Fast Casual Foods-Evolution of eating out practices in the US

Eating out practice is a part of the societal evolution with the growth of modern industrial and business environment forcing families to spend less and less time in the kitchen to feed them. Such dining out is in vogue all over the world, it is most conspicuous in America and Europe. Over a period of time the concept of eating out has seen a sea change from formal dining to dining on the side of the streets. Remarkably fast food joints and food trucks have grown phenomenally that they are threatening the very foundation of established restaurants which provide ambiance and fine quality food preparations to be enjoyed in a relaxed atmosphere. Fast food restaurants serving products made mostly from frozen products offer low cost foods at a fast pace. These food caterers, mostly in chain mode, have hundreds of outlets across the country with standardized eateries, characteristic of each chain. A new catering concept called fast casual started a few years ago which seems to have caught the fancy of people as reflected by dramatic growth of this sector and though they are also fast food outlets, their food offerings are much superior in quality to those served by fast food set ups, though they may cost 50% to 100% more. Here is a take on this new trend.

"While fast casual chains do not compare to the robust revenue stream of restaurant giants like McDonalds, the industry has witnessed growth rates not seen in the quick service industry. It is reported that sales of fast casual outlets rose by 10.5% in 2014, compared with 6.1% for fast food chains. Notably, industry leader Chipotle is enjoying 20% annual growth rates. Combining ambience and meal quality comparable to casual dining with the convenience of a quick service chain, the fast casual industry has been a model for current and future success. A number of factors, including affordability in conjunction with quality, taste, convenience, and customer service, form the basis for fast casual outlets.In general, a fast food meal costs between $5 and $7 while offering average food quality, no table service, and limited customization. Conversely, the fast casual concept incorporates affordability with high quality ingredients. While the typical cost of fast casual meals is more expensive than their quick service counterparts, consumers are afforded more natural ingredients and custom meals. As mentioned previously, Chipotle Mexican Grill is at the forefront of the rapid growth. Chipotle offers made-to-order meals with plenty of options for customization. As consumer habits shift to healthier life choices, ingredients labeled organic, fresh, and non-GMO are associated with higher prices. As a result, the average Chipotle customer spends $11.56 per visit with prices continuing to rise as a result of commodity price fluctuations. However, the sector still maintains high volume sales, indicating that people prefer quality and hygiene over low prices. (For more, see: 22 Ways To Fight Rising Food Prices.)"

Rise of fast casual food outlets also saw the emergence of food trucks which offer foods made from fresh raw material though they do not have very comfortable sitting facilities, most of them serving foods to customers on the sides of designated roads. They enjoy the advantage of shifting their operation to places where customer density is high. Fast casual restaurants, on the other hand provide seating facility and serve many customized products prepared in full visibility of the customers! Look at India where fast food restaurant concept is emerging now, most of them being of American origin through some of their offerings are "adapted" to local flavor preferences. There are a few Indian traditional food caterers who have started fast food outlets serving standardized  ethnic foods while road side vending is also growing with millions of cart based and van based caterers doing decent business in almost all towns and cities in the country. Of course these street food vendors cannot be compared to food truck business in the US, especially in terms of hygiene, sanitation and safety.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

THE GALLOPING FOOD COST-HUNGER IN RICH NATIONS?

Being born in a rich country like the US or in Europe is considered a blessing because of high per capita income enjoyed by the population there. It is true that on PPP basis the citizens might not be as rich as thought to be because of high cost of living experienced there. A note worthy phenomenon which cannot escape notice of a discerning observer is the relatively low cost of the food as part of the family income. While in a country like India an average family in the lower middle class category may be spending almost 50% of the income on purchasing food and groceries, the same works out to less than 10% for a US family. In spite of constant inflation eating away part of the purchasing power of the citizen, still the food is considered affordable because of huge subsidies being showered on the farmer community by the government. In spite of the above recent reports suggest that there are significant pockets of poverty across that country with many families unable to muster even the minimum money required to buy essential foods for meeting the daily nutritional needs. A human tragedy of herculean dimension. Here is a take on this queer phenomenon.

"Food prices have risen in recent years due to growing demand in developing nations and speculative shenanigans in the commodities markets, but food in America is still cheap. As Michael Pollan noted in The New York Review of Books, President Richard Nixon reacted to a spike in food prices in the early 1970s by shifting policy from supporting price stability for farmers to increasing output of a few crops such as corn and soy (this explains why there's corn and soy in everything). As a result of this policy shift and technological gains that have increased productivity per acre, Americans spend less on food as a percentage of their income — slightly less than 10 percent — than at any time in modern history. Hunger persisted, however, because at the same time the cost of housing increased markedly, which left people with less money for food. Thankfully, the cost of housing in Las Vegas decreased with the housing bust. Still, hunger persists, though now it's because people can't find work or their income is swallowed up by medical costs."

