It looks like savings. It feels like savings. But in many grocery aisles, the “deal” is designed to make you stop calculating.

The result is simple: shoppers fixate on the sticker, while the real price quietly climbs in the background.

The sale price that is not really a sale

One of the most common ways consumers overpay is by trusting the word “sale” without confirming the checkout price. A 2025 Consumer Reports investigation found that shoppers at Kroger-owned stores were overcharged on more than 150 items that appeared to be discounted, with the average overcharge running 18.4 percent per item. In plain terms, the shelf promised one price and the register took another.

That matters because grocery buying is fast, repetitive, and habit-driven. Most people do not compare every receipt line to every shelf tag, especially when buying dozens of items at once. A promotion only has to look credible long enough to influence the decision. By the time the total rings up, the psychological work is already done.

Regulators are paying attention to this broader pricing problem. The Federal Trade Commission’s fee rule guidance, which took effect in 2025, makes clear that businesses cannot build a total advertised price around discounts or promotions that are not actually available to everyone. That principle is especially important in food retail, where “member price,” digital coupon price, and limited-time price can sit side by side and create confusion.

The modern version of the fake bargain is not always an outright false ad. Sometimes it is simply friction. You need the app, the account, the clipped digital coupon, or the right checkout method. Miss one step, and the “deal” vanishes. What looked like a routine discount becomes a full-price purchase hiding in plain sight.

Bigger packages and bulk buys can cost more

Consumers are trained to think bigger means cheaper, but unit pricing often tells a different story. Consumer Reports has repeatedly advised shoppers to compare the per-ounce or per-pound figure because larger containers, family packs, and warehouse formats do not automatically carry the lowest cost. In many stores, the medium size beats the jumbo one, and the multi-buy promotion beats neither.

This is where shrinkflation adds another layer of confusion. Researchers discussing the practice at the FTC have described how brands reduce package size while holding the shelf price steady, causing the unit price to rise even though the headline price appears unchanged. To a hurried shopper, the item looks familiar, the price looks familiar, and the value quietly worsens.

Food waste can make the “bulk bargain” even more expensive. Consumer Reports, citing the Natural Resources Defense Council, notes that food waste can cost a family of four about $1,500 a year. That means a lower sticker price on oversized produce, meat, snacks, or dairy is not a real savings if part of it spoils before anyone eats it.

The practical lesson is blunt: the best grocery deal is not the lowest package price. It is the lowest usable cost. If 32 ounces cost less per ounce than 64, or if the larger pack ends up in the trash, then the supposed bargain is exactly the kind of deal that makes you pay double.

Personalized pricing is turning deals into moving targets

The newest risk is that the price itself may no longer be stable from one shopper to the next. In January 2025, the FTC said its surveillance pricing study found that companies can use data such as location, browsing history, time, and shopping behavior to target different prices or discounts to different consumers for the same goods and services. A deal, in other words, may not be a deal in any universal sense.

Consumer Reports pushed that concern further with its investigation into Instacart’s AI-enabled pricing experiments. The reporting found that identical grocery baskets could vary in price, and advocacy material tied to the investigation said nearly 3/4 of tested grocery items showed price differences across users. Instacart later halted the practice after the scrutiny, according to Consumer Reports.

This changes the meaning of comparison shopping. You may think you are checking “the” price, when you are really seeing your price in that moment on that platform. The old bargain-hunting rules assumed a shared shelf and a shared tag. Digital grocery shopping increasingly does not work that way.

That is why the real defense is old-fashioned arithmetic. Check unit prices, confirm discounts actually apply, and review receipts before leaving the store or closing the app. The deal you pay double for is usually not dramatic. It is small, routine, believable, and repeated often enough to become expensive.

Dinner for four under $10 sounds like a social media stunt. In 2026, it is closer to a budgeting exercise with very little room for error. We tested the numbers against current grocery trends and found that the answer is yes, but only sometimes.

The math is tougher than it looks

Start with the national backdrop. Feeding America’s latest Map the Meal Gap report, reflecting 2023 spending data released in 2025, puts the national average meal cost at about $3.58 per person. That means a typical dinner for four lands near $14.32 before anyone reaches for seconds. USDA’s December 2025 low-cost food plan also shows how tight grocery budgets already are for families, even before convenience foods or restaurant meals enter the picture.

Prices have not moved evenly. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in July 2026 that food-at-home prices were up 2.7 percent from a year earlier. Fresh vegetables were up 6.3 percent, tomatoes jumped 12.8 percent, and rice, pasta, and cornmeal rose 3.9 percent. Not everything got worse: chicken was down 2.7 percent year over year, dried beans, peas, and lentils were down 1.4 percent, and eggs had dropped sharply after earlier spikes.

