The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants."Recently, butter has been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. This change, however, has had little im

While it may be true that most customers do not have an objection in consuming margarine in place of butter, I feel it is an infringement upon their most basic rights to do so without their knowledge and consent. The author has nowhere stated the procedure followed by the establishment while making this change. Essentially his customers might not be aware of the new ingredient. Hence the fact that only 2% of consumers have had reason to complain, cannot be taken as proof of a generalized consumer opinion. Margarine and Butter are two similar tasting components. However their composition is entirely different. His customer could have an allergy to a component in margarine, which he might consume without his knowledge. In any culinary establishment there is a protocol followed. A key point of that being, disclosing all the major ingredients of any meal for sale. This fact takes away the very foundation of the author’s appeal. On these grounds I find fault in his statement.

Secondly, the author speaks of how when a customer asks for butter , and is provided with margarine instead, he does not complain. This implies that while a customer might make do with margarine, his actual desire is for butter. And this is exactly the opposite of what the author is attempting to prove. In the long run the popularity and success of these restaurants depends solely on consumer satisfaction. A satisfied customer is one who gets what he asks for. Also said,” butter” can actually be perceived as “either butter or margarine”. This statement is baseless. Without conducting a survey to understand the opinion of his customers, there is no way to conclusively resolve that statement.

I feel, the first fault in the change made by Happy Pancake House is the procedure followed. The switch should start with an option on the menu between butter and margarine. This should be followed by an analysis of the popularity of Margarine as a substitute. Secondly, in the case of butter being a more desired alternative, the restaurant chain should reconsider their plan entirely. This switch could cause a long drawn, but assured, downfall in the sales of the restaurant. Most restaurant chains work on publicity by ‘word of mouth’. While considering the matter of Butter and Margarine as each other’s substitute, a survey should be carried out amongst a larger group of people of all ages ,who are not necessarily customers of the mentioned restaurant.

Hence while admitting to the plausibility of the author’s statements, I disagree with him. Without a more vivid view of the customer’s preference, I feel it is impossible to determine whether Butter and Margarine are replaceable with each other.