Richard

A computer science professor is warning that advanced AI could be developed within the next couple of years, leading to mass unemployment by 2030.

On a recent episode of “The Diary of a CEO” podcast, University of Louisville Computer Science Professor Roman Yampolskiy warned that AI could cause “99%” of all workers to be unemployed by 2030. Yampolskiy said that artificial general intelligence systems (AGI) that are as capable as humans would likely be developed by 2027, leading to a labor market collapse three years later. He predicted that AI would provide “trillions of dollars” of “free labor,” giving employers a better option for their employment needs.

“You have free labor, physical and cognitive, trillions of dollars of it,” Yampolskiy said. “It makes no sense to hire humans for most jobs if I can just get a $20 subscription or a free model to do what an employee does.”

Related: Microsoft AI CEO Warns That ‘Dangerous’ and ‘Seemingly Conscious’ AI Models Could Arrive in the Next 2 Years: ‘Deserves Our Immediate Attention’

Yampolskiy predicted that any job on a computer would immediately be automated once AGI arrives and that humanoid robots would take over physical labor jobs within the next five years, leading to unprecedented levels of unemployment.

“So we’re looking at a world where we have levels of unemployment we’ve never seen before,” Yampolskiy said on the podcast. “Not talking about 10% unemployment, which is scary, but 99%.”

The only jobs left will be those that humans prefer another human to do for them, Yampolskiy said. AI will “very quickly” gain the capacity to take over other human occupations, including teachers, analysts, and accountants, he predicted.

Yampolskiy claims to have coined the term “AI safety” in a 2011 article and has since published more than 100 papers on AI’s dangers. He has written multiple books, including his 2025 book “Considerations on the AI Endgame: Ethics, Risks and Computational Frameworks.”

Related: The ‘Godfather of AI’ Says Artificial Intelligence Needs Programming With ‘Maternal Instincts’ or Humans Could End Up Being ‘Controlled’

In the podcast interview, Yampolskiy said that even coding and prompt engineering weren’t safe from automation. AI can design prompts for AI “way better” than any human, he stated.

Retraining is also impossible in this new reality because AI will automate all jobs and “there is no plan B,” Yampolskiy said.

Yampolskiy’s predictions match the forecasts made by other AI experts. Geoffrey Hinton, known as the “Godfather of AI” due to his pioneering work in the subject, stated in June that AI is going to “replace everybody” in white collar jobs. He challenged the idea that AI would create new jobs, pointing out that if AI automates tasks, there would be no jobs for people to do.

Meanwhile, in May, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei stated that AI would eliminate half of all entry-level, white-collar jobs within the next one to five years, causing unemployment to reach a high of 20%.

Related: ‘When I Get Paid, You Get Paid’: Software Engineers Looking for Work Are Promising $10,000 or More to Anyone Who Can Help Them Land a Job

It pays to have AI skills — nearly $20,000 more per year on average.

A recent study conducted by the job insight website LightCast analyzed over a billion job postings and found that employers are not only looking for workers with AI skills — they are also paying them more.

“Job postings are increasingly emphasizing AI skills, and there are signals that employers are willing to pay premium salaries for them,” LightCast’s Head of Global Research Elena Magrini told CNBC.

Related: Google Reportedly Told Its Staff to Use AI More or Risk Falling Behind: ‘It Seems Like a No-Brainer’

The study found that job postings that asked for AI skills paid 28% more, or around $18,000, than jobs that didn’t require AI. Jobs requiring two or more AI skills paid 43% more.

The roles with the highest differences in pay between workers with AI skills and those without were in the fields of customer support, sales, and manufacturing.

There are now over 300 possible AI skills, according to LightCast, from generative AI to AI ethics to autonomous driving and robotics. But the most common AI skills employers requested were two of the most mainstream — ChatGPT or Microsoft Copilot.

In a surprising twist, non-technical sectors demanded AI skills more than technical ones, according to LightCast’s report. Since November 2022, when ChatGPT launched, demand for generative AI skills shot up by 800% for non-technical roles.

Related: These 3 Professions Are Most Likely to Vanish in the Next 20 Years Due to AI, According to a New Report

A recent report from The Wall Street Journal found that entry-level college graduates are getting six- or seven-figure salaries right out of school because of their proficiency with AI. Databricks, a data analytics firm, is planning to hire triple the number of recent graduates this year compared to last year because of these young workers’ ability to use AI, the company told The Journal.

While learning AI may give workers a boost in salary negotiations, the technology also has the potential to replace entry-level employees. A Stanford University study released last week found that AI-impacted jobs, like software developers, customer service representatives, and accountants, saw employment for workers ages 22 to 25 decline by 13% over the past three years.