That mix matters because a sub-$10 dinner only works when families build around the right ingredients. Expensive proteins, packaged sides, and salad kits break the budget fast. In practice, the winning formula is starch + modest protein + one low-cost vegetable, with pantry basics doing most of the flavor work.

What our $10 test dinner looked like

To see whether the claim holds up, we built a practical meal from the ingredients most often favored by budget cooks and nutrition planners: chicken thighs, rice, black beans, onion, carrots, canned tomatoes, and a little seasoning. These foods are widely available, store well, and stretch better than boneless breasts, fresh herbs, or specialty sauces. They also reflect what many low-cost meal plans rely on in real households.

The result was a skillet-style chicken, rice, and bean dinner with softened onions and carrots cooked into the base. Using store-brand pricing common at discount grocers, the rough total came in just under $10 for four servings. The biggest reason it worked was portion control: each plate got a sensible amount of chicken, not the oversized servings many families are used to.

The dinner was filling, but it was not indulgent. There was little waste, no separate side dish, and no dessert. If we added shredded cheese, fresh salad greens, garlic bread, or a beverage beyond tap water, the total crossed the line quickly. Under $10 is possible, but only when dinner is treated as a complete one-pot meal rather than a full spread.

Where the budget works, and where it fails

The strongest case for a $10 family dinner is repetition. A large bag of rice, a pound of dried beans, a family pack of chicken thighs, and a few sturdy vegetables can anchor several meals in one week. That strategy spreads the cost of oil, spices, broth, and leftover ingredients across multiple dinners instead of loading them onto one plate.

It also helps that some core budget foods remain comparatively stable. BLS data show chicken and legumes have been gentler on shoppers than many fresh produce items, which is why so many frugal meal plans lean on chili, lentil pasta, bean tacos, fried rice, and soup. The method is less about finding one miracle recipe than about shopping a system built around low-cost staples.

Still, the under-$10 target fails in plenty of real kitchens. Regional prices vary sharply, families with teens often need larger portions, and dietary needs can make beans, pasta, or cheap poultry unrealistic. The honest verdict is this: a family of four can eat dinner for under $10, but not every night, not everywhere, and not without disciplined shopping, modest portions, and a pantry stocked to support the plan.

Restaurant bankruptcies have continued to reshape the quick-service business in 2026 as operators look for ready-made sites instead of building from scratch. That dynamic is now playing out around Salad and Go’s abrupt shutdown, with Dutch Bros moving quickly to secure dozens of the chain’s former drive-thru locations. The proposed transaction, filed the same day Salad and Go entered Chapter 11, would turn a failed salad chain’s real estate into a fast expansion play for coffee.

Salad and Go collapsed, and Dutch Bros moved in the same day

Salad and Go filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas on August 5, 2026, and permanently closed all 70 of its restaurants that day, according to the company’s press release as reported by Restaurant Dive. In the same bankruptcy case, the company asked the court to approve a $105 million cash sale of lease assets to Dutch Bros, KTAR reported from the court filing. The proposed buyer was identified as a Dutch Bros-affiliated entity in the filing, and the agreement covers leases plus furniture, fixtures, and equipment rather than the Salad and Go brand itself.

The scale is unusually large for a post-bankruptcy restaurant real estate deal. KTAR reported the proposed sale includes 51 drive-thru leases in Arizona and Nevada and another 14 in Texas and Oklahoma, for 65 leases total, even though Salad and Go said it closed 70 restaurants on August 5. The public filings cited in coverage do not explain every gap between the closed-store count and the lease-sale count, and not every former site appears to be part of the proposed transaction.

Court records described Dutch Bros as one of a very small number of operators that fit the properties. KTAR reported Salad and Go screened 16 potential buyers and said only three met its requirements, which included a drive-thru model, at least 300 locations, more than $100 million in available funding, and a format compatible with compact buildings that lack full kitchen infrastructure.

The immediate impact is clearest in Arizona and Nevada, with some Texas and Oklahoma sites included

The most clearly confirmed geographic impact is in Arizona and Nevada, where the bankruptcy filing identified 51 leases for the proposed Dutch Bros purchase, according to KTAR. Another 14 leases are in Texas and Oklahoma, but public reporting so far has not provided a complete city-by-city list for all four states. That matters because Salad and Go’s earlier retrenchment had already reduced its footprint outside its core Southwest markets before the final shutdown.

