Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

For the Colonel, It Was Finger-Lickin’ Bad (1976)

kottke.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 177 posts

Re: For the Colonel, It Was Finger-Lickin’ Bad (1976)

#61

Post by sublinear »

mywittyname wrote: post #56
peanut_worm wrote: post #7

Miracle whip in coleslaw? Not sure I can trust his judgement

I also hate MW on sandwiches and whatnot because it's way too sweet. However, most coleslaw recipes add a ton of sugar anyway. So I don't think the end result is that far off. The primary reason that I suspect he used MW is that it contains a yeast inhibitor (potassium sorbate), which seems to keep the yeast from turning the coleslaw into sauerkrautslaw. The Colonel probably didn't understand this, but knew the resul…

> MW keeps the slaw crunchier

It contains less oil in it than mayo. Corn starch is used to achieve this.

Re: For the Colonel, It Was Finger-Lickin’ Bad (1976)

#62

Post by SargeDebian »

Etheryte wrote: post #50
fifilura wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many ways to loose control of your company without selling it upfront. For example if you take money from an minority investor with the promise of an IPO (so they can make profit from their minority share). After the company goes public, control is much more iffy. You may for example not have your place in the board anymore even though you are majority owner.

This makes no sense whatsoever. If you're the majority holder then by definition you hold more than 50% of the stock and can force whatever resolution you see fit. Perhaps you meant largest holder, but without a majority?

Or multiple stock classes, where done have more voting rights than others.

Re: For the Colonel, It Was Finger-Lickin’ Bad (1976)

#63

Post by dylan604 »

sublinear wrote: post #48
elchief wrote: post #38

KFC has been garbage for decades, at least in Canada. I hope Popeye's eats their lunch

Not sure if this is also true in Canada, but Popeyes now sells some of the worst quality fried chicken since 2020. They haven't even been anything close to "Louisiana inspired" in years. This is supposed to be their brand differentiator, but I haven't seen jambalaya or gumbo on their menu in over a decade. Most locations in my area haven't brought back the seafood since 4 years ago despite being on the menu (always o…

> Most locations in my area haven't brought back the seafood since 4 years ago despite being on the menu (always out of stock).

I don't know, I'm kind of okay with that. Seeing seafood offered in very land locked locations has always been suspect to me. In a fast food place, I'd doubt it was actually anything other than imitation version anyways though so what's the point?

Re: For the Colonel, It Was Finger-Lickin’ Bad (1976)

#64

Post by sublinear »

astura wrote: post #58
sublinear wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if this is also true in Canada, but Popeyes now sells some of the worst quality fried chicken since 2020. They haven't even been anything close to "Louisiana inspired" in years. This is supposed to be their brand differentiator, but I haven't seen jambalaya or gumbo on their menu in over a decade. Most locations in my area haven't brought back the seafood since 4 years ago despite being on the menu (always o…

>I haven't seen jambalaya or gumbo on their menu in over a decade. Probably because nobody wants it? I worked for Popeyes 25 years ago. We never had gumbo and people would order jambalaya like every other day, if that. Literally everything was more popular than jambalaya.

It was probably true back then for the same reason nobody wants wings from pizza hut today either :D

All I was saying is that it was on the menu in the past and the decline in quality has been steady for a long time. It's as if it's built into their long term strategy for the business.

Re: For the Colonel, It Was Finger-Lickin’ Bad (1976)

#65

Post by TehCorwiz »

brookst wrote: post #52
infotainment wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I find utterly depressing is how literally every American fast food chain has infinitely better quality and taste in their overseas locations. Evidently they save their absolute worst products for their home market.

I’d say they’re responding to different market demands.

Yeah, the rest of the world has laws that demand minimum product quality.

Re: For the Colonel, It Was Finger-Lickin’ Bad (1976)

#66

Post by jasonjayr »

KingOfCoders wrote: post #3

Every founder I have met after selling their company.