“There’s definitely evidence that AI is beginning to have a big effect,” the study’s first author and Stanford Professor Erik Brynjolfsson told Axios about the report.

When our vertical series “Brace Face Betty” became the week’s top series by user engagement according to Social Peta, it wasn’t a big surprise for me. Our team has been working on content production for a long time, growing My Passion, the books platform, and My Drama, the short-form, vertical series platform. Over the years, we’ve identified the principles that make hits. These hacks apply to any creative niche, not just books or series.

Until recently, I didn’t have any social media accounts, and now I’ve become the algorithm’s ideal target audience. Here’s the system I use to predict and create viral products. Whether you’re building apps, content, consumer products or services, these insights will help you understand what makes audiences stop, engage and share.

70% of success happens before creation

Here’s what most creators get wrong: They focus on production quality and hope for the best. But viral success is determined long before you start creating. It’s about understanding three critical elements: niche, audience and platform.

Take the vertical short series, for example. This niche is growing like crazy now! According to iMedia Research, the vertical short drama market will be worth more than $13.8 billion by 2027, up from $5.2 billion in 2023. There are now over 200 apps dedicated to vertical series content, and the format is attracting talent from traditional TV and film who see an opportunity to create more efficiently and reach younger audiences directly. To be No. 1 in this niche in the EU and U.S. markets, we need to know it inside out. What hooks work? What pacing keeps attention? What elements make content shareable?

The second is audience psychology. We explore the emotional triggers that engage people. Typically, the topics of bullying, forbidden love and age gaps resonate well. Seek what works in your niche. These are not necessarily the topics you are interested in. Conduct audience research, put yourself in their shoes and determine their typical behavior. Use this as a basis for product development and creatives.

And the last element — platform mechanics. Each platform has different algorithms, user behaviors and content formats that favor specific approaches. We distribute content on all social platforms and prepare separate creatives for each.

The remaining 30% is execution. But without the foundation, even perfect execution fails.

Related: 5 Proven Tips to Better Understand Your Audience and Drive Sales

How to scroll social media smartly

Don’t confuse trend-watching with random TikTok scrolling and reposting funny Reels. The essence of trend-watching is not to mindlessly consume content, but to analyze what you see and spot opportunities.

I spend 20 to 30 minutes each morning and evening on strategic scrolling. Previously, I trained algorithms to show me what I need to see. It’s not tricky: follow your competitors, like relevant posts, click on their ads and even leave comments. Done. Your feed is now a perfectly curated research tool.

Then I apply my analysis framework, which looks like this. When I spot viral content, I dig deep. How many creative variations are they testing? Which geographic markets are they targeting? What engagement patterns am I seeing? Can this approach scale? I document everything, because patterns emerge over time that individual posts can’t reveal.

Then I pass on the insights to the team. For instance, if competitors are launching 10-minute promotional videos while we’re using 1-minute clips, it means we’re at a disadvantage. So we need to catch up quickly. When I notice “I’m pregnant” hooks performing well across multiple verticals, I write to the team that we urgently need to use it too.

Surely, my whole team is also engaged in trend-watching. We use tools like Airtable, Make, Asana and others to exchange information quickly. It’s really important in the creative niche, since trends don’t last long and you need to act ASAP.

Viral product framework that works in each niche

Analyzing hundreds of viral products, I’ve identified key characteristics that unite them across all creative industries. This framework works whether you’re building apps, creating content, designing products or launching services.

Proven foundation. Instead of starting from scratch, try building on concepts that have already demonstrated success. For example, we use our content library of proven IPs and cast actors with track records from previous hits. The goal isn’t to copy, but to know what foundational elements work and build upon them smartly.

Trend integration. Implement everything you discovered during trend-watching. Automate your creative process with AI tools to launch faster and catch the trend when it’s hot.

High-level execution. Every element needs immediate engagement drivers that grab attention within seconds. In vertical series, this means compelling hooks, pacing that maintains interest and cliffhangers that create anticipation. For apps, it’s intuitive onboarding and instant value delivery. For physical products, it’s solving user problems elegantly from the first interaction.

Related: This Is How Close AI Is to Coming Up With the Next Viral Product

Your product is viral, what’s next

The common mistake founders make is stopping after they have a hit. I often notice it even on Netflix. Just imagine how its metrics and profits would have grown if they had made a sequel to Wednesday.

Every product should be designed to evolve and extend. So when you create a potential hit, think long-term about how you will develop it further and don’t aim for just a one-time success!

As young Americans struggle with high costs of living and salaries that haven’t kept pace with inflation, some of them rely on loans to make ends meet.

Nearly half (46%) of Gen Z between the ages of 18 and 27 depend on financial assistance from their family, according to a 2024 report from Bank of America.

What’s more, even though some parents are willing to help their kids out with cash, those loans don’t always come without strings attached — sometimes in the form of interest.

