There
is an old saying in the restaurant business: If at first you don't succeed, try
again. That may be the philosophy behind Circle
K's newest strategy. However, according to Steven Johnson, Grocerant Guru® at
Tacoma, WA based Foodservice
Solutions® this bet on the past just might become a learning lesson not a
path forward.
The
convenience-store giant, together with The Briad Group, is preparing to open
what it calls its first multi-brand Circle K travel center in
Binghamton, New York. The 6,800-square-foot facility at 265 Court Street is
designed to combine a Circle K convenience store, eight fuel pumps, two
dedicated drive-thru lanes, Dunkin', Wendy's and a nontraditional Papa Johns
offering. A second location in Watertown, New York, is under construction and
is expected to open in January 2027. Briad says it ultimately could develop as
many as 40 locations under its long-term Circle
K agreement.
On
paper, it sounds like the future of the convenience-store foodservice business.
From
the historical perspective of the Grocerant Guru®, however, it also
sounds remarkably familiar.
And
that deserves a closer look.
Co-branding isn't new. The industry has been trying it for
decades.
Restaurant
companies discovered co-branding decades ago.
In
the 1990s and early 2000s, the basic proposition was seductive: Put two
restaurant brands under one roof, share real estate and infrastructure, capture
more consumer occasions, expand dayparts and give customers more choices.
Yum
Brands became perhaps the industry's most famous practitioner, combining KFC,
Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, A&W and Long John Silver's in various combinations.
A
2005 Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly analysis found that
Yum's co-branding strategy had, at that point, typically generated sales
approximately 30% higher than comparable single-brand units. But the research
also identified an important problem: operational complexity.
That
distinction matters.
Co-branding
can increase the number of things a consumer can buy without necessarily
increasing the value of the host brand.
And
restaurant history provides several cautionary examples.
1. KFC + A&W
KFC
and A&W represented an early attempt to put different restaurant
propositions under the same roof.
The
idea was logical: chicken plus burgers/root beer creates more choice.
But
eventually A&W became one of the brands Yum Brands decided no longer fit
its long-term strategy.
In
2011, Yum sold A&W and Long John Silver's. Yum reported $86 million in
pretax losses and other costs, primarily associated with closures and
impairment, related to those divestitures.
The
lesson isn't that putting two brands together can never work.
The
lesson is that more brands don't automatically create a stronger business.
2. Long John Silver's + other Yum brands
Long
John Silver's was another component of Yum's multibranding experiment.
The
company eventually concluded that both A&W and Long John Silver's no longer
fit its long-term growth strategy and sold the brands in 2011.
The
historical irony is striking.
The
same corporate portfolio that once promoted multibranding as a way to make
restaurant real estate more productive ultimately simplified the portfolio.
Today,
Yum's principal concepts are KFC, Taco Bell, Pizza Hut and Habit Burger &
Grill.
3. Dual-concept KFC/Taco Bell locations
KFC/Taco
Bell became one of the industry's best-known co-branded combinations.
But
even where the combination remained viable, franchise documents demonstrate one
of the industry's recurring problems: dual-concept restaurants can require
larger buildings, additional equipment, more signage and greater remodeling
costs.
One
franchise company's SEC filing specifically noted that a dual-concept
restaurant generally required more equipment and a larger building, increasing
costs when franchise standards changed.
And
that is the part of co-branding that consumers never see.
They
see more logos.
Operators
see more systems.
4. McDonald's + Krispy Kreme
The
most recent example is particularly relevant because it occurred in the middle
of today's consumer environment.
McDonald's
and Krispy Kreme launched a major partnership in 2024, putting Krispy Kreme
doughnuts into McDonald's restaurants.
But
the program struggled to scale. By May 2025, fewer than 20% of McDonald's
locations were selling Krispy Kreme doughnuts, and Krispy Kreme paused further
expansion. The companies ultimately ended the partnership in 2025 after Krispy
Kreme concluded it was not profitable enough to sustain.
The
problem wasn't awareness.
Everybody
knew McDonald's.
Everybody
knew Krispy Kreme.
The
problem was economics, logistics and consumer demand.
That's
an important warning for Circle K.
So why is Circle K recycling the co-branding template?
That
is the question I would ask.
Why
does Circle K believe that a restaurant co-branding formula that has repeatedly
encountered operational and economic challenges will suddenly become a winning
formula inside convenience retail in 2026?
Perhaps
the answer is that Circle K isn't actually trying to build a traditional
co-branded restaurant.
Perhaps
it is trying to build something different:
a
convenience-store travel destination.
That
distinction matters.
The
Binghamton project isn't simply a KFC/Taco Bell-style shared restaurant. It
combines fuel + convenience retail + multiple restaurant brands + drive-thru
access.