For Texas readers, some former Salad and Go sites expected to be part of the conversion effort have been identified in broader reporting, including stores in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, Frisco, Katy, and San Antonio. Still, the company has not released a comprehensive final list of affected Texas addresses tied to the Dutch Bros purchase agreement. Oklahoma is included in the lease package, but publicly available reports have not broken out a confirmed city list there either.

What is confirmed is that Salad and Go had already been shrinking in Texas and Oklahoma before the bankruptcy filing. Restaurant Dive reported the company closed 32 units in those two states in January, following 41 earlier closures in Texas in 2025. By the time the Chapter 11 filing arrived on August 5, the chain’s remaining business was concentrated in Arizona and Nevada, making those two states the center of both the collapse and the proposed handoff.

Court filings point to expansion missteps, rising costs, and weaker demand

The reasons cited for the collapse were direct and specific. Restaurant Dive said Salad and Go attributed the bankruptcy to sustained pressure on consumer demand, past strategic growth challenges, and rising costs. Bloomberg Law, citing court papers, reported the company said a summer Cyclospora outbreak across the broader salad category accelerated losses and hurt customer traffic, even though Salad and Go was not linked to any illnesses.

The filings also point back to earlier expansion decisions. Bloomberg Law reported the company said a costly push into Texas and Oklahoma had already forced dozens of prior closures, while continuing rent obligations on dark stores and corporate overhead strained cash flow. Restaurant Dive separately reported CEO Michael Tattersfield had previously described the Texas growth strategy as flawed because the chain needed a large central kitchen capable of supporting a much bigger store base.

For customers, the near-term takeaway is practical: Salad and Go is gone, and some of its former drive-thru buildings may reopen under a different brand rather than sit vacant. No reopening timeline for specific converted Dutch Bros stores has been publicly confirmed. What has been confirmed is that Dutch Bros remains in active expansion mode, with 1,177 locations in 25 states as of March 31, 2026, according to the company’s investor relations materials, making the former Salad and Go portfolio a fast way to add more sites if the bankruptcy court approves the deal.

A sharp rise in foodborne illness cases this summer has renewed attention on how the U.S. tracks contaminated produce through a sprawling supply chain. The clearest example came on July 17, 2026, when Taylor Farms de Mexico pulled iceberg lettuce from the U.S. market after federal investigators tied it to a fast-growing Cyclospora outbreak.

Taylor Farms recall turned a summer outbreak into a national test case

Taylor Fresh Foods announced on July 17, 2026 that Taylor Farms de Mexico was voluntarily removing all iceberg lettuce sourced from central Mexico from the U.S. market because of possible Cyclospora contamination, according to the company announcement posted by the FDA. The recall covered foodservice products sold under brands including CV, JB, MARK, PK, SUB, SY, and TF, plus Marketside retail products sold at Walmart as “Iceberg Salad” in 12-ounce and 24-ounce packages and “Shredded Lettuce” in 8-ounce and 16-ounce packages, all with best-if-used-by dates from July 18, 2026 through August 3, 2026.

The company said the shredded iceberg product had been distributed from June 29 through July 16 in Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Taylor Fresh Foods told consumers to discard the recalled iceberg lettuce immediately, not consume it, or seek a full refund at the place of purchase.

By August 13, the FDA said the multistate outbreak had reached 9,481 confirmed illnesses, 398 hospitalizations, and two deaths across 17 states. The agency said many illnesses began before the July 17 recall, underscoring how outbreaks can keep growing even after a product is pulled because case confirmation and reporting can take weeks.

The outbreak’s biggest lesson was not just contamination, but limited visibility

What made the Cyclospora outbreak stand out was not only its scale, but how difficult it was to map in real time. The CDC said Cyclospora is harder to track than many bacterial pathogens because whole genome sequencing is not available for it, which limits investigators’ ability to quickly connect cases the way they often can with Salmonella or Listeria.

That weakness matters in a produce outbreak tied to restaurants, retailers, and multiple downstream products. FDA said the illnesses in this outbreak involved people who reported exposure to processed iceberg lettuce from Taylor Farms de Mexico served or purchased at various locations, including Taco Bell, while the broader 2026 Cyclospora season stretched far beyond this one cluster. CDC reported 13,895 laboratory-confirmed domestically acquired Cyclospora cases since May 1, 2026, with at least 10,455 additional cases still requiring investigation and analysis.

Consumer Reports said in its August 2026 Food Policy Insider that the outbreak showed why CDC and FDA funding needs to be restored for FoodNet tracking of Cyclospora and seven other pathogens dropped because of budget cuts. The group also said the FDA traceability rule, already delayed for years and not scheduled to take effect until July 2028, should move faster.

