical major,
         | unlike, say English (assuming America here).
         | 
         | I will admit to having to re-learn how logarithms work nearly
         | every time I use them. And each time, it's pretty obvious based
         | on the websites I see with instructions that logs are taught to
         | like sixth graders.
        
         | at_a_remove wrote:
         | I was a private tutor for quite some time, largely specializing
         | in math. I can tell you with complete sincerity that for _most_
         | students who have any math issues, fractions were their first
         | stumbling block, and it is typically left unaddressed and
         | festering. Going back, addressing the issue, working toward a
         | full unconscious mastery, then working forward again was the
         | often painful solution.
        
       | h2odragon wrote:
       | If you pile more inedible crap on my plate, it's still not a
       | bargain. I don't want it in the first place.
       | 
       | The only A&W I ever tried had taken over the old "Sonic"
       | location, and the comparison made Sonic positively glow in every
       | way. I think they stayed in operation 3 months or so; and they
       | were across the street from the town hospital. The hospital had
       | better food.
        
       | yarcob wrote:
       | Third-pound-burger just doesn't roll off the tongue like
       | quarterpounder.
        
       | marstall wrote:
       | this explains the "double quarter pounder
        
       | isamuel wrote:
       | "Third pounder" is also a bad name. "Quarter pounder" has a
       | pleasing rhythm and rhyme to it; "third pounder" doesn't. "Third"
       | is also easily scanned as "first, second, third," which "quarter"
       | is not.
       | 
       | Should have called it the "pebble pounder" (0.02 stone--sure, it
       | doesn't make sense really, but it sounds nice, doesn't it?) Or
       | the "fifteen'r" (150 grams is about a third of a pound).
        
         | thom wrote:
         | Would "Bigger-Burger" have been too on the nose?
        
           | aclissold wrote:
           | "Quarter" has a nice big plosive at the beginning, which
           | really gives it an impact. The "th" in third pounder makes it
           | sound kind of weak in comparison.
           | 
           | Bigger Burger is great! Aliterates, rhyming, and TWO
           | plosives!
        
           | Chris2048 wrote:
           | plus pounder?
        
           | mhb wrote:
           | Hundred and fifty gramer.
        
           | SamBam wrote:
           | "Monster burger," "Megaburger," anything at all, really.
           | Nothing's too on the nose in a country that happily ate large
           | pieces of fried chicken in place of the bread in the "Double
           | Down" sandwich.
           | 
           | I agree with GP that "Third pounder" was a terrible name.
        
           | smolder wrote:
           | I think this is probably the best of the alternatives
           | proposed in these comments.
        
         | jallen_dot_dev wrote:
         | You're suggesting they should have introduced metric units
         | (grams) to an American audience or assume they'd recognize
         | stone as a measure of weight?
        
         | tejohnso wrote:
         | I read it as the third in the series of "pounder" burgers,
         | which just left me completely confused. I kept trying to recall
         | what the first two "pounder" burgers were, which got in the way
         | of thinking of it as a fraction.
         | 
         | I would have preferred "quarter and twelfth", advertised with a
         | "I'll take an extra twelfth!" catch phrase :)
        
         | m12k wrote:
         | "Quarter pounder" sounds like something eaten by a quarterback.
         | "Third pounder" sounds like something eaten by the guy that
         | always comes in third place.
        
           | pitspotter2 wrote:
           | >always comes in third place.
           | 
           | Yes. 'Third' means 1/3 but also place number three. Whereas
           | 'quarter' means 1/4 but not 'forth'.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | Forth is not a number, so why would quater or 1/4 ever mean
             | 'forth'? Fourth is probably the word you're looking for.
        
               | treesknees wrote:
               | >quater
               | 
               | Quater is not a unit (or a word) so why would it ever
               | mean 'fourth'? Quarter is probably the word you're
               | looking for.
        
               | pitspotter2 wrote:
               | I did find an obscure prefix:
               | 
               | https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/quater-
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | One is a typo, the other is using the wrong word.
        
               | djur wrote:
               | "Forth" is just as easy a typo for "fourth" as "quater"
               | is for "quarter". It's uncharitable to assume someone is
               | using the wrong word when it's just as likely that they
               | made a typo or misspelled the correct word.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | Except that's not what happened if you read the other
               | comments
        
               | pitspotter2 wrote:
               | Hey, you're correct. I meant 'fourth'. I also have
               | problems with the word versions of 12th and 40th! By the
               | way, the prefix 'quater-' means _multiply_ by four.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | quarter means divide by 4. quadruple means to multiply by
               | 4.
        
               | thugthrasher wrote:
               | Quater also means multiply by 4. I think they were
               | pointing out that in the same post where you were
               | criticizing them for what was pretty clearly a typo
               | ("forth" instead of "fourth") you also made a typo
               | ("quater" instead of "quarter") that changed the meaning.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | >Quater also means multiply by 4.
               | 
               | Are you making the same typo or using a new word here?
               | Let's get past the typo.
               | 
               | I have never seen the word quarter used to mean multiply
               | by 4. If I was told to quarter something, I would divide
               | it into fourths. When/where were you taught or come to
               | understand that quarter means to multiply. If you quarter
               | something, you went from one item to four items. Is that
               | your understanding of multiplying? You didn't go to 4
               | items though you went to four 1/4 items.
               | 
               | I just have never in my experience seen quarter mean
               | multiply by 4. If there's something to be learned, I'm up
               | for learning it.
        
               | jenseng wrote:
               | Nobody said "quarter" means multiply by 4. They said
               | "quater" means multiply by 4, which it essentially does
               | [1]. In addition to being a real word, it's also a
               | prefix, e.g. "quaternary" means fourth in order.
               | 
               | You made a typo (quater) in correcting someone's else's
               | typo (forth). Several people have pointed out the irony
               | and have patiently tried to teach you a new word, but you
               | seem to keep reading past all of them without
               | comprehending -\\_(tsu)_/-
               | 
               | [1] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/quater
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | tokai wrote:
           | >sounds like something eaten by a quarterback
           | 
           | More like the quarterbacks boyfriend.
        
             | eigengrau5150 wrote:
             | This doesn't deserve the downvotes. Too many nerds taking
             | themselves and the internet too damn seriously, I guess.
        
         | ahallock wrote:
         | Agree. Third pounder does not exactly roll off the tongue.
        
         | solatic wrote:
         | "pebble" sounds small to the American ear.
         | 
         | More likely their product teams would have done better with a
         | name that didn't refer to the portion size.
        
           | geoduck14 wrote:
           | >More likely their product teams would have done better with
           | a name that didn't refer to the portion size.
           | 
           | I propose: The PILE OF MEAT burger
           | 
           | The BIG PILE OF MEAT burger
           | 
           | The REALLY BIG PILE OF MEAT burger
        
             | nemo44x wrote:
             | I think it was the motivation behind the "Thick Burger"
             | from Carls Jr.
        
             | OneEyedRobot wrote:
             | The GIANT PILE OF CHEAP-ASS MEAT BURGER
        
               | AniseAbyss wrote:
               | Uch I'm not a vegetarian or some health freak but the
               | amount of meat they put in some dishes... It just
               | completely overwhelms the taste. And at the risk of
               | sounding like an eco warrior terrorist I think meat is
               | too cheap if you can put an entire sausage on a EUR7
               | pizza. There is an environmental cost that isn't priced
               | in- and a health cost too.
        