Related: Gen Z Is Turning to Side Hustles to Purchase ‘the Normal Stuff’ in ‘Suburban Middle-Class America’

Financial media company MarketBeat.com‘s new report, which surveyed more than 3,000 parents, found that an increasing number are charging their adult children interest on family loans.

“The Bank of Mom and Dad has always been generous, but even generosity comes with boundaries,” says Matt Paulson, founder of MarketBeat.com. “What’s striking is that while most parents don’t expect repayment — and certainly not at commercial interest rates — inflation and rising costs are starting to reshape how families think about money.”

The average interest rate charged by parents was 5.1%, according to the data. That’s still well below the costs their children might incur elsewhere: The average personal loan rate is 12.49% for customers with a 700 FICO score, $5,000 loan amount and three-year repayment term, per Bankrate.

Related: This Stat About Gen Alpha’s Side Hustles Might Be Hard to Believe — But It Means Major Purchasing Power. Here’s What the Kids Want to Buy.

Only 15% of parents would be comfortable with lending their kids $5,000 or more at one time, according to MarketBeat’s research.

Family loan repayment terms can also vary significantly by location. The top five toughest state lenders based on the interest rates parents charge were Nebraska (6.8%), Oregon (6.8%), Mississippi (6.5%), Georgia (6.4%) and Arkansas (6.3%), the report found.

Parents in Delaware and Maine tended to be the most lenient when it came to charging their children interest on loans, with 2% and 4% rates, respectively, according to the findings.

Related: Baby Boomers Over 75 Are Getting Richer, Causing a ‘Massive’ Wealth Divide, According to a New Report

Many parents who expect repayment also have a fast-tracked timeline in mind. Twenty-one percent anticipated seeing their loan repaid in one month, 15% within one year and just 8% more than a year later, per the survey.

Although 59% of parents reported being happy to help their kids with money, 27% said they would only do it if necessary, and 4% admitted to feeling resentful.

In many cases, family loans don’t just provide financial support — they’re also “emotional transactions that test trust, responsibility and family dynamics,” Paulson notes.

Some of the richest people in the world — Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg — made their fortunes in Silicon Valley. However, a new report in the Wall Street Journal suggests that most U.S. billionaires did not amass their wealth in tech. Instead, it’s the banking and finance fields that have produced most of the country’s super-rich.

According to data shared with the WSJ from wealth intelligence company Altrata, there were 1,135 billionaires in the U.S. last year, up from 927 in 2020. Approximately 300 billionaires made their money in banking and finance, while an estimated 110 came from the tech sector. Meanwhile, 75 billionaires earned their money in real estate.

Many, of course, got a head start by inheriting wealth. One-third of U.S. billionaires received some or all of their wealth from an inheritance, per Altrata.

Related: This 30-Year-Old Billionaire Says Life ‘Hasn’t Really Changed That Much’ After Making Billions. Here’s Where She Spends Money.

The data shows that U.S. billionaires are worth $5.7 trillion in total. Musk, Bezos, and Zuckerberg alone comprise about $1 trillion, or nearly one-sixth, of that wealth.

Altrata also found that billionaires tend to live in one state above all others: California. The highest percentage of them, about 255 people, live in the Golden State. However, they have primary businesses in nearly every U.S. state, except for Wyoming and Alaska.

The list of U.S. billionaires includes some recognizable names, including Oracle founder Larry Ellison and Google co-founder Sergey Brin, as well as some more private individuals, like Diane Hendricks, co-founder of ABC Supply, North America’s biggest distributor of building products.

Hendricks, who is the richest self-made woman with a net worth of $22.3 billion, is one of 150 female billionaires based in the U.S., joining stars like Taylor Swift and Selena Gomez. Most of the list, 86%, is comprised of men.

Related: Is Selena Gomez the Next Beauty Billionaire?

When it comes to philanthropy, Altrata data shows that billionaires have donated or pledged to donate about $185 billion to charitable organizations over the past decade. Among them is Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett, who donated a record $6 billion to different foundations in June.

Nearly half of all overall donations from billionaires, $90 billion, went towards two causes: education and medical research. Some of the most popular organizations that received donations were the Central Park Conservancy in New York City, which received funds collectively worth about $100 million from 89 individuals, and Johns Hopkins University, which received donations from about 30 individuals totaling $7.5 billion.

However, charitable giving isn’t a priority for all billionaires. One in four has donated less than a million dollars each since 2015.

Over the past few months, I’ve received a surprising number of emails and even phone calls from private equity firms asking if I’d consider selling my business.

“Gene,” they all say, “we’ve followed your growth in the technology space and believe we can help you unlock value while preserving your legacy and team. Would you be open to a 20-minute call to discuss mutual opportunities?”