For shoppers and restaurants, the gap is in tracing what moved where and when

For consumers, most of the recalled retail dates have already passed, and both the FDA and CDC said the affected products should no longer be available in stores or restaurants. Even so, the agencies advised people who previously bought or received recalled iceberg lettuce to clean and sanitize any surfaces or containers it touched, a reminder that food safety problems can linger beyond the shelf life of the product itself.

For restaurants and grocers, the practical issue is supplier visibility. Consumer Reports said stores and restaurants often absorb the reputational and economic damage from outbreaks even when contamination began farther upstream, and it urged them to scrutinize suppliers more rigorously, enforce safety standards, and be prepared to switch suppliers when risks emerge.

The broader policy issue is that traceback remains slower and less precise than regulators and buyers want. FDA said it has increased border screening and sampling and launched an onsite inspection at Taylor Farms de Mexico with Mexican officials, while CDC said it continues to integrate interviews, laboratory data, and food traceback information to define the outbreak. Until those systems improve, this outbreak will remain a case study in how a recall can move faster than the country’s ability to fully track a pathogen.

Italian regional dishes continue to find new global audiences through television, tourism, and social media. One of the clearest examples remains Stanley Tucci’s praise for spaghetti alla Nerano, a zucchini pasta linked to the village of Nerano on Italy’s Sorrento Peninsula. The moment that pushed the dish into wider public view came in CNN’s February 14, 2021, premiere of Stanley Tucci: Searching for Italy.

The TV moment that made the dish a headline

CNN’s Stanley Tucci: Searching for Italy debuted on February 14, 2021, with the episode “Naples and the Amalfi Coast,” according to CNN’s press materials and episode listings. In that episode, Tucci tasted spaghetti alla Nerano and described it as “one of the best things” he had ever eaten, a line that has continued to circulate in food coverage and recipe stories. The dish was presented as a local specialty in Campania, the southern Italian region that includes Naples, the Sorrento Peninsula, and the Amalfi Coast.

Coverage that followed helped cement the quote in the food media cycle. The Independent later described the scene as Tucci calling the pasta “one of the best things he’s ever eaten,” while The Daily Meal and other outlets tied the comment directly to spaghetti alla Nerano. That repeated attribution matters because it moved the pasta from regional specialty to recognizable international dish.

The dish itself is notably simple. Reports describing the episode identify spaghetti alla Nerano as pasta dressed with fried zucchini, cheese, and basil, with some versions emphasizing Provolone del Monaco as a key local ingredient. Its rise was less about a new launch or corporate campaign than a specific on-camera endorsement that audiences remembered.

Why Nerano and the Amalfi Coast stayed central to the story

The geography is unusually important in this case because the dish is not just “Italian pasta” in a broad sense. The New Yorker reported that Tucci visited Nerano, described as a village on the Sorrento Peninsula at the beginning of the Amalfi Coast, and that the appearance helped raise the profile of spaghetti alla Nerano and draw visiting diners. That makes the local impact more specific than a general tourism bump for Italy.

The restaurant most often connected to Tucci’s televised meal is Lo Scoglio da Tommaso, which has been repeatedly cited in follow-up coverage. Forbes, in a 2026 travel piece, also referenced Lo Scoglio on the Amalfi Coast when pointing readers to the signature dish Tucci praised on television. Even years later, the dish remains tied to that coastline in travel and dining coverage.

What is less clear is any verified count of how much tourism or restaurant traffic increased because of the episode. Public reporting has described a steady stream of visitors and heightened interest, but a comprehensive official tally of affected businesses in Nerano or along the Amalfi Coast has not been publicly released. The confirmed point is narrower: the dish’s modern fame remains anchored to Campania, and specifically to Nerano and nearby coastal dining destinations.

What the quote says about food media and what diners can expect

The wider context is that food television increasingly shapes destination dining. In this case, Tucci’s endorsement worked because it elevated a highly localized dish without changing its identity. The New Yorker noted that the segment gave spaghetti alla Nerano A-list culinary prominence, while later food and travel coverage continued to use his praise as shorthand for the dish’s appeal.

That pattern also reflects what audiences respond to now: specificity, place, and recognizable ingredients. Spaghetti alla Nerano is not a mass-market branded product or a seasonal chain menu item. It is a regional pasta with a clearly defined origin story in Campania and a television moment that made viewers want to seek out the original.

For diners, the practical takeaway is straightforward. Anyone encountering the dish today should expect a zucchini-based pasta closely associated with Nerano, typically built around spaghetti, fried zucchini, basil, and cheese, though restaurant versions may vary. The dish’s public identity still rests on the same factual touchpoints: a February 14, 2021 CNN episode, a meal on the Amalfi Coast, and Tucci’s now-famous assessment that it ranked among the best things he had ever eaten.

