oakapple

That's a problem with tasting menu wine pairings all over town. People will eat great food fairly quickly, but they want time to savor the wine.

Sorry, but that's a little silly. Who do you think was filling the "Friends & Family" seats? Why, Noodle & Ssam Bar regulars, that's who.Want to find the Ko website? You get there from the same place as the other two establishments: momofuku.com. But in any case, the comment is red herring. Even if Ko were entirely separate, FG's comment would remain valid, because he is describing what all ultimately successful restaurants do. Even those that are truly new eventually find ways to attract and cultivate their regulars. Maybe Ko will break that paradigm...and maybe not.

This was exactly the point I was trying to make when I suggested that I didn't feel like getting a reservation, at any restaurant, either by having to hit the reload button on my computer or the redial button on my telephone. It's not that once-in-a-lifetime concert, it's a restaurant. ← I do make an exception for what I'd call "unique experiences" — and Ko falls in that category. I also spent 20 minutes on hold with Per Se to get a reservation, and it was well worth it.On the other hand, I have never been to Gramercy Tavern because it's too difficult to get in. Obviously it's no more difficult than Ko or Per Se—clearly less so, in fact. But it hasn't 'grabbed me' enough that I'm willing to make it an obsession, which it clearly needs to be if you want to dine there at what I consider to be a reasonable time. Likewise, my fitful attempts to get a reservation at Babbo (I've dined at the bar in the past) have been met with failure, and at this point I've stopped trying. You did get lucky, because that was the first day. The site was only intermittently working, and they had a whole week's worth of tables to sell. The last couple of days, the "next open day" has sold out in under two minutes.

Yes, but by the same token, you've never (as far as I can tell) foregone the 'diversity' part of the equation, so I could argue that you don't know what it's like to never try anything new, which is essentially what your book advocates.

In Turning the Tables, Fat Guy suggested that it's much better to become a regular at just a few places, rather than try a whole bunch of places. He reiterates it here. I disagreed then, and I disagree now. The suggestion is also at odds with his own track record. Given Fat Guy's practically encyclopedic knowledge of NYC restaurants, it's clear that he's out to try as many of them as realistically possible. So am I. He is also fortunate enough to have become a regular at a few of those places, and to have seen the benefits that accrue by doing so. This I have not done, for a variety of reasons. And for most people, I don't think it's particularly necessary or useful. The fact is, in the OpenTable era, there is hardly a day or time when you can't get into a great restaurant. For instance, just now I searched for a 4-top at 8:00 p.m. tomorrow (Saturday), and got back 528 restaurants with availability within 2 hours of that, including several excellent ones at exactly 8:00 (along with a lot of dreck, to be sure). There's something seriously wrong with you if you can't find a restaurant on that list for just about any mood or price range. Even Per Se was available, albeit at 9:00. Now, it would be extremely tedious to have to call restaurants one by one at short notice. A decade ago, that would've been your only option. But when you can find availability online instantly, it's less important to have a "go to place" that, no matter what, can always accommodate you. FG's point on the Momofuku thread was seriously misunderstood. He wasn't saying, "Unless they treat me like royalty, I'm not going there." He was merely saying that at places where he makes a large investment of time and money — he doesn't expect Ko to be one of them — he expects to be treated like a valued customer. And one way smart restaurants do that is by holding back some seats for regulars. It's too soon to tell whether Ko will do that; they could be doing it already, for all we know. I doubt that very many people become regulars with a quid pro quo explicitly in mind. FG became a regular at Gramercy Tavern primarily because he loves the place. I doubt that he, of all people, would waste his time there if this weren't the case. But at the same time, he both appreciates and expects that his loyalty will be rewarded. Why shouldn't he? It seems logical enough.

I got farther today than I did yesterday. I actually got back the screen with some green checkmarks available, but didn't click fast enough to get one.