It’s flattering, sure. And it makes sense. According to Harvard’s Corporate Governance site, private equity exits jumped from $754 billion in 2023 to $902 billion in 2024 — about a 20% increase. Other reports show deal value rising by 50% in the first half of 2024 alone, with strategic acquisitions leading the way.

Private equity is everywhere — scooping up contractors, manufacturers, distributors and yes, even tech companies like mine.

Why? Because many business owners are aging out. The average small business owner in the U.S. is over 55, according to the Small Business Administration — and that was back in 2020. So a wave of exits is underway, and investors are eager to buy businesses with strong financials, recurring revenue and growth potential.

But my business? I don’t think I’m sellable. Not because I wouldn’t entertain an offer — but because once a buyer looks under the hood, they’ll realize the uncomfortable truth: My company has no real value.

Related: Want to Maximize the Sale Price of Your Business? Start with These 5 Value Drivers

The balance sheet no one wants

Let’s start with the basics. My business has no hard assets. No buildings, no equipment, no physical property. Just a bit of cash and accounts receivable.

Sure, we also have very few liabilities. In fact, most of our “payables” are actually prepaid client deposits — blocks of time that customers purchase in advance. It’s a great way to boost cash flow and reduce risk, but it creates a liability a buyer would need to honor. Not exactly attractive.

No contracts, no guarantees

We don’t lock clients into long-term contracts. We’ve never sold maintenance agreements or recurring support plans. Our clients use us when they need us — and leave when they don’t.

There’s no proprietary process or secret sauce. What we do isn’t complicated. In fact, anyone could learn it online. Our clients hire us not because we’re unique, but because they don’t have the bandwidth to do it themselves.

So if a private equity firm were to evaluate my company, they’d quickly realize there’s no predictable revenue stream to base a valuation on. No recurring income. No clear multiple to apply. We go project to project, client to client.

That might work for me. But it doesn’t work for them.

A team that disappears when I do

I do have employees. But most of the work is handled by independent contractors. That comes with its own risk — from worker classification issues to a lack of long-term commitment.

Our setup has always been virtual. We’ve been remote since 2005. No office. No shared culture. No in-person meetings. Everyone works independently, and I check in as needed. It works for us — but it doesn’t scream “scalable organization.”

The reality? This business doesn’t run without me. I do the selling. I do the marketing. I oversee projects, handle accounting, manage admin and lead the day-to-day. If I were hit by a bus tomorrow, this business would fold within 30 days — with contractors and staff likely splintering off to do their own thing.

No IP, no exclusivity, no moat

We implement CRM platforms. It’s a crowded, competitive space. The very vendors we represent are often our biggest competitors. There’s no barrier to entry. Competitors appear regularly — usually cheaper, often younger and sometimes better.

We don’t have any intellectual property, documented systems or defined processes. Every project is different, and it rarely makes sense to create templates or workflows that won’t apply next time.

So there’s nothing here to “buy.” No assets. No exclusivity. No edge.

So, what do I have?

I have a business that works for me.

For more than 25 years, it’s paid the bills, put my kids through college and built a retirement plan for my wife and me. It’s also supported dozens of employees and contractors along the way. That’s something I’m proud of.

My model has always been simple: do the work, bill for it, generate cash, save what you can. Rinse and repeat. And for me, it’s worked beautifully.

But let’s be honest: this model doesn’t build transferable value. There’s no goodwill. No buyer-ready systems. No brand equity. No enterprise value. Just a highly functional, one-person-driven operation that disappears without me.

Related: Starting a New Business? Here’s How to Leverage Transferable Skills From Your Prior Careers and Drive Success

If your business looks like mine

Don’t be discouraged. But do be realistic.

You may be generating cash — and that’s great. You may be living well — even better. But unless you’ve intentionally built for scale, structure and succession, your business may not be worth much to anyone else.

And that’s okay — as long as that’s the plan.

For me, it is.

Are you hungry for business? Burger franchises are sizzling hot, offering entrepreneurs a slice of one of the most enduring — and profitable — sectors in the food industry. From iconic, time-tested staples to bold newcomers flipping the script on fast-casual fare, the burger game is as competitive as it is delicious. What connects the biggest winners? Consistency, strong brand appeal and operations that can be replicated coast-to-coast — and even around the world.

In this ranking, we’ve rounded up the top 10 burger franchises lighting up the scene this year, based on the 2025 Franchise 500. Whether you’re craving the comfort of a beloved classic or chasing the next up-and-coming smash hit, these burger brands bring more than flame-grilled meat — they deliver scalable systems built to stand the heat.

This article will help you decide whether these burger giants — and rising stars — are serving up the right opportunity for you.