Kroger is trimming its national store base as grocery chains face higher costs and changing shopping patterns. In Michigan, that broader strategy has now produced a specific local result: the Kroger at 5249 Corunna Road in Flint Township is set to close. The decision gives Genesee County residents the first confirmed example of which Michigan store is being eliminated in Kroger’s current downsizing plan.

Kroger names a Flint Township store in its 60-store reduction plan

Kroger confirmed that its Flint Township store at 5249 Corunna Road will permanently close on September 30. The location is part of the company’s plan to shutter approximately 60 underperforming stores over the next 18 months, a move Kroger disclosed in its first-quarter 2025 earnings materials and earnings call on June 20, 2025. In that filing, the company said it took a $100 million impairment charge tied to the planned closures.

The Flint Township store appears to be Michigan’s first publicly confirmed location in that national reduction. Kroger’s store directory has listed the Corunna Road site among its Flint-area stores, and local reporting identified that address as the one scheduled to close at the end of September. Kroger also said employees at affected stores would be offered roles in other locations, a point executives repeated when discussing the broader closure plan.

The company has framed the closures as a portfolio decision rather than a full-scale retreat. Kroger said the goal is to improve efficiency and strengthen long-term profitability while keeping the vast majority of its more than 2,700 stores open. Company executives said the closures should allow Kroger to reinvest in stronger-performing stores and support future growth across its remaining network.

What is confirmed in Michigan, and what remains unclear

For Michigan shoppers, the confirmed impact is narrow but significant. The only location publicly identified in the available reporting is the Flint Township store on Corunna Road, with a closing date of September 30. That gives residents in and around Flint Township a firm timeline, but it does not yet answer whether additional Michigan stores will also be included in Kroger’s 18-month plan.

Kroger has not released a comprehensive list of affected Michigan locations. That means it is not yet possible to confirm a statewide closure count beyond the Flint Township store. Reporting tied to the announcement has also not identified additional city-level closures elsewhere in Michigan, so any broader map of impacted communities remains incomplete.

The local effect is especially relevant because Kroger still operates other Flint-area stores. Kroger’s online store listings recently showed multiple locations in Flint, including the Corunna Road address now slated to close. For customers who use the Flint Township location, Kroger has said nearby stores will remain open, though the company has not publicly outlined any route changes, service transfers, or location-specific transition details beyond saying workers may transfer.

Why Kroger is closing stores now, and what customers should expect

Kroger’s stated reason is operational efficiency. In its first-quarter 2025 earnings release, the company said the store closures were tied to underperforming locations and presented the move as part of a strategy to improve profitability over the next 18 months. During the earnings call, executives said they expected sales from some closed stores to shift to other nearby Kroger locations, helping the company operate a more productive network.

That explanation fits wider pressures across the grocery business. Industry reporting has tied recent supermarket closures nationally to rising operating costs, stronger competition from discount chains and warehouse clubs, and continued shifts toward digital grocery ordering. Kroger’s own comments emphasized reinvestment in remodels, digital capabilities, and e-commerce rather than an across-the-board reduction in brick-and-mortar grocery demand.

For residents in Flint Township, the practical expectation is straightforward: the Corunna Road store is scheduled to stop operating on September 30, while other nearby Kroger stores are expected to remain open. Kroger has said associates will be offered opportunities at neighboring stores, and the company has not announced additional confirmed Michigan closures at this stage. Until Kroger releases a fuller list, Flint Township remains the clearest identified Michigan community affected by the company’s current national downsizing effort.

Cold drinks have become a bigger battleground for fast-food chains as companies look for growth beyond burgers, fries, and the breakfast rush. McDonald’s is now bringing that strategy into a new category with an unexpected menu pairing: Red Bull drinks at participating U.S. restaurants starting August 17, 2026.

McDonald’s puts Red Bull on the menu

McDonald’s has started offering Red Bull-branded beverages at participating U.S. locations, with the launch date confirmed as August 17, 2026 in recent menu materials and store-level rollout information. Earlier this year, Reuters reported that McDonald’s was preparing to add a Red Bull Dragonberry Energizer as part of a broader overhaul of its cold drink lineup in U.S. restaurants, citing company documents and a Wall Street Journal report. McDonald’s had already signaled a larger beverage push in an April 28, 2026 company announcement introducing its first nationwide lineup of Refreshers and Crafted Sodas.

