Something that has been bugging me for some time (genuine question, please forgive me lack of geopolitics/economy understanding) is this: Supposing we want to hurt Russian economy - how are we hurting it by stopping selling them licenses/branding/machines to make and sell burgers and fries? Are we not ripping them off money if we sell to them? As in: we gain, they lose? I understand we don't want to sell advanced tec…
i think what’s going on is that lots of companies have collectively left on their own (not sanctions) and McDonalds is being “bullied” to leave too, possibly by their shareholders
the case here might be that they don’t want to devalue their brand, which is worth far more than their business in Russia
> The Company intends to initiate the process of “de-Arching” those restaurants, which entails no longer using the McDonald’s name, logo, branding, and menu, though the Company will continue to retain its trademarks in Russia. Obviously they'd want to keep the trademark, otherwise they have no way to prevent those sold restaurants from "re-Arching" after the "de-Arching" :)
> Obviously they'd want to keep the trademark, otherwise they have no way to prevent those sold restaurants from "re-Arching" after the "de-Arching" :) If a country has gone sufficiently rogue to invade a neighbour, respect for property[0][1] - and by extension trademarks - appears to matter very little, at least for now? [0] https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/16/business/russia-aircraft-... [1] https://www.bbc.com/news…
Yeah, in the short term, any property rights of foreign organizations in russia is probably not something to rely on. On the other hand, regimes do fall and organization can survive long enough for the policy in russia to change. So it makes sense at least have a claim for trademark (because right now it is really a claim, not a property, since russia can take it away any time it wants)
> The Company intends to initiate the process of “de-Arching” those restaurants, which entails no longer using the McDonald’s name, logo, branding, and menu, though the Company will continue to retain its trademarks in Russia. Obviously they'd want to keep the trademark, otherwise they have no way to prevent those sold restaurants from "re-Arching" after the "de-Arching" :)
Could they still prevent it, though? What would they do, sue a state that's already started using "revoked" copyrights and is slowly starting to treat western laws the way many people treat the "fasten the seat belt" signs?
I don't understand why anyone would call it "good". Cheap and convenient maybe, appeals to kids, somewhere to stop on a long journey in the middle of the night. There are so many options that are tastier, more interesting and more nutritious. It's not even in the top 5 best burger franchises in my town.
[apologies if you're joking, and even if you aren't you're still entitled to your opinion]
you aren't gonna be loving it when you get health problems
What kind of health problems would you expect from going there once in a while? There was no mention of frequency. Going there once every month or two is not going to do much.
It’s a statement about social class disguised as one about health. Note that the insecurity tells you that they’re on some level concerned that they’ll be confused with the kind of person who eats a lot of McDonald’s. Any time you see performative hatred of something ask who the performance is for.