Business
Shack sales: The burger chain is hungry for better margins

Shack sales: The burger chain is hungry for better margins

Shake Shack reported this week that its sales grew 17% last year, with operating losses narrower than analysts had expected.

After starting life as a humble hotdog stand in Madison Square Park in 2001, “The Shack” was eventually upgraded to a kiosk in 2004, but the burger chain didn’t fully take shape until 2010 when it opened its first store outside of New York. Since then, the company's restaurant count has grown quickly, with a total of 436 Shacks worldwide — though the financial side of the business hasn't stacked up quite as nicely.

Steep shack

Shake Shack’s slim margins are hardly uncommon in the world of casual and fast food, but things really turned for the chain when the pandemic took a big bite out of its business. Revenue shrunk to $523m in 2020 and the company’s modest operating income quickly turned to a $44m loss. While revenues have bounced back since — the Shack took in over $900m last year — the company still hasn’t been able to get out of the red.

Shake Shack execs will be hoping that a new luxuriously decadent white truffle range will be the key ingredient to boost its margins. Unfortunately, it may have trouble convincing customers who already see it as the chain that offers the least “bang for your buck”.

More Business

See all Business
business

Paramount is expected to raise its Warner Bros. offer to $32 per share

Paramount’s seven-day window to talk to Warner Bros. Discovery about its best and final offer is set to end at 11:59 p.m. ET on Monday, and the company is expected to finally raise the per-share dollar amount of its bid.

According to reporting by Variety, Paramount’s revised offer is likely to arrive at $32 per share for the HBO and CNN parent.

Paramount’s last major revision to its offer came earlier this month, when it said it would cover the $2.8 billion breakup fee that WBD would owe Netflix in the event of that deal falling apart, and would pay shareholders a “ticking fee” of $0.25 per share for every quarter the deal hasn’t closed after the end of 2026.

Netflix’s next move will be determined by the response of Warner Bros.’ board. Per reporting by Reuters, the streamer has ample cash to increase its own offer for its streaming rival. Analysts at MoffettNathanson Research last week said they expect Netflix to walk away from Warner Bros. if Paramount’s bid comes in “well beyond” $32.

As of Monday at 9 a.m. ET, prediction markets speculating on which company will ultimately come out on top of the bidding war have Netflix at a 46% chance over Paramount’s 43% odds.

Also potentially affecting prediction markets is a Truth Social post by President Trump on Sunday, in which Trump wrote that Netflix must fire board member Susan Rice immediately or "pay the consequences."

(Event contracts are offered through Robinhood Derivatives, LLC — probabilities referenced or sourced from KalshiEx LLC or ForecastEx LLC.)

Loading...
 

Paramount’s last major revision to its offer came earlier this month, when it said it would cover the $2.8 billion breakup fee that WBD would owe Netflix in the event of that deal falling apart, and would pay shareholders a “ticking fee” of $0.25 per share for every quarter the deal hasn’t closed after the end of 2026.

Netflix’s next move will be determined by the response of Warner Bros.’ board. Per reporting by Reuters, the streamer has ample cash to increase its own offer for its streaming rival. Analysts at MoffettNathanson Research last week said they expect Netflix to walk away from Warner Bros. if Paramount’s bid comes in “well beyond” $32.

As of Monday at 9 a.m. ET, prediction markets speculating on which company will ultimately come out on top of the bidding war have Netflix at a 46% chance over Paramount’s 43% odds.

Also potentially affecting prediction markets is a Truth Social post by President Trump on Sunday, in which Trump wrote that Netflix must fire board member Susan Rice immediately or "pay the consequences."

(Event contracts are offered through Robinhood Derivatives, LLC — probabilities referenced or sourced from KalshiEx LLC or ForecastEx LLC.)

Loading...
 
business

Microsoft makes dramatic shake-up to its gaming division as gaming CEO Phil Spencer and Xbox President Sarah Bond depart

Microsoft’s gaming division underwent a major shake-up on Friday, as the tech giant announced the departure of gaming CEO Phil Spencer, who led the division for 12 years and championed its Game Pass subscription service.

Xbox President Sarah Bond is also out, according to Spencer’s memo to employees.

Xbox has fallen significantly behind rivals Sony and Nintendo in recent years. Microsoft raised Xbox console prices twice last year and bumped subscription fees up 50%. In November, the console was even outsold (in unit sales) by the motion-controlled Nex Playground console.

The pair have overseen a shift at Xbox from standard consoles to an array of consoles, handhelds, and various devices and screens accessed via cloud gaming.

Spencer’s replacement as the head of gaming is Microsoft’s president of CoreAI product, Asha Sharma. In a memo to staff, Sharma made three commitments: great games, the “return of Xbox,” and to “invent new business models and new ways to play.”

Xbox has fallen significantly behind rivals Sony and Nintendo in recent years. Microsoft raised Xbox console prices twice last year and bumped subscription fees up 50%. In November, the console was even outsold (in unit sales) by the motion-controlled Nex Playground console.

The pair have overseen a shift at Xbox from standard consoles to an array of consoles, handhelds, and various devices and screens accessed via cloud gaming.

Spencer’s replacement as the head of gaming is Microsoft’s president of CoreAI product, Asha Sharma. In a memo to staff, Sharma made three commitments: great games, the “return of Xbox,” and to “invent new business models and new ways to play.”

business

Judge rejects Tesla’s attempt to overturn $243 million verdict over fatal 2019 autopilot crash

Tesla’s effort to appeal a $243 million jury verdict related to a fatal 2019 crash that occurred when a Tesla vehicle was in self-driving mode was rejected by a federal judge in a ruling made public on Friday.

Tesla is expected to appeal the decision to a higher court.

The case was the first federal lawsuit surrounding an autopilot death to go to a jury trial for Tesla. In August, a jury found the automaker 33% responsible for the 2019 crash. The jury determined that Tesla was partly to blame for enabling the driver to take his eyes off the road, and the company was ordered to pay an additional $200 million in punitive damages.

Tesla reportedly turned down a $60 million settlement offer prior to the trial. According to Electrek, dozens of similar cases involving the EV maker are working through the court system.

This month, Tesla stopped using the term “autopilot” in its marketing in order to avoid a sales ban in California. Tesla appears to have replaced the term with “Traffic Aware Cruise Control” and added “supervised” to its mentions of Full Self-Driving tech.

The case was the first federal lawsuit surrounding an autopilot death to go to a jury trial for Tesla. In August, a jury found the automaker 33% responsible for the 2019 crash. The jury determined that Tesla was partly to blame for enabling the driver to take his eyes off the road, and the company was ordered to pay an additional $200 million in punitive damages.

Tesla reportedly turned down a $60 million settlement offer prior to the trial. According to Electrek, dozens of similar cases involving the EV maker are working through the court system.

This month, Tesla stopped using the term “autopilot” in its marketing in order to avoid a sales ban in California. Tesla appears to have replaced the term with “Traffic Aware Cruise Control” and added “supervised” to its mentions of Full Self-Driving tech.

Latest Stories

Sherwood Media, LLC produces fresh and unique perspectives on topical financial news and is a fully owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., and any views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of any other Robinhood affiliate, including Robinhood Markets, Inc., Robinhood Financial LLC, Robinhood Securities, LLC, Robinhood Crypto, LLC, or Robinhood Money, LLC.