The news: Starbucks has reportedly explored a takeover of Chipotle, per the Financial Times.

Why this might happen: Starbucks and Chipotle occupy similar positions in the quick-service restaurant ecosystem and face some of the same pressures from rising operating costs and choosier consumers.

Starbucks, which is in the midst of a wide-ranging turnaround touching everything from store design and food offerings to its rewards program, is also seeking new paths to growth.

One potential advantage is international expansion. Starbucks operates nearly 23,000 locations outside the US and has established supply chains, real estate relationships and regulatory expertise across dozens of countries. That infrastructure and experience could help Chipotle accelerate its relatively limited global footprint.

Semafor speculated that a combined company could provide cost savings by adopting a Yum Brands-style structure that keeps the brands separate while sharing capabilities such as real estate and back-office operations.

Why this is unlikely to happen: The price tag alone would make a deal difficult. Chipotle has a market cap of roughly $41.9 billion, making it a massive acquisition even for a company the size of Starbucks.

There’s also less operational overlap than their shared QSR label might suggest. Chipotle locations famously don’t have freezers, with the chain’s model built around preparing fresh ingredients in restaurant kitchens and a supply chain designed to support that approach. Starbucks relies much more heavily on a centralized supply chain that delivers refrigerated and frozen products to stores that generally aren’t equipped with full kitchens or staffed with cooks. Those differences limit the obvious cost savings and operational synergies that could help justify such a large acquisition.

Implications for the restaurant industry: Although we’re skeptical about the prospects of a deal, the fact that talk of a potential tie-up has reached the Financial Times speaks to the pressure restaurants face as consumers become more cautious about when and where they eat out and operating costs remain elevated.

It’s easy to see how a tie-up could generate some savings by sharing investments in technology, marketing, real estate, loyalty, and other back-office functions. But it’s far from clear that the whole would be greater than the sum of its parts. Starbucks and Chipotle may be an awkward operational fit given how differently their restaurants and supply chains operate.

This content is part of EMARKETER’s subscription Briefings, where we pair daily updates with data and analysis from forecasts and research reports. Our Briefings prepare you to start your day informed, to provide critical insights in an important meeting, and to understand the context of what’s happening in your industry. Non-clients can click here to get a demo of our full platform and coverage.