I see a decal on the window with the word "LOCAL" I thought this was a national chain... What will be the local aspect?

I see a decal on the window with the word "LOCAL" I thought this was a national chain... What will be the local aspect?

Apparently Hopdoddy has a bias toward local sourcing of their ingredients and also is active in supporting local charities in the markets they serve. I agree that it is a bit of a confusing message, as it might draw customers who are specifically looking to support locally-owned business and the general "supprt local" trend. Whether or not this confusion is intentional is debatable.

I think there is a difference between saying "local" and "locally owned". If they are willing to use local contractors, local suppliers, local workers, local banks, etc., then more power to them for using "local". Sure, the profit goes to the non-local owner, but that is only fair if they are bringing in non-local capital, taking the risk, and bringing a quality product to the market.

I think there is a difference between saying "local" and "locally owned". If they are willing to use local contractors, local suppliers, local workers, local banks, etc., then more power to them for using "local". Sure, the profit goes to the non-local owner, but that is only fair if they are bringing in non-local capital, taking the risk, and bringing a quality product to the market.

I don't disagree that their model is a great one and certainly INTENTIONALLY adds way more to the community than most out-of-town chains. There are also plenty of out-of-state brands in which the locally-based ownership is beyond reproach for their commitment to the community. For instance, the folks who own OKC's Fuzzy's Tacos and Texadelphia locations are OKC born-and-raised, and have done great exclusively-local stuff like Jones Assembly.

The question is whether such verbiage use ("local") is used to intentionally cash in on the "buy local" movement by luring unsuspecting consumers who think they are buying from a local owner. I don't THINK they are doing this here; just saying I understand why the question was asked. There is a lot of wiggle room in the language parsing you suggest, and I think most consumers would assume "local" and "locally owned" are essentially synonymous.

Example: there used to be a local "brewing company" which intentionally cashed in on a growing consumer desire to drink locally-brewed beer. They had a post office box and a home brewing system and not much else. They contract brewed by having a brewer in another state put beer into bottles with the OKC company's label on them. They sent an occasional bag of Oklahoma-grown grain to that brewer and had it mixed in with the main batch of whatever it was that they were brewing. So they were listed on their bottles as "an Oklahoma brewing company" (technically true, I guess), and their labels told consumers that their beers were "brewed with Oklahoma grains." You, or I, or anyone else could have done exactly the same thing for the cost of a post office box, a graphic designer, and the wholesale cost of the beer. Since their product was imported rather than created in Oklahoma they actually had an ADVANTAGE in selling it to bars and liquor stores through wholesalers. They had less legal red tape.

They didn't have Oklahoma employees. For all intents and purposes - and actually by your definition - Miller-Coors or Anheuser Busch were more "local," as they at least employed several hundred Oklahomans and surely bought many of their supplies locally.

Meanwhile, other would-be brewery owners in OKC were going out, raising capital, getting investors, borrowing money, mortgaging their houses to pay for brewing systems, employing brewhouse staff, meeting with Oklahoma lawmakers to get laws changed, and trying to create a brewing culture from scratch in this state.

I tell this story not to dog someone out. The company in question eventually moved its contract brewing to Oklahoma (good for them), ended up investing more in the local scene (also great) and now isn't even in business. I'm not looking to put anyone on front street or dance on their grave; I'm just making the point that many of their initial customers intentionally chose them because of the way they represented themselves. Consumers weren't necessarily expecting shades of gray when they read the label; they just wanted to "drink local."

My other example: one of Hopdoddy's competitors, OKC-based Tucker's, prominently displays "EAT LOCAL" in their stores (not "eat locally-owned," incidentally). Who knows whether that will make the cut when they inevitably open stores outside of the OKC metro. But for the time being at least it is undeniable that "local" means something very different there than it does at Hopdoddy.

So how do you feel about say Whiskey Cake that tries to buy locally sourced ingredients vs maybe a locally owned Redrock that I believe supplies from standard food distributors. Who is actually more local?

^^^^^^^^^
I think that as most consumers understand it Red Rock is the more local of the two, in OKC of course. In Wichita, Overland Park or Sputhlake (where there are other Red Rock locations), Red Rock is in no way local. But an important point is that Red Rock doesn’t in any way that I’m aware of push a “local” identity or narrative.

I think that if you consider the nuance Whiskey Cake does a great job of embracing the market and that presenting themselves as having an emphasis on locally sourced ingredients is appropriate. It’s when a place intentionally plays word games to deceive consumers that I personally have a problem with it.

I CAN tell you that Whiskey Cake was one of the first places I ever noticed that seemed at first glance to be an out of state place trying to market itself as local. On my first visit right after they opened I personally peppered them with questions about the topic as it was not immediately clear that they weren’t locally owned, and I felt that this was intentional. It’s a tricky business. You and I have to take them at their word that they are sourcing heavily local. The local ownership of Red Rock or Tucker’s is quite clear.

