Did Ray Kroc rip off the McDoldalds brothers?
I wonder if this movie will touch on that.
Boston and Philly love to slander us, but they don t have as many fans as us
Depends what you mean by "rip off"
share
MovieChat Forums > The Founder (2017) Discussion > Did Ray Kroc rip off the McDoldalds brot...
You gotta be KIDDING! Ray Kroc made McD's what it is today, and it NEVER would have happened with the two McDonald idiots still involved. He bought them out for I tink $1.5 million each which was WAY more than the value at the time.
shareRay Kroc made McD's what it is today
Not sure if you intended on being ironic, but this is my favourite comment of the day. share
Not sure if you intended on being ironic, but this is my favourite comment of the day.
Why would you think it is ironic?? Kroc is the one that built McD's into the empire it is, being the business that created more franchisee millionaires than any other business in history (at least until the tech boom). share
He bought them out for I tink $1.5 million each which was WAY more than the value at the time.True. But he also cheated them out of a share of the MacDonald's profits PLUS he even cheated them out of the McDonalds brand name. (And if you want to see HOW he did both of the latter, see the film!) share
(SPOILERS ABOUND)
If the movie is an accurate reflection of the what the McDonalds brothers were thinking/feeling, then I don't think it was about their cut of the profits. The two brothers were raking in plenty of money from their original burger stand as well as their 0.5% cut of what the franchisees were bringing in. Yes, they could have had even more money, but as the brothers pointed out, they weren't greedy.
Look at the beginning of the movie - Ray and his first wife were doing OK. Ray made enough money for them to get by, but Ray wanted more. And no matter how much money Ray made, it was never enough. And it wasn't the money either, Ray had to trade-up wives as well. The McDonalds brothers were the same way in that they were both making a good living. The difference is that the McDonalds were content with what they had. Had Ray and the McDonalds never met, the McDonalds would have gone along perfectly happy while Ray would have gone on being miserable with his unfulfilled dreams.
I don't feel sorry for the McDonalds family losing on out what should be hundreds of millions of dollars every year, because the money was never important to them. I feel sorry for the McDonalds brothers because they lost their name and their restaurant. Was it really necessary for Ray to take away their name? Or to build a McDonalds across the street to drive them out of business? No. But we see Ray reveal that about himself when he says that running a restaurant is war. I believe the line was "If my competitor is drowning, I stick a hose in his mouth and turn the water on."
It seems throughout history, when there's a partnership of the idea guy and the money guy, the money guy wins in the end.
I don't feel sorry for the McDonalds family losing on out what should be hundreds of millions of dollars every year, because the money was never important to them.
There would have NEVER been hundreds of millions if the McD Brothers had remained. Kroc built the McD name, the company, all of it. The McD Brothers had a super efficient, revolutionary restaurant, but that was it, they would never have been able to make hundreds of millions, not even a small fraction of that. Kroc was the brains behind McD's..... share
The point is they weren't looking to make hundreds of millions.
shareThe point is they weren't looking to make hundreds of millions.
And the point I made was this, whether or not they were looking make "hundreds of millions" or not is not relevant, they never could have, or would have made that. McD's had less than 100 restaurants when Kroc bought them out. McD's at that point in time was not worth anything NEAR the $1,000,000 AFTER TAXES each brother received in 1961. share
I don't care how you spin this, he's still a fucking asshole. Money isn't everything in this world and the Mc brothers knew that. Then suddenly some shark comes in their midst and takes everything from them (oke, they got 1.4 mil out if it but they never wanted that!). Money = evil and that is shown over and over again.
shareMoney = evil
So you had given away all your money, I presume ?
Ray was born in 1902. People who lived through the Great Depression were often like that. They could have ten million in the bank, they still saw the wolf right outside the door.
shareAnd though I was born much later, in 1960, I still feel the same way. By the way, did you know the wolf reference came from Disney's early Depression era classic The Three Little Pigs, with the wolf and the financial situaiton and unemployment being pretty mjuch the same..that became a rallying cry. With how sometimes I think lprices rise, I som etyimes sing that song in a kind of homage to thirties, peop.e
shareTrue. But he also cheated them out of a share of the MacDonald's profits PLUS he even cheated them out of the McDonalds brand name. (And if you want to see HOW he did both of the latter, see the film!)
I have not seen the film, yet. But every TOP business school in America that has an MBA program uses the Ray Kroc/McD's as a classic case study.
Kroc did NOT cheat the brothers out of any profits, and he did not "steal" their name. Kroc paid far more $$$ than the name and business were worth at the time, far more. Kroc then built that business into the mammoth it is today, not the McDonald brothers. And if you do know the background, Kroc HAD to get rid of the McD brothers because they kept interfering with the business plan and vision Kroc had. McD's would never be what it is today if the brothers remained involved. share
If those are, in fact, the facts then the film is misrepresenting essential truths....
