49

This Facebook post by 9gag.com makes the claim that customers of A&W thought that A&W's 1/3 pound burgers weighed less than McDonald's 1/4 pound burgers, and preferred to buy the McDonald's burgers due to them thinking that a 1/4 pound burger has more meat than a 1/3 pound burger.

One of the most vivid arithmetic failings displayed by Americans occurred in the early 1980s, when the A&W restaurant chain released a new hamburger to rival the McDonald's Quarter Pounder. With a third-pound of beef, the A&W burger had more meat than the Quarter Pounder; in taste tests, customers preferred A&W's burger. And it was less expensive. A lavish A&W television and radio marketing campaign cited these benefits. Yet instead of leaping at the great value, customers snubbed it.

Only when the company held customer focus groups did it become clear why. The Third Pounder presented the American public with a test in fractions. And we failed. Misunderstanding the value of one-third, customers believed they were being overcharged. Why, they asked the researchers, should they pay the same amount for a third of a pound of meat as they did for a quarter-pound of meat at McDonald's. The "4" in "1/4," larger than the "3" in "1/3," led them astray.

(full meme image)

Was there ever such a customer focus group held by A&W, and did it reach the result described in the image?

Laurel
  • 30,040
  • 9
  • 132
  • 118
March Ho
  • 18,688
  • 12
  • 81
  • 109

3 Answers3

51

The source of this image is an article in NY Times Magazine, the text of which (about a quarter down the page) is quoted exactly.

Kevin Drum, a blogger for MotherJones, tried to track down the source of this anecdote. He found a tweet by the article's author, Elizabeth Green, saying that she got it from "Threshold Resistance", the memoirs of Alfred Taubman, then-owner of A&W.

Reproducing the quote from that book that's on the MJ site:

Well, it turned out that customers preferred the taste of our fresh beef over traditional fast-food hockey pucks. Hands down, we had a better product. But there was a serious problem. 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!

Since any actual data on the study performed is probably private data of A&W and the Yankelovich research group, the question comes down to "do you believe Taubman?"

Sebastian Redl
  • 861
  • 9
  • 10
  • 8
    This is as far as my research got too. I would take issue with Taubman's claim that `"customers preferred the taste of our fresh beef over traditional fast-food hockey pucks."` Most companies claim to have a superior product, and without reading his book, we can't know how this conclusion was reached. I imagine any "study" done by A&W is going to favor A&W. – Will Aug 13 '15 at 18:11
  • 41
    You'd think they'd come out with a 1/5th burger. – Brian M. Hunt Aug 13 '15 at 19:59
  • 1
    @BrianM.Hunt The McD's regular burger is a sixth pound patty. Obviously, they didn't have this problem when they dubbed their larger burger "the quarter pounder". I think Taubman is passing the buck. The product probably failed for legitimate business reasons. McD's is a tough competitor. –  Apr 02 '20 at 20:13
  • 4
    "we'll probably have to take Taubman at his word here" -- I would be skeptical of his word here. He is hardly an unbiased observer. It was his company at the time. "The customers are too stupid to want our superior product" (paraphrased) is a bit too self-flattering. – John Coleman Apr 01 '21 at 14:42
  • 7
    @fredsbend a regular McDonald's hamburger patty is 1.6 ounces, which is a tenth of a pound. (As with the 4-oz quarter pounder, this is the weight before cooking.) But, crucially, they never marketed it based on its fractional relationship to the pound. They never called it a tenth-pounder or a sixth-pounder or anything of the sort, so there was no reason for anyone to be confused. – phoog Apr 05 '21 at 04:20
  • @phoog Wow! That's so small. I didn't realize it was *that* tiny. –  Apr 05 '21 at 05:32
  • @fredsbend indeed. And rather more decimal than non-metricated Americans are used to. Someone ought to mention the former McDonald's "Angus Third-Pounder" product line, though, which [existed from 2007 through 2013](https://www.businessinsider.in/slideshows/miscellaneous/then-and-now-how-the-mcdonalds-menu-has-changed-through-the-years/slidelist/74500038.cms#slideid=74500099). In fact, I remember hearing about this arithmetic confusion in connection with that product line, not A&W, but the memory is vague and may be inaccurate. – phoog Apr 05 '21 at 15:37
  • It seems weird that at a time when people were more likely to go to the butcher and order meat by the point (or fraction thereof) that they would be confused. Perhaps it was women that went to the butcher and men who bought fast food and/or answered surveys? Either way I agree that we can't really assume this is true just because someone who was around claims it was true. It seems unlikely and as pointed out Taubman is not exactly impartial. Sounds like a decent study for a grad student, what percentage of people will buy a product that is 1/3 off versus 1/4 off. – Eric Nolan Feb 07 '23 at 10:44
  • @JohnColeman Good point, I modified the last sentence. – Sebastian Redl Feb 07 '23 at 21:48
-3

A&W Confirms https://awrestaurants.com/blog/aw-third-pound-burger-fractions

(Unfortunately my browser is treating it like an image, so it’s hard to copy and paste)

And they source a book written by the then owner Alfred Taubman called “Threshold Resistance”

Paul Tomblin
  • 95
  • 1
  • I'm confused. Why the down-votes? The OP questions whether this happened, and this answer goes directly to a source that would be the ***MOST*** involved, which confirms the claim. – PoloHoleSet Feb 09 '23 at 17:02
  • 4
    The book used as the ultimate source here is already quoted in the answer from 2015. Other than confirming that the current marketing team stands by the story, this doesn't add much. – IMSoP Feb 11 '23 at 11:35
  • I don't know that this is "SE Law" really, but I frequently find answers that are primarily link based to be invalid after a few years. The links don't work anymore, and the answer is useless without the link. Ideally, answers should use links as support, but still plainly state what the answer is (quoting the relevant text within the link as part of the answer, for example). – JamieB Feb 27 '23 at 19:07
-4

From Mother Jones article:

UPDATE: Elizabeth Green tweets that her source for this anecdote is Threshold Resistance by Alfred Taubman, who owned A&W in the 80s. Here’s the relevant passage, after Taubman has called in Yankelovich, Skelly and White to figure out what was wrong with their burger:

"Well, it turned out that customers preferred the taste of our fresh beef over traditional fast-food hockey pucks. Hands down, we had a better product. But there was a serious problem. 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!"

Threshold Resistance: The Extraordinary Career of a Luxury Ret Oct 13, 2009 by A. Alfred Taubman ISBN-13 : 978-0061235375

BobJD
  • 1
  • 1