According to a cursory Google search, In-N-Out has stated it will never go public or issue franchises. So they are less "pyramid-shaped" than a lot of businesses.
However, nothing is forever and philosophies can change. Look at the saga of Chipotle, they were so very full of themselves, and now they have someone from Taco Bell to pick up the pieces of their shattered reputation.
Any "family business" undergoes instability as generations hand off to new ones.
Interestingly, someone has been selling fake In-N-Out franchises in California. So you could say that even if you don't want to be pyramid-shaped, the pyramid sellers will find you.
They are not pyramid-shaped at all. Running a successful franchise does not depend on your ability to recruit other franchise owners and then collect rent from them.
You can interpret "pyramid-shaped" how you please. The way I interpreted it, was that businesses that are not pyramid schemes per se, nevertheless pay off early investors with later investors' money.
Having a successful public company involves recruiting investors, and being successful in franchising involves recruiting investors.
And, if you have a successful business that is just a family business, maybe you want to sell it at some point...
As I wrote, you can define "pyramid shaped" as you please, but if nothing can be "pyramid shaped" without literally being a "pyramid scheme", then the term "pyramid shaped" has no reason to exist - that violates normal assumptions about reasonable discourse.
Pyramid shaped refers to crap like HLF where the only way to actually be successful is to get more people to do the exact same thing you did.
You can have a successful In-N-Out and your success absolutely does not depend on someone then buying a franchise on your referral that you skim off of.
You are not the one who initially used the phrase "pyramid shaped", so I don't see why you would expect others to defer to your authority on what it means.
Given the cooperative* nature of normal conversation, one must assume (at least initially) that there is a reason for saying "pyramid shaped" rather than "pyramid scheme". The obvious interpretation (to me) is that there is a continuum between pyramid schemes and non-pyramid schemes.
Objecting to the placement of In-N-Out near the "non-pyramid scheme" end of things, on the basis that it is not at all a pyramid scheme seems like an aesthetic preference for binary categories - that's all right for you, but other people may generalize.
Only if you are the owners that have all of them; In-N-Out is a private, (mostly?) family-owned business that doesn't franchise, and has stated that they won't ever do that or go public.
However, nothing is forever and philosophies can change. Look at the saga of Chipotle, they were so very full of themselves, and now they have someone from Taco Bell to pick up the pieces of their shattered reputation.
Any "family business" undergoes instability as generations hand off to new ones.
Interestingly, someone has been selling fake In-N-Out franchises in California. So you could say that even if you don't want to be pyramid-shaped, the pyramid sellers will find you.