             | peanut_worm wrote:
             | Would you like another EXTRA BIG ASS FRIES
        
             | dr_dshiv wrote:
             | Totally agree with the approach. Here, but with fewer
             | letters.
             | 
             | BURGER
             | 
             | FAT BURGER
             | 
             | BIG FAT BURGER
             | 
             | GINORMOUSLYUGE BIG FAT BURGER
             | 
             | (To encourage association of more letters more meat)
        
             | kthejoker2 wrote:
             | You laugh, but Texas already has Big Gas Burger (get it?),
             | and yeah, it's 1/3 pound.
        
         | bserge wrote:
         | Quarter double pounder, Triple pounder?
        
         | nanis wrote:
         | I hadn't heard the phrase "quarter pounder" before I came to
         | the U.S. ... Heck we'd had McDonalds for a only a few years. I
         | think there may have been at most a handful of locations
         | through most of that time.
         | 
         | So, one night, we go to McDonalds and I see "quarter pounder"
         | on the menu. It just sounds big ... waaaaayyy bigger than 113
         | grams (I have no problems converting among different units).
         | But, subconsciously, I had expected something that would take
         | some effort to eat.
         | 
         | I don't think I've had another one in the intervening decades.
        
           | m_mueller wrote:
           | strange, I find the "Royale" here still the best on their
           | menu if it wasn't for the no-gluten options I nowadays prefer
           | for digestive reasons. very glad they have those in
           | Switzerland btw., their burger quality here is remarkably
           | consistent and decent IMO.
        
           | nielsbot wrote:
           | "The Royale with Cheese"
        
             | nemo44x wrote:
             | What do they call a Big Mac?
        
               | chihuahua wrote:
               | Le Big Mac
        
               | nemo44x wrote:
               | Le Big Mac! Hahahaha. What do they call a Whopper?
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote:
       | > Alfred Taubman, who owned A&W at the time, wrote about the
       | confusion in his book Threshold Resistance:
       | 
       | This seems like one of those things that sounds like it is true
       | but is just too convenient.
       | 
       | It is really convenient to put out a story about how Americans
       | are bad at fractions.
       | 
       | In addition, the story originally came from a book the guy that
       | owned A&W wrote. Thus he would have incentive both to create a
       | good story and to deflect blame from himself to American
       | stupidity.
       | 
       | Finally, Americans use the imperial system with cups, etc and
       | there are always a ton of fractions like 1/3, 1/4 in recipes. I
       | bet most American households have measuring cups of 1/3 and 1/4
       | cup in size and surely know that the 1/3 cup is bigger than the
       | 1/4 cup.
       | 
       | For me this story just seems to good to be true and I would take
       | it with a huge (1/3 pound) grain of salt.
        
         | jsight wrote:
         | Yeah, especially since the study wasn't even seeking to
         | determine a size comparison. It sounds like they took some
         | random anecdotes from respondents and read the wrong things
         | into them.
         | 
         | If you wanted to find out the actual incidence of this
         | confusion, you'd want a test structured in a really different
         | way from this.
        
         | toyg wrote:
         | _> I bet most American households have measuring cups_
         | 
         | You are betting that most Americans _cook often_ and _cook
         | using written recipes_. That 's a very bold assumption.
         | 
         | I expect most people who cook a lot just know "how much is
         | enough", and people who don't cook a lot, well, they just don't
         | cook much if at all. This is compounded by the story being
         | about customers of fast-food joints, who likely fall
         | disproportionately in the "don't cook at all" camp.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | >I expect most people who cook a lot just know "how much is
           | enough",
           | 
           | It depends on what one is making of course, but most people
           | who cook (and, especially, bake) a lot absolutely measure
           | things.
        
             | toast0 wrote:
             | Baking often requires decent precision, but stovetop
             | cooking is more foregiving with ingredient mixes,
             | especially if you taste as you go. Some parts of baking are
             | kind of like that too, sometimes you know when you've added
             | enough flour because of how the dough changes and that may
             | not be a specific amount, and you'll know when you've done
             | enough mixing or beating when things change, not by a
             | specific duration, but other items you do need to be
             | specific.
        
           | sixothree wrote:
           | Sounds like you're extrapolating his argument. He said most
           | Americans have measuring cups. I would agree with this to be
           | true. How many people have you met that don't have measuring
           | cups?
           | 
           | This article is a distraction from what really happened here
           | - insanely bad marketing. Third pounder is a terrible name
           | for a burger. It's derivative and implies gluttony.
        
             | toyg wrote:
             | _> How many people have you met that don't have measuring
             | cups?_
             | 
             | I have measuring cups. Do I actually ever use them? No.
             | Would that make me unfamiliar with their size, if I weren't
             | decent at math? Probably.
        
             | horsawlarway wrote:
             | Even outside of the marketing - In the US A&W is
             | essentially considered off-brand fast food. They're already
             | starting from the position of bad branding, and then using
             | an _absolutely_ terrible name for a burger.
        
       | gorpomon wrote:
       | Is this is a sad illustration of American's numerical illiteracy?
       | Or is this just another argument for doing away with fractions
       | and using a decimal system?
       | 
       | This anecdote is a common one to share when the intent is to
       | bemoan the intelligence or decline of America, but I am starting
       | to think there's more to this story.
       | 
       | Consider a few points:
       | 
       | First off-- being bad at math doesn't mean a general lack of
       | intelligence. I've met plenty of college educated, liberal minded
       | people who openly say that math is their weakness. I've met
       | people with masters degrees who struggle with math. The American
       | student loan crisis should be evidence enough that even college
       | educated people struggle with math.
       | 
       | Second-- the decision to buy a burger is not one that is often
       | carefully measured and considered. It's more of a "do I pull off
       | this highway right now to get this burger?" and in that moment,
       | you're acting more on instinct that rationality. So in that
       | moment yes, 1/3 < 1/4, it's not ideal but our brain makes a lot
       | of other more serious fallacies.
       | 
       | Third-- does anyone here really doubt that if you explained to
       | those focus groups that 1/3 is larger than 1/4 they still
       | wouldn't understand? I don't. I'm sure those focus groups quickly
       | did understand, but the conclusion drawn was that unless it was
       | explained to the broader public, everyone would make the same
       | incorrect initial assumption.
       | 
       | Fourth-- let's just be honest, fractions are confusing. 1/3 > 1/4
       | is confusing to read and understand quickly. I still can make
       | this mistake from time to time. In the special case of 1/4 vs 1/3
       | even text is confusing. "Quarter pounder" just sounds larger than
       | "third pounder", "quarter" is a heftier word. If you don't think
       | sound informs meaning, why do so many sports cars have "Z" in
       | their model name instead of "K"? The only way this would be
       | really clear is if McDonalds was calling it a ".25 pounder" and
       | then A&W could launch a ".33 pounder"
       | 
       | In my opinion, wielding this anecdote as an example about the sad
       | state of anything, people, intelligence, America, etc, is ill-
       | informed. If it's unfortunate that American's often confuse
       | fractions, it's even more unfortunate that the confusion is
       | easily turned into a powerful meme that doesn't stand up to
       | scrutiny.
        
