If
Papa Murphy’s is closing
underperforming pizza restaurants, why should anyone believe adding frozen
yogurt will fix the underlying problem asks Steven Johnson, Grocerant Guru®
Founder, Foodservice Solutions®,
Tacoma, Washington.
That
is the consumer test Papa Murphy’s and parent company MTY Food Group need to
answer before celebrating their latest co-branding strategy.
Three
franchise agreements to combine Papa
Murphy’s Take ’n’ Bake pizza with Pinkberry
frozen yogurt represent a business development announcement. They do not
prove stronger consumer demand, more frequent visits, improved profitability,
or a successful turnaround.
My
challenge to Papa Murphy’s and MTY is simple: Prove that consumers want the
combination before treating co-branding as a growth strategy.
Are
consumers rejecting Papa Murphy’s because the brand is not meeting their needs?
Or is management betting that adding a second brand will make the existing
business more attractive?
That
distinction matters.
From
the perspective of the Grocerant Guru®, consumers do not organize their lives
around corporate portfolios, franchise agreements, or shared real estate. They
organize food purchases around eating occasions, convenience, taste, price,
portability, and perceived value.
A
family looking for dinner does not automatically want frozen yogurt. A consumer
craving dessert does not automatically want take-and-bake pizza. Putting both
brands under one roof may create operating efficiencies, but efficiencies alone
do not guarantee incremental customers, repeat visits, or stronger profits.
If
the combination generates new customers, more frequent visits, stronger
transactions, and sustainable incremental profits, it deserves consideration.
If it simply adds another operation to manage while the core pizza business
struggles, this is not innovation solving a consumer problem. It is management
adding complexity without yet proving the payoff.
That
is the test every foodservice growth strategy should face: Does it make the
brand more relevant to the consumer—or merely make the corporate portfolio look
bigger?
What the Announcement Actually Says
On
October 7, 2026, Papa Murphy’s announced three franchise agreements for its
co-branded concept with Pinkberry. The locations are:
·
Sunriver, Oregon:
Joshua and Samantha Kimzey plan to open their first location in both systems in
early November 2026.
·
Santa Fe, New Mexico:
Longtime Papa Murphy’s franchisee John Perea will add Pinkberry to his existing
restaurant, which he has operated since 2010.
·
West Haven, Utah:
Casey Kauer, who operates five Papa Murphy’s restaurants in Utah, plans to open
a new co-branded location in summer 2027.
The
company identifies shared real estate, labor, and operational resources as
potential benefits. The concept also offers franchisees an opportunity to serve
different eating occasions and develop additional revenue streams. MTY has
identified other possible co-branding opportunities, including sweetFrog.
The
important distinction: Three franchise agreements
demonstrate interest in testing the model. They do not establish that consumers
want the combination, that the economics will outperform a standalone
restaurant, or that the concept can reverse Papa Murphy’s broader business challenges.
Those
are separate questions, and the industry should not confuse them.
Problem No. 1: Papa Murphy’s Has a Core-Business Challenge
The
facts: In July 2026, MTY said it expected to close between 45 and
50 underperforming Papa Murphy’s locations as part of a broader plan to close
68 corporate-owned restaurants across its portfolio. Industry reporting also
indicated that Papa Murphy’s U.S. footprint had fallen more than 20% from its
2020 level.
MTY’s
third-quarter fiscal 2026 results showed same-store sales declining 1.9% across
its system, with the U.S. segment down 2.7%. Those figures cover MTY’s broader
business, not Papa Murphy’s alone.
The
Grocerant Guru® perspective: These figures make the consumer
question more urgent. Before celebrating a new concept, management must
establish whether the existing pizza business is attracting customers,
retaining them, and generating attractive returns.
Adding
another brand might help. It could also introduce additional inventory
requirements, equipment needs, staffing demands, and marketing complexity.
The
essential question is whether Pinkberry
improves the economics of the pizza operation—or simply adds another business
to manage.
A
new revenue stream is not automatically a profitable one. Management needs to
demonstrate that the combined concept produces incremental sales and profits
after accounting for all associated costs.
Problem No. 2: More Menu Options Do Not Automatically
Create More Demand
The
facts: Papa Murphy’s and Pinkberry offer different but
potentially complementary propositions. Papa Murphy’s sells take-home pizza
that customers bake themselves. Pinkberry specializes in frozen yogurt and
toppings.
Pizza
can address a family dinner, while frozen yogurt can serve a dessert or snack
occasion.
The
Grocerant Guru® perspective: Complementary products do not
necessarily produce complementary purchasing behavior.
A
customer who buys pizza for dinner may not want frozen yogurt. Someone looking
for an afternoon dessert may have no reason to visit a take-and-bake pizza
store.
The
concept must demonstrate that the combined offer creates incremental purchases
rather than simply shifting existing Pinkberry or Papa Murphy’s transactions
into a shared location.
That
distinction matters because incremental sales are not the same as incremental
profit.