That April announcement showed McDonald’s moving well beyond its traditional fountain-drink lineup. The company said it was launching new Refreshers and Crafted Sodas in the U.S., building on work that came out of CosMc’s, the beverage-focused concept McDonald’s opened in late 2023. McDonald’s later said the CosMc’s test would help bring “CosMc’s-inspired beverages” to hundreds of standard McDonald’s restaurants in the U.S., confirming the scale of its beverage expansion in a May 23, 2025 corporate update.

The Red Bull move stands out because McDonald’s beverage strategy had largely been associated with soft drinks, coffee, and internally developed specialty beverages. A Red Bull-branded product places a major energy drink name directly on McDonald’s menu boards, which is a notable shift for a chain long associated with Coca-Cola fountain products and McCafé offerings. McDonald’s online drinks menu also shows the company’s beverage section continuing to expand in 2026.

What the rollout means in U.S. restaurants

For customers, the clearest confirmed point is that the drinks are being sold at participating U.S. McDonald’s restaurants rather than every location nationwide. McDonald’s has not released a comprehensive public list of participating cities, states, or franchise locations, so it is not yet possible to verify exactly which local markets received the Red Bull drinks first. The company’s consumer-facing menu language for other specialty beverages also uses participating-location terms, underscoring that availability can vary by restaurant.

That means the local impact is real but uneven. Some restaurants appear to have added the drinks as part of a wider specialty beverage setup, while others may not be included in the initial wave. Without a full list from the company, readers should understand that menu availability is confirmed at participating U.S. restaurants but not yet mapped market by market.

The limited public detail also reflects how McDonald’s typically handles menu tests and phased rollouts. The company’s previous beverage test tied to CosMc’s-inspired drinks was introduced in more than 500 restaurants in Wisconsin and Colorado, according to Restaurant Business, before broader menu expansion followed. In this case, McDonald’s has confirmed the category push, while the exact city-by-city footprint for Red Bull drinks remains undisclosed.

Why McDonald’s is making this move now

McDonald’s has been explicit that beverages are a bigger strategic priority. In its April 28, 2026 announcement, the company said its new lineup was designed to open “a new era of drinks” in the U.S., framing beverages as a traffic and innovation opportunity rather than just an add-on purchase. Reuters also reported in April that the company planned to price new drinks below specialty beverage rivals such as Starbucks, Dutch Bros, and Sonic, placing McDonald’s directly into a fast-growing competitive set.

The Red Bull addition also fits the company’s post-CosMc’s playbook. McDonald’s said its CosMc’s concept gave it a real-world “Learning Lab” that helped it test, refine, and narrow beverage ideas before bringing the strongest options to more traditional restaurants. By May 2025, McDonald’s had already said CosMc’s-inspired beverages would land in hundreds of U.S. locations, showing that the company intended to scale the category even after closing the standalone concept.

For customers, the practical takeaway is that McDonald’s beverage menu is no longer limited to the chain’s legacy staples. Depending on the restaurant, customers may now see refreshers, crafted sodas, and Red Bull-based drinks alongside the usual soft drinks and McCafé items. McDonald’s has framed the broader rollout as part of a continuing beverage expansion in U.S. restaurants, suggesting drinks will remain a visible part of the chain’s menu strategy through 2026.

Egg recalls have taken on added urgency this summer as federal health officials track several multistate foodborne illness investigations. In this case, the focus is a Texas-linked shell egg recall that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has now placed in its most serious hazard category. The affected products were sold under grocery and store brands across parts of the South and Southwest.

FDA assigns its highest-risk label to a Texas egg recall

Midwest Poultry Services, L.P. initiated the recall on July 22, 2026, covering 1,589,577 dozen white shell eggs and brown cage-free shell eggs produced in Texas, according to the company announcement posted by the FDA. The agency later classified the action as a Class I recall, the FDA category reserved for cases in which there is a reasonable probability that exposure could cause serious adverse health consequences or death.

The recalled eggs were produced between June 6, 2026, and July 3, 2026, and carry sell-by or best-by dates from July 20, 2026, through August 17, 2026, according to the FDA outbreak advisory. Federal officials said the products were sold in bulk and in retail cartons containing 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, and 60 eggs under Country Morning, Cal-Maine Sunups, Brookshire’s, Simple Truth, and Kroger brand names.

FDA materials identify the recalled cartons by plant codes P-1950 or 0840962 and Julian dates 157 through 184 printed on the carton. Product listings published by the FDA include varieties such as Kroger Large 12 eggs, Kroger Large 18 eggs, Simple Truth Cage Free Large Brown 12 eggs, Brookshire’s Large 12 Eggs, and Country Morning Large 12 Eggs, along with UPCs tied to each item. The FDA said consumers, restaurants, and retailers that purchased or received the eggs should throw them away or return them to the place of purchase for a refund.

