The Burrito Index
What Chipotle’s 19% stock drop says about the future of nonprofit news
I was listening to a CNBC anchor last week as they rattled through earnings updates. Most of it faded into background noise until one report made me stop. Chipotle’s stock had dropped 19 percent. Now, I don’t own Chipotle (CMG) stock, but when I heard the explanation for the drop, I realized that the reason was a warning for leaders in the nonprofit news sector.
What caused it wasn’t a new menu or a political statement. It was something Scott Boatwright, the CEO, said during their earnings call. He admitted that Chipotle is “over-indexed” to younger consumers, especially those between 25 and 35. Many of them are dealing with unemployment, student-loan repayments, and slower wage growth. On top of that, lower- and middle-income customers, about 40 percent of their sales, are cutting back.
That landed. When I was at Lehigh Valley Public Media and we launched our digital news outlet, we aimed squarely at individuals aged 25 to 49. We called them our growth engine. They were smart, civically engaged, and willing to pay for quality journalism. They’re also the people Chipotle is now losing. And they’re the same ones many nonprofit newsrooms rely on for donations, memberships, and subscriptions.
In The Loyalty Collapse, I wrote that trust and loyalty don’t protect you the way they used to. Even your most devoted audience now behaves more like careful investors than lifelong members. This Chipotle moment proves that. The story isn’t about burritos. It’s about what happens when values-based loyalty meets a shaky economy.
The discretionary squeeze
Here’s what should worry you. Discretionary spending is the first thing to go.
When 25- to 35-year-olds can’t justify a twelve-dollar burrito bowl, they start rethinking that five-dollar monthly membership or hundred-dollar annual donation. Nonprofit news sits in the same mental budget as Chipotle. It’s a purchase that feels good until money gets tight.
And money is getting tight. According to Chipotle’s earnings call, their core 25-35 demographic faces unemployment, student loan repayments, and slower wage growth—headwinds that have pushed youth unemployment significantly higher this year. Groceries keep climbing faster than wages. The same people who once fueled small-dollar giving programs are now in survival mode.
The over-indexed risk
If your donor list skews young and urban—and many do, especially digital-first outlets—you’re facing the same economic headwinds that hit Chipotle. This isn’t about values. It’s about math. People can love what you do and still not renew when the credit-card bill comes due.
During the pandemic, generosity surged. Remember those months when every newsletter ended with “Support local journalism” and people actually clicked the button? We were home, anxious, and trying to do something that felt like impact. That wave has passed. Savings are down. Optimism is down. The urgency that powered that giving has cooled.
We built a lot of the nonprofit news economy on the idea that loyalty equals stability. It doesn’t. Chipotle just showed what happens when your most loyal customers simply can’t afford you.
When value gets redefined
Chipotle is now testing dollar add-ons and limited-time offers to prove value. When your audience is stretched thin, those tweaks don’t work. Nonprofit news faces the same trap. You can’t “out-premium” your way through a recession. Quality journalism is a harder sell when rent is due.
This is the moment when value becomes existential. For Chipotle, that means defending the price of lunch. For journalism, it means proving that a donation isn’t optional—it’s part of a community’s survival.
The challenge isn’t proving journalism matters. It’s proving it matters more than rent.
Don’t expect foundations to fill the gap
Individual giving is the base of most nonprofit news models. It’s what proves community support and unlocks matching grants. If that base shrinks because your core audience is broke, you lose leverage everywhere else. Foundations don’t want to fund collapse. They want to amplify resilience.
That’s what makes the Chipotle story worth paying attention to. If a single investor call can wipe out billions in value for being too dependent on young consumers, what does that say about newsrooms built on recurring ten-dollar donations from the same group?
What to do now
Look at your donor data. Do you know how many of your sustainers are under forty? How many earn under a hundred thousand a year? If you don’t know, find out.
Run a stress test. What happens if renewals fall by fifteen or twenty percent in the next two quarters? Do you have reserves? Can you pivot your messaging quickly?
Expand your reach. This isn’t about changing your mission. It’s about widening the circle. Are older, more financially stable audiences seeing your work as essential?
Offer flexibility. If the economy stays rough, high-ticket memberships might backfire. Could you create lower-cost entry points that still build habit and connection?
Track financial patterns, not just engagement. Start monitoring when people cancel, when they reduce giving levels, and what external economic signals (tax season, back-to-school, holiday spending) correlate with churn. If you understand the financial rhythm of your audience, you can design around it—offering pause options, seasonal pricing, or hardship tiers before people simply disappear.
The bigger signal
I keep thinking about that earnings call. One phrase—”over-indexed to younger consumers”—wiped out billions in value. In journalism, there’s no stock ticker flashing red, but the signal is just as clear.
The Chipotle story isn’t really about burritos. It’s about what happens when a business or a mission relies too heavily on people who can no longer afford to care.
Loyalty used to mean staying through the storm. Now it means staying until payday.
How does your organization think about this risk?
If you’ve seen early signs of this squeeze—or found ways to counter it—I’d love to hear what’s working for you. Let’s compare notes in the comments.
P.S. - If you found this post helpful, would you please consider restacking it and sharing it with your audience?
This spreads the word and keeps me writing the types of content that you have enjoyed.
The parallel to subscription fatigue in media is spot on. When discretionary income shrinks, people make tough choices between services that all feel essential. The problem isn't just churn, it's that younger demos are facing cumulative financial pressue that makes every recurring payment feel like a luxury. Newsrooms betting on steady small-dollar donations from 25-40 year olds might need to rethink their whole revenue model before the next downturn hits.