         | coffeedan wrote:
         | If we're going to do away with fractions, can we also fix time?
         | What kind of insanity makes this true?
         | 
         | 12am < 10am < 11 am
        
           | lou1306 wrote:
           | It's technically correct, since am=ante meridiem="before
           | noon". And midnight, of course, comes before noon. You can
           | call it 0am, but then you'd have to call noon 0pm which is
           | weird. Plus, remember most analog watches in the world have a
           | big "12" on top.
           | 
           | The obvious fix would be switching to 24hr.
        
             | esrauch wrote:
             | There's no reason you have to kill the 12. It would work to
             | just have 1:00 be the first hour of the day, have the day
             | be 1:00-12:59am followed by the same as pm. 1:00pm is
             | "meridiem". No change to analog watches.
             | 
             | Obviously there's zero chance of switching to that at this
             | point from a pragmatic point of view but it does just work
             | out fine.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | Given an AM/PM 12 hour system, unless it's obvious from
               | context, the best thing is usually to write noon or
               | midnight. 12am and 12pm in isolation can absolutely be
               | confused. Even if I know the convention, I don't know if
               | the person writing 12am does.
        
           | midasuni wrote:
           | What does am mean?
           | 
           | It's currently 1300, an hour ago was 1200, two hours was 1100
        
           | numpad0 wrote:
           | Yeah but it's 2021/09/14 21:10 where I am, perfectly big
           | endian for me
        
         | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
         | I'm convinced that most people who think they are bad at math
         | only think that because math is typically taught in a way that
         | makes it seem tedious and useless.
        
           | madmax96 wrote:
           | Not only that, but studying math takes discipline,
           | commitment, and practice. You can't passively learn math. To
           | a certain extent, mathematical illiteracy is encouraged in
           | society by the standard trope "I'm bad at math." Almost
           | everyone is bad at math. The difference is that some people
           | understood math is the best way to precisely understand the
           | world and worked to understand it.
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | I think that's more like it. There have been many attempts
             | to reform math curricula over the years and you still end
             | up with a decent percentage of (at least sometimes
             | otherwise intelligent) students who shrug their shoulders,
             | grit their teeth, and resign themselves to being "bad at
             | math."
             | 
             | Mind you, I also think there are differences in natural
             | aptitude and the degree to wich on connects with the
             | subject. Speaking for myself, I mostly did well through
             | high school math--geometry proofs less so--but mostly just
             | got by on the more advanced math I needed for an
             | engineering degree.
             | 
             | (Then I tutored a group of students in business school who
             | basically handle high school level algebra.)
        
         | spywaregorilla wrote:
         | Is this really an American specific issue? Do people not see
         | problematic levels of innumeracy in other countries among the
         | poor? It's not exactly obvious to observe if you're not waist
         | deep in it. If you're in a moderately well off environment the
         | idea that someone can't do fractions is pretty absurd.
         | 
         | > This anecdote is a common one to share when the intent is to
         | bemoan the intelligence or decline of America, but I am
         | starting to think there's more to this story.
         | 
         | No. Absolutely not. The lowest common denominator of
         | intelligence should not define our approach to mathematical
         | syntax. Fractions are important.
        
         | dwighttk wrote:
         | > another argument for doing away with fractions and using a
         | decimal system
         | 
         | so what? you are imagining a law that says you must name your
         | food in decimals, not fractions? What does "doing away with
         | fractions" mean in your imagination?
        
         | jrootabega wrote:
         | I think this is more of an entertaining fable than factual and
         | analytical.
        
         | smeej wrote:
         | I do doubt that people would understand even once it was
         | explained.
         | 
         | I've seen way too many people's faces glaze over immediately as
         | soon as a number enters the conversation.
        
           | sethammons wrote:
           | "Would you rather get 1 for every 3 dollars given away, or 1
           | for every 10? 1/3 is more than 1/10."
        
       | dustintrex wrote:
       | Should've called it a Royale with Cheese.
        
       | tristor wrote:
       | I don't know how many people on HN have even been in an A&W since
       | they've been dying for more than a decade and closing franchises,
       | but I have. The store wasn't clean, the food was overly greasy
       | but not in a good way, and they didn't properly season the fries.
       | I'm not really a fan of McDonald's, but one thing I'll give
       | McDonald's is that I've rarely been in a store that's dirty, and
       | the food is the same whether I'm in downtown NYC or in Tulsa,
       | Oklahoma, so I know exactly what I'm going to get, not wondering
       | when the last time was that they changed the fry oil or whether
       | they ran out of salt.
       | 
       | When it comes to fast food, the order of importance is pretty
       | much: 1. Consistent, 2. Fast, 3. Cheap, 4. Quality. A&W tried to
       | compete on quality and failed because the quality wasn't there,
       | first of all, and because they failed to be consistent, fast, and
       | cheap, which are more important. McDonald's is the absolute best
       | at #1. In the US, Wendy's is superior to McDonald's for a
       | nationwide chain in quality, but the consistency is more
       | variable, so McDonald's rules. Burger King is faster and cheaper,
       | but the consistency is variable, so McDonald's rules. McDonald's
       | understands the ordering of priorities here, and so they win,
       | it's that simple.
       | 
       | McDonald's understands that not everyone will like McDonald's but
       | that almost nobody finds it outright objectionable and many
       | people love it. As long as they keep doing the same thing in
       | every single store or franchise across the country, McDonald's is
       | always a safe choice for stopping into the drive-thru due to that
       | consistency.
       | 
       | A&W failed with the third-pounder because they had bad marketing
       | and because they failed to understand the marketplace to achieve
       | product-market fit, not because Americans are too dumb to
       | understand fractions. I'm sure there's /some people/ who don't
       | understand fractions, but the vast majority of people I've met
       | understand fractions and use them in their daily life...
        
         | clon wrote:
         | > almost nobody finds it outright objectionable
         | 
         | Correction: .. among people that are into eating junk food
         | 
         | I can assure you there are many many people that would not
         | touch Mickey-D, nor Wendy's, nor Burger King.
        
           | mark-r wrote:
           | I know a guy who hates McDonalds and Burger King, but loves
           | Wendy's. There's no universal rule that applies to everybody.
        
           | throwawayboise wrote:
           | The burgers aren't really much different from what most
           | people would make at home. It's decent quality beef on a
           | white-bread bun.
           | 
           | The fries and the sugary drinks are the real junk.
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | I guess I'm not most people. But if I grill a burger, it's
             | thicker and juicier, is on a better bun of some sort, and I
             | actually like it. Not that I've eaten one in years but fast
             | food burgers are pretty awful in my opinion generally. (The
             | higher end fast casual places, on the other hand, I quite
             | like now and then--usually when traveling.)
        
               | throwawayboise wrote:
               | They are, because they have to be cooked to death to
               | reduce any chance of food-bourne pathogens. If you took a
               | McDonald's quarter pounder beef patty and cooked or
               | grilled it at home to medium doneness it would be as good
               | as the same thing made with supermarket ground beef.
        
               | wavefunction wrote:
               | I worked the grill at McDonalds for a while (admittedly
               | two decades ago) and I disagree. They were frozen when
               | retrieved for cooking and I just don't think those frozen
               | pucks compare to fresher ground chuck hamburgers that
               | occasionally I buy at the grocers.
        
