Fat Guy

There are all sorts of feasible systems. The number of reservations being dealt with per day is pretty small. These guys all have blackberries that they're on all the time. Regulars at the Momos have Cory's cell number and various other ways of reaching out to the people they know in the organization. Whether this is done by phone or online, it's not hard to do. I'm sure they'll figure out a way when the time comes.

All this stuff can be automated. You set your regulars' accounts to a different access level that shows them reservations others can't see. At a certain time, like noon the day of, those reservations go into the public pool. You can announce all this stuff -- just say right on the website "Some tables may open up at noon the day of; please check back then."

Of course it's feasible.

Even if the restaurant and owner said that there would not be any preferential treatment (for obtaining reservations, anyway)? Would you still feel entitled? ← I would certainly be annoyed. For example, I have some good friends from out of town who come in a few times a year. Because of the nature of their business, these trips are always last minute. These are some of the most beloved people in my personal universe, and when they come to town we always go out to dinner together and I want to be able to show them a good time. So when they say they're coming in two days, I get on the phone and reach out to a restaurant where I've established some seniority and I get us a table at that restaurant. I would be annoyed if a restaurant I thought was great, with which I'd spent years developing a relationship, couldn't squeeze me in. Ever.

Right. The last couple of times I was in were midweek after midnight, and the place was pretty slow. It can't possibly be efficient to offer the whole menu under those circumstances. (Service was also off, as it has been ever since Cory stopped being a constant presence at Ssam Bar.) So it's great, from my perspective, that they're going to a limited menu, because the alternative would be to close at midnight.

So why are Noodle Bar and Ssam Bar regulars invited to previews at Ko? There's obviously a connection. ← Obviously, there is. But you're talking about ENTITLEMENT. ← Eek! Entitlement! How awful! Of course we're talking about entitlement. I pay therefore I'm entitled. The only question is what I'm entitled to. I think it's more than just the food on the plate.

I love how "expect" is being treated as a dirty word. You're damn right I expect a lot when I go out to a restaurant. When you go to a restaurant you're not a guest in someone's home. You're a paying customer. And if you pay over and over and over again, you should get more than someone who pays once. You should expect more. If you don't, you're expecting a lot less than you deserve. Indeed, that system -- which is essentially a frequent flier program -- is just as "egalitarian" as any other system, because everybody with the means to participate in the system has an equal opportunity to do so. It's just that credits need to be earned. That's totally appropriate. Now let's see if Ko really treats everybody the same.

So why are Noodle Bar and Ssam Bar regulars invited to previews at Ko? There's obviously a connection.

"I obviously go more frequently to places that treat me well" but "I would NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER stop going to a place just because they didn't give me special treatment as a regular." Given that you visit a finite number of restaurants per year, how can both statements be true?

By waiting until the initial buzz dies down a bit, by taking the less desirable reservation times, by going once, going again and becoming a regular.

When I spend money, I expect to get the food that I've paid for (nothing more). ← So you don't expect a chair, a table, service, silverware or anything other than the food? When you go to a restaurant you pay for a package of goods and services. When you repeat your business at a restaurant you pay into a long-term relationship. Part of that relationship involves recognizing previous business. This isn't unique to restaurants. It's a basic tenet of service-oriented businesses. When I go to somebody's home I'm thrilled to get whatever I'm given. When I pay to go to a restaurant I expect more.

Echo. ← I absolutely expect special treatment when I spend thousands of dollars at a restaurant over a period of years. Any restaurant that doesn't give that to me doesn't get my business for long. The idea that it's somehow morally superior to treat all customers the same is risible. People who have supported Noodle Bar and Ssam Bar with thousands of dollars worth of business should be given priority in reservations at Ko. I'm not really among those people -- I'm a third-tier regular and special treatment for me consists of Cory saying "hi Steven" and giving me some ham to taste -- but were I among those people I'd be pissed if I couldn't get into Ko. Somebody please explain how that justifies telling me and everybody like me to go fuck ourselves. As for the definitions of bias being propagated here, I have a few extra dictionaries I'd be happy to send around. Again, Chang is not implementing a democracy, fighting nepotism, or ridding the world of bias. He's advocating for an egalitarian model. We'll see how that works. If history is any guide, most such experiments are failures.

It's not unbiased. It simply has different biases from what we're accustomed to seeing. That's the fallacy of egalitarianism. It's biased towards people who can click refresh a lot at 10am, as opposed to being biased towards the people who have supported the business economically. In terms of potential hypocritical behavior that flies in the face of proclamations of "democracy" (leaving aside the issue of what has already occurred with previews), the most interesting thing to see is going to be whether the principals of the restaurant at some point decide to make "just a few" reservations on the administrative end. Beyond that, there's the question of whether every customer at the restaurant will be served the same meal. Because it's kind of silly to say you have this egalitarian institution on account of its reservations system and then go ahead and reward VIPs with better meals. Pretty much, once you go down the road of claiming egalitarianism, anything you do anywhere -- even if it's special treatment at Ssam Bar -- is hypocritical.

