

Panera bread tries a "pay what you want" model - derwiki
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2011-05-16-panera-pay-what-you-can_n.htm

======
hncommenter13
I grew up in Clayton, MO, and this is the former St. Louis Bread Co (now
Panera) that I have been going to since the early 90s. I live in SF, but I go
back there several times a year, and I have been to this store since it went
to its current pay-what-you want model.

A few observations: 1\. As the article indicates, the system is really
confusing. People who haven't been there before have no idea what's going on.
They ring up the total amount as if you were purchasing the food normally, and
then it's up to you what to do. If you decide to pay, they can make you
change. For example (IIRC), your sandwich is $7.50, you put $10 into a little
donation box, and they give you change of $2.50. The first few times I went I
wasn't sure what to do.

2\. It's in a fairly nice area of St. Louis (right across from the county
courts+jail as well as several small high-rise office towers). There isn't a
huge homeless problem like you would have in downtown SF, where it would
effectively be a soup kitchen.

3\. The neighboring businesses hated it--they viewed it as a big chain driving
them out of business by undercutting prices on lunch. One business on the same
block posted a big sign in its front window protesting the move. I don't know
if any competitors have actually closed as a result, but they certainly didn't
like the idea.

4\. This location of BreadCo/Panera has always had low-price day-old bread and
pastries available, iirc. They are now pay-what-you-want, which means mostly
free. They keep bags of them by the door, and I have seen folks (most of whom
look like they need it) take them.

Having been there a few times and as a fan of STL Bread Co, it's hard for me
to believe that this would work on a large scale.

~~~
briandon
I would have loved to see the message on that other eatery's protest sign.

Do you remember which place it was?

I was just looking at what I think (may be wrong) is the Panera location
mentioned in the article:
[http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&...](http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=panera+clayton,+missouri&aq=&sll=38.642551,-90.323753&sspn=0.004859,0.004002&layer=tc&ie=UTF8&hq=panera&hnear=Clayton,+St+Louis,+Missouri&ll=38.649891,-90.338345&spn=0.027483,0.032015&t=h&z=15&lci=com.panoramio.all,com.youtube.all,com.google.webcams&cbll=38.649876,-90.338329&panoid=J932OLQIrWVpfczbj5N0Ag&cbp=12,94.01,,1,8.79)

------
mikeknoop
Trivia for those who don't know, Panera was originally called "St. Louis Bread
Company".

I am curious, because the article is light on details, how the company defines
"success". Presumably, the company is taking a 100% loss on everything sold
with all donations being passed on. Is "success" defined as accumulating
donations approximately equal to to the cost of running that location? With
all the good will advertising on top?

~~~
amock
The article says "Overall, the cafe performs at about 80% of retail and brings
in revenue of about $100,000 a month. That's enough to generate $3,000 to
$4,000 a month above costs, money being used for a job training program for
at-risk youths." so it sounds like success includes being profitable. It
doesn't seem like Panera is as quite as charitable as you thought.

~~~
jcampbell1
And, it doesn't sound like much of a success. If they just donated the profits
from that store to charity, the charity would presumably receive $24k per
month.

That being said, it is nice to know that a little faith in humanity doesn't
result in a disaster.

~~~
Natsu
> And, it doesn't sound like much of a success. If they just donated the
> profits from that store to charity, the charity would presumably receive
> $24k per month.

That analysis appears to forget the charity given directly by the store to
those people who weren't able to pay for all of their food, but were able to
have birthday meals and whatnot they could not otherwise have afforded.

I understand the thinking, but there's something to be said for not optimizing
everything away.

------
Vivtek
I'd heard about this when they instituted it - great to see some statistics
about its success!

------
zach
Panera is run by the founder-in-effect of the Au Bon Pain chain well known to
Cantabrigians.

At one point he decided to leave behind Au Bon Pain and switch horses, kicking
off Panera's nationwide expansion:

[http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_07/b42150921...](http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_07/b4215092151745.htm)

------
edwardy20
I wonder if homeless people take advantage of the cafe? What do they do about
that?

~~~
lionhearted
The first time I saw "pay what you want" at a cafe was in Salt Lake City, UT.
It was right next to the Utah College of Massage Therapy in an upper-middle
class neighborhood.

I went in there a few times. Most people actually overpaid a little bit,
throwing in like a $10 when they got a coffee, main course, and a snack (this
was 10 years ago, would've cost maybe $7 to $8 at the time normally).

Some people did take a meal and only put in $1 or whatever, but not too many
and that's probably more than compensated by people who overpay a little. The
key is probably where your location is.

~~~
juiceandjuice
Downtown, around 300 E and South Temple? That's not really upper middle class
per se, it's really just mixed, but it can seem like that. I lived two blocks
away in a one bedroom apartment which rented for $400/mo. On the flip side, I
know the apartments across the street are one or two bedroom and rent for
about $1000+/mo. Just saying, if it's where I think it is, that's a fairly
mixed neighborhood, and about 3 more blocks to the north/northwest you start
getting into Rose Park. It's kind of like calling the Mission in SF upper
middle class... I mean it is, but it's not.

------
aneth
> Generally, peer pressure prevents that sort of behavior, he said. "It's like
> parking in a handicapped spot," Shaich said.

> "The lesson here is most people are fundamentally good," Shaich said.
> "People step up and they do the right thing."

Interesting contradiction here. Is it peer pressure or fundamental goodness?

~~~
sanswork
If people weren't fundamentally good would there be peer pressure to give more
than you need to?

~~~
makmanalp
I'll play devil's advocate:

Damn right they would. Your argument assumes that if they aren't good, they
must be evil. This is plain wrong. Many people are neither, and just float in
between. Society and peer pressure in general serve to drag people towards the
more honest side of the spectrum. Arguably, it's the reason society exists at
all. We gather together and make up some rules (that ostensibly make us give
up some things) in order to make life and relations more predictable and tame.

\----------

Slightly related tangent with devil's advocate level 2:

In contrast, if people aren't fundamentally evil, why can't we do without
society?

