Tim Hortons Case Analysis BUS800

Simon Campbell (500180401) Paper ID: 291984095

SUBMITTED TO: ISABELLE GIROUX SUBMITTED ON: MONDAY DECEMBER 10, 2012

2

Key Economic Variables: Industry: Tim Hortons competes in the Full-Service Restaurants industry, as defined by NAICS 722110, and includes key competitor McDonalds (Full-Serive Restaurants, 2012). This report will focus on the North American segment. Industry size: Full-Service restaurant industry has revenues of $7.6 billion and $82.2 billion in Canada and the U.S respectively (Datamonitor, 2012). Industry concentration: Highly fragmented, 70% of establishments are independent (Shields, 2008). Industry lifecycle: Growth stage. Although the market is showing signs of saturation, new locations are continuously being opened. Market is growing at a rate of 3.1% per year, and is anticipated to be worth $8.8 billion in Canada and $93.6 billion in the U.S by 2016 (Datamonitor, 2012). The industry is experiencing moderate growth. This industry grows whether or not the overall economy is growing. The U.S market is much larger than the Canadian market and represents much greater potential for industry competitors as well as Tim Hortons. As the industry is highly fragmented and still growing, industry members must increase their competitiveness, as growth will attract new entrants. External Analysis: Political/legal: Nutrition labeling is becoming more prevalent in major U.S cities, however in Canada a bill calling for improvements in restaurant labeling was defeated in 2007 (Beck, 2012). Economic factors: Entire food service industry continues to grow even in poor economic condition (DiPietro, 2011). Historical over-supply of coffee has driven down the price of this input (Argenti, 2004). Social: increasing obesity rates, especially in the U.S, is sparking debate among policy makers and social interest groups (Burton, 2009). There is an all-time high level of distrust against corporations (Argenti, 2004). Legal and regulatory issues are much more prevalent in the United States, however industry members and Tim Hortons must monitor progress or changes in Canada. Industry members can expect to perform well financially even in harsh economic climates. With increasing obesity rates and public distrust of corporations, industry members must establish trust and good will among consumers with expanded CSR and public relations initiatives. Porters 5 Forces: Bargaining power of buyers: Moderate-Strong. There is a lack of switch costs within a given price range, and choice is dependant on consumers taste which can change daily. There is a high price elasticity of demand as industry offerings are not essentials (Datamonitor, 2012). Consumers are small and numerous. Bargaining power of suppliers: Moderate-Strong. Keeping costs down is important for industry members, and maintaining reliable relationships with suppliers of quality goods is important for success. Supplier inputs are essential. Suppliers are large and few (Datamonitor, 2012). Threat of new entry: Fierce. High reliance on franchising for distribution of industry members reduces entry costs. This industry does not require a large capital outlay (reflected by high fragmentation) and is experiencing moderate growth. Industry member retaliation is high and the brand strength of major competitors is high (Datamonitor, 2012). Threat of substitution: Moderate. A wide variety of other forms of foodservice and food retailing exist. These offer consumers more control over their diet and health concerns are an increasingly important to consumers (Datamonitor, 2012). Rivalry among competing sellers in the industry: Strong. Consumers are price sensitive and have low switch costs. Suppliers are large and few relative to industry members. Low capital investment for franchising models, fragmentation, the use of franchising, and moderate industry growth increases the threat of new entry. Rivalry among industry members is strong and can be expected to increase. Overall, the industry is relatively unattractive as the competition is extremely strong, however the size of the market in the U.S and its growth suggest that Tim Hortons can expect new competitors to enter the industry.

3

Forces driving industry change: Changing social concerns, values, lifestyles: There has been an increased trend towards eating out (Scourboutakos, 2012), however customers are also becoming more health conscious. Some industry members, such as McDonalds, have faced numerous class action lawsuits over the past several years due to health concerns (Buchholz, 2003). Industry growth rate: The market is growing at a rate of 3.1% per year, and growth is anticipated in the next several years in both Canada and the US (Datamonitor, 2012). With consideration that the majority of competitors are independent, making up 70% of the market (Sheilds, 2008), the growth can be expected to attract many new independent competitors or franchisees as people seek a low-cost method of entry. Tim Hortons has begun to focus on growing their share of the lunch market with the introduction of high-quality, hot Panini sandwiches (Q3 2012 Tim Hortons, 2012), and offering consumers various healthy meal choices. Further, Tim Hortons extensive use of a franchised business model will allow them to increase their market penetration in both Canada and the U.S, as proprietors will continue to seek a cost-effective method of entry into this growing industry.

