Mcdonalds v. burger king, which is better?
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
williamfoote
Voting Style: | Open | Point System: | 7 Point | ||
Started: | 12/5/2013 | Category: | Funny | ||
Updated: | 5 years ago | Status: | Post Voting Period | ||
Viewed: | 2,675 times | Debate No: | 41780 |
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)
Mcdonalds is a better place than burger because its
1) world wide 2) a big part of the western culture 3) CHARITY 4) it can be cheaper
I have accepted your challenge to debate the supreme epic-ness of BK/McDonald's. The Con debater stated that McDonald's was superior because it is world-wide and "CHARITY" while in reality, BK is also worldwide and donates to charity. Although McDonald's is cheaper, quantity doesn't always beat quality. For example if you were to open a burger from McDonald's you would find a slab of meat that it looks nothing like the meat we call beef. This McDonald's has more customers and is expanding faster than BK is because of the fact that they have good marketing and campaigning, and cheap, bad quality food. Secondly, Con stated that McDonald's is superior because it is "a big part of the western culture". This argument does not prove the superiority of McDonald's but rather states that it is a big company. For example, I could state that AT&T is a big company, but that does not prove that it is a better carrier than Verizon/Sprint/T-Mobile (this is merely an example). Now to my points: I believe that BK is far better than McDonald's because of: 1. Better customer satisfaction 2. Looks 3. Quality In a study done by the American Customer Service Index (ACSI) in 2012, Burger King ranked higher than McDonald's, who had a 73 percent satisfaction rate, and have ranked dead last in the standings for 18 years straight years. This proves people are happier at Burger King which goes to show why BK is better than McDonald's. When looking at a McDonald's burger you see a golden-brown, flat-as-the-dickens sandwich rather than a luscious piece of amazing known as a hamburger, something BK burgers actually resemble unlike McDonald's monstrosity excuse for a burger (may be a slight exaggeration). Finally, while McDonald's food is usually cheaper, high-quality products are not always cheap. This can be proven by the comparison between Chinese outsourced phone cases compared to an OtterBox Defender, the latter being of way-higher quality. Sources: www.brandchannel.com www.examiner.com |
![]() |
sparkle1 forfeited this round.
Sparkle1 forfeited the round so I have no new arguments or rebuttals so I'll just re-state that BK has better customer satisfaction, food looks better, and have higher quality items. |
![]() |
sparkle1 forfeited this round.
Sparkle1 forfeited another round so I guess I will conclude my arguments. All in all, Burger King is far superior to McDonalds. Even though McDonalds may be cheaper, you get what you pay for. Burger King also has better customer service, the food looks better, and the food is high quality. |
![]() |
Post a Comment
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Correct123 5 years ago

Report this Comment
Posted by PatriciaCarroll698 5 years ago

Report this Comment
Posted by TheDeadLeafEcho 5 years ago

Report this Comment
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by TheLastMan 5 years ago
sparkle1 | williamfoote | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: Con forfeited. Conduct point goes to pro for that reason. Pro presented more reasons than Con. Pro also cited sources, but where the evidence was in his sources was unclear.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 5 years ago
sparkle1 | williamfoote | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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 | 3 |
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments were more convincing, but where the evidence was in his sources was unclear.