However he sold it; they apparently, to this day have rights to his likeness. I would hope that would give him some power to call them out if they are making a lesser product in his name, all the while passing it off as his 'original recipe'

Re: For the Colonel, It Was Finger-Lickin’ Bad (1976)

#67

Post by crazygringo »

petre wrote: post #49
dghughes wrote: post #16

I remember the day when KFC started "boiling" the chicken it went from crispy to soggy. Here in Canada currently there's big controversy KFC went halal. No more bacon!

Vote with your Canadian dollars, eat from restaurants who serve pork. It turns out that my countrymen love porchetta.

But when has KFC ever served pork or bacon?

They're a chicken restaurant.

Best I can guess is maybe they had a fried chicken sandwich that had strips of bacon too? But not really a huge loss -- bacon is definitely not any kind of classic topping for fried chicken, the way it is for burgers. I mean, I love bacon but I don't want it with fried chicken. Bacon adds crunch and chewiness to a burger; fried chicken is already crunchy and chewy.

Re: For the Colonel, It Was Finger-Lickin’ Bad (1976)

#68

Post by kemayo »

dylan604 wrote: post #54
rootusrootus wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So if the first listed ingredient represents the most abundant ingredient... It's seasoning, so it doesn't seem surprising at all that MSG would be pretty high on the list. Do you think that's bad?

When some one says "secret recipe of 11 herbs & spices" my mind doesn't immediately jump to MSG as an herb or spice. Then to see that it is the primary ingredient definitely jumps out to me. Does it not to you?

It's in the same category as salt, which I'd kinda expect to be in the 11-things "secret recipe", but which isn't a herb or spice.

Re: For the Colonel, It Was Finger-Lickin’ Bad (1976)

#69

Post by mistrial9 »

alsetmusic wrote: post #42

I used to have a photo of a man who owned a KFC with The Colonel on my fridge. Shot in the 70s, from his appearance. The man was our customer when I had a retail gig and gave me the photo. I wish I still had it. Here’s to Bernard.

A 1970s KFC franchise was a profitable thing to have .. lots of people who come from working class background had a chance to connect to "big business" and get a real economic lift. After seeing how some people genuinely struggle about money, it is hard for me to be wholly critical of the business, major flaws and all...

Re: For the Colonel, It Was Finger-Lickin’ Bad (1976)

#70

Post by ryandrake »

saghm wrote: post #31
amiga386 wrote: post #8

Sanders in 1963 on What's my Line? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wk4Eq8IcQMk And a video on the history of Sanders' fight with KFC corporate, and what exactly is in the seasoning? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WJYOgzFydc My takeaway is that Sanders cared about serving quality fast food, and KFC corporate cared about reducing costs and doing brand necromancy. The upshot is you won't get KFC chicken at KFC, just…

> My takeaway is that Sanders cared about serving quality fast food, and KFC corporate cared about reducing costs and doing brand necromancy. The upshot is you won't get KFC chicken at KFC, just a pale, cheap imitation of the original Assuming that's the case, the anecdote in the article of him walking into the kitchen in a random KFC and berating the people for making the chicken the was they did seems a bit unfair;…

> it's not like the random people working there had any choice in the corporate policies or autonomy to choose to make the chicken in a different way.

I'm torn on this one, and can see both sides. For any kind of mega-business, not just restaurant chains: If your goal is to correct corporate behavior, protest or "make things difficult for corporate" then there really aren't any good options. You could annoy the individual stores and/or frontline staff, but as you say they are usually powerless minimum-wage drones who can't change things, and even might probably be sympathetic to your cause. On the other hand, if enough people make the businesses unpleasant or do things at those business that end up costing corporate, there is a slim chance that corporate might make changes.

A big problem with mega-business style capitalism is that key stakeholders like employees and the general public are powerless. You can only change a business's behavior if you're either 1. shareholders or 2. customers via boycott or 3. regulators. Unfortunately, the non-customer general public cannot vote a corporation out, nor can they walk into their local WalMart and "complain to the owner of WalMart" like they can for smaller local businesses.

Post reply on HN