I think you're over-simplifying. What it takes to become a regular varies tremendously according to the circumstances. And of course, even among regulars there's a hierarchy; there are regulars and regulars. It's not a fixed formula, either. It's not as if, after X visits and Y thousand dollars, some magical set of perks suddenly becomes available to you.At a small neighborhood place, looking after a regular might just be second nature. At Gramercy Tavern, they have a database with all their best customers' names, birthdates, wives' names, favorite entrees, etc., etc. It just depends.

Not to be contrarian, but... how do you know?The only thing you know is that reservations are no longer available for next Thursday. We have only their word for it that those reservations were handed out in a strictly egalitarian fashion.

Not at the better places. For instance, we know that Danny Meyer takes care of his regular, but I've never felt like a second-class citizen at any of his restaurants (and I'm not a regular at any of them).

Steven didn't say "a medical emergency". Not all doctor's visits are emergencies. He simply said that businesses with whom you have a long-term relationship are likely—if they're smart—to extend courtesies they wouldn't give just anyone.I don't think Steven marches into restaurants and starts demanding things. He is just making an empirical observation. At places where you've become a regular, those courtesies do exist. On those occasions when he needs a favor—not that it happens every day—he does expect something in return for his long-term loyalty. Of course it would.Up till now, we've all assumed that Chang is being truthful. The question is whether he's being wise. If it turns out that he's been fibbing, obviously that warps the discussion.

I think you're looking at it the wrong way.Every restaurant that survives eventually attracts significant support from regulars. And restaurants generally offer perks to give regulars the incentive to stay that way. I think Steven is simply expressing skepticism that Ko can be successful without doing this. On one level, he is right. Successful restaurants do the things he says they do. But Steven has often said that Momofuku Ssam Bar "shattered" the traditional restaurant paradigm. So it's a little inconsistent to praise them for shattering something, while at the same time complaining that they shattered too much.

Hypothetically, Chang could hold back 6 out of the 12 seats for regulars and VIPs, which would reduce our chances by 50%. We'd still get in, but it would be harder. Eventually, after the furore dies down, Chang would find that he doesn't need those seats every night, and they'd go back into the pool for everybody.As Steven noted in Turning the Tables, there's a point in the day when the house seats are put back on the market if it turns out that regulars haven't taken them. I think it's well-established that the opposite is true. Indeed, several people have mentioned that dishes now being served at Ko were previewed at Ssam Bar. Clearly many of those being comped during F&F were Ssam Bar regulars. That's the wrong analogy, because Daniel came first, and I'm sure that those Daniel regulars who wanted to try Bar Boulud went to the front of the reservations line.Here, it's Ssam Bar that came first. Clearly there would never have been a Ko if Ssam Bar hadn't been a hit. So there's something to be said for rewarding those who made Ko possible in the first place. Basically, he's done that with an extended F&F period. Over time, Ko (if it succeeds) will build up its own cadre of regulars, who may or may not be the same as the Ssam Bar regulars. What he does (if anything) to make them continue to feel special—other than just serving the same food he serves everybody—remains to be seen. Obviously the concept of a "Ko regular" will be different, not only because of the difficulty of getting in, but nobody wants to eat an $85 degustation menu all the time. By its nature, Ko isn't going to be a "drop in and snack" place, the way Ssam Bar is. But initially, much of the Ko buzz is clearly coming from those who already bought into the Ssam Bar package. When I spend money, I expect to get the food that I've paid for (nothing more). ← I think FG is right that when you decide to make a restaurant your "go-to" place, and spend thousands of dollars there, you normally will get some kind of special preference. A restaurant that doesn't somehow reward loyalty will get less of it.

