Oh, “breastaurants,” those dens of chicken wings, beer, and scantily clad women that make suburban ladies clutch their pearls and teenage boys thirsty.

Surely, the people behind these chains think wonders of their loyal customers, right? Right? Apparently, no—at least not at Twin Peaks.

In a revealing (if not completely shocking) internal branding memo leaked to Think Progress, it quickly becomes very clear that Twin Peaks believes its customers are basically mindless, ogling “guys-guys” straight out of some sitcom stereotype.


Some of the gems from the memo include:

1. The target demographic: “…adventurous, sports-minded, guys-guys who deserve better food, colder beer and love to have their ego stroked by beautiful girls.”

2. What Twin Peaks must deliver: “…[a space that] feeds their ego with the attention they crave.”

3. On Aesthetics: “…a rugged man lodge.”

4. On Ambiance: “…arrogantly better.”

5. What customers (apparently) think of themselves: “I deserve to drink cold beer and watch the game without being asked what I’m thinking. I like attention from beautiful girls and being recognized in front of the guys. I got game! Now get me a beer…pretty please?”


twin-peaks-memoPhoto: Think Progress

Whether or not the demographics listed might be (somewhat) true, the restaurant has some serious explaining to do to its fan base, including female clients who might actually be in it for the fried pickles.

UPDATE: Rick Van Warner, the corporate spokesperson for Twin Peaks, told Think Progress that the document is “an old brand consultant’s discussion document that was never distributed to employees.” Van Warner told the website, “I’m not saying it’s a fraudulent memo. But it was not, to my knowledge, part of a staff training. We were unaware that this was in the public domain.” He went on to say that “it’s not a policy document, it’s not a memo.” The employee who sent the document to ThinkProgress has a different opinion. The anonymous employee says that “Twin Peaks’ corporate office emailed the memo to some staff and its contents were covered in a pre-shift meeting.” (For some reason, we believe the employee.)

[via Think Progress]