I read somewhere that McDonald's makes more money from their real estate holdings than anything else they do. Can't vouch for how accurate that is, but it seems very plausible.
> About 85% of the company in 2016 was represented by franchisee-run locations—people who agree to operate individual McDonald’s restaurants with a licensed privilege to the branding. But rather than collect a lot in royalties or sell its franchisees cooking equipment, McDonald’s makes much of its revenue by buying the physical properties and then leasing them to franchisees, often at large mark-ups.
https://www.wallstreetsurvivor.com/mcdonalds-beyond-the-burg...
> Today McDonald’s makes its money on real estate through two methods. Its real estate subsidiary will buy and sell hot properties while also collecting rents on each of its franchised locations. McDonald’s restaurants are in over 100 countries and have probably served over 100 billion hamburgers. There are over 36,000 locations worldwide, of which only 15% are owned and operated by the McDonald’s corporation directly. The rest are franchisee-operated.
On coffee too, they're big enough to go straight to the farmers and set their prices
https://www.thecommonscafe.com/starbucks-criticized-for-low-...
(And actually, all that has been done, but action isn't being taken, so now we have to solve that problem)
IIRC McDonalds even went as far as to become a landlord many of its franchisees, so it pays rent to itself.
For many small businesses - especially mom and pops, the majority of the surplus value is captured by property owners, and the amount has increased over the years. This is partly how Piketty's r > g came about.