It’s clearly not simple conveyor belts. Look at the picture. There are big boxes the food goes into that have to be pushed out and then back. And then multiply that by the number of cars and you’ve got something that’s going to add too much maintenance costs onto a low margin restaurant.
It’s clearly not simple conveyor belts. Look at the picture. There are big boxes the food goes into that have to be pushed out and then back.
Yes, there’s one box attached to the conveyor that goes back and forth, and a second , larger box at the carport that has some degree of motion, adjustable by the consumer. The situation is explained in more detail in the article link I posted.
My point stands that there weren’t a lot of complex parts involved there. There was a motor for each unit inside the restaurant which probably received the greatest wear & tear, which wasn’t all that much, considering. Compare that to motors powering assembly line conveyor belts, and even at full capacity, these were operating a few minutes per hour. So, pretty light work.
And then multiply that by the number of cars and you’ve got something that’s going to add too much maintenance costs onto a low margin restaurant.
The whole point of the restaurant was to lower costs all around, not unlike robots & AI replacing labor, and evidently they were successful. The place did great business upon opening and went on for several years. From the article, it seems to be implied that consumers simply got tired of the gimmick after a few years, perhaps preferring the human touch. It did not mention maintenance issues nor associated costs.
it’s just simple conveyor belts in a region of mild weather… not a lot to go wrong, there
It’s clearly not simple conveyor belts. Look at the picture. There are big boxes the food goes into that have to be pushed out and then back. And then multiply that by the number of cars and you’ve got something that’s going to add too much maintenance costs onto a low margin restaurant.
Yes, there’s one box attached to the conveyor that goes back and forth, and a second , larger box at the carport that has some degree of motion, adjustable by the consumer. The situation is explained in more detail in the article link I posted.
My point stands that there weren’t a lot of complex parts involved there. There was a motor for each unit inside the restaurant which probably received the greatest wear & tear, which wasn’t all that much, considering. Compare that to motors powering assembly line conveyor belts, and even at full capacity, these were operating a few minutes per hour. So, pretty light work.
The whole point of the restaurant was to lower costs all around, not unlike robots & AI replacing labor, and evidently they were successful. The place did great business upon opening and went on for several years. From the article, it seems to be implied that consumers simply got tired of the gimmick after a few years, perhaps preferring the human touch. It did not mention maintenance issues nor associated costs.