The food inflation in many developing countries has witnessed alarming spurts and the condition in these places is not congenial for supporting a decent life style. It is not long ago the Prime Minister of India "lamented" about the sorry conditions in the country where majority of children are suffering from gross malnutrition and under nutrition with insufficient access to foods due to economic factors. It is not a solace that the government economists declaring that inflation for the last 4 weeks is less than zero though the food markets tell a different story. The fact is that there is no price stability practically for any food, especially the protective foods like fruits and vegetables and government does not seem to have any clue as to what needs to be done to make them available in plenty at affordable cost.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

THE GALLOPING FOOD COST-HUNGER IN RICH NATIONS?

Being born in a rich country like the US or in Europe is considered a blessing because of high per capita income enjoyed by the population there. It is true that on PPP basis the citizens might not be as rich as thought to be because of high cost of living experienced there. A note worthy phenomenon which cannot escape notice of a discerning observer is the relatively low cost of the food as part of the family income. While in a country like India an average family in the lower middle class category may be spending almost 50% of the income on purchasing food and groceries, the same works out to less than 10% for a US family. In spite of constant inflation eating away part of the purchasing power of the citizen, the food is considered affordable because of huge subsidies being showered on the farmer community by the government. In spite of the above, recent reports suggest that there are significant pockets of poverty across that country with many families unable to muster even the minimum money required to buy essential foods for meeting the daily nutritional needs. A human tragedy of herculean dimension. Here is a take on this queer phenomenon.

"Food prices have risen in recent years due to growing demand in developing nations and speculative shenanigans in the commodities markets, but food in America is still cheap. As Michael Pollan noted in The New York Review of Books, President Richard Nixon reacted to a spike in food prices in the early 1970s by shifting policy from supporting price stability for farmers to increasing output of a few crops such as corn and soy (this explains why there's corn and soy in everything). As a result of this policy shift and technological gains that have increased productivity per acre, Americans spend less on food as a percentage of their income — slightly less than 10 percent — than at any time in modern history. Hunger persisted, however, because at the same time the cost of housing increased markedly, which left people with less money for food. Thankfully, the cost of housing in Las Vegas decreased with the housing bust. Still, hunger persists, though now it's because people can't find work or their income is swallowed up by medical costs."

The food inflation in many developing countries has witnessed alarming spurts and the condition in these places is not congenial for supporting a decent life style. It is not long ago the Prime Minister of India "lamented" about the sorry conditions in the country where majority of children are suffering from gross malnutrition and under nutrition with insufficient access to foods due to economic factors. It is not a solace that the government economists declare the inflation for the last 4 weeks coming down to below zero, though the food markets tell a different story. The fact is that there is no price stability practically for any food, especially the protective foods like fruits and vegetables and government does not seem to have any clue as to what needs to be done to make them available in plenty at affordable cost. Could it be a cold comfort to people in poor countries to know that there are plenty of cousins feeling the pangs of hunger in rich countries too? In stead of trying to conquer the outer space or amassing nuclear bombs, world must redirect its resources, efforts, energy and focus on eradicating poverty where ever it exists and restore the human dignity.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

FARM SUBSIDIES-MAKING FOOD COSTLIER TO THE CONSUMER?

The subsidy dilemma is not confined to India alone where the national budget is full of provisions for "give away" to deserving as well as undeserving recipients of all colors and hues. But it can be an equally trouble some area of concern in other more developed countries including the US. What bothers the policy makers is whether such subsidies to farmers really influence the market dynamics as far as food is concerned. While a strong section of experts in the US believe that low cost of foods in the country is due to billions of dollars of agricultural subsidies doled out year after year, an equally assertive lobby feels the other way. It is another matter that agricultural subsidies in some developed countries sharply reduces the competitive edge for many agricultural products imported into these countries from out side, a clear violation of WTO mandate.

"What got the committee's attention, however, was my warning that drafting another business-as-usual farm bill in 2012 was going to be more difficult, because of a strengthening belief that the farm subsidies are contributing to our nation's obesity crisis by making unhealthy foods too cheap. The committee knew, and I confirmed in my testimony, that this is in fact an unfounded charge. When the farm bill places restrictions on sugar imports to protect the income of American sugar growers it actually make all sweetened products – from candy to ice cream – artificially expensive rather than cheap. And when Congress enacts subsidies and mandates to divert 30 percent of our corn crop to the making of ethanol for auto fuel, it is making both corn and other animal feeds – and hence all meat products – artificially expensive as well. Nor is it true that corn-based sweeteners are more obesity-inducing than natural sugar. Nor is it true that the price of junk food has fallen in America while the price of healthy foods (fruits and vegetables) has remained high. All of these misconceptions about farm programs are explained in Chapter Eight of my Oxford book, my chapter on "The Politics of Obesity."

Prima facie, it appears that any subsidy to agricultural commodity growing will invariably reflect their market price and processors and consumers can be expected to get these food materials at relatively low cost. But for these subsidies American farmers can never expect to export their wheat, peas, lentils and other food grains at prices much less than that prevalent in many developing countries. Already American farmers have the advantage of the economy of scales in their operations having large farms and mechanized farming tools and subsidy further helps them to dump their products in world market at significantly lower price. It is convoluted logic to claim that imported foods with lower price tag would have reduced the prices further as a response y the domestic industry. If subsidies are removed the food inflation in the US is bound to go up making every thing more expensive and the government there knows this truth.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com