Briad
says the building was specifically engineered around the partnership, with
Circle K, Dunkin', Wendy's and Papa Johns integrated into one facility.
That's
different architecture.
But
architecture doesn't automatically create consumer value.
What is Circle K going to do differently?
This
is where the strategy needs to be tested.
Circle
K should be able to answer five very simple questions:
1.
What does Circle K own in the consumer's mind?
If
the consumer comes for Dunkin' coffee, Wendy's lunch and Papa Johns pizza, does
the consumer remember Circle K—or simply remember the restaurant brands?
2.
What is the Circle K reason to visit?
If
three national restaurant brands are doing the food marketing, what unique food
proposition does Circle K create?
3.
Does the customer experience become easier or more complicated?
Three
restaurant brands can mean three menus, three operating systems, three sets of
expectations and potentially three different customer journeys.
4.
Does co-branding increase Circle K's basket—or merely rent Circle K's real
estate to other brands?
That's
a critical distinction.
5.
What happens when consumers stop thinking in restaurant categories?
That
last question may be the most important of all.
The consumer has already moved beyond the industry's silos
The
modern consumer doesn't necessarily think:
"I
need to visit a convenience store."
Or:
"I
need to visit a restaurant."
Or:
"I
need to visit a grocery store."
Consumers
increasingly think in terms of occasions.
Breakfast.
Lunch.
Dinner.
Snack.
Coffee.
A
cold drink.
Something
portable.
Something
fresh.
Something
fast.
Something
affordable.
That's
the foundation of the Grocerant Niche.
The
consumer doesn't care which industry supplied the food.
The
consumer cares about the food, price, value, quality, convenience and
experience.
That
is why I have argued for decades that there are no silos in the consumer's
mind.
The
restaurant industry can divide itself into QSR, fast casual, convenience,
grocery, foodservice and retail.
Consumers
don't have to.
The real Circle K opportunity isn't co-branding
Circle
K already possesses something extremely valuable:
a
consumer relationship built around convenience.
Fuel.
Cold
beverages.
Coffee.
Snacks.
Fresh
food.
Prepared
food.
Impulse
purchases.
Speed.
Location.
Extended
hours.
Those
are assets.
Adding
recognizable restaurant logos doesn't necessarily strengthen those assets.
It
may actually create a branding paradox.
If
Wendy's is the destination for burgers, Dunkin' is the destination for coffee
and Papa Johns is the destination for pizza, what is Circle K's food
identity?
That's
the question.
And
it becomes even more important as convenience retailers increasingly build
their own fresh-food identities.
The
competitive battlefield isn't simply:
Circle
K vs. Wendy's.
It
is:
Who
owns the consumer's food occasion?
Three Insights from the Grocerant Guru®
1. Co-branding adds logos; it doesn't necessarily add
value.
The
history of restaurant co-branding demonstrates that putting recognizable brands
under one roof can create incremental sales, but it can also create operational
complexity, higher costs and conflicting brand priorities. Yum's experience
with A&W and Long John Silver's and the McDonald's-Krispy Kreme partnership
demonstrate that famous brands alone don't guarantee sustainable economics.
2. The 2026 consumer is buying occasions—not restaurant
brands.
The
consumer has moved toward a Mix-and-Match Meal Component mentality.
Coffee
from one brand.
A
breakfast sandwich from another.
A
beverage from the convenience store.
A
snack from a different section.
Dinner
assembled from multiple sources.
The
consumer doesn't need Circle K to put three restaurant brands under one roof.
The
consumer needs Circle K to make the entire food occasion faster, easier,
fresher and more valuable.
3. Circle K should build the Circle K food brand—not become
a billboard for everybody else's brands.
This
is the biggest strategic question.
If
consumers enter a Circle K travel center and immediately think Dunkin',
Wendy's and Papa Johns, then Circle K has created a terrific location for
three restaurant brands.
But
if consumers enter and think:
"Circle
K is where I can get whatever food I want, quickly, affordably and
conveniently,"
then
Circle K has created something much more powerful.
That's
the difference between co-branding and brand building.
And
from the perspective of the Grocerant Guru®, that distinction could
determine whether Circle K's 2026 multi-brand travel-center strategy becomes a
genuine next-generation convenience model—or simply the industry's latest
attempt to make an old co-branding formula work in a new building.
For international corporate
presentations, educational forums, or keynotes contact: Steven Johnson
Grocerant Guru® at Tacoma, WA based Foodservice Solutions. His extensive experience as a multi-unit
restaurant operator, consultant, brand / product positioning expert and public
speaking will leave success clues for all. For more information visit www.GrocerantGuru.com, www.FoodserviceSolutions.us or call
1-253-759-7869