Distribution was confirmed in six states, with Texas at the center

The FDA said product distribution has been confirmed in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. In the company recall notice, Midwest Poultry Services said eggs were shipped to foodservice and retail customers in Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana, and were also available through Brookshire Grocery stores in Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, and Mississippi, as well as other smaller retail outlets.

Texas is the key geography in the recall because the eggs were produced and distributed from farms in Texas, per the FDA and the company notice. Kroger store sales cited in the recall were confirmed in Texas and Louisiana, while Brookshire’s distribution extended to the six-state footprint listed by the FDA. The company has not released a comprehensive city-by-city list of affected stores or foodservice customers in Texas or the other states.

The public health impact reaches beyond those six distribution states. As of the FDA’s July 24, 2026 update, 98 people infected with the outbreak strain of Salmonella Enteritidis had been reported across 17 states, with 26 hospitalizations and no deaths. The states with confirmed illnesses were Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, North Carolina, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, and West Virginia.

Testing linked the eggs to part of a wider Salmonella outbreak

The FDA said laboratory, epidemiological, and traceback evidence determined that shell eggs recalled by Midwest Poultry Services are a likely source of illnesses in the outbreak. According to the agency, the company shared third-party testing results with FDA on July 21, 2026, and samples collected at farms in Texas tested positive for Salmonella. Whole genome sequencing performed by the firm’s third-party lab found that some samples matched the outbreak strain.

Federal investigators also drew a narrower conclusion: Midwest Poultry Services appears linked to part, but not all, of the outbreak. The FDA said the producer was identified as a common egg source during traceback work, but it “does not account for all the illnesses” in the multistate investigation. The agency said additional investigation is ongoing to determine whether other sources are contributing to reported illnesses.

For shoppers and food businesses in the affected states, the practical impact is specific rather than open-ended. The FDA said recalled eggs can be identified by the listed plant codes, Julian dates, and date range, and that any purchased or received products should be discarded or returned for a refund, with potentially contaminated areas disinfected afterward. As of the latest FDA outbreak update, the investigation remained active and the advisory was subject to further revision as new information became available.

Restaurant chains across the U.S. are still shrinking footprints as operators sort through higher labor costs, lease obligations and uneven customer traffic. In Santa Maria, that pressure is now hitting one of the city’s longtime national chain restaurants: Red Lobster at 1525 S. Bradley Road is scheduled to close at the end of August after about 32 years in business. The move ties a local loss to the company’s broader post-bankruptcy restructuring.

Santa Maria’s Red Lobster is scheduled to close on August 31

Red Lobster Restaurants LLC has filed a California WARN notice showing that its Santa Maria restaurant at 1525 S. Bradley Road is set for permanent closure effective August 31, 2026. State-tracked WARN data reviewed through layoff monitoring services lists the event as a closure affecting 37 employees, while local reporting by KSBY also stated the restaurant is closing at the end of August. The location has operated in Santa Maria for roughly 32 years, according to local coverage.

The filing is significant because WARN notices are among the clearest public indicators that a closure has moved beyond rumor and into a formal labor action. In this case, the effective date is publicly listed and the employer is specifically identified as Red Lobster Restaurants LLC. That gives Santa Maria residents a confirmed timeline for when the restaurant is expected to stop serving customers.

The closure adds another California chapter to Red Lobster’s long restructuring process. The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in May 2024, then moved through a court-approved sale and reorganization later that year. Since then, Red Lobster has continued evaluating its restaurant base as it works to stabilize operations under new ownership.

What is confirmed in Santa Maria, and what remains unclear in California

What is confirmed is narrow but important: the Santa Maria location is the restaurant identified in the available WARN records, and the address attached to the filing is 1525 S. Bradley Road in Santa Maria. The worker count publicly associated with that filing is 37 employees. The closure date publicly tied to the notice is August 31, 2026.

What is not yet clear is whether any additional California Red Lobster locations are facing similar action at the same time. The company has not released a comprehensive public list of affected California restaurants tied to this specific round of evaluation. Publicly available reporting tied to this event centers on Santa Maria, not a broader statewide shutdown.

For Santa Maria, the impact is immediate and local. A national chain restaurant that had been part of the city’s dining mix for more than three decades is preparing to leave, and dozens of workers are attached to that change. For customers, the practical takeaway is simple: unless Red Lobster announces otherwise, the Santa Maria restaurant is expected to operate only through the stated August 31 closure date.