Strategic Group Map: The strategic group map, based on the relationship between Price/Quality and Geographic Coverage of the competitors. Starbucks and McDonalds are the most favourably positioned competitors, each occupying a unique segment of the market (differing only on the Price/Quality relationship of their offerings). Tim Hortons competes very closely with Dunkin Donuts, and is slightly larger despite generating most of its business in the smaller Canadian market (Heffes, 2010). Tim Hortons offers slightly higher quality products than Dunkin Donuts, and as it does operate in both Canada and the U.S,

has greater North American market coverage. KSF: Marketing related: Industry is characterized by substantial investment in brand capital (Dahlstrom, 1999) and brand power is considered the greatest weapon in the industry (Datamonitor, 2012). Brands with strong relationships with their customers are better positioned to withstand problems caused by service failures (Kathryn, 2006) and bad publicity. Distribution: The size of the network is key to success. Increasing distribution and coverage depends on the ability to attract partners such as franchisees. The use of franchising can be a source of competitive advantage, creating first mover advantage (Yolanda, 2011). Operations: quality control, cleanliness, and standardization are important for customer satisfaction, which generates long-term benefits including brand loyalty and sustained revenues (DiPietro, 2011). Tim Hortons has done an excellent job of marketing their brand to the point where they have become part of peoples’ lives and lifestyles in Canada (Summerville, 2002). Tim Hortons has been able to successfully distribute their products across Canada, making themselves the country’s largest restaurant chain (Staios, 2011) with 99% of stores being owned and operated by Franchisees (Heffes, 2010, p.23). Tim Hortons managed to open 44 new restaurants in Canada and 22 in the U.S in Q3 2012. Tim Hortons has been working diligently to improve customer experience in their restaurants with various new improvements to interiors and exteriors, as well as the addition of free wifi (Q3 2012 Tim Hortons, 2012). Tim Hortons has done extremely well matching the industry’s key success factors to their business, which has resulted in their current success. Tim Hortons must build off of these successes in order to remain a market leader in an industry that can be expected to become more competitive.

4

Competitor Analysis: Competitor Strengths Weaknesses Threat McDonalds • Massive global presence with 32,737

restaurants in 117 countries (Datamonitor, 2012).

• Strong financial performance and growth.

• Slue of class action lawsuits against the firm over past decade (Buchholz, 2003).

• Major threat, considered to be Tim Hortons’ main competitor as they are in all of the same market (Heffes, 2010).

Dunkin Donuts • Growth through franchising and 99% of restaurants are franchised (Schmidt, 1999).

• Franchisees receive rigorous training (Schmidt, 1999).

• Recent aggressive growth focused on coffee (Bryan, 2012).

• Americas top selling retailer of coffee (per cup basis) at 2.7 million cups per day (Bryan, 2012).

• Low-end offering (Bryan, 2012). • Operates solely in the U.S market. • Poor financial performance.

• Represents a major threat in the U.S market as they have been expanding their offerings and have placed a strong focus on the coffee segment. Dunkin Donuts utilizes a similar business model and distribution strategy to Tim Hortons.

Starbucks • Recognized as being committed to CSR (Angreti, 2004).

• Low employee turnover (Angreti, 2004).

• Rapid expansion and fiercely loyal customers (Ruzich, 2008).

• Distinct, unique position (Ruzich, 2008).

• Contradicting strategy of trying to be a world-dominant corporation while retaining image of friendly small business (Ruzich, 2008).

• Experienced a dilution in the brand image from over-expanding and modifying the offering (Bryan, 2008).

• Starbucks is an indirect competitor as they do not compete within the Full-Service Restaurant industry, however they do compete in some of the segments that Tim Hortons competes in, including the essential coffee and snack segments.

Independents • Represent 70% of the market (Shields, 2008).

• Do not have substantial geographic coverage, and usually consist of one, or a small number of locations.

• Do not have substantial resources to invest in brand capital and distribution.

• Independents do not represent a significant threat to Tim Hortons as, individually, they are extremely small and do not have the opportunity for major expansion.

