How many restaurants you have to own in order to say that you own a chain? Two or more than two? What do you think?
Technically a chain is a "sequence of items of the same type". So two or more would be a chain. If you only own 2 stores calling it a chain may seem a bit premature. However, it's a chain.
@NetStar has it right. I will only add that there are "regional chains" and "national chains" with the regional chains typically being much smaller in number and much more geographically concentrated.
As above, I'd think of a chain of restaurants, or similar, being at least 4-5 in number, with a minimum of 3. Calling 2 shops/whatever does sound a bit like you're milking it.
I guess it also depends on your aspirations. Own 2 but they have different menus, decor and clientele? That's not a chain. Own 2 and they have the same menu, run the same way and you plan to open more? Yep, you could call that a chain.
I just did a basic search and it seems like you've all got it wrong. Only 10+ units will constitute a chain provided that they operate under the same name and share the same headquarters. Less than 10 units cannot and should not be called a chain.
I looked and Wikipedia does set this minimum number of 10 in their definition. The dictionary sites like Merriam-Webster do not specify a minimum threshold of units but use the word "numerous." That leads to me to question if I had 9 "JRBIZ Hamburger Heavens", all with the same menu and under my corporate control, what would they be? A gaggle of companies? A pack? A rasher?
You can't say "Less than 10 units cannot and should not be called a chain". That's absolutely silly. This topic isn't the matter of being right or wrong. It's actually the matter of preference and opinion. In fact (I said FACT), wikipedia is actually no different than this thread. It's made up of user contributed data which may or may NOT be accurate or confirmed. In fact (I just said fact again), wikipedia (or I should say the person who added to the page) does not cite a source for the claim suggesting a chain is 10 or more and definitely not less. A chain is multiple. You can have a chain of 3 restaurants. I believe it would be absurd to say to someone with a chain of 9 restaurants "sir....what you have here is not a chain... but rather a line of restaurants". See how stupid that correction sounds? Again... this is a matter of preference and opinion. Nothing more. Nothing less. While I will absolutely admit it can sound misleading to have a chain of 2 or 3 "links"... regardless of size or what some anonymous random idiot posted on wikipedia...you have a fucking chain.
First off, let me express that I'm entertained with this thread. Like well-known members are like citing their stand regarding the topic. Here's my piece of thought. Ok so like, assuming you have 10 units of restos operating under the same name and everything and then like 3 of those shut down. Will you go say like "I no longer have a chain of restos, I only have seven" Isn't that still a chain? if not, I dont know what else to term it. Perhaps, a series? a line? a link?
My opinion,, if the restos is less than 10, they call it as branch or branches? " I owned several branches of coffee shops"?
Thing is, you could actually say you have a chain before the first one opens. If you have the funding, the branding but are still selling franchise packages, scouting locations, doing fit out, hiring staff etc it could still be a chain. Then you have regional issues. If you have a chain in the US but are only opening your first outlets in NZ is your operation down here part of the chain? I found it amazing how Carls Jr went from 0 outlets to about 15 in 6 months - that's a huge financial investment for a brand that had zero awareness. I haven't been to one yet, a little put off by the locations they chose - all pretty downmarket areas.