[BryanZ]

Eater brought this decidedly shady operation to my attention today, and I think it's worth discussing. They're offering tables at popular restaurants at, here's the important part, prime dining hours. The downside is that each reservation costs between $25-$45 depending on your membership type and how far in advance you've booked.

I know people sell reservations to El Bulli and the like on eBay, but this is slightly more organized. Is this a smart business move, ethical, legal? What are the reprecussions if this practice catches on?

Personally I think that it will require more restaurants requiring a credit card to hold a reservation, a very annoying policy.

The Eater post.

Quote

...they've got an impressive stable of reservations to offer.

Here are tables for four that are at this time available for tonight:

    Blue Hill, 8 PM
    Il Mulino, 8 PM
    Gordon Ramsay, 9 PM
    Grammercy Tavern, 8:30 PM

And for tomorrow:

    Spice Market, 8 PM
    Nobu, 8:30 PM
    Lupa, 8:00 PM
    Le Bernardin, 8 or 8:15 PM

There are two last pieces of information you'll want to have before you sign up. First, members are informed that mentioning PrimeTimeTables at restaurant check-in is absolutely verboten; second, you will not get a table at Per Se from these guys.

I'm not sure if the Per Se thing is true, but it would make sense. Per Se typically requires confirmations 2-3 days in advance and charges a massive no-show fee. The risk and timeline Per Se imposes makes it nearly impossible for this servce to be of use.

PrimeTime Tables
Registration is required and is not instantaneous. I registered tonight just to see what it's like and I guess will hear back to see if my registration was accepted tomorrow.

This post has been edited by BryanZ: 18 January 2007 - 10:29 PM

[docsconz]

This is even more despicable than ticket brokers buying and reselling seats to Broadway shows or sporting events and I am not particularly enamored of them. At least with the latter they are having to outlay some cash.

[rich]

It's a service. It fills a need. Very creative.

No one is forcing anyone to join. So if you're prone to reserving late and want a guaranteed prime-time table, I don't see any harm to the service.

[oakapple]

docsconz, on Jan 19 2007, 03:59 AM, said:

This is even more despicable than ticket brokers buying and reselling seats to Broadway shows or sporting events and I am not particularly enamored of them. At least with the latter they are having to outlay some cash.

I don't really have a problem with ticket brokers. I have used them on occasion. It's nice to know that if you really want to go on a specific date, and are willing to pay a premium, you have options available.

The odious thing about this service is that you have to show up under an assumed name, and you're specifically told not to mention PrimeTime Tables to the restaurant. That's very different from the ticket broker scenario, where all you're doing is exchanging pieces of paper, and the theatre or stadium doesn't really care whose name is on it.

This post has been edited by oakapple: 19 January 2007 - 06:26 AM

[rich]

oakapple, on Jan 19 2007, 08:26 AM, said:

The odious thing about this service is that you have to show up under an assumed name, and you're specifically told not to mention PrimeTime Tables to the restaurant.

I didn't see that in Bryan's post. I read where he said not to mention primetime, but no mention of an assumed name.

[oakapple]

rich, on Jan 19 2007, 07:30 AM, said:

oakapple, on Jan 19 2007, 08:26 AM, said:

The odious thing about this service is that you have to show up under an assumed name, and you're specifically told not to mention PrimeTime Tables to the restaurant.

I didn't see that in Bryan's post. I read where he said not to mention primetime, but no mention of an assumed name.

The use of pseudonyms is mentioned here.

Think about it: how else could it work? Obviously this "service" is snapping up prime-time reservations long before they know who'll be using them. After they sell the table, they don't call the restaurant and say, "Change the Jones reservation to Smith." If they did that, they would quickly be unmasked.

[Simon_S]

rich, on Jan 19 2007, 12:26 PM, said:

It's a service. It fills a need. Very creative.

No one is forcing anyone to join. So if you're prone to reserving late and want a guaranteed prime-time table, I don't see any harm to the service.

Yes, but the upshot is that in the long run it will become virtually impossible to get a table at a "prime" time in a "prime" restaurant without paying for the privelege. I wouldn't be happy about that.

Si

[slkinsey]

I can't imagine that the restaurants are happy about this. Is it even legal?

If I were a high end restaurant and saw someone selling my reservations for $45 a pop, I might consider litigation.

[rich]

oakapple, on Jan 19 2007, 09:36 AM, said:

rich, on Jan 19 2007, 07:30 AM, said:

oakapple, on Jan 19 2007, 08:26 AM, said:

The odious thing about this service is that you have to show up under an assumed name, and you're specifically told not to mention PrimeTime Tables to the restaurant.