Tim Hortons’ main competitor in both the Canadian and U.S markets is McDonalds (Heffes, 2010). McDonalds is an extremely international brand with operations in 117 countries (Datamonitor, 2012), and a strong presence in both Canada and the U.S. Tim Hortons receives direct competition in the U.S. from Dunkin Donuts, who utilizes a business model extremely similar to that of Tim Hortons and has similar offerings in the U.S. market. Tim Hortons will have difficulty differentiating from Dunkin Donuts as they continue to expand into the U.S. Starbucks is a high-end offering competing indirectly with Tim Hortons. Starbucks’ main focus is on coffee, however they also offer a wide range of healthy snack alternatives. This is aligned with shifts in consumer lifestyles and therefore does create a strong, albeit indirect form of competition. Independent restaurants and chains represent the majority of the market, however individually they are small and lack geographic coverage and brand reputation. They also represent a form of indirect competition. Tim Hortons must focus its efforts on differentiating from their major competitors, McDonalds and Dunkin Donuts, as they continue to expand into the U.S. Mission: Deliver superior quality products and services for our guests and communities through leadership, innovation, and partnerships (Tim Hortons, 2009). Vision: “To be the quality leader in everything we do” (Tim Hortons, 2009). Tim Hortons’ mission is aligned with its vision. Their vision is guiding the firm to be a leader in quality, however it does not specify what products or markets they will serve. Senior management in the firm is committed to the notion that it must constantly widen and adapt its offering to remain relevant to its consumers (Heffes, 2010). With that, this lack of clarity does not present a strategic issue. Value Chain:

5

Supply of raw materials: Tim Hortons is involved in grass root projects in local communities where they source their coffee to help farmers produce higher quality coffee more efficiently. Tim Hortons has developed a clear set of outlines for all suppliers to ensure they meet regulatory and ethical standards. Manufacturing: Tim Hortons owns several roasting plants in Rochester, Hamilton and Oakville. Distribution & Warehousing: Tim Hortons owns and operates distribution centers that are able to serve its restaurants in Ontario and Quebec, however it primarily relies on third party distributors to serve the rest of Canada and the U.S (Tim Hortons, 2011b). Restaurants: Over 99% of Tim Hortons’ full-serve restaurants are owned and operated by franchisees. A significant part of Tim Hortons’ business model includes renting restaurant locations to franchisees. Tim Hortons owns 83% of the real estate in its full-serve restaurant system (Tim Hortons, 2011b, p.5). In 2011 Rents and royalties accounted for approximately 36% of total Revenues (Tim Hortons, 2011a, p.47). Marketing: Tim Hortons has established itself as a part of everyday life in Canada (Tim Hortons, 2011b), and is widely recognized, but less so in the U.S. (Heffes, 2010). In Canada, Tim Hortons has achieved nearly universal brand recognition (Tim Hortons, 2011a, p.10). Tim Hortons has been pressing in the U.S market, and has made its product available at certain NHL, NBA, and college football stadiums (Tim Hortons, 2011a, p.10). Profit margin: Tim Hortons’ Net Profit Margin was 13.52% for the 2011 fiscal year (Tim Hortons, 2011a, p.79). Tim Hortons has been extremely effective in Canada. Further expansion into the U.S may require more control of distribution channels. Tim Hortons should continue to apply its unique business model including land ownership to continue to generate revenues from property rents. VRIO:

Resource Valuable Rare Difficult to Imitate

Supported by Org Competitive Implications Performance

Brand image Yes Yes (in Canada) Yes (in Canada) Yes Sustainable Competitive Advantage (in Canada)

Above Normal

Distribution method

Yes No No No Competitive Parity Normal

Land ownership Yes Yes No No Temp. Competitive Advantage

Above Normal

Tim Hortons’ brand image supplies them sustainable competitive advantage, however only in Canada. In the U.S their brand image is valuable, but it is not rare. Tim Hortons will have to continue to develop their brand image in the U.S in order to grow in this market. Tim Hortons distributes its products through a highly franchised model. Franchising permits expansion at low cost, and a higher percentage of franchised outlets has a positive correlation with network size (Yolanda, 2011). This however, is not rare, as key competitor Dunkin Donuts utilizes the same method on a similar scale (Dunkin Brands, 2011). Tim Hortons has been able to generate substantial revenues by owning the majority of its physical stores. This is valuable and unique, however it is easy to imitate. As this has proven to be effective, it is likely that competitors will begin to mimic this strategy in the future. Financial analysis:

