Covid-19 and Consumer Future Restaurant Intentions

Household Income

The sample skewed heavily toward more affluent households with 52.56% of respondents reporting income over $100,000 (N=175). 81.69% reported income over $50,000 per year (N=272).

Ethnicity

Respondents skewed heavily towards identifying as “white,” with 87.36% (N=304) selecting this category. One respondent complained that this demographic question did not allow for choosing more than one ethnicity.

Educational Attainment

The sample was highly educated with 35.78% (N=122) reporting having attained a 4-year degree, 19.94% (N=68) a master’s degree, and 6.16% (N=21) a doctorate. Additionally, 23.34% (N=83) reported having “some college” which is likely reflective of the author’s association with students who were made aware of the survey.

Frequency of Dining Out

A dramatic variance in consumer intention is found in response to the questions, “Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic how frequently did you dine out in sit down restaurants;” and “After the COVID-19 pandemic how frequently do you think you will dine out in sit down restaurants?” Respondents were offered the following options: Very Often, Somewhat Often, Sometimes, Rarely, and Never. Not only did respondents anticipate dramatically shifting away from their pre-COVID behaviors, with a “very often,” decreasing by more than 50%, those reporting that after COVID-19 they will “rarely eat at sit down restaurants increased by more than 300%.

The “sometimes” category also showed an increase from 31.63% to 37.78%, while the “never” category remained quite low, but still showed a marked increase from pre-COVID behavior, to anticipated post-COVID behavior.

[Image One Near Here]

The results show an increase from .77% of respondents reporting that they “never” ate in restaurants prior to COVID-19, to 1.14% reporting that they anticipate that they will “never” eat in sit down restaurants after COVID-19.

[Image 2 Near Here]

It is likely that, over time, consumer sentiment will shift, particularly if a vaccine is developed to treat the virus. Still respondents to this survey expressed a reluctance to eat at sit down restaurants until after there is a vaccine for the virus.

[Image 3 Near Here]

When asked the question, “To what degree do you agree with the following statement? "I will be reluctant to eat in restaurants until there is a vaccine for COVID-19,” 45.87% of the sample reported they either “Strongly agree” or “Agree” with the statement.

Types of Restaurants

Variance is also found in the responses to the paired questions of, “Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, what types of restaurants did you frequent?” and, “After the COVID-19 pandemic, what types of restaurants do you think you will frequent?”

[Table 1 Near Here]
While responses suggest that fine dining will enjoy an increase in participation, all other categories saw drops in future consumer intent. Some categories, like buffet type restaurants saw significant drops in future consumer intent. The buffet segment realizes a 44% decrease in consumer future intended patronage, which suggests that the segment will need to make significant changes to maintain market share.

[Image 4 Near Here]

Interestingly, food trucks remained the same in terms of pre-COVID and post-COVID consumer intent, suggesting that the respondents do not perceive a need to adjust their behavior in that space. Given that food trucks offer guests the opportunity to eat their food outside, or to take it home with them, this is not surprising, but it is interesting that food trucks do not see a benefit of consumers shifting their preferences toward their model.

[Image 5 Near Here]

Respondents were asked about their future intentions regarding preparing meals at home, and there was a difference between pre and post intent. Previous to COVID-19 71.10% respondents indicated that they cooked at home either “Very Often,” or “Somewhat Often,” (N=391), while post COVID-19 intent increased by nearly 10% to 80.97% (N=352).
Conclusion, Advice for Industry and Academics, Limitations, Future Research

The author identified several key patterns in the survey responses. Of most concern to the food and beverage industry is the shift away from certain styles of restaurants. In particular it appears that buffet style restaurants will be hard hit by consumers changing desires. This is likely because buffet style restaurants are already one of the least frequented by respondents, but also, they have a reputation for being on the cheaper side of food offerings. Given that respondents indicated an increase in intent to patronize fine dining restaurants, it could be that even buffet consumers are placing a higher premium on the value of eating in public and moving away from the value proposition of inexpensive, all you can eat meals. Additionally, even with the safety procedures of sneeze guards, food held at safe temperatures, and more, consumers may still regard buffet food as less safe than that of higher-end establishments. The increase in intent to patronize fine dining, combined with the drops in intent with fast casual, casual, and quick service, suggesting that consumers may be unwilling to take risks in the age of COVID-19 unless it is for a special experience.

While buffets will be hardest hit, every style of restaurant other than fine dining saw a decrease in future purchase intent. Casual (-13%), fast casual (-14%), and quick service (-18%), all saw significant pre vs post COVID-19 intent from the respondents of this survey.

Food trucks saw an insignificant reduction in future intent, which suggests that respondents currently view them as a safe alternative to in-seat dining. It is interesting, however, that food trucks did not see an increase in future consumer intent, as guests seek alternatives for their dining needs.

There was an increase in intent to cook more meals at home of nearly 10% when comparing pre vs post COVID responses, suggesting that a good amount of people are embracing some of the requirements of COVID-19 confinement.

Of particular importance to the food and beverage industry is that 45.87% of respondents indicated strong reluctance to in-seat dining until such time as a vaccine has been approved. Recently, some states have begun to allow non-essential business to reopen and the news has reported strong demand with customers flooding into various establishments. While some operators might find this to be pleasing, these people would fall into the category of guests who did not indicate a desire for vaccines, hence they are representative of a more risk tolerant segment of the population. Whether or not the more risk averse segments of the dining public are willing to return anytime soon is of importance to academics and industry alike.

Restaurant operators are facing unknown territory as state and federal restrictions are being lifted. While there is some sense of optimism coming from industry, there is the very real matter of how restaurants will face the various requirements, and how they may or may not put businesses at legal risk should they fail to perfectly follow the instruction. With many agencies suggesting 50% seating, and requiring masks, there is the very real question of whether or not diners will want to eat out where the experience is so stifled and not what they have been accustomed to. In China, where restrictions were lifted a month earlier than when The United States began considering changes in requirements, shops, theaters, and restaurants did not see heavy traffic, and the people who were eating in dining rooms were distanced, and quiet (Wang, 2020). In Wisconsin, where restrictions related to COVID-19 were struck down by the State’s Supreme Court, patrons flooded into bars almost instantly after the ruling allowed bars to reopen (O'Kane, 2020). This may suggest that the food and beverage industry will be fine, however it is important to consider what is being reported in the popular press against the backdrop of the findings presented in this paper. With nearly 46% of respondents reporting that they would be unlikely to frequent food and beverage locations until after there is a vaccine, it would seem that the customers seen in Wisconsin’s bars are the more risk tolerant. Perhaps they may also be the more reckless, as seems the case from photographs of patrons standing tightly at bars, with no masks, and ignoring all advice regarding social distancing. Restaurant operators may wish to think about what kinds of customers are going to come into their establishments as the various state economies begin to relax restrictions.

While food is a main ingredient in attracting customers to restaurants, service and atmosphere have a higher impact on repeat patronage (Bardwell, et. al., 2018). Changes in seating arrangements, the use of single use utensils and condiments, as well as servers wearing protective clothing and masks, may have serious impacts on patron’s perceptions of the dining experience, which could lead to changes in a restaurant’s customer base. While, the results in this study find that food trucks remain essentially flat in sales, and fine dining goes up 8%, all other segments take significant hits, and their ability to claw back customers will rely heavily on their ability to make the guest feel safe, while at the same time providing an environment that pleasing to the senses and meets government guidelines. For many restaurants, this is likely to be a very heavy lift, particularly when one considers the need for expensive alterations like the addition of barriers between customers, and between customers and staff, as well as increased cleaning costs, potential legal liabilities, and more. Combined with the already low profit margins in the industry and COVID-19’s impacts will be painful for many restaurants as they struggle to stay afloat.

An important question that is not answered by this study, but which is given a glimpse of is that of switching costs. The reduced future intent may be because of various switching costs that COVID-19 had an impact on. In particular, relational switching costs may be impacted by the requirements to shelter in place. Relational switching costs involve the discomfort of breaking bonds, but in the current economy COVID-19 can be blamed, therefore absolving the consumer of guilt (Burnham, Frels & Mahajan, 2003). During this time, consumers have had a great deal of time to think of alternatives to eating in restaurants; have developed new cooking skills; and saved money by not going out. If consumers have mentally switched from their previously preferred habits, they will, upon reopening, be presented with an almost infinite number of new options, which could lead to choice issues, and becoming overwhelmed. Should this paradox of choice occur it is possible that it could lead to consumers not engaging in the same ways that they previously did. In turn all of that can lead to shifts in the consumer’s evoked set of restaurant options, and lessened emotional switching costs.