I didn't see that in Bryan's post. I read where he said not to mention primetime, but no mention of an assumed name.

The use of pseudonyms is mentioned here.

Think about it: how else could it work? Obviously this "service" is snapping up prime-time reservations long before they know who'll be using them. After they sell the table, they don't call the restaurant and say, "Change the Jones reservation to Smith." If they did that, they would quickly be unmasked.

Hey that's cool - it's fun being someone else for an evening. Reminds me of the 70's when I would make my reservations under different names just for fun.

[rich]

slkinsey, on Jan 19 2007, 09:53 AM, said:

I can't imagine that the restaurants are happy about this.  Is it even legal?

If I were a high end restaurant and saw someone selling my reservations for $45 a pop, I might consider litigation.

Of course it's legal. Just like it's legal to charge one price for early payment to an event - most have dinner attached - and another price for payment after a certain date.

Look at it this way, you're paying a 10% premium to get a late reservation at the time you want. I would do that in a heartbeat. If I was spending $400 on a meal - another $40 to get the place and time I wanted (on very short notice) is worth it. And you get the benefit of going with an assumed name - way cool!!!

Great business idea - almost as good as ebay! No money outlay except for building the site and in this case making the phone calls - and sometimes waiting on the phone for an extended period of time before you get through. Hell, I paid someone $50 to keep calling Per Se for me. I see no difference.

This post has been edited by rich: 19 January 2007 - 08:29 AM

[Simon_S]

Of course, if the restaurant wishes to stop the practice in its tracks, all it needs to do is see what reservations are being sold, tally with their own reservations system, and then refuse to honour the reservation.

Si

[oakapple]

rich, on Jan 19 2007, 08:16 AM, said:

Great business idea - almost as good as ebay! No money outlay except for building the site and in this case making the phone calls - and sometimes waiting on the phone for an extended period of time before you get through. Hell, I paid someone $50 to keep calling Per Se for me. I see no difference.

I agree with Sam that the restaurants have got to be unhappy. Indeed, the fact that you're told not to mention PrimeTime Tables confirms this. If the restaurants could figure out a way to distinguish PTT reservations from "real" ones, I'm sure they'd put a stop to the practice.

Simon_S, on Jan 19 2007, 08:22 AM, said:

Of course, if the restaurant wishes to stop the practice in its tracks, all it needs to do is see what reservations are being sold, tally with their own reservations system, and then refuse to honour the reservation.

I'm not quite sure what you're suggesting. I show up at Le Bernardin and introduce myself as the Smith party. How do they know my name's not really Smith, and I purchased my reservation over the Internet? I'm sure that PTT folks are using a wide variety of pseudonyms, to ensure they're not predictable.

I suppose they could force me to show ID, but that would be utterly demeaning to the vast majority of their customers who make reservations the usual way. They could also look at my name when I pay by credit card at the end, but by then the meal's already over.

[Simon_S]

oakapple, on Jan 19 2007, 03:30 PM, said:

I'm not quite sure what you're suggesting. I show up at Le Bernardin and introduce myself as the Smith party. How do they know my name's not really Smith, and I purchased my reservation over the Internet? I'm sure that PTT folks are using a wide variety of pseudonyms, to ensure they're not predictable.

I suppose they could force me to show ID, but that would be utterly demeaning to the vast majority of their customers who make reservations the usual way. They could also look at my name when I pay by credit card at the end, but by then the meal's already over.

If they monitor the website and see that, for example, the 8:00 slot on Saturday is up for sale, they consult their own records, see who booked that slot, and hey presto, they know what the name is. Of course, if there are multiple reservations for a particular time it won't work, but I'm assuming the restaurants in question stagger the bookings to ensure that the load on the kitchen is spread.

Si

[Nathan]

Offhand, I don't see any reason why it would be illegal.
NOTE TO PRIME TABLES, THIS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE! I HAVE NOT RESEARCHED THIS. PLEASE HIRE COUNSEL AND RUN IT BY THEM, IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY DONE SO.

ok, with that said, I don't see what it's unethical about it either.

some years ago there was an article about people who use the names of celebs or notables to gain prime-time reservations at NY restaurants. Basically, restaurants just go with it. They don't turn someone away when they show up if they've successfully booked a reservation. In some cases, they always paid with cash so the restaurant could never be certain that their name wasn't actually "Brad Pitt" or whatever...

I mean, I've made reservations for people under my name when I wasn't even attending the meal. Never thought twice about it.

This post has been edited by Nathan: 19 January 2007 - 08:46 AM

[Simon_S]

Nathan, on Jan 19 2007, 03:46 PM, said:

I mean, I've made reservations for people under my name when I wasn't even attending the meal.  Never thought twice about it.

The name is hardly the issue, I'm sure the restaurant doesn't care what you decide to call yourself. It may care, however, that people are making a secondary market in reservations at the restaurant. Of course, they may not care, as long as the restaurant remains full, but I suspect they won't be too pleased at others making money in this way. Maybe it's only a matter of time before restaurants offer this service themselves...

Si

[oakapple]

Simon_S, on Jan 19 2007, 08:38 AM, said:

If they monitor the website and see that, for example, the 8:00 slot on Saturday is up for sale, they consult their own records, see who booked that slot, and hey presto, they know what the name is.

I am reasonably certain that most restaurants have more than one 8:00 p.m. slot.

[Porthos]

rich, on Jan 19 2007, 09:16 AM, said:

slkinsey, on Jan 19 2007, 09:53 AM, said:

I can't imagine that the restaurants are happy about this.  Is it even legal?

If I were a high end restaurant and saw someone selling my reservations for $45 a pop, I might consider litigation.

Of course it's legal. Just like it's legal to charge one price for early payment to an event - most have dinner attached - and another price for payment after a certain date.

My NON-LEGAL opinion:

If you have to refrain from mentioning PTT and have to use a psuedonym, that seems to reek of fraud. IMHO there is a major distinction between buying tickets from a broker and being able to be known as yourself when you use them and buying a reservation and pretending to be someone you aren't to use the reservation.

Porthos

[docsconz]

I think that it is a problem and unethical if not illegal because it is taking a commodity that ought to be available to anyone at no cost, reserving it to make a profit. Their taking these reservation slots thereby make it more difficult for me or anyone else to be able to get legitimate reservations for personal use. I have no problem if I can't get a reservation because the restaurant is popular enough that others who will be dining there thought and acted first. I do resent them going to an under-the-counter broker though. As for the ticket brokers - if it wasn't for them it would be easier (and cheaper) to get tickets in the first place. There is a word for what they do - "scalping." At least they have to outlay cash and make an investment. The reservation brokers take at most limited financial risk. They are simply parasites on the system as far as I can see.

[Genny]

This is an interesting discussion. How does this concept differ from someone walking in off the street and tipping the host for a table, or the "right" table, etc.? Although this practice is frowned upon in some circles, it isn't illegal. I believe there is a discussion of the subject here (I didn't find it, does someone remember the topic title?) in which opinions were mixed as to whether they would or have tipped the host to get a table.

I would suppose, however, that restaurants aren't thrilled about someone making reservations that may not be filled, thus leaving a table empty during service. And they probably don't love the thought of another entity making a buck off of them without getting a piece of it.

[rich]

docsconz, on Jan 19 2007, 11:21 AM, said:

They are simply parasites on the system as far as I can see.

I once made parasites with a tonnato sauce - very tasty.

It's a business model like many others. Hey who knows it may not even last.

A lot of people loathe ebay for the same reason - they don't have a money outlay. All they do is provide the means and they don't even make a phone call. Well, PrimeTime provides the means (their site) and they have the goods (the reservations). It's just an available service if needed - they bring people and a commodity together.

Live and let live I say - everyone has to make a living.

[rich]

Genny, on Jan 19 2007, 11:39 AM, said:

And they probably don't love the thought of another entity making a buck off of them without getting a piece of it.

They're also not thrilled with critics that give them less then stellar reviews who make a living off them but have no stake. Talk about parasites...and they get to eat for free.

[Nathan]

"This is an interesting discussion. How does this concept differ from someone walking in off the street and tipping the host for a table, or the "right" table, etc.?"

it doesn't differ.

"I would suppose, however, that restaurants aren't thrilled about someone making reservations that may not be filled, thus leaving a table empty during service."

These restaurants always have plenty of walk-ins hoping for a table and waiting lists....

[Sneakeater]

The difference between this and ebay is that ebay isn't interposing itself into an already existing system and making scarce commodities even scarcer. I'm affronted by the fact that this will now make getting reservations -- already much too hard -- even harder.

[Sneakeater]

rich, on Jan 19 2007, 11:40 AM, said:

Live and let live I say - everyone has to make a living.

The point is, these guys are taking something away FROM ME. Why shouldn't I be pissed off?

[Fat Guy]

I don't see it as illegal or unethical at all. It's no different from queuing up for anything that's free, and then selling that item.

What I think it does do is expose, in a more obvious way than the no-show problem, the idiocy of the current system high-end restaurants use for offering reservations. It's just unsustainable to offer reservations with a cost-free cancellation policy, a weak confirmation policy and no means of policing. It's no way to run a business. Hotels, airlines and many other services have all come up with superior models. Because hotels are part of the hospitality industry, they probably provide the best models. If restaurants don't improve the system, they'll just leave open opportunities for others to benefit from their foolishness.

This isn't a new concept, either. There have over time been several attempts, and it's a pretty standard trick of the trade for private guides who cater to rich tourists. There have also been efforts -- I was involved in one about 7-8 years ago -- to auction prime tables for charity, with the restaurants' cooperation.

[oakapple]

Rich's comments show the power of the Wrong Analogy.

The most telling points are the false name and the caution not to mention where you got the reservation. I leave the legality to the lawyers, but it's undeniably shady. Nothing remotely like that is involved with eBay, critics' reviews, or even tipping the maitre d'.

[rich]

oakapple, on Jan 19 2007, 12:05 PM, said:

Rich's comments show the power of the Wrong Analogy.

The most telling points are the false name and the caution not to mention where you got the reservation. I leave the legality to the lawyers, but it's undeniably shady. Nothing remotely like that is involved with eBay, critics' reviews, or even tipping the maitre d'.

Let's see about that.

Ebay - many scams involving people who register under assumed names, never send items that have been paid for, many scams from people who bid, never pay and can't be found...hmmm

critics' reviews - eat for free, make reservations under assumed names, some write their reviews under assumed names, some go in disguise...hmmmm

tipping MD - silently slipping money to get ahead of a line or get a better table, while leaving people with reservations to hang, money goes unreported into MD's pocket...hmmmmm

Right - nothing shady about those.

[Sneakeater]

Fat Guy, on Jan 19 2007, 12:04 PM, said:

I don't see it as illegal or unethical at all. It's no different from queuing up for anything that's free, and then selling that item.

What I think it does do is expose, in a more obvious way than the no-show problem, the idiocy of the current system high-end restaurants use for offering reservations. It's just unsustainable to offer reservations with a cost-free cancellation policy, a weak confirmation policy and no means of policing. It's no way to run a business. Hotels, airlines and many other services have all come up with superior models. Because hotels are part of the hospitality industry, they probably provide the best models. If restaurants don't improve the system, they'll just leave open opportunities for others to benefit from their foolishness.

This isn't a new concept, either. There have over time been several attempts, and it's a pretty standard trick of the trade for private guides who cater to rich tourists. There have also been efforts -- I was involved in one about 7-8 years ago -- to auction prime tables for charity, with the restaurants' cooperation.

So, just to make what I take to be an unstated premise clear, you're saying that a (if not "the") primary cause of the scarcity of reservations at "hot" spots is the practice of making multiple reservations and then either no-showing without cancelling or failing to cancel until the last minute?

[rich]

Sneakeater, on Jan 19 2007, 11:57 AM, said:

rich, on Jan 19 2007, 11:40 AM, said:

Live and let live I say - everyone has to make a living.

The point is, these guys are taking something away FROM ME. Why shouldn't I be pissed off?

They're not taking anything from you SE. If you wanted to eat there that bad, you would have the reservation way in advance.

It actually helps you. You enjoy going to places at the last minute - now you have a means (if you choose) to get a table at a prime hour.

[Sneakeater]

rich, on Jan 19 2007, 12:19 PM, said:

Sneakeater, on Jan 19 2007, 11:57 AM, said:

rich, on Jan 19 2007, 11:40 AM, said:

Live and let live I say - everyone has to make a living.

The point is, these guys are taking something away FROM ME. Why shouldn't I be pissed off?

They're not taking anything from you SE. If you wanted to eat there that bad, you would have the reservation way in advance.

It actually helps you. You enjoy going to places at the last minute - now you have a means (if you choose) to get a table at a prime hour.

They are, though. I don't make reservations way in advance. (That's why I've never eaten at Per Se, rarely eat at JG, and Ramsay is still a ways off for me.) And they're virtually ensuring that I have to (or else pay a premium). You can say that, since I don't want to pay the premium, it must not be important enough to me to eat at the restaurant. I'd only reply: enough already (with the cost, I mean).

This post has been edited by Sneakeater: 19 January 2007 - 10:30 AM