               | roothog wrote:
               | McD switched to fresh beef for the quarter pounders in
               | 2018.
               | 
               | https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/13/business/mcdonalds-marion-
               | gro...
        
             | jcranberry wrote:
             | I've never seen anyone make a 1/10th pound burger patty at
             | home.
        
           | philwelch wrote:
           | https://www.theonion.com/area-man-constantly-mentioning-
           | he-d...
        
             | clon wrote:
             | That's actually very witty. I do realise though that eating
             | good quality food is not a choice that everyone is free
             | make in the US. Not when a decent carrot costs the same as
             | a cheeseburger down the road [1]
             | 
             | [1] https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20180222-how-can-
             | a-fast...
        
           | j7ake wrote:
           | If they cut up the Big Mac into bite sized mini burgers
           | skewered by a long toothpick I bet many would be fooled.
        
             | rawling wrote:
             | I'm pretty sure I saw that video about a decade ago...
        
           | LanceH wrote:
           | Good for you.
        
         | phkahler wrote:
         | >> A&W failed with the third-pounder because they had bad
         | marketing and because they failed to understand the marketplace
         | to achieve product-market fit,
         | 
         | Right.
         | 
         | >> not because Americans are too dumb to understand fractions.
         | 
         | Wrong. They did research and found that to be a significant
         | factor.
         | 
         | I'm sure there's /some people/ who don't understand fractions,
         | but the vast majority of people I've met understand fractions
         | and use them in their daily life...
         | 
         | That's what I thought years ago when I first heard about this,
         | but you might need to get out into other parts of the world. I
         | see at least 2 kinds of people who will make the mistake 1)
         | People with no math ability (these really do exist) and 2)
         | People who could easily see the difference if they thought
         | about it even a little bit, but 3 vs 4 is smaller at first
         | glance and they never bothered to "think" about it. There are a
         | lot of the second kind of people too. Advertising doesn't
         | usually need people to think, in fact they usually don't want
         | you to do that.
        
           | throw8383833jj wrote:
           | If you're an engineer, this will surprise you. but, the vast
           | majority of people don't know how to normalize data or even
           | why you'd do it in the first place. cost of a burger of 1/3
           | lbs vs cost of a burger over 1/4 lbs, ( i don't mean to sound
           | insulting) but the fact is: that's waaayyyy to much thinking
           | for most people (it just doesn't come naturally for people to
           | think like that). Personally, I normalize nuritional data on
           | a per 2000 calorie basis. I've even had a doctor question
           | this, until I explained the concept of normalization. It's
           | just not how non engineers/ non scientists are accustomed to
           | thinking.
        
           | TillE wrote:
           | From the article: "More than half of the participants in the
           | Yankelovich focus groups questioned the price of our burger."
           | 
           | They "did research" which found that a handful of people
           | didn't understand fractions, in an unusual group social
           | setting which can easily amplify oddball beliefs if other
           | participants aren't 100% confident.
           | 
           | You can do general polling of a question like this, which
           | will give you actual serious data about whether Americans
           | understand fractions.
        
           | rdtwo wrote:
           | The problem with comparing 1/3 to 1/4 is that it's not
           | immediately apparent how much more. I have to do fraction
           | math to figure out how much more and really 1/12th more isn't
           | exactly meaningful. All of that has to happen in the
           | consciousness brain so it's not effective marketing
        
             | feoren wrote:
             | But it's not a 1/12th more, it's 1/3 more. 1/3 is 33% more
             | than 1/4.
        
               | mb7733 wrote:
               | It's a 1/12th of a pound more.
        
               | jcelerier wrote:
               | "1/3 to 1/4 is [...] how much more", as is, is ambiguous:
               | on some cultures, "how much more" may depend on the local
               | field of reference (1/3), and on others on the global one
               | (1)
        
               | 6nf wrote:
               | Even HN people struggle with fractions evidently!
        
               | foofoo55 wrote:
               | A&W should have just called it the "Quarter-plus
               | pounder".
        
           | noir_lord wrote:
           | It's been my observation that most of the time most people
           | simply don't think.
           | 
           | I'm not super smart (nor do I in anyway claim to be) but
           | people often consider me to be smart when really it's all
           | down to two things, I think about things other people don't
           | consider and I have endless curiosity about almost
           | everything, I'm an eternal 5 year old constantly asking
           | _why_.
        
           | yissp wrote:
           | A similar thing to 2) is probably the reason seemingly every
           | product is priced $x.99. Everyone is probably aware that's
           | basically the same as $(x + 1).00 but when you're on auto-
           | pilot maybe you still feel like the former is a meaningfully
           | better deal. I mean, it must work given how common the
           | practice is.
        
         | annoyingnoob wrote:
         | There has not been an A&W where I live in decades.
        
         | protomyth wrote:
         | The A&W in Albany, MN was well kept last time I was there. Not
         | a bad place to stop on a trip down I94.
        
         | ilamont wrote:
         | > McDonald's understands that not everyone will like McDonald's
         | but that almost nobody finds it outright objectionable and many
         | people love it. As long as they keep doing the same thing in
         | every single store or franchise across the country, McDonald's
         | is always a safe choice for stopping into the drive-thru due to
         | that consistency.
         | 
         | This is the same approach taken by mass-market U.S. beers. The
         | WSJ had an article about this in 2006:
         | 
         |  _Sitting in the wood-paneled "corporate tasting room" of
         | Anheuser-Busch Cos.' headquarters here, August Busch III
         | surveyed five recently thawed cans of Budweiser beer,
         | representing a quarter of a century of beer history. In the
         | early 1980s, the Anheuser chairman ordered that freshly brewed
         | cans of Budweiser and Bud Light be cryogenically frozen, using
         | technology typically employed in preserving human tissue.
         | 
         | "We wanted to make damn sure we would have the same beer 20
         | years down the road," said Mr. Busch, 68 years old ... For
         | decades, Anheuser's aim was to develop a beer that would sell
         | across America, one inoffensive enough to appeal to the
         | nation's varied palate._
         | 
         | The article also noted that the references copies showed a
         | gradual decline in hoppiness over the years to make the flavor
         | more middle of the road and inoffensive ... but niche brewers
         | were rising up and about to eat AB's lunch.
         | 
         | https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB114601602889736048
        
         | browningstreet wrote:
         | I don't think A&W gets thought of the way McDonald's or In n
         | Out or other chains do. It just doesn't have the mindshare.
         | 
         | But the McDonald's where I live are all disasters, and the one
         | A&W we had (until recently, when it got replaced by a new VW
         | dealership) was really nice, with table service and frosty
         | mugs.
        
         | duxup wrote:
         | Yeah this is similar to the "Dominoes taking off with new tech"
         | articles where they cite growth and some changes.
         | 
         | Really though Dominoes changed their recipe a and it doesn't
         | taste like garbage anymore and folks noticed.
         | 
         | I have had similar experiences with A&W franchises being
         | inconsistent / dirty stores, etc.
        
         | chasd00 wrote:
         | The same holds for the large brewing companies. I toured the
         | Budweiser plant in Ft. Collins once, one of the things they
         | were very proud of is the fact that no matter where or when you
         | buy a Budweiser it tastes like a Budweiser. It's no small
         | accomplishment, i can taste the differences between batches
         | with the small brewery stuff i like.
        