I need to see the film, but when Kroc bought out the Brothers he over paid for the value, at the time McD was nothing compared to what it became....
shareIt clearly was not worth what it is today but Kroc knew the value of it's future worth. According to the film their was NO business valuation. The McDonalds were portrayed as honest, hard working ethical folk who would rather be done with Kroc and his way of doing business. It was negatively affecting the health of one of the brothers.
Please see it.
No one "knew" the future.
It´s easy TODAY think that Kroc paid too little for a billionaire corporation, but AT THAT TIME, that was only a dream or a hope, not an assured truth.
It was the handshake deal on 1% of profits in perpetuity that he reneged on. Because he was an ass.
sharethe ONLY asses HERE were the Brothers McDonald.
shareEven the dumbest person of the universe would knew that he has no intention to honor the promise. And even then, they signed the deal.
I can´t feel sorry for them.
Agreed, if that's what happened in real life (and even if it isn't - just judging the characters portrayed in the film), they had to have known he'd never honor the 1%. They signed to be done with it and with Kroc.
shareThere was no such deal.
shareLet's dispense with the lies to start with.
Ray Kroc had a business agreement that allowed him to franchise stores using the McDonald's name and speedie system. So no he did not steal that.
Then he bought the complete rights to the brand by paying them $2.7M in 1961.
I'm tired of idiots saying he stole something.
Agreed though the cutthroat angle of McDonald's success isn't very flattering. Take for instance any such local establishment such as the original McDonald's stand, they're out there even to this day. No chance their products &/or ideas see the light of a global marketplace, unless a Ray Kroc of the world comes along & greases the wheels.
I only feel badly the brothers were cut off from the pool of trillions, not at all upset they had to see their restaurant idea be visited by billions of ppl.
...my essential 50 http://www.imdb.com/list/ls056413299/
I only feel badly the brothers were cut off from the pool of trillions
You feel bad that a pair of *beep* didnt get even more money? ..... Ok Idiot of the day right there. share
I totally agree with you. I love McDonalds.
Amanda Bynes is hot and Lindsay Lohan is not.
Just saw it and yes the film does more than just 'touch on that', it's the main theme/thrust of the entire film.
I don't want to give any spoilers but it was a really good film and well worth seeing, really good script and story.
I think it would have been a better film with a different director as the story itself is pretty great and could have had more done with it, not that I would have liked it directed by Martin Scorsese but a little Coen Bros or P.T. Anderson might have taken this really good film/story to the next level.
Oh yeah, I'm also now less likely to eat McDonalds having seen the film......so that's an extra plus!
Coen Bros, Frank Darabont or Robert Zemeckis would've been perfect for this.
shareNo, but it did.
(To Kroc naysayers only)
So Ray A.Kroc just bought the McDonald Brothers out? So What/ You sound like rap artists who hate Pat Boone (who would've munched on a McD.burger in his heydey when the Kroc franchise was still fresh and young).
You sound like Kathy Griffin attacking Donald Trump (Who Raymond A.Kroc is compared to-note I used the full names of President-YES, PRESIDENT Trump-and Mr.Kroc, out of respect) in bashing Ray Kroc and thinking
obviously that the brothers MCD should have kept the place as was. You disgust me. You don 't wan't Mr.Kroc (Mr.-again, respect) to have succeeded. What in hell is wrong with Ray Kroc wantin' a little income?
And that scene near the end, of the borhters in their San Bernadino flagship stand
a) having to be The Big M out of non-competition
b) being driven outta business by yet another Kroc McDonalds having just newly opened at that time
just across the street, all theabove described in the above paragraph in just one short time in 1961
Was gleeful to me! I loved it!
Amanda Bynes is hot and Lindsay Lohan is not.
I had a McQuarter poiunder and cocoa Cola at the Commerce, La La Land, Southern California McD today.:)
shareYes, in a way. He took their name and wouldn't even let them use their own name, then he reneged on the royalty deal of 1% which would have been about a billion dollars. They shook hands on the deal and he didn't honor it the bastard! But it's their fault for not asking for it in the contract. The film goes into the conflict between them.
I'm just watching it now and just had a thought. Michael Keaton in this reminds me a little of him in Pacific Heights; especially the scene where he comes in with flowers (;-p)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7oiBhdKwp8
There was no 1% deal. Neither of them complained about not receiving royalties in their lifetime and made no attempt legally to get them.
If they wanted lifetime royalties they should have never sold out. They were getting .5% of gross sales from every damn store already!!!!
People who use terms like Ray Kroc "took", "stole" "ripped off" are idiots. The brothers SOLD their interest in the company willingly!!! They received a lot of money for it. Kroc was hired to grow the brand and he did big time!
Ray Kroc was responsible for growing the franchise from 5 stores to 228. The brothers did not hardly have to do a thing. Then after doing all that he offered the brothers $2.7M(Worth 10X that today) to buy them out. They agreed!!!!!