Or are you just being angry for not getting invited to f&f given your "regular and co-founder with Nathan of the New Paradigm labeling movement" status? ← I'm a low-level regular. There would be no excuse for inviting me to friends and family. If anything I might have been invited as media. I'm in favor of not inviting me to previews. However, I want Jesikka to be able to take me. And she can't take me. She can't even take her best friends from out of town when they come in and want her to show them this restaurant she says is so great. I'm waiting for each regular, in turn, to come up against the absurdity of the egalitarian system and to eat crow here.

Not doing so fits my definition of crazy. But even if I used the wrong word -- like I said it was Zoroastrian -- it wouldn't change anything. Anyway, Ko's "very few seats" thus far have indeed been given to "individuals who have been good customers in the context of another business." As they should be.

Can you please explain where I said what you claim I said? The grand claims of "democracy" are only credible if the system is truly egalitarian. So far, it of course has not been because so many regulars and media have been invited in for previews. So they can defend the reservations system without having to sacrifice actually eating at the restaurant. Down the road, however, we'll start seeing whether the system truly remains egalitarian or not. That will be the point where, I believe, the restaurant will need to choose between alienating its supporters and behaving hypocritically.

No, nepotism is favoritism based on kinship. In addition, it implies that the favoritism is unearned. Treating someone better on account of that person being a good, well-behaved, enthusiastic, supportive customer is the opposite of nepotism. It's far more akin to meritocracy. And the only democracy in place now at Ko is that whomever is more willing to hit refresh, whomever gets luckier with the open sockets on the server, gets the reservations. It makes a lot more sense to prioritize the customers who got you where you are today. Not that the Wednesday reservations are up on the server anyway.

Some of the best restaurants in the world are part of restaurant groups headed by a chef-restaurateur like Alain Ducasse, Jean-Georges Vongerichten or Thomas Keller. And those same chef-restaurateurs have some real duds in their collections. Until we know a lot more about Daniel Boulud's Vancouver venture -- the scope of his involvement, the caliber of chef-de-cuisine selected for the restaurant, and of course the particulars of the food -- it's going to be pretty hard to draw conclusions one way or the other about its seriousness.

It has nothing to do with democracy. Throwing around terms like "nepotism" to refer to treating your good customers well and "democracy" to refer to not doing so simply doesn't reconcile with the definitions of those words. And while I do think it's a little ironic that the defenders of the egalitarian system are the ones who've been invited to previews, my point is simply that the restaurant eventually will need to choose between true egalitarianism and some fake, hypocritical, patronizing version of it.

Jesikka, apparently you don't speak for all regulars. Sure, some will follow Chang to the gates of Hell in his grand egalitarian experiment (unless of course it's just a facade), but some are already fed up and it's only day two.

That presumes they'd be alienated, but the Momofuku regulars seem to be people who've bought into this whole "New Paradigm" thingy, and who are intrigued, rather than offended, at a place that allegedly "shatters" the traditional restaurant concept. ← As a Momofuku regular and co-founder with Nathan of the New Paradigm labeling movement, I find it alienating.

Because the regulars haven't participated in the system. They've been invited to previews. It will be interesting to see how those same regulars feel later on. It has nothing to do with nepotism.

Right. The choice is between 1- alienating the regulars, and 2- practicing some form of hypocrisy (making egalitarian claims but actually maintaining a hierarchy).

[Moderator's note from "weinoo": On the Momofuku Ko topic, there has been a rather lively discussion of what it takes to become a regular, whether indeed there are regulars at the Momos, the gall of regulars for expecting certain treatment, do regulars get special treatment, what is special treatment, etc. etc. So, I've decided to split posts off of that topic (as best I can) into this topic, where a nice discussion may be had about all of the above points, as they relate to the Momos and any and all other places where one may deem themself to be a regular. This will hopefully keep the Ko topic focused mainly on the food, wine and reservation system, sans talk about regulars. This discussion initially started in response to the new, in-house reservation system at Momofuku Ko, and whether indeed it is egalitarian (defined thusly - adj. Affirming, promoting, or characterized by belief in equal political, economic, social, and civil rights for all people), and if so, will it remain that way? -Mitch ("weinoo")] You say that like it's a good thing. But for someone who builds a relationship with a business as a repeat customer, it's entirely reasonable to expect priority in making reservations. For now, Ko has rewarded loyal customers of Momofuku with preview seatings. But what will happen going forward?

Noticed this in the help file: And this on the main page: