subway you are very naughty

Comments

I said this somewhere else, but I don't think that me boycotting the Masterton store is going to help anyone; instead, it could hurt a local business that employs local people and has never caused anyone any harm as far as I know. If Subways were all operated by the same company, that would be different, but each one is independently owned and operated by a franchise holder. My local Subway owner probably has a grand total of zero influence over the Dunedin Subway owner.

Maybe someone could enlighten me on how a nationwide boycott helps and I'll change my mind.
said best on public address http://www.publicaddress.net/system/topic,398,hard_news_graceless_islanders.sm?p=16496#post16496
"Franchise agreements always have very strong brand protection clauses in their contract, so corporate Subway are talking out of their arse when they say this is nothing to do with them. Do McDonalds leave their franchisees to their own devices over matters like spilled coffee and body parts planted in burgers? Of course not. They sell one thing - their brand. And they will crawl over broken glass to protect it."

Oh, I agree that corporate Subway should surely get involved in this. My gripe (well, not really a gripe but you know what I mean) is with the idea that by boycotting Masterton Subway, that it will send a message to corporate Subway. I don't think it does. I think it just hurts the local owner. I mean, sure, go ahead and boycott the Dunedin Subway if you are against their actions, but don't throw out the barrel over one rotten apple.

Post a comment

Already a Vox member? Sign in