Related: Considering franchise ownership? Get started now to find your personalized list of franchises that match your lifestyle, interests and budget.

1. Culver’s

• Founded: 1984
• Franchising since: 1988
• Overall rank: 7
• Number of units: 1,020
• Change in units: +17.1% over 3 years
• Initial investment: $2,642,500 – $8,573,000
• Leadership: Julie Fussner, CEO
• Parent company: Culver Franchising System LLC

Culver’s isn’t just slinging burgers — it’s crafting a cult following, one ButterBurger at a time. Born in Wisconsin and steeped in Midwestern hospitality, the brand has grown steadily to more than 1,000 units, thanks to its focus on quality, community and crinkle-cut fries done right. Under CEO Julie Fussner’s leadership, Culver’s has embraced calculated growth, posting a 17% unit increase over the past three years — not to mention a top 10 ranking in the 2025 Franchise 500. With an investment starting at just over $2.6 million, franchisees are buying into a system designed to last, backed by a brand that still feels like family.

Related: The Culver Family Opened Their First Restaurant in 1984 — Now Culver’s Has 1,000 Locations. What’s Its Secret?

2. Wendy’s

• Founded: 1969
• Franchising since: 1971
• Overall rank: 8
• Number of units: 7,282
• Change in units: +5.8% over 3 years
• Initial investment: $310,095 – $2,828,707
• Leadership: Kirk Tanner, president & CEO
• Parent company: Wendy’s

Wendy’s brings bold flavors and bigger ambitions to the quick-service burger game. Known for square patties, Frosty treats and fast-food snark, the brand continues to evolve with modern store formats and a push into digital ordering and global markets. Its relatively low entry point for a legacy brand — paired with strong consumer recognition and a multibillion-dollar support system — makes Wendy’s a compelling option for franchisees who want scale and staying power.

Related: From ‘Where’s the Beef?’ to the Metaverse — Here’s How Wendy’s Keeps Innovating Fast Food

3. McDonald’s

• Founded: 1955
• Franchising since: 1955
• Overall rank: 22
• Number of units: 42,406
• Change in units: +7.6% over 3 years
• Initial investment: $1,471,000 – $2,728,000
• Leadership: Chris Kempczinski, CEO
• Parent company: McDonald’s

McDonald’s reigns as the unrivaled titan of quick-service burger franchising. Its iconic Golden Arches are backed by a proven, scalable model and powerful real estate strategy. To own a slice of its legacy, franchisees must navigate a seven-figure investment alongside a $45,000 franchise fee and have at least $500,000 in liquid assets. But the payoff is baked in: McDonald’s strong brand, operational rigor and global footprint offer unmatched scale — and profitability — for those able to match its ambition.

4. Burger King

• Founded: 1954
• Franchising since: 1961
• Overall rank: 53
• Number of units: 19,732
• Change in units: +2.5% over 3 years
• Initial investment: $2,064,200 – $4,730,500
• Leadership: Chris Elias, senior director, business development and franchising
• Parent company: Restaurant Brands Int’l.

Burger King — originating in 1953 and franchising since 1959 — offers a storied license into fast-food royalty with a typical investment of $1.8 to $4.2 million and a $50,000-$55,000 franchise fee. Under the umbrella of Restaurant Brands International, Burger King is undergoing a bold transformation — acquiring its largest franchisee for $1 billion and rolling out a sweeping remodel plan dubbed “Reclaim the Flame.” The chain aims to modernize nearly 90% of U.S. outlets by 2028, blending heritage with sleek, high-tech efficiency.

Related: Burger King’s Owner Is Buying the Chain’s Biggest Franchisee for $1 Billion

5. Sonic Drive-In

• Founded: 1953
• Franchising since: 1959
• Overall rank: 56
• Number of units: 3,521
• Change in units: -0.11% over 3 years
• Initial investment: $1,714,200 – $3,370,900
• Leadership: Jim Taylor, brand president
• Parent company: Inspire Brands

Sonic Drive-In has carved out a lane all its own in the burger world — where roller skates meet cherry limeades and carhops still matter. Launched in 1953 and franchising since 1959, the brand now boasts more than 3,500 locations nationwide. Backed by Inspire Brands, Sonic offers flexible formats, from full-scale drive-ins to nontraditional locations, with startup costs ranging from roughly $669,000 to over $3.6 million. Franchisees need strong financials — typically $1 million in net worth and $500,000 in liquid assets — and pay ongoing royalties and marketing fees. It’s not just nostalgia on wheels — Sonic is evolving fast, backed by serious tech, bold flavors and a fiercely loyal fan base.