           | tristor wrote:
           | You are so right about AB's consistency. I home-brew and am a
           | certified cicerone. One of the absolutely hardest things to
           | do in brewing is having consistency from batch to batch. One
           | of the things that AB has been able to do to help here is
           | develop innovative food chemistry processes to test
           | ingredients prior to use and a chemical understanding of all
           | the flavor compounds in their product so they can blend
           | different brew batches together prior to packaging to achieve
           | the same ratios of flavoring compounds. Both of which are
           | processes largely unavailable to smaller breweries and home
           | brewers.
           | 
           | Consistency in your product is crucial in the food and
           | beverage industry, because a buyer needs to know what they're
           | getting. If you've already successfully sold them on your
           | product, the repeat sale is only going to happen if they can
           | be assured they're going to get the same thing they liked the
           | first time. Nobody in the industry understands the importance
           | of consistency better than Anheuser-Busch. McDonald's is
           | right there with them on understanding this. Food and
           | beverages are products like anything else, and just like with
           | any product, once you achieve product-market fit, it's
           | important not to make changes that would eliminate or chip
           | away at the fit you have with your customer base.
        
             | leetcrew wrote:
             | I'm reminded of the (perhaps apocryphal) story of how
             | starbucks overroasts its coffee beans to achieve a
             | consistent taste despite having multiple sources for beans
             | (necessary due to its scale). the implication being that
             | they sacrifice the average quality of the finished product
             | to reduce variance.
             | 
             | is there a similar tradeoff in brewing? I do notice fairly
             | obvious differences batch-to-batch in microbrews, but I
             | would still prefer the worst batches of my favorite local
             | beers to any AB product I can think of. are they trading
             | away best/average taste for consistency, or is it more a
             | function of the price point (microbrews being quite a bit
             | more expensive)?
        
               | throwawayboise wrote:
               | Yeah that's true, the Starbucks "house" beans they use in
               | their stores are nearly soot, and the coffee tastes like
               | it.
        
               | tristor wrote:
               | From what I've seen, the brewers at AB are world-class,
               | and they have a very specific and longstanding flavor
               | profile they target. I happen to also not be a fan of
               | Budweiser, but it's been the same for decades and has a
               | very loyal following. They are not brewing to a price
               | point, they spend more on process and verification than
               | any microbrewery to ensure that consistency, although
               | they have introduced the use of adjunct brewing (rice) to
               | make the materials cost fit their price point, and they
               | were able to do it without changing the resulting product
               | taste.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | > I'm reminded of the (perhaps apocryphal) story of how
               | starbucks overroasts its coffee beans to achieve a
               | consistent taste despite having multiple sources for
               | beans (necessary due to its scale). the implication being
               | that they sacrifice the average quality of the finished
               | product to reduce variance.
               | 
               | The version I'd heard was people associate the ashy taste
               | and dark roast with higher caffeine, even though it's the
               | opposite.
        
             | basseq wrote:
             | There's the apocryphal[1] story about the (Trappist?
             | Belgian?) brewer-monk who, when asked about his favorite
             | beer, answered "Budweiser" because of the consistency over
             | millions of gallons.
             | 
             | The linked[1] article below also highlights that "quality
             | light beers are incredibly difficult to brew". So here you
             | have Budweiser/AB excelling on two fronts: a difficult brew
             | and incredible consistency.
             | 
             | [1]
             | https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/11/light-
             | bee...
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | conductr wrote:
         | > The store wasn't clean, the food was overly greasy but not in
         | a good way, and they didn't properly season the fries.
         | 
         | When they expanded the "new concept" in Texas, guessing
         | 90s-00s, they were often coupled together with a Long John
         | Silvers and they obviously shared the same fryer because I
         | could taste seafood with the fries. If I order fried seafood
         | that's fine I suppose, but not when I'm ordering a burger and
         | fries for a meal from A&W which has no seafood (AFAIK). I think
         | I tried it twice in total and swore it off. All to say, when it
         | comes to consistency, they weren't even trying.
        
           | cogman10 wrote:
           | Yeah, I've found A&W to be all over the board in terms of
           | quality.
           | 
           | Also, nothing beats whataburger :D. IDK why it's confined to
           | the southern states.
        
             | wavefunction wrote:
             | Whataburger was recently purchased by a Chicago-based
             | private equity firm so you may get your wish for an
             | expansion.
        
               | conductr wrote:
               | FWIW Shipley Donuts recently got bought by PE too. I
               | talked to them as a then potential franchisee and they
               | have pretty big growth plans. If you're curious, it
               | wasn't right fit for me now that PE is involved. I was
               | interested as a casual absentee owner, but their growth
               | plan doesn't really have much room for that anymore.
        
             | conductr wrote:
             | As a Texan I'm obligated to concur on whataburger however
             | if I'm being truthful their consistency is all over the map
             | too. I'm pretty sure it's a result of store level execution
             | and management. Oddly enough, I find the best ones are
             | those located in pit stop towns between the major cities.
             | They get enough traffic to stay fresh, they probably have
             | low turnover, and the manager might be making a career of
             | it. That how I rationalize it anyhow.
        
           | newman8r wrote:
           | I'm very sensitive to any seafood taste as well, and If I
           | ever detect it in something that's not seafood, I'll just
           | instantly throw the meal away. I'll make an exception for
           | caesar dressing.
           | 
           | I like seafood too, just not in my onion rings.
        
         | sergers wrote:
         | completely different experience in canada.
         | 
         | all the A&W restaurants are clean and courteous, amazed at the
         | employees commitment at a probably min wage job.
         | 
         | 1)you are greeted at the door as you enter, open the door as
         | you come and go for you.
         | 
         | 2)if you are eating indoors, they will bring the food to you
         | like a sit down restaurant (just you paying up front).
         | 
         | 3)they come by and ask about refills, or ordering any other
         | items
         | 
         | 4)come by and offer treats.
         | 
         | 5)all the food is made to order.
         | 
         | 6)the quality is good, hormone free quality beef.
         | 
         | my understanding canadian AW is operated by a diff company than
         | US AW, so maybe different policies and practices
        
         | subsubzero wrote:
         | 100% agree, people do not factor in consistency when it comes
         | to fast food, McDonald's is the king of consistency its why
         | they have expanded so fast around the world, also they are a
         | clean restaurant. My expectation in 20 years is mcdonald's to
         | own the burger chain experience globally, I expect Carls
         | Jr.(hardees) Wendys, and A&W to not be around by then.
        
         | oceanghost wrote:
         | This rings true to me. I used to live next to an A&W-- I went
         | there exactly once, absolutely hated it and never went back.
        
         | MBCook wrote:
         | The last time I was in an A&W was most of a decade ago. All I
         | wanted was a root beer.
         | 
         | They were out.
         | 
         | Of A&W root beer.
         | 
         | I haven't been back.
        
           | tk75x wrote:
           | Well yeah, it's the thing in their name and therefore must be
           | the most popular item.
        
             | MBCook wrote:
             | Honestly, the store is really rundown and I almost never
             | see anyone at it. I'm amazed they were out of anything.
        
               | singingboyo wrote:
               | I went into a place known for smoothies/slushes a few
               | months ago. They were out of the frozen yogurt they use
               | in something like half of them. And then tried to sub
               | with almond milk or something.
               | 
               | Some places just can't manage stocking properly, I guess.
        
               | mark-r wrote:
               | There was a sub sandwich place near the University I went
               | to. Went in one day and was told they were out of bread.
               | I figured that meant they were really in trouble,
               | probably fell behind on paying for supplies.
        
               | MBCook wrote:
               | If almost no one ever comes to your restaurant, I imagine
               | it's pretty hard to hire/pay to hire a good manager who
               | would prevent something like that from happening.
        
         | yardie wrote:
         | There is room for variation in consistency. Like McDonald's
         | abroad is not the same in every country. The menu in India is
         | primarily chicken-based. Muslim countries don't even carry a
         | bacon option. The order of importance also varies by region.
         | McDonald's in France has consistently been the best fast food
         | I've ever had. Me and my 20-something coworkers would regularly
         | go while older, upper-management would make fun of us and head
         | over to pricier brasseries for lunch. The complained about the
         | service while we were in and out in 10mins.
         | 
         | Burger King left France as an abject failure 20 years and re-
         | arrived a few years. What changed? Different marketing and
         | leadership. Trying less to be an American company abroad and
         | more of French fast food company that happens to be American.
        
           | tristor wrote:
           | I wouldn't necessarily call that variation in consistency,
           | but it's interesting you bring up the regional variations at
           | McDonald's (Pizza Hut is one that has some /very/ interesting
           | regional variations as well). This is something that can
           | actually be jarring to Americans when they travel abroad, so
           | much so that it's become something of a meme in travel
           | communities for first-time travelers.
           | 
           | I think it's important to understand that it's pretty rare
           | for a business to fail in its home market and succeed
           | elsewhere, so winning in the home market first is important.
           | A&W's home market and McDonald's home market is the US, and
           | in the US McDonald's is /extremely/ consistent nationwide.
           | It's probably the most consistent restaurant in any category.
        
           | teakettle42 wrote:
           | > Muslim countries don't even carry a bacon option.
           | 
           | That's ... minor.
           | 
           | I ate at a McDonalds in Marrakech (Morocco), and language and
           | minor local menu variations aside, the food and experience
           | was as close to quintessential as any McDonalds I've visited
           | in the elsewhere in the world -- including, of course, the
           | US.
        
         | Zanni wrote:
         | This is especially true overseas. I call McDonald's "American
         | Embassies." When I'm traveling and stressed, tired, hungry and
         | definitely not in the mood for an adventure, I can count on
         | McDonald's to have a menu I can order off, whether I know the
         | language or not, for the food to be satisfying and safe, for
         | the prices to be predictable, for the restaurant to be clean
         | and for the bathrooms to have toilet paper.
        
         | salamandersauce wrote:
         | I have. Here in Canada I'm pretty sure A&W is still growing and
         | doing well. It's very different from the US version from what
         | I've heard. It's one of the better fast food chains IMO,
         | especially of the larger ones. Definitely have the best onion
         | rings.
        
           | Kluny wrote:
           | Canadian a&w is a totally different beast from the American
           | franchise, related in name only, and my favorite fast food by
           | a long way.
        
           | stewjacks wrote:
           | A&W Canada is a different company entirely
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A%26W_(Canada)
        
             | 3pt14159 wrote:
             | Not the person you're replying to, just a similarly
             | perplexed Canadian. They're the only fast food joint I go
             | to here in Canada when I'm not traveling (and, really,
             | other than traveling that's maybe 5 to 10 times a year) but
             | their quality here is quite high for the category and
             | price.
        
               | lhorie wrote:
               | I've found that Toronto has a bigger appetite (pun not
               | intended) for higher quality "fast food". Quiznos and
               | craft burger joints also come to mind.
        
         | lostapathy wrote:
         | Most of the mcdonald's experience is pretty consistent - but
         | they need to figure out the bun situation. All too often I get
         | a burger with a nasty, stale bun and it's just gross.
         | 
         | Usually when I'm getting drive-through on a road trip so I
         | can't even go back and complain about it.
        
         | darepublic wrote:
         | I sometimes go to A&W in Toronto Canada, and here I would say
         | its the opposite - A&W is generally pretty reliable and
         | consistent in quality across its locations whereas Mcdonalds
         | can vary quite a bit based on time and location.
         | 
         | Poeple's attachment to certain restaurants is deeper than
         | seeking out the best deal or best taste. Generally I consider
         | an A&W burger superior to Mcdonalds, just as I would consider
         | many boutique burger places superior to mickey ds. Yet the
         | latter has a place in my heart that is really pretty irrational
        
           | dirtyid wrote:
           | A&W Canada has been downright impressive in being
           | consistently good. Around the level of south-asian owned
           | popeyes franchises. Whatever culture they have behind the
           | scenes, I hope franchises restaurants follow.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | tesseract wrote:
           | A&W Canada has been unrelated to A&W in the US since the 70s,
           | and seems to be the more successful of the two by far.
        
             | jcrawfordor wrote:
             | Yes, as an American when I was driving across Alberta I was
             | absolutely astounded by how many A&Ws there were and how
             | nice they seemed. At least in my corner of the US, A&W has
             | a thorough reputation as a cheap, lame has-been that's
             | usually tandemed with other failed fast food brands. The
             | only one I know of in the state regularly garners comments
             | that "wow, that still exists?" when driving by.
             | 
             | In Canada, on the other hand, it seems to be a major and
             | well-liked brand... As much as I found the slogan "American
             | food" very funny given their reputation here.
        
               | katbyte wrote:
               | A n W is the most popular well liked fast food in my
               | friend group, and imho the best quality chain in Canada.
        
             | myohmy wrote:
             | Its worth noting that the reason this happened is because
             | management bought out the company from Unilever. They were
             | able to switch to a long term vision, then transformed and
             | succeeded.
             | 
             | Just goes to show that the boardroom can absolutely hobble
             | a good management team.
        
             | sleepybrett wrote:
             | There used to be a A&W in my home town that finally closed
             | in 2017. For awhile durning some kind of ownership tranfer
             | the franchisees were mostly left high and dry and that
             | place became the best 'fast food' burger in town. I think I
             | remember that the franchise owner basically started buying
             | everything from other suppliers and was only buying a few
             | things from upstream A&W (notably root beer). He pivoted
             | his burgers to compete on quality with the other fast food
             | in town, i think that all went to shit a couple of years
             | later presumably when he either sold or got smacked down
             | the the franchise. Either way it's kind of one of those
             | 'zombie brands' now .. slowly succumbing to economics.
        
           | eddanger wrote:
           | I totally agree. The A&W burger in Canada is superior to
           | other fast-food chains hands down. It seems to be A&W in name
           | only.
        
             | FpUser wrote:
             | I am no longer customer of fast food chain (mostly BBQ at
             | home) but many years ago when I used to I very much
             | preferred Harvey's to anything else.
        
           | loloquwowndueo wrote:
           | Piling up on the Canadians who like A&W thread. It's our go-
           | to fast food chain, burgers are of decent quality, their
           | vegetarian option is reasonably good, and the root beer is
           | delicious.
        
         | jandrese wrote:
         | I'm dubious of the claim that there were enough Americans who
         | don't understand fractions to cause the product to fail. There
         | are a huge number of reasons why a product sells poorly. It may
         | be too expensive. It may not be the right product (too big for
         | lunch). The place where it is being sold may have other issues.
         | 
         | I've only been to an A&W a couple of times, and in both cases
         | the food was notably subpar--it seemed like something I might
         | find in a school cafeteria, the service was slow, and the
         | ambiance was dingy. I also don't like root beer that much so
         | the restaurant has little draw for me. I'm more surprised that
         | they were able to sell enough to stay in business at all.
         | Customer confusion over the size of the 1/3 pounder is the
         | least of their problems.
        
         | space_ghost wrote:
         | Personal anecdote: I've only gotten food poisoning from a
         | restaurant _once_ in my life, and it was an A &W in the early
         | 2000's.
        
         | throwaway0a5e wrote:
         | "Mismanaged franchise declines" doesn't get smug upvotes, cheap
         | comments, shares and general engagement/popularity among the HN
         | and Reddit demographics the way portraying fast food eating
         | Americans as dumb does.
         | 
         | Every human (and many non-humans, though they may have more
         | difficulty expressing it) who's had to divide things by three
         | and four knows that knows that a third is more than a quarter.
         | People know in the back of their minds that other people know
         | this. But the dumb lizard brain takes over and they can't help
         | but engage with low effort content that is spun in a way that
         | confirms their biases.
        
           | colechristensen wrote:
           | For what it's worth i've personally had a few disagreements
           | with people who wouldn't believe a third was bigger than a
           | fourth.
        
             | the-dude wrote:
             | Choose your battles wisely.
        
           | subsubzero wrote:
           | Everyone knows that a 1/3 lb burger is larger than a quarter
           | pounder, but unsure why the author never thought the reason
           | people objected to the 1/3lb burger was due to its way too
           | much meat to have for a burger, usually fast food is eaten
           | during lunch and people don't want to have a gigantic lunch
           | that will make them groggy during the 2nd half of the day.
        
             | whoopdedo wrote:
             | This is supported by the success of the fast-casual chain
             | Fuddruckers which also served 1/3 pound burgers. Their
             | restaurants are configured for large groups. It's the sort
             | of place you take the whole family out to dinner. I don't
             | think anyone was confused by the menu options when they
             | went there.
        
             | thatguy0900 wrote:
             | I'm not sure if the average American would actually have
             | difficulty eating that anymore
        
         | WarOnPrivacy wrote:
         | > Wendy's is superior to McDonald's for a nationwide chain in
         | quality, but the consistency is more variable, so McDonald's
         | rules.
         | 
         | Wendy's sandwiches here are 2x-3x higher than McD's. Some folks
         | don't expect it - they read the Wendy's menu & then drive next
         | door to McD's.
        
         | davio wrote:
         | A&W was always a combo stores with Long John Silver's here.
         | 
         | Fried fish with malt vinegar, fried cheese curds, frosty mug of
         | root beer - meal of champions
        
           | mark-r wrote:
           | I think they had one of those in Tomah, Wisconsin. Closed
           | unfortunately.
        
         | MAGZine wrote:
         | What a strange, meandering comment. I'm not really sure what
         | your thesis is. You seem to disagree with the article but the
         | only real rebuttal you offer is "I know people, and everyone is
         | good with fractions," which is more a comment on your
         | interaction bubble than on the American populace.
         | 
         | Everything else is just a comment on A&W in the last decade or
         | two and holds no bearing on the quarter/third pounder topic.
         | The war was won even before your hierarchy of what's important
         | could be standardized over large geographic areas, which is
         | really unclear to me how much it matters/is accurate. feels
         | like conjecture. I could postulate what I think is important to
         | the American consumer, but, again, conjecture.
        
       | johnnyApplePRNG wrote:
       | >More than half of the participants in the Yankelovich focus
       | groups questioned the price of our burger. "Why," they asked,
       | "should we pay the same amount for a third of a pound of meat as
       | we do for a quarter-pound of meat at McDonald's? You're
       | overcharging us." Honestly. People thought a third of a pound was
       | less than a quarter of a pound. After all, three is less than
       | four!
       | 
       | Why not create a fifth pounder then?
        
         | maxk42 wrote:
         | Or rebrand it the 5-ouncer. 5oz being juuuust below a third of
         | a pound, but still more than a quarter pound.
        
         | david422 wrote:
         | I can just see that backfiring as well. "I paid for more meat
         | and all I get is this tiny thing."
        
         | mywittyname wrote:
         | Double-eighth burger!
        
         | adamrmcd wrote:
         | Or a 113 grammer!
        
       | lbrito wrote:
       | Not to reedit Imperial vs Metric, but I asked an American friend
       | why he preferred the former, and he said it was "more
       | intuitive/natural".
       | 
       | I always found that answer really strange (how can "next exit 3
       | 3/4 miles" be more intuitive than "next exit 3.75 miles"?), and
       | this A&W anecdote kind of proves my point. If the burgers were
       | measured in grams there could be no confusion about 400g being
       | greater than 300g.
        
         | mcdonje wrote:
         | People who work in the trades with imperial measures get used
         | to fractions and reasoning about distances in fractions.
         | 
         | I have this 2-5/8 tile I need to split in half. Ok, 1-5/16.
         | Contrast that with 2.625 / 2 = 1.3125.
         | 
         | I'm sure tradespeople who use metric have their own ways of
         | making simple calculations in their heads, but that's an
         | example of why a lot of people who work with fractions prefer
         | them.
        
           | lbrito wrote:
           | >I have this 2-5/8 tile I need to split in half. Ok, 1-5/16.
           | Contrast that with 2.625 / 2 = 1.3125.
           | 
           | The latter is much easier to think about IMO.
        
             | mcdonje wrote:
             | Just double the denominator. Do you have .625/2=.3125
             | memorized?
        
               | tempest_ wrote:
               | No but half of 625 is very easy math (half of 600 is 300,
               | half of 25 is 12.5) and it makes doing everything else so
               | much easier.
        
               | seszett wrote:
               | That and in practice, tiles aren't found in dimensions of
               | 26.25 cm, but 20, 25 or 30 cm.
               | 
               | Calculations with those numbers are trivial to make, and
               | when they aren't trivial those numbers are also easier to
               | type on a calculator than fractions.
        
               | andrew_ wrote:
               | It's "easy math" if you're trained to think and calculate
               | in that way. Never assume something is universally easy
               | because it comes easy to yourself.
        
               | abdulmuhaimin wrote:
               | not a convincing argument. Same can be said for the other
               | side
        
             | nkrisc wrote:
             | I find the latter more difficult because you're carrying
             | numbers to different places and have to reason about the
             | whole number. In the former you can cheat by just halving
             | (doubling, yeah it's a little counterintuitive) the
             | denominator (ignoring the integer in both examples, since
             | that's easy in both).
             | 
             | But I will grant you, converting between denominators makes
             | my head hurt in the imperial system. Overall I do still
             | think metric is easier as a whole.
        