Well, any set of rules is going to be biased in favor of those who are able to follow them. But there is a huge difference between announcing a set of rules that might be more convenient for some people than others, but that gives everyone the same chance; and having a murky hierarchy that is documented nowhere except in the proprietors' heads.Now, just imagine if Babbo told you exactly how many tables it sets aside for "regulars", told you exactly how they define "regular", and what you need to do to become one of those people who can always get in at 8:00. That would be the equivalent of what Ko has done—or claim they have done. You might not like Babbo's rules, but you'd know what they were. I'm not suggesting Babbo is doing anything wrong. But there's a difference between biases that are clearly documented, and those that are hidden. Even Frank Bruni has joked about this: a restaurant offers you 5:45 p.m. or 9:30 p.m. You don't know if you called too late, or if the 8:00 p.m. table wouldn't have been available no matter when you called. I think you have to "leave aside" previews. The restaurant wasn't technically open at that point, although it's undeniable that Chang indulged some skillful self-promotion — as he always does.You can only hold Chang accountable for what he claims. He has never said, "Everyone at Ko will get the same meal," has he? The only thing he's said is that everyone has the same chance at a reservation. If he violates that (while still making the same claims), we should call him on it. By the way, I don't necessarily trust David Chang to do what he says. I am merely assuming he will for the sake of discussion.

I agree with Steven that you're adopting an unusual definition of "nepotism". There are many businesses (not just restaurants) that provide a higher level of service for their best customers. That's not what nepotism is.It remains to be seen how Ko will handle this. It's hard to comp a dish when there are only 10 seats, and it's going to be rather apparent that the person next to you got something you didn't get. Right now, the people who are poised to hit the refresh button at exactly 10:00 are those who've already boarded the Momofuku train. The issue (if there is one) will come much later, after the early lustre has worn off. But if Frank Bruni awards four stars, that could take a long time to happen.

I think Steve is saying that at those places where he chooses to become a regular, he wants V.I.P. treatment in return, and other places do indeed give that to him.He realizes that at all restaurants where he isn't a regular—that is, most of them—he needs to wait in line like everyone else.

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. ← It will be partly self-correcting, because presumably the website's bugs will get fixed, and the demand for seats will become less intense.

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.

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. I was responding from the perspective of the original commenter, who does not aspire to become a Ko regular, but simply wants a reservation at a reasonable time without a lot of hassle.It so happens that's my own perspective too, so I'm gratified that there's a popular place where, at least for now, my chances at an 8:00 p.m. reservation are identical to everybody else's. I wonder too. I would add, when Chang says it's absolutely democratic, I'm taking him at his word.

It has been erratic, no question about it. But I would not judge a website after 26 hours of operation, any more than I would judge a restaurant that way.

Assuming they fix the stability issues, the Momofuku website is certainly no more annoying than the ritual at Babbo or Gramercy Tavern: hitting redial 80 times, then waiting on hold for twenty minutes, only to be told there are no tables available. And at Ko, unlike those other places, the prime time tables aren't held in reserve for regulars and VIPs.Some of the measures taken on the website are merely indicative of Chang's success. Otherwise, unscrupulous diners would be snapping up reservations and hawking them on eBay—as a few people already tried to do.

← If memory serves me right, that notice wasn't there earlier in the day. I suspect they saw comments about rezys being sold on eBay—perhaps they even saw it right here—and decided they had to take action. Good for them.

I think you're right. They thought they had something that was less expensive than OpenTable, with the extra plus that they'd have total control. They're learning the hard way that it's not as easy as it looks.

Assuming you're not running the amateur hour, you need at least three servers: production, test/backup and development. Plus a huge amount bandwidth, cost of development and maintenance, and professional management. I'd like to know where you think that's available for $208.33 a month. ← that's ludicrous. it's a restaurant with 12 seats. they're not running three servers...just one, if that, for all I know they're just virtually hosting it (which would make sense). obviously they don't have a huge amount of bandwith. ← Well, even supposing you did it with just one server, I doubt you get all that for $208.33 a month. But in that case, of course, just wait till the time you want to enhance or modify it—trust me, that will happen—and you have no "sandbox" to work in. Amateur hour indeed (if that's what they did).

Assuming you're not running the amateur hour, you need at least three servers: production, test/backup and development. Plus a huge amount bandwidth, cost of development and maintenance, and professional management. I'd like to know where you think that's available for $208.33 a month. We are seeing right now just how difficult it is.

Indeed, I wonder that too. I used to be a computer programmer. There's always this great temptation to waste your time on problems other people have already solved.Money quote from the Eater comments: