Panera is changing how it makes its bread... and it will make its sandwiches taste very different
The popular chain confirmed this week it will shutter all remaining factories within two years as part of a move toward an 'on-demand' baking model.
Instead of mixing and shaping dough in-house, Panera will partner with third-party bakeries that follow its recipes.
The bread will be par-baked, frozen, and then finished in stores throughout the day.
'This new model helps us to have greater availability of the breads our guests love, as well as to ensure quality, while allowing us to expand innovation and variety,' Panera Bread told DailyMail.com.
The change means customers will no longer get bread baked fresh that morning, though Panera insists quality won't be compromised.
The closures are part of a broader turnaround strategy led by new CEO Paul Carbone, which includes a major menu revamp.
Facilities in Lenexa, Kansas, and Greensboro, North Carolina, will be among the first to close — impacting nearly 150 workers.
The company has already shut down other dough facilities in California, Texas, Arizona, Georgia, Colorado, and Washington.
Roughly 350 employees were laid off last year.
With its existing centralized Fresh Dough Facilities, dough is prepped and then sent to 2,200 locations to be baked fresh daily.
The new model shifts all early prep to external partners who will then deliver it frozen to stores.
Panera says laid-off workers will be offered job fairs, benefits, and reassignment opportunities.
The changes come as Panera battles slumping sales, which fell 5 percent last year to $6.1 billion.
It also follows the nationwide removal of its controversial Charged Lemonade after the drink was linked to multiple deaths.
Despite the shake-up, Panera says great bread will remain 'at the heart of the Panera experience.'
The chain was also forced to phase out its controversial Charged Lemonade from stores nationwide after the drinks were linked to several deaths, including Sarah Katz, who had a pre-existing heart condition before her death in 2022.
The brand is now part of parent company Panera Brands, which also owns Caribou Coffee and Einstein Bros. Bagels and is owned by Luxembourg-based conglomerate JAB Holding.
CEO José Alberto Dueñas stepped down in January, and Paul Carbone, the company's CFO, has been named interim CEO while the board searches for a permanent replacement.
Meanwhile, rival Subway quietly shuttered 631 locations last year. It means the chain has fewer than 20,000 locations in the US for the first time in 20 years.
It marks the eighth straight year Subway has shuttered restaurants in its home country. It peaked at around 27,000 stores in 2015.
Despite the decline, Subway still holds the title of America's largest restaurant chain by location count.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business News Wales
2 hours ago
- Business News Wales
Auction Business Launches New Property Firm
Property business Paul Fosh Auctions has launched a new business, YourBid. YourBid lists the properties it has on its books on its website and the dates on which bidding takes place. At the end of the auction, the highest bidder has the exclusivity of 56 days in which to make all the necessary arrangements to complete the purchase of the property. The types of property offered in this way are those which are generally mortgageable as opposed to many in a traditional Paul Fosh Auctions sale which either require major renovation or could be unmortgageable. Auctions valuer Olivia Williams has been appointed to head up YourBid for Paul Fosh Auctions. Owner and managing director Paul Fosh of the Newport-based business, said: 'We believe that this is a real game changer not just for us as a business but the industry as a whole. 'YourBid opens up property auctions to a whole new swathe of buyers who, up until now, have been unable to take advantage of the very many benefits of buying a house at auction. 'I don't like the term but so-called Modern Auctions allow many more people, who until now have had to watch enviously and frustratedly from the sidelines as properties that they would otherwise have loved to have bought sold during traditional property auctions, to cash buyers, speculators and investors. 'It is aimed fairly and squarely at owner occupiers who have targeted a particular property which they want to make their home as against developers who may want to do up and flip the lot. 'In a nutshell, YourBid enables these buyers to enter the market. Unlike traditional auctions where when the gavel falls a contract to buy is exchanged, in our new, modern, system successful bidders have time to make all the necessary arrangements, including arranging their mortgage or means to buy the property, before the sale completes. 'It's a win/win which we believe will add a further string to our bow of what is a constantly expanding offering from Paul Fosh Group which now not only covers traditional property auctions but estate agency and lettings. 'After a soft launch we're now confident that, after ramping up our offering, we can soon be achieving a high number of sales each month just through YourBid.'
Fashion United
6 hours ago
- Fashion United
Judge dismisses 25 million dollar NFT lawsuit against Dolce & Gabbana's US arm
A New York federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Dolce & Gabbana USA Inc. that had accused the retailer of abandoning a non-fungible token (NFT) project and failing to deliver on promised benefits. The case was originally filed in May 2024 by Luke Brown and later amended in September. The plaintiff had claimed that both Dolce & Gabbana USA and its Italian parent company Dolce & Gabbana SRL operated as 'effectively the same company'. The brand's Dubai-based partner UNXD and Italian firm Bluebear Italia, the creator of the NFT collection, were also named as defendants. In the latest court documents, the 25 million dollar lawsuit was found to be insufficient on the grounds that Dolce & Gabbana USA was the only US-based defendant cited, and was therefore not liable for the allegations against its parent firm. In the suit, Brown claimed that Dolce & Gabbana did not follow through on certain perks that were promised upon the purchase of an NFT from its 'DGFamily' collection. Among the benefits initially offered were that of physical clothing, access to events and digital outfits, all of which were supposed to be delivered each quarter. According to Brown, however, the brand had 'failed to provide the complete set of benefits' promised. Brown also accused Dolce & Gabbana of delaying the delivery of the NFTs by a week, causing their value to decrease by 5,800 dollars. The suit says the delays occurred when the brand failed to secure approval for certain assets from UNXD. Dolce & Gabbana USA filed to dismiss the suit in January 2025, stating that as it was a separate subsidiary to its Italian parent, which had allegedly established the NFT project, it could not be held accountable. Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald had determined that the suit lacked specific facts to prove the US entity was directly involved in the project, meaning that it was 'plainly insufficient to withstand D&G USA's motion to dismiss'. Buchwald added: 'The court finds that plaintiff has not adequately alleged that D&G SRL completely dominated D&G USA even if D&G SRL allegedly shared some employees and office space with D&G USA.'
Spectator
6 hours ago
- Spectator
The Ministry of Defence has dropped the ball on fighter jets
If Defence Secretary John Healey didn't have an anxious and unsettled weekend, he should have done. The Ministry of Defence once again has serious questions to answer over equipment, this time the F-35 strike aircraft programme, the cutting edge of the Royal Air Force's offensive capabilities. It is a political commonplace that our executive faces inadequate parliamentary scrutiny, but there is one institution which can still cause ministerial pulses to quicken in panic: the National Audit Office (NAO). Established just over 40 years ago, the NAO carries out financial audits and value-for-money surveys on government departments. Essentially, it is the independent watchdog of public expenditure, and its head, the comptroller and auditor general, is an officer of the House of Commons, not a civil servant. On Friday last week, the NAO published a report on 'the UK's F-35 capability', examining the procurement, operation and maintenance of the jointly operated RAF/Royal Navy fleet of Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning multi-role strike fighters. Its conclusions, by any reasonable reading, were delivered with asperity; at worst, they were damning. The UK first became a partner in the United States-based design of the F-35m in 1995, and the programme has been beset by a range of problems over the intervening decades. Successive governments have exacerbated the situation: in 2010, the Ministry of Defence decided to switch from the F-35B variant to the F-35C, then reversed the decision two years later. Typically of the MoD, financial decisions have repeatedly been deferred in vain and usually counter-productive attempts to save money. The headlines from the NAO's report are plain. Of the 138 F-35s the UK has ordered, 37 are in service, but there is no schedule for the remaining aircraft. The programme has already cost £11 billion, and the MoD estimates the whole-life cost, keeping the aircraft flying until 2069, will cost £57 billion; until recently it insisted it would be £19 billion. The NAO estimates it will be £71 billion. The programme is at least two years behind schedule, and the ability of the aircraft to fire long-range 'stand-off' missiles will not be achieved until the 2030s. In 2024, the F-35 fleet was only available to carry out all seven missions required of it by the MoD a third of the time; one time in two, it was available to perform at least one of those seven missions. Shortages of engineers and spare parts have meant that pilots have not been able to log enough flying time for training and development. Bluntly, the MoD is paying vastly more than it expected over a longer time period for aircraft that are not currently able to perform all the functions for which they are required. Some of these problems are being addressed, but on others there is silence. This is not just the fault of the current government, of course. The dysfunctional roots of the programme go back decades. But John Healey happens to be holding the baby at the moment. The appropriate response from the MoD would have been acknowledgement of responsibility, a degree of contrition and a clear, straightforward plan explaining what would be done to address or at least mitigate the myriad problems the NAO identified. That was not how the MoD reacted: The National Audit Office's report rightly recognises the world-class capabilities of the F-35 fighter jet, as well as its significant economic benefits – including £22 billion of work for UK companies, creating thousands of jobs. The programme continues to operate within its approved budget, and the UK will have two full squadrons of F-35 fighter jets ready for deployment by the end of this year. It is true the NAO noted the advanced capabilities of the F-35, but the MoD addresses none of the failings, claims that it 'continues' to operate within budget (which the NAO contests) and points to the economic benefits, as if the F-35 was a job creation scheme. I don't expect the programme's senior responsible officer to commit seppuku on the steps of the MoD. But this blind refusal, which senior civil servants and military officers have displayed repeatedly, to accept that anything is amiss is insulting and deeply worrying. If they won't admit what has gone wrong, do they know? If they don't know, how will they stop it happening again? Healey's Defence Reform programme has created a new National Armaments Directorate to manage procurement, though the director is yet to be appointed. But it is hard to see what he or she will be able to do unless there is a dramatic change of culture at the MoD. Only ministers can achieve that change. I hope John Healey did a lot of thinking over the weekend.