           | otikik wrote:
           | I've seen this in action in some US Youtube channels.
           | 
           | To me it feels like those videos of people who lost their
           | arms and learned to play the drums with their feet.
           | 
           | Impressive, but also born out of limitations.
           | 
           | > tradespeople who use metric
           | 
           | 2.625 / 2 = Divide each digit by 2 = 1 . 3 1 (2.5) = 1.3125
           | 
           | Most of the time it isn't needed because there isn't a lot of
           | those fractions going around to begin with. The problem isn't
           | the units, themselves (inches, etc). It's that their relation
           | isn't 10.
        
             | philwelch wrote:
             | > The problem isn't the units, themselves (inches, etc).
             | It's that their relation isn't 10.
             | 
             | That's a feature. 10 isn't divisible by 3.
        
           | mturmon wrote:
           | Now, repeat the exercise with a 3-5/8 tile.
           | 
           | Not as easy.
        
           | nicoburns wrote:
           | That's why metric distances of smallish objects are measured
           | in millimetres. The unit is small enough that you'd pretty
           | much never need more than one decimal place.
        
             | mywittyname wrote:
             | You'd think, but that isn't the case. 3/8ths - an extremely
             | common SAE measurement - is 9.5mm. 1/2in is 12.7mm; 1/4 is
             | 6.4mm.
             | 
             | These rounding errors add up. And you can't really get away
             | with sticking to metric because (in the USA) you're bound
             | run into a situation where you have to buy pre-fabbed goods
             | measured in SAE.
             | 
             | So now you need to not only deal with decimal to fraction
             | conversions, but remember the "special cases" like 3/8ths.
        
               | nicoburns wrote:
               | When other countries switched to metric they also
               | switched their standard measurements to metric-rounded
               | equivalents. In fact, here in the UK it's a legal
               | requirement that everything (with a few exceptions) must
               | be sold using metric measurements. It's certainly doable.
        
               | gnopgnip wrote:
               | Are 1/4" ratchets labeled 6.3mm in the UK?
        
               | tristor wrote:
               | I don't know how the UK tool companies do things, but I
               | buy and use a lot of German tools and it depends on the
               | brand. Most use metric measurements everywhere, some of
               | them that are more widely distributed like Wera will use
               | SAE measurements in their US/NA literature and metric
               | everywhere else and use geolocation to provide you the
               | appropriate product page or data sheet. It is very common
               | though to see 9.5mm or 12.7mm drive ratchets (I don't
               | really look at tiny stuff, so can't recall ever seeing
               | 6.3mm but I'm sure I have).
               | 
               | Anyone who works with hand tools should already be
               | familiar with both metric and imperial and converting
               | between them at this point, especially in the UK where
               | /both/ measurement systems are used.
        
           | bluGill wrote:
           | THIS IS ALL WRONG! When working with tile you level of
           | precision is 1/4 an inch. So the 2-5/8 tile is either 2-1/2
           | or 2-3/4. Either way divide by 2 and it is 1-1/4 or maybe
           | 1-1/2 - both will fit so who cares.
           | 
           | Significant digest isn't only something they teach in
           | physics, it exists in the real world.
        
             | mcdonje wrote:
             | It was a contrived example with the tile. I've had to do
             | that calculation in the past with other materials.
        
         | panzagl wrote:
         | He probably meant the units themselves were more natural, not
         | fractions vs decimal- 1 foot seems like a much more natural
         | unit than 30 cm or .3 meters, 1 cup rather than 250 ml, etc.
        
       | danielrpa wrote:
       | "Quarter" have other popular usages that are deeply ingrained in
       | American culture. "Quarterback", "Insert a quarter", "This
       | quarter's results were good", "quart" (measurement), "it's a
       | quarter to one" etc. Actual math aside, it's simply a more
       | familiar word.
        
         | canadaduane wrote:
         | Good point. Maybe "Quarter Plus Pounder" would ride on that
         | familiarity.
        
       | jmaygarden wrote:
       | I guess Hardee's/Carl's Jr. took this information into account
       | when they went with "Thickburger."
        
       | millisecond wrote:
       | Kinda reminds me of all the early Twitter clones where you could
       | post 141 or unlimited or whatever size posts. Just thinking that
       | mathematically bigger is immediately better in all dimensions
       | seems like a common fallacy.
        
         | koala_man wrote:
         | Remember when consoles were all trying to beat each other on
         | word length? We had machines marketed as "128bit" for a while.
        
       | jasonhansel wrote:
       | Now that I think about it, I'm curious about the reliability of
       | this result. While it says that the majority of participants
       | "questioned the price of [the] burger," it doesn't explicitly
       | state that all of these people questioned the price because they
       | thought 1/3 < 1/4. There are also no hard numbers provided in the
       | quotation, and we aren't told anything about the methodology or
       | sample size.
       | 
       | It seems possible that people questioned the price, not because
       | they were confused about fractions, but because they thought that
       | the burger was too low in quality to justify the same price as a
       | McDonald's Quarter Pounder.
       | 
       | [edit: While they say that A&W's burger outperformed in blind
       | taste tests, those taste tests could have had methodological
       | differences (or even just a different sample of the population)
       | that would make it impossible to compare their results to those
       | of the focus groups.]
       | 
       | [edit 2: New Coke also outperformed regular Coke in blind taste
       | tests and was also priced the same. But it was a massive failure,
       | and not because of mathematical confusion.]
        
         | porbelm wrote:
         | It won taste comparisons and was priced the same?
        
         | WarOnPrivacy wrote:
         | > Now that I think about it, I'm curious about the reliability
         | of this result.
         | 
         | I heard the same story in the 1980s & again in the 1990s and it
         | was about Wendy's  1/3 lb burgers. There were no A&Ws in either
         | of those markets.
        
         | pverghese wrote:
         | It was priced the same
        
         | Izkata wrote:
         | I always thought "quarter" referred to the monetary unit, not a
         | modifier to "pound", implying "cheap for the amount of meat you
         | get".
        
           | netrus wrote:
           | But then the French would not need to call it a Royale with
           | Cheese!
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | gitonup wrote:
         | Regarding taste tests, it's common for _very_ sweet drinks to
         | win because they give a small amount to taste. The experience
         | of drinking the normal serving size (in the US) of 12oz is a
         | different beast.
        
         | throwaway91321 wrote:
         | A few other points - first, from what I can tell, the third
         | pounder used two 3 ounce patties while the quarter pounder used
         | one 4 ounce patty. So it's possible that it looked like less to
         | people.
         | 
         | Second, the third pounder later changed it's name to the Papa
         | Burger. Though there's a lot of discussion claiming the name
         | "third pounder" hurt sales, I can't find any information about
         | how the change in name effected sales. And even after the name
         | change, it still doesn't seem to have been nearly as successful
         | as the quarter pounder or the whopper.
         | 
         | Third, the way A&W management talk about this makes it seem
         | like if they just offered up a larger burger a good chunk of
         | the population would come to them instead of McDonald's. It
         | sounds like they convinced themselves that "bigger burger" was
         | going to be a hugely successful campaign, but it's likely a lot
         | of people didn't care that much.
         | 
         | I wouldn't be surprised if some people opted for the quarter
         | pounder because they're bad at fractions, but my guess is that
         | there are other, more important factors involved. When choosing
         | a fast food place I doubt the first thing that pops into most
         | people's minds is "how many ounces are in everyone's signature
         | burgers?"
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-09-14 23:02 UTC)