6

Tim Hortons has experienced strong financial growth between 2007 and 2011 with revenues growing from $2-$2.8 billion. Tim Hortons has also experienced improvements in Net Income over the same period, except over the past year. Net Income grew from $297 million in 2007 to $385 million in 2011. Despite this overall improvement, Net Income has been cut in half

between 2010 and 2011, declining sharply from $647 million in 2010. 2010’s Net Income was not driven by substantial revenue gains, but rather by lower operating costs and a higher Net Profit Margin. On average Tim Hortons’ Costs/Expenses have increased steadily with Revenue, suggesting no substantial increases in efficiency. (Tim Hortons, 2011a, p.79-80). Tim Hortons’ Revenues, Net Income, and EPS have been compared with key competitors McDonalds and Dunkin Brands. All three firms have experienced growth in revenues over the past 5 years, with McDonalds’ growth and totals leading the industry. McDonalds has also experienced consistent, but modest growth in their EPS, which increased from $1.93 to $5.27 (McDonalds, 2011, p.7). Tim Hortons has been less consistent ranging from $1.43 in 2007 to $3.58 in 2010, and dropping to $2.35 in 2011 (Tim Hortons, 2011a, p.79). Dunkin Brands has performed poorly with a consistently negative EPS. Tim Hortons’ Net Profit Margins have consistently hovered around 13%, except for 2010 when they were 25% (Tim Hortons, 2011a, p.79). McDonalds has been able to increase their efficiency and grow their profit margins from 10.51% in 2007 to the 20% range between 2009 and 2011 (McDonalds, 2011, p.7). Dunkin has been, again extremely inconsistent and is trailing the industry. Despite strong gains, Tim Hortons has a weak Working Capital Ratio, which at its highest was 0.955 in 2010, but dropped to 0.214 in 2011, which is aligned with historical figures. As current liabilities exceed current assets, Tim Hortons is consistenly lacking liquidity. Tim Hortons consistently maintains a Debt-to-Equity ratio below 0.5, however it has increased in 2011 to 0.396 from 0.303 in 2010. This suggests that Tim Hortons’ borrowing has increased and signals increasing levels of debt. Tim Hortons has an aggressive four-year strategic plan, including international expansion strategy (N.a, 2012), controlling current and total debt will be important to sustain this growth. Increasing revenues and general increases in Net Income suggest that to-date, expansions have been successful. SWOT:

Strenghts: • Brand image in Canada and dominance of Canadian market. • Strong involvement with suppliers. • Vertical integration. • Business model. • Historical consistence in financial performance and profitability. • Revenue and business growth.

Weaknesses: • Lacking brand strength in larger U.S market. • Lack of controlled distribution in U.S. • Reduction in Net Profit Margins between 2010 and 2011.

Opportunities: • Growth in larger U.S. market. • Industry growth. • Acquire U.S. distribution channel for economcies of scale and growth

support. • Pressure Dunkin Brands in U.S with higher quality offerings. • Capitalize on Dunkin Brands relatively weak financial standing.

Threats: • Highly fragmented and competitive industry. • Growth increases threat of new entry. • Socio-political environment in U.S. • Low buyer switch costs. • Key competitors Dunkin Brands and McDonalds.

Issues to address: • Leverage their brand strength and performance in Canada into the larger U.S market. • Increase the efficiency of their operations over time to help increase their Net Profit Margin. • Continue adapting offerings to meet market demands. Do this in a way that capitalizes on

socio-political changes in the U.S. to establish stronger position and make the brand unique relative to comeptitors such as Dunkin Brands.

7

Strategic Issues & Recommendations:

Tim Hortons is the industry leader in the Canadian market. The firm is ubiquitous in Canada

and has become a part of peoples’ lifestyles (Summerville, 2002). The organization does have

operations in the U.S and has been expanding, but most of its profits are made in Canada (Heffes,

2010). Tim Hortons continues to expand in the smaller Canadian market at a rate nearly double of

that in the States, opening 44 new locations in Canada to 22 in the U.S in Q3 of 2012 (Q3 2012 Tim

Hortons, 2012). With international operations and a specific strategic focus on international growth

(N.a., 2012), Tim Hortons must find a way to leverage their success and brand strength from Canada,

into the much larger U.S. market. There is a substantial opportunity for Tim Hortons in the U.S.

market, especially when considering the weak financial position of Dunkin Brands, and consumer

tastes shifting to healthier options. In the U.S. market, Tim Hortons has undertaken marketing

initiatives to begin to embed the brand in U.S. culture, as it has done successfully in Canada. To do

so, Tim Hortons has begun to establish relationships with key professional and collegiate sports

franchises, in order to help diffuse the brand across the American market and help develop certain

lifestyle associations with the brand. Recently, Tim Hortons entered into a North America wide

agreement with Kraft Foods, to market and distribute their coffee in the single-serve market via

Kraft’s Tassimo brand (Q3 2012 Tim Hortons, 2012). This strategic marketing initiative will help the

organization gain further market penetration by giving consumers more ways to use its coffee

products. Tim Hortons needs to continue these initiatives and continue establishing relationships with

organizations that will help further diffuse the brand across the U.S. and promote positive brand

associations.