When consumers are choosing “local” over not specifically local they are making more than a taste decision; they’re making a values decision. They are intentionally trying to support the local economy and their neighbors. They shouldn’t be tricked via deceitful buzzword usage. That said, my read on Hopdoddy is that they aren’t doing this but instead truly attempt to align with the local market in multiple ways.

This has been an insightful discussion. I am not sure if there is an existing thread for such a conversation that these need to be moved to, though.

However, to add to the conversation, there is a relatively new place in Yukon that goes by the name LOKAL, but I am not sure of their food supplier, I do know that they recently changed food providers and had to slightly alter their menus, some for the better some for the worse. But I like the concept and I like that we finally have a decent space in Yukon, but with their name saying LOKAL, I only hope they are serious in sourcing local.

. . had a similar question re: the "locally sourced" coffee at Buttermilk. Expected something from an OKC roaster, but it was Slate. . from Seattle. Response to inquiry was that it was purchased locally (from a local coffee shop) and they intended to include local roasters in their rotation. Pls don't misunderstand. . .food was great. . coffee was great. . .was just a little uneasy with their descriptor.

When this discussion first went towards the local verbiage, I immediately thought of Whiskey Cake. I appreciate that they have a board up next to the bar with all the locally sourced ingredients being used in the menu. I suppose I never got the impression that they were trying to pass themselves off as local, merely that they were doing what they could to support local economy, but maybe it was different when they opened up at first.

When this discussion first went towards the local verbiage, I immediately thought of Whiskey Cake. I appreciate that they have a board up next to the bar with all the locally sourced ingredients being used in the menu. I suppose I never got the impression that they were trying to pass themselves off as local, merely that they were doing what they could to support local economy, but maybe it was different when they opened up at first.

OKC was only their 2nd location, IIRC. It was certainly local to its only two markets at the time, and locally-sourcing ingredients is great. I am enjoying this discussion of the usage of "Local."

In regards to Whiskey Cake, their whole concept is "farm to table" so local means something different in that context.


On the broader subject of what constitutes local, I present Devon Energy (and really any 'local' publicly traded company). Yes, they are headquartered here with a bunch of employees but the huge majority of their stockholders -- the owners of the company -- do not reside in Oklahoma. Therefore, the huge amount of their profits leave the state.

Or what about a local franchisee for a restaurant? Some of their profit goes upstream to the parent company but the real business owner lives here (most the time), employs people from the area and typically uses suppliers, contractors and other local businesses.

As to development, First National Center is often held up as a success story, often attributed to 'finally' getting local ownership. But Charlie Nicholas of DFW is not only one of the main players in that entity, he is almost certainly the largest owner. And the simple truth is when it comes to similar properties, their real ownership structure is completely hidden. The people out front in the press in these project often have a very small slice of the ownership pie.

And finally, a reminder that none of the big players in 'local' media are locally owned at all. Not The Oklahoman, the Journal Record or any of the TV stations. Even if they have local news and production facitilies all of these entities out-source a lot of their work and none of their profits stay here. Ironically, The Oklahoman and it's reporters are always pleading the 'support local journalism' case.

...And finally, a reminder that none of the big players in 'local' media are locally owned at all. Not The Oklahoman, the Journal Record or any of the TV stations. Even if they have local news and production facitilies all of these entities out-source a lot of their work and none of their profits stay here...

This part of the discussion is now of course WHOLLY off-topic, but...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KWTV-DT

http://www.news9.com/story/8118618/history-of-griffin-communications

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griffin_Communications

http://griffincommunications.net/#heritage


DAVID F. GRIFFIN
President & Chief Executive Officer

University of Oklahoma, Communications

A third-generation Oklahoman, David is not your typical CEO. Approachable, engaging, enjoyable and very active in the business. David focuses on strategic issues, competitive challenges and makes a point of meeting one-on-one with advertisers across the state. Additionally, he maintains an extremely open door policy for all employees and can often be found sharing strategy and results with team members. David is active in the development and growth of Oklahoma, he sits on numerous boards, is a member of the Young Presidents Organization and he and his wife Kirsten are involved in many charitable causes. David can often be found shuttling kids between soccer, football, basketball and other athletic activities as well as hiking and seeking new adventures.


t starts with David and Kirsten Griffin of Oklahoma City and John and Ashley Griffin of Tulsa, local owners with deep roots and commitment to Oklahoma.

Am I reading any of this wrong?

^

No, you are right, I forgot about Channel 9.

To answer the OP's question of "What constitutes local?", to me, it's simply being owned and operated by a person who lives in the same area as their business. Specifically, within reasonable driving distance. 'Linda's Birkenstock' is a good example, although it is now gone. She sold sandals that were made elsewhere but she lived here and spent her hard earned local dollars here. That's local. A taco truck owner with similar locality would fit as well. 'Anthony's' clothing stores would be a larger example, also long gone. I would say 'Braums' is local, but i don't know all of the details there. Maybe Drew actually lives on an island somewhere in the Pacific and not in Tuttle with the cows. I feel like "local" is sometimes just co-opted for marketing. 'Locally sourced' is of course different.