6. Freddy’s Frozen Custard & Steakburgers

• Founded: 2002
• Franchising since: 2004
• Overall rank: 59
• Number of units: 531
• Change in units: +30.8% over 3 years
• Initial investment: $897,836 – $2,753,566
• Leadership: Chris Dull, president & CEO
• Parent company: N/A

Founded in 2002 and named after a WWII veteran, Freddy’s Frozen Custard & Steakburgers has become a fast-casual standout with over 500 units across the U.S. and strong systemwide sales near $1 billion. Franchisees invest between $786,000 and $2,750,000 up front, with typical minimum asset requirements of $850,000 net worth and $250,000 liquidity. Acquired by Thompson Street Capital Partners in 2021, Freddy’s is accelerating expansion — targeting Canadian provinces and opening locations like Beaumont, Texas, later this year. With strong growth and proven AUVs, Freddy’s remains a compelling franchise opportunity.

Related: Fried, Fast and Franchised — These Are The Top 10 Chicken Franchises in 2025

7. Habit Burger & Grill

• Founded: 1969
• Franchising since: 2013
• Overall rank: 107
• Number of units: 379
• Change in units: +10.2% over 3 years
• Initial investment: $1,026,000 – $2,859,000
• Leadership: Jonathan Trapesonian, head of franchising and development
• Parent company: Yum! Brands

Habit Burger & Grill started as a fast-casual restaurant called The Habit in Goleta, California, in 1969, and didn’t open its second location until 1996. It started franchising in 2013, and in 2020, Yum! Brands purchased the company and expanded it to more than 350 locations worldwide. The fast-casual chain is known for its charburgers, chicken and ahi tuna sandwiches. Franchisees interested in opening a Habit Burger & Grill must have a net worth of $3 million and a cash requirement of $1 million.

Related: This Is the Most Important Thing You Can Do to Improve Your Business, According to the Co-Founder of a $32 Billion Company

8. Jack in the Box

• Founded: 1951
• Franchising since: 1982
• Overall rank: 182
• Number of units: 2,178
• Change in units: -1% over 3 years
• Initial investment: $1,910,500 – $4,032,100
• Leadership: Van Ingram, CDO
• Parent company: Jack in the Box Inc.

Founded in 1951 in San Diego, Jack in the Box began franchising around 1982 and now operates nearly 2,200 restaurants across 22 states. Aspiring franchisees face an upfront investment ranging from about $2 to $4 million, alongside a $50,000 franchise fee. Ongoing fees include a 5% royalty and 5% marketing contribution. You must have at least $1.5 million in net worth and $500,000 in liquid capital to open a Jack in the Box franchise. The brand is expanding into new markets like Georgia and Chicago, but is also streamlining operations: under its “Jack on Track” strategy, including closing underperforming locations to sharpen its long-term performance.

9. Carl’s Jr.

• Founded: 1945
• Franchising since: 1984
• Overall rank: 187
• Number of units: 1,719
• Change in units: +2.6% over 3 years
• Initial investment: $1,486,000 – $3,176,500
• Leadership: Joe Guith, CEO
• Parent company: CKE Restaurant Holdings, Inc.

Carl’s Jr. has come a long way from its 1941 origins — franchising since 1984 and now operating around 1,700 U.S. restaurants. If you’re aiming to own one, be prepared for a startup cost between approximately $1.3 and $3.4 million, plus a franchise fee of nearly $25,000. Ongoing obligations include a royalty of around 4% of sales and marketing fees of about 6%. Candidates generally must have a net worth of at least $1 million and liquid capital between $300,000 and $500,000. The brand’s premium image and franchisor support make it a solid bet for seasoned operators.

Related: 3 Lessons I Learned Selling My Billion-Dollar Company

10. A&W Restaurants

• Founded: 1919
• Franchising since: 1925
• Overall rank: 193
• Number of units: 848
• Change in units: -5% over 3 years
• Initial investment: $298,899 – $1,639,906
• Leadership: Betsy Schmandt, CEO
• Parent company: A&W Restaurants

A&W is a storied icon of American fast food — founded in 1919 and franchising since 1926, it’s the nation’s oldest restaurant franchise still thriving today. With around 460 U.S. locations (and nearly as many worldwide), A&W has been fully franchisee-owned since 2011. Initial investments range from approximately $300,000 for compact formats to over $1.6 million for freestanding outlets, plus a $30,000 franchise fee (discounted for veterans). Ongoing costs include a 5% royalty and marketing fee. Franchisees need at least $500,000 in net worth and $250,000 in liquid capital.

Starbucks revealed its protein lineup on Tuesday, and the company is going “all in,” according to a press release.

Starbucks coffeehouses in the U.S. and Canada will offer a Protein Cold Foam topper alongside a new line of Protein Lattes starting September 29. The lattes are made with protein-boosted milk.

Related: Starbucks Is Betting on Protein Cold Foam and a ‘Sugar Reduction’ to Turn Around Lagging Sales. Here’s a Look at the Sweeping Changes.

