Hungry Jack's or Mcdonald's
Debate Rounds (3)
To support my stigma of affordability, hungry jacks constantly provides the public with reasonable coupons for when one may be short of money. Minded that McDonald's does this too, however, their prices never seem to be as affordable - I have also had problems pertinent to purchasing whenever eating at McDonald's - this has never occurred for me at hungry jacks.
In terms of customer friendliness, hungry jacks indubitably takes the cake on that one. As with McDonald's, I can count incidences on both hands pertaining to the staff treating me like a second class customer. Therefore, my opinion towards customer friendliness is also justified and supported by the previous committee of words.
My final thesis, hungry jacks is substantially more convenient than hungry jacks. Whenever dining at hungry jacks I have always been served quicker and without any hassle in contrast to McDonald's. Despite this, McDonald's also has an adequate service system although it does not hold a candle to the service received at hungry jacks.
In conclusion, hungry jacks, in my opinion, is undoubtedly more efficient, sufficient, coherent and less sumptuous than McDonald's.
McDonald's may provide their customers with the freedom to assemble their own burgers but does it cost more?
Finally, I have previously insinuated and justified my experiences with McDonald's affordability and compared and contrasted it with hungry jacks affordability, and I must say that I have always purchased hungry jacks meals without any problems or issues pertinent to expense.
However, hungry jacks in my opinion does have better quality food that since being flame grilled it is healthier too. Isn't the reason for eating at a restaurant, is to eat quality food for reasonable prices?
In addition, hungry jacks isn't open practically 24/7 because they believe in giving their workers time to sleep and replenish, plus they pay their workers more.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Bennett91 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: A very well articulated and thorough argument by Con Pro's round 2 rebuttal was paltry compared to the points Con made.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.