By Steve JohnsonCNNMoneyMoney.com–November 18, 2017–(BUSINESS WIRE)–In a recent interview with the New York Times, burger chain Burger King CEO Steve Easterbrook explained how he and other leaders at the chain use the word “dunk” to describe their burgers and other products.
The “dunker” in Dunk refers to the meat of the burger, which typically contains more protein than a regular burger, Easterbrook said.
The “dunks” in the word Dunk are the most expensive cuts of beef, he said.
“You can make a great hamburger, but it will take a couple of dunks to really get the taste and texture of a real good hamburger,” he said in an interview published Friday.
Easterbrook explained that it takes about a quarter of a pound of beef for a single-cut bun to last for two hours on a single serving.
“If you can’t have enough dunks, you’re going to end up with an overcooked burger,” he told the Times.
“I’ve tried to take the time to really think about what’s in the bun, the ingredients and the way we can create the best possible product,” Easterbrook added.
“It’s a little bit of a challenge to say that a Burger King burger tastes good, but I’ve had people who were shocked to say they were disappointed.”
Easterwood said he’s spent more than $50 million on research into the issue of how to reduce the dunker’s effect on burgers.
“We’ve spent a lot of time thinking about what people are looking for in a burger,” Easterwood said.
“But at the same time, we know that if we want to get the same flavor, it’s important to have the right ingredients.”
Eggs, chicken and other meats are among the items Easterbrook and other top Burger King executives say they don’t like to use.
“They’re so cheap that they’re just not going to taste the same,” Easter Brook said of beef and other meat.
“I know that it’s true for some other meats, too, like chicken, but that’s not the case with beef.”
Eccleston’s recent comments about the dunk were first reported by the New England Journal of Medicine.
EccLeston’s comments came days after the company’s CEO, David Eskin, called for an end to the duple dunk, the practice of cooking the burger with one side of the meat being cooked and then using the other side to make the bun.
Eeskin, who is the CEO of the McDonald’s Corporation and owns about 4.3 million shares of the company, was asked in an earnings call this week if he thought that his company’s beef bun, “which is so popular in New England,” was the only product that could withstand the dune dunk.
Easily the most widely-recognized dunker in Burger King history, the term “dunky” was first used by an author in 1949.
In that book, “The Dictionary of American Usage,” “dud” was used to describe the bun of beef used in a popular hamburger.
In an interview with CNNMoney, Eeskin said that he has not read any of the dictionary definitions for the term dunk, and that the dictionary definition was written in the 1950s.
The definition of “dude” was changed in 1995, when it was changed to “dune,” according to the definition of the word.
“My definition is that dunker is the part of the bun that is overcooked, overcooked is when you cook the burger so it’s not really beefy, and overcooked beefy is when it gets overcooked,” Eesin said.
Esin, who took over as CEO in January, has faced criticism from some customers for the burger company’s “dump and dunk” burgers, which are served on the bun at a higher price than the standard hamburger bun.
In his interview with NYT, Easin said that the term Dunker is a “bad word” to use because it’s “not in common use,” adding that he’s “always been in favor of using the word dunker.”
Easin told the NYT that he “was very surprised” by the criticism of the “dumped” word, saying that “it doesn’t bother me because people are always calling it dunk.
But it does bother me when it comes to other things, like beef, because that’s what I eat.”
Eisen told the paper that he didn’t think the term was offensive.
“There are some people that don’t want to use it, but people use it in different ways, so there’s no real difference,” he explained.
Essin said he believes that the majority of people would be fine with the term if it was used in other ways.
“You can use it for everything,” he noted.
“Some people think it’s a derogatory term,