“As we continue to get back to Starbucks, we’re focused on modernizing our menu with innovative, relevant, and hype-worthy products that will resonate with our customers,” said Tressie Leiberman, Starbucks’ global chief brand officer, in the release. “Our new protein beverages tap into the growing consumer demand for protein in an innovative, premium, and delicious way that only Starbucks can deliver.”

Starbucks says its Protein Cold Foam has been used in one out of every seven beverages since the company began testing the foam in July. The company also says the demand is there — 70% of Americans surveyed said they were interested in consuming more protein, according to the 2025 IFIC Food & Health Survey.

^Starbucks

The new drinks are customizable with sugar-free and unsweetened options.

Related: Starbucks Just Experienced a ‘Record-Breaking Sales Week’ Thanks to One Line of Products

What Is Starbucks Protein Cold Foam?

According to Starbucks, the foam is a “creamy, frothy topping that adds texture and flavor to any cold coffee, tea, or Refreshers, creating a delicious, layered drink” and adds 19 to 26 grams of protein per Grande beverage.

It also comes in various flavors (banana, vanilla, sugar-free vanilla, chocolate, matcha, salted caramel, brown sugar, and plain), and seasonal flavors, including pumpkin and pecan.

The new lattes, meanwhile, offer even more protein: 27 to 36 grams worth. Rather than the foam topper, these drinks are crafted with the newly introduced protein-rich milk.

Related: Starbucks Is Hiring a ‘Global Content Creator’ to Travel, Drink Coffee, and Get Paid Six Figures

As a founder, your focus is growth — more users, more features, more market share. But sometimes the biggest thing standing in your way isn’t your business model, marketing or funding. It’s your tech team.

Not because they’re doing something wrong — but because they’ve taken you as far as they can.

And when you finally bring in a new team or vendor, it’s a stress test. For the business, it means facing hard questions about control. For the new team, it means diving into someone else’s legacy code. And for you, the founder, there’s one phrase no one ever wants to hear:

“Honestly, it might be easier to rebuild this from scratch.”

But here’s the thing — you don’t need a fire to smell the smoke.

Related: The Top 2 Mistakes Founders Make That Hinder the Growth of Their Companies

The calm before the stall

Sometimes, founders realize something’s off when everything starts breaking — delivery delays, ballooning budgets or a tech stack that feels five years old. But just as often, things look fine on the surface.

Code is getting shipped. Deadlines are met. Users are active, maybe even paying. On paper, it all looks “on track.”

But under the hood, your product may already be maxed out. Not because of bugs — but because the team that built it wasn’t thinking far enough ahead.

This is the silent stall: when your product stops being a launchpad and becomes a ceiling. It still works, but it can’t grow.

No scalable tech foundation

Most growth plans boil down to a simple idea: make it work, then scale. But can your architecture, tools and infrastructure handle that scale?

If your tech partner lacks a long-term mindset, they’ll deliver what you ask for — but not what you’ll need next. That means you’ll constantly be in maintenance mode, fixing things that should’ve been built right the first time.

And growth adds pressure fast: more users, more data, more complexity. What works for a few thousand users might fall apart at scale — or cost you exponentially more to run.

A good tech partner doesn’t treat scalability as an upgrade. They design for it from day one. Modular systems, clean infrastructure and smart trade-offs aren’t technical luxuries — they’re what make future features (and funding rounds) possible.

Because rebuilding later costs more. In time, money and momentum you won’t get back.

An incomplete team

Here’s something that trips up a lot of startups: assuming developers alone can carry the product.

Developers are essential, of course. But building a successful digital product takes more than code. You also need:

• Business analysts to map user and market needs into features
• UX and UI designers to shape user experience
• Solution architects to plan scalable systems

If your current vendor only supplies engineers, you’re not working with a product partner — you’re working with a contractor. That might be fine early on, but over time, it’s a limitation.

Without the right roles in place, your product gets built in a vacuum. There’s no one translating strategy into functionality or guiding decisions with the bigger picture in mind.

A complete product team is cross-functional by design. The best vendors can pull in the right expertise when needed — not weeks later, but immediately.

No plan for what’s next

Plenty of teams are great at delivering today’s requirements. But what about tomorrow’s?

If your tech partner isn’t helping you plan for monetization, scale or the next fundraising round, you’re not set up for sustainable growth.

Think about how much future planning touches:

• Payment systems
• Onboarding flows
• App store requirements
• Subscription models
• Analytics and data tracking

Miss these pieces early, and you’ll end up rebuilding later — right when you should be scaling. Investors notice too. They expect clean data, thoughtful UX and systems that support growth, not just usage.