Tim Hortons works closely with certain suppliers of raw materials, particularly suppliers of

coffee. Further, Tim Hortons has been able to successfully vertically integrate part of their operations

into the manufacturing and distribution portion of their supply chain. Although these activities are

8

valuable, they have not lead to substantial increases in efficiency by reducing operating costs. Tim

Hortons’ Net Profit Margins on an annual basis from 2007 to 2011 have been; 14.55%, 13.84%,

13.11%, 25.51%, and 13.52% (Tim Hortons, 2011a, p.79). Over this same period, McDonalds has

been able to demonstrate substantial improvements in operating efficiency, consistently improving or

maintaining their Net Profit Margin. This has drastically increased the competitiveness of McDonalds

and helped the firm grow. As the market continues to grow, Tim Hortons must find ways to improve

their operating efficiency to capitalize on growth opportunities and penetrate further into the U.S.

market. Improvements in efficiency will also be crucial to help defend against the market leader

Mcdonalds, as well as the threat of new entrants into this growing market. Tim Hortons must look to

further vertically integrate their operations to become completely independent of third party

distributors and fully capitalize on the economies of scale that can be realized by further developing

their U.S. operations. Tim Hortons has a unique business model which allows them to gain

substantial revenues from rent while effectively utilizing franchising to reduce costs associated with

increases in market presence and distribution. Tim Hortons must continue to effectively utilize this

model as they continue to expand.

Tim Hortons’ management has demonstrated commitment to adapting their product offerings

and menu items in order to remain relevant as consumer tastes shift (Heffes, 2010). Tim Hortons has

made several adaptations recently to their offerings including the addition of high-quality Panini

sandwiches (Q3 2012 Tim Hortons, 2012). This reflects changing consumer tastes and lifestyles and

helps further differentiate Tim Hortons from Dunkin Brands. However, the organization has also

entered into the ice cream market in the U.S to increase traffic during low-demand periods (Heffes,

2010) and compete directly with Dunkin Brands Baskin Robins chain. Although this initiative reflects

a widening of offerings to remain relevant to consumers and demonstrates an offensive maneuver

against Dunkin Brands and McDonalds, it is not necessarily aligned with changing lifestyles and

9

increased health consciousness. Tim Hortons must be cautious when expanding its offerings in a way

that is not aligned with the host country’s social values.

Tim Hortons’ expansion efforts into the U.S. have been successful so far. In 2007, Tim

Hortons had 398 locations in the American market (Tim Hortons, 2011a, p.80). By 2011, that number

grew to 714 locations (Tim Hortons, 2011a, p.80). Tim Hortons should focus on continuing this

growth and expansion to put further pressure on Dunkin Brands and opportunistically capture market

share. Dunkin Brands has been struggling financially. Although Dunkin Brands may be a potential

acquisition candidate, Tim Hortons should focus on expanding their own operations, using their

superior financial strength, market-centric offerings, and unique business model to acquire market

share from Dunkin Brands. Tim Hortons needs to ensure they maintain a strong Debt-to-Equity ratio

while expanding, and that they do not rely on excessive borrowing to finance their growth. Tim

Hortons’ prudent financial management has resulted in historically strong financial performance.

However, over the past year their Debt-to-Equity ratio has increased and their Net Profit Margin and

Earnings per Share have decreased. Tim Hortons needs to ensure that they grow at a pace that does

not put financial strain on the organization, and that it remains financially viable. The firm’s working

capital ratio is extremely weak and has always been bellow 2:1, signifying an inability to liquidate

current assets. With that, Tim Hortons does have substantial assets in Property and Equipment,

representing approximately 66% of Total Assets (Tim Hortons, 2011a, p.104). This reflects their

business model, which is unique to the industry an entails owning retail locations and renting them to

proprietors, allowing the firm to securely and reliably generate considerable revenues. With these

items in consideration, Tim Hortons is poised to continue their expansion into the North American

market.

10

References: Argenti, P. A. (2004). Collaborating with activists: How Starbucks works with NGOs. California

Management Review, 47(1), 91-116. Beck, L. (2012, September 6). Would Calorie Count On Menus Change Your Fast-Food Order? The

Globe and Mail. Retrieved from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/would-calorie-counts-on-menus-change-your-fast-food-order/article4187568/

Bryan, C. S., Robert, C. C., & Bradley, W. B. (2012). Starbucks: Maintaining a clear position. ().