Management
should measure how many customers purchase from both brands, how many are new
to each brand, how often customers return, and whether average transaction
values and contribution margins improve.
Without
that evidence, co-branding remains a hypothesis—not a proven growth strategy.
Problem No. 3: Operational Efficiency Is Not the Same as
Customer Value
The
facts: MTY promotes shared real estate, labor, and operational
efficiencies as benefits of the co-branding model. In Santa Fe, franchisee John
Perea has cited seasonality as one reason the combination appealed to him,
including the potential to support year-round employment.
These
are legitimate business considerations.
The
Grocerant Guru® perspective: A lower-cost operating model does not
automatically deliver a better customer experience.
Consumers
continue to evaluate food quality, price, convenience, service, and whether a
purchase fits the occasion. If the combined operation creates confusing
ordering, slower service, inconsistent product quality, or an unconvincing
value proposition, the projected efficiencies may not translate into customer
loyalty.
The
brands must also protect their individual identities. Papa Murphy’s must remain
relevant to customers seeking a convenient take-home meal, while Pinkberry must
offer a compelling frozen-dessert experience.
The
winning formula is not simply two signs on one building. It is two distinct
customer needs served effectively through a coordinated operation.
The Consumer Test: Five Measures That Matter
Before
expanding the concept, Papa Murphy’s and MTY should evaluate five measurable
outcomes.
1.
Incremental customers. Are new customers entering because of
the combined concept, or are existing customers simply switching locations?
2.
Cross-brand purchasing. What percentage of pizza transactions
also include Pinkberry, and vice versa? Are customers genuinely buying across
both brands?
3.
Visit frequency. Does the combination give customers a
reason to visit more often throughout the week?
4.
Profitability. After labor, food costs, equipment,
marketing, and occupancy expenses, does the combined operation generate
stronger returns than the alternatives?
5.
Brand preference. When customers choose between
competing pizza, take-home meal, and dessert options, does the combined offer
improve the likelihood that they choose these brands?
These
measures would help distinguish a promising franchise development story from a
genuinely successful consumer strategy.
1.
Build around eating occasions, not just co-branding.
Map
the customer journey from dinner planning to dessert. Test family meal bundles,
pizza-and-dessert offers, and promotions that give customers a clear reason to
purchase from both brands. Measure incremental sales rather than relying on
bundle redemptions alone.
2.
Make value visible to the consumer.
The
combined concept must deliver a compelling reason to choose it over buying
pizza and dessert elsewhere. Test price points, portions, family offers, and
promotional combinations. Track repeat purchases and contribution margins so
discounting does not create the illusion of growth.
3.
Prove the model before scaling it.
Use
the three locations as a disciplined learning opportunity. Establish baseline
performance, measure cross-brand purchases, compare results with appropriate
standalone locations, and evaluate the findings before committing to a broader
rollout.
Three Grocerant Guru® Insights
Insight
No. 1: Fix the Core Before Adding Another Concept.
Co-branding
is not a substitute for consumer relevance. Papa Murphy’s must demonstrate that
it can attract customers, earn repeat visits, and deliver a compelling Price
Value Service Equilibrium. Adding Pinkberry may create another revenue
opportunity, but the real measure is whether it strengthens the underlying
business.
Insight
No. 2: Sell More Eating Occasions, Not Just More Menu Items.
Consumers
think in terms of breakfast, lunch, dinner, snacks, and dessert—not corporate
brand portfolios. Papa Murphy’s and Pinkberry must prove that their combination
creates incremental purchases across those occasions. Shared real estate is an
operating strategy; winning more consumer occasions is a growth strategy.
Insight
No. 3: Measure Consumer Behavior Before Expanding the Footprint.
Three
co-branded locations offer an opportunity to test the concept, not declare
victory. Measure new customer acquisition, cross-brand purchases, repeat
visits, average transaction value, and incremental profitability. If the
numbers demonstrate sustained consumer demand, expand. If they do not,
management should resist confusing franchise development with brand growth.
The Bottom Line: Follow the Consumer, Not the Logo
Papa
Murphy’s and Pinkberry may have found a workable way to share space, labor, and
customer occasions. That possibility deserves a fair test.
But
Papa Murphy’s store closures and MTY’s declining U.S. same-store sales make it
especially important to distinguish franchise expansion from consumer-led
growth. Three signed agreements are a starting point, not a verdict.
The
Grocerant Guru® perspective is straightforward: A new concept is only as good
as the consumer behavior it changes.
If
the combination attracts new customers, increases visit frequency, strengthens
brand preference, and generates sustainable incremental profit, it deserves
consideration for expansion. If it merely adds operational complexity while the
core business continues to struggle, it risks becoming a distraction dressed up
as innovation.
Foodservice
brands do not grow simply by combining logos. They grow by earning more
consumer occasions, delivering meaningful value, and giving people a reason to
come back.
Prove
the consumer demand first. Celebrate the expansion second.
Steven
Johnson, Grocerant Guru®
Founder, Foodservice Solutions®
Tacoma, Washington