A strong tech partner will challenge assumptions and help you anticipate what comes after this version. Because scaling isn’t just more code — it’s pricing, performance, infrastructure and go-to-market timing all working together.

If your team isn’t thinking that far ahead, it’s time to find one that is.

Related: 6 Unconventional Habits That Actually Help Entrepreneurs Find Work-Life Sanity

Final thoughts

Not all stalled products fail loudly. Sometimes the most dangerous moment is when everything seems fine — but nothing’s moving forward.

You don’t need a crisis to justify a change. You need a vision that your current team can grow into — not just keep afloat.

Yes, switching vendors takes time, effort and sometimes cleanup. But it also gives you a reset — a chance to align your product with where your business is actually going.

If you’ve hit a ceiling, don’t wait until it becomes a wall. Find a partner who can build what’s next, not just maintain what’s now.

When uncertainty rises, many leaders do the reasonable thing. They become more careful. They slow spending. They pause plans. They wait for clearer signals before committing to big moves.

At first, it makes sense. The conditions are unclear. The pressure is real. No one wants to overcommit when the stakes are high and the path ahead is blurry. A measured pause can feel responsible, even necessary.

But over time, that caution can shift the culture. Motion slows. Teams hesitate. The energy that once kept people building begins to fade. Not because anyone made a bad decision, but because belief is no longer being modeled.

When leaders stop showing confidence in where the company is going, the whole system responds. This is not about charisma or volume. It is about posture, the way conviction shows up in tone, in timing, in the pace of decisions.

In moments like this, optimism is not a luxury. It is what keeps progress alive.

Related: How The Best Executives Show Leadership in Times of Uncertainty

The power of optimism

I have led through crises, pivots and culture resets. In each case, the same pattern showed up. When leaders carry belief, even when the path is unclear, teams keep moving. When belief disappears, momentum fades. People start waiting for clarity, direction or permission.

In complex environments, the emotional posture of leadership becomes the silent operating system. Optimism either sustains forward motion or its absence introduces friction. Even the best plans slow down when belief disappears from the room.

Optimism is not a personality trait. It is a leadership practice. It shapes how you speak, how you make decisions and how you guide others through complexity.

You do not need to be overly positive. You do not need to perform. You need to keep pointing forward with consistency. When your team sees that, they stay engaged.

The strongest leaders I’ve worked with are not the ones who avoid uncertainty. They are the ones who can hold it without handing it off to their teams. Optimism helps them do that. It keeps the weight from becoming the tone.

In most organizations, tone travels faster than tactics. If you grow more hesitant, your team will sense it. That is not a flaw. It is a human response to the emotional signals leaders send.

What you say may be precise, but how you say it often has more impact. A slight shift in energy from the top can change how an entire team interprets risk and momentum.

I experienced this in a high-pressure environment when our company came under scrutiny. We had a plan, but the atmosphere changed. People paused. Focus slipped. Energy became scattered. The quiet question in the room was clear. Do we still believe in what we are building?

In moments like that, no one waits for an all-hands meeting. People take their cues from daily tone, hallway conversations and executive language. That is why steady belief matters.

What helped us recover was not a new strategy. It was steady communication. We named the pressure. We spoke with clarity. We made sure people heard conviction in our voice. And we chose to keep moving.

That choice mattered. It gave people something to align around. It gave them permission to act.

Once teams see that leadership still believes, they recalibrate. Confidence comes back. Initiative returns. You do not need a perfect plan. You need clear, active belief.

This is what optimism does. It restores direction. It keeps systems in motion when certainty is unavailable.

Related: How to Lead With Positive Energy (Even When Times Get Tough)

Lead with belief

Optimism is not about ignoring risks. It is about leading with belief anyway. When that belief is present, teams stay focused. They solve problems faster. They keep building when others start waiting.

It helps people think creatively instead of defensively. It creates space to try instead of waiting to react.

If things feel stuck, take a closer look at how you are showing up. Not just in presentations or briefings, but in everyday conversations. Are you modeling progress or stalling? Are you holding direction or broadcasting hesitation?

Because people do not just need approval. They need to know their leaders still believe in what they are working toward. That belief, when communicated with intention, becomes contagious. It resets energy. It shifts momentum. It brings direction back into the room.

Optimism, when carried with clarity, cuts through noise. It is not emotional. It is structural. It sets pace. It creates alignment. It holds energy in motion.

The leaders who move teams through uncertainty are not always the ones with the perfect plan. They are the ones who give people a reason to keep going. They carry belief on purpose. They model direction even when the conditions are imperfect.

Optimism is not the opposite of realism. It is what makes realism useful.

When leaders carry it well, the effect spreads. Not because they are louder, but because their clarity steadies the room.

Related: How to Lead With a Balanced Sense of Optimism When The Future Looks Bleak