Cullowhee, United States, Cullowhee: The DreamCatchers Group, LLC. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1037815154?accountid=13631

Buchholz, T. (2003). Are Fast-Food Establishments Making Americans Fat? Journal of Controversial

Medical Claims, 10(4). Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/ ehost/detail?vid=3&hid=25&sid=15710b9bc8734b12b17637133352cf40%40sessionmgr13&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=11611294

Burton, S., Howlett, E., & Andrea, H. T. (2009). Food for thought: How will the nutrition labeling of

quick service restaurant menu items influence consumers' product evaluations, purchase intentions, and choices? Journal of Retailing, 85(3), 258-273. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2009.04.007

Dahlstrom, R., & Nygaard, A. (1999). Ownership decisions in plural contractual systems twelve

networks from the quick service restaurant industry. European Journal of Marketing, 33(1), 59-87. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/237024870?accountid=13631

Datamonitor. (2012). Canada – Fast Food. Retrieved from

http://bi.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/essentials/article/GALE|A281923463/34dd38e054fbff2516ac41a1ac392caf?u=rpu_main

DiPietro, R. B., H.G. Parsa, & Gregory, A. (2011). Restaurant QSC inspections and financial

performance: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 23(7), 982-999. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09596111111167560

Dunkin Brands, Inc. (2011). Annual Report. Retrieved from

http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ABEA-68SCR9/2207589156x0x559505/00C55D3E-37E3-4AC0-B5E9-90E358901198/DNKN_2011_ANNUAL_REPORT_FINAL.pdf

Full-Service Restaurants. (2012). Business Insights: Essentials [Data file]. Retrieved from

http://bi.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/essentials/industry/722110?u=rpu_main Heffes, E. M. (2010). Cynthia Devine. Financial Executive, 26(7), 22-26.

11

Kathryn, A. B., Michael, S. L., & Elizabeth, F. L. (2006). Is that a finger in my chili? using affective advertising for postcrisis brand repair. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 47(2), 106-120,100. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/209712638?accountid=13631

McDonalds. (2011). Annual Report. Retrieved from

http://www.mcdpressoffice.eu/downloads/2011_Annual_Report.pdf N.a. (2012). Tim Hortons launches new restaurant in Middle East. (2012). Food and Beverage Close

– Up. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1151878771?accountid=13631

Q3 2012 Tim Hortons inc. earnings conference call - final. (2012, Nov 08). Fair Disclosure Wire.

Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1183056308?accountid=13631

RUZICH, C. M. (2008). For the love of joe: The language of Starbucks. Journal Of Popular Culture,

41(3), 428-442. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5931.2008.00529.x Schmidt, R. A., & Oldfield, B. M. (1999). Dunkin' donuts - the birth of a new distribution and

franchising concept. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 16(4), 376-385. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/220134648?accountid=13631

Scourboutakos, M. J., & L'Abbé, M. R. (2012). Restaurant menus: Calories, caloric density, and

serving size. American Journal Of Preventive Medicine, 43(3), 249-255. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2012.05.018

Shields, J., & Shelleman, J. (2008). Restaurant revenue management practice. Journal of Applied

Management and Entrepreneurship, 13(4), 47-63. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/203904160?accountid=13631

Staios, G., Khan, W. U., M.Sc, Chiuccariello, L., Sellings, L. H., PhD., De Sousa, K., Wang, S., . . .

Elkader, A. K., PhD. (2011). Tabulating ingestion of mocha solution (TIMS): A longitudinal prospective cohort study. Canadian Medical Association.Journal, 183(18), 2149-2150. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/922565213?accountid=13631

Summerville, T. (2002). Selling us an horizon of insignificance. Canadian Issues, 56-60. Retrieved

from http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/208697755?accountid=13631

12

Tim Hortons. (2009). Frequently Asked Questions. Retrieved from http://www.timhortons.com/ca/en/about/faq.html.

Tim Hortons. (2011a). Annual Report. Retrieved from http://annualreport.timhortons.com Tim Hortons. (2011b). Sustainability & Responsibility Summary Report. Retrieved from

http://sustainabilityreport.timhortons.com/pdf/Summary_report_full.pdf Yolanda Polo-Redondo, Victoria Bordonaba-Juste, & Laura, L. P. (2011). Determinants of firm size

in the franchise distribution system. European Journal of Marketing, 45(1), 170-190. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090561111095649