The closure reflects Red Lobster’s broader turnaround after bankruptcy

Red Lobster’s larger financial problems have been documented in bankruptcy filings and national reporting since 2024. The company said when it sought Chapter 11 protection in May 2024 that the process was intended to strengthen its financial position and maximize value for stakeholders. Reporting from the Associated Press and Bloomberg Law tied the filing to rising lease and labor costs, debt pressure and declining performance at some locations.

Court and restructuring records also show the chain had already begun trimming weaker stores before and during the bankruptcy process. Case trackers covering the reorganization reported that Red Lobster closed 93 underperforming restaurants in May 2024, and later emerged from bankruptcy under new ownership led by Fortress-backed lenders. That context matters because the Santa Maria decision fits the same pattern of portfolio review rather than an isolated local event.

For customers and residents, the immediate meaning is limited but concrete. The Santa Maria restaurant is scheduled to close, and the public filing gives a date and an employee count, but it does not provide a detailed public explanation for why this single site was selected. The broader company context suggests an ongoing effort to keep only locations viewed as viable over the long term, as Red Lobster continues operating while reducing costs and reshaping its footprint.

Grocery stores have long been treated as a private-sector problem. Now, a growing number of cities are asking whether food access should be handled more like public infrastructure.

That shift reflects frustration with store closures, rising prices, and neighborhoods that national chains still do not see as profitable.

Why cities are stepping into the grocery business

The push for public grocery models is rooted in a stubborn market failure. USDA’s Food Access Research Atlas continues to map low-income areas where residents are far from SNAP-authorized retailers or large grocery stores, underscoring how distance, transportation, and income still shape who can buy healthy food easily. In many cities, elected officials have concluded that waiting for a major chain to return is no longer a strategy at all.

Chicago became one of the clearest examples of that frustration. After floating a city-owned grocery concept in 2023, officials said a feasibility review found a public role was necessary where private operators had not delivered sustainable options. But by February 2025, the city pivoted toward municipally backed public markets instead of a single city-run supermarket, arguing that a broader food ecosystem approach could better support local growers, existing vendors, and neighborhood demand, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

Madison, Wisconsin, has taken a slightly different route. Rather than operate a supermarket itself, the city secured a lease in November 2024 for Maurer’s Market to open in a 24,000-square-foot city-owned grocery space at 815 Cedar Street, with an anticipated mid-2025 opening. That model keeps the real estate in public hands while relying on an experienced private operator to run the store day to day.

What “cutting out the middleman” actually means

In practice, most cities are not trying to replace every supermarket. They are trying to reduce the layers of cost and risk that make groceries expensive or unavailable in underserved areas. That can mean public ownership of the building, subsidized rent, discounted fit-out costs, direct procurement partnerships, or a city contracting with an operator instead of leaving the entire project to a chain’s return-on-investment formula.

Atlanta’s emerging model shows how aggressive that support can become. Invest Atlanta approved more than $8.1 million in financial incentives for two stores announced on December 31, 2024, including a municipal grocery in southwest Atlanta to be operated by Savi Provisions under a sublease agreement with Invest Atlanta. City leaders said the stores would accept SNAP, offer discounts, partner with local farmers and vendors, and are expected to create 80 jobs with an estimated $21 million economic impact.

New York City has pushed the idea furthest into the mainstream. In July 2026, Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced that five city-run grocery stores, one in each borough, would offer a core basket of staple goods at prices set 30% below typical retail levels once a month. The city says the stores will be publicly backed but run with experienced private operators through an RFP process, an acknowledgment that governments may be able to lower overhead without pretending they are automatically better grocers.

The promise is real, but so are the risks

The appeal of these models is obvious. A city can lower occupancy costs, target neighborhoods that chains avoid, and treat food access as a service instead of a profit center. In a period when federal inflation data showed grocery prices were still elevated, with the BLS reporting the food-at-home index up 2.4% year over year in June 2025, public officials have a strong political case for experimenting with anything that can make staples cheaper.

Still, municipal groceries are not a magic trick. Even supporters acknowledge that food retail remains a low-margin business with spoilage, labor, logistics, refrigeration, and security costs that do not disappear just because a city owns the walls. Chicago’s retreat from a traditional city-run store to a public-market concept reflects that reality: governance is easier to announce than to operationalize.

The most credible lesson so far is that cities are not truly eliminating the middleman as much as redesigning it. They are using public land, financing, leases, and procurement power to make stores viable where private markets have failed. If these experiments work, they may not kill the supermarket model, but they could permanently change who gets to build it, subsidize it, and decide where it belongs.