oakapple

I suspect the only restaurants doing this are those that can easily fill the table. The example given was Morandi, which clearly fits the bill.In that case, the "cost" to the restaurant is an alienated customer. True, the customer probably knew (or strongly suspected) that there was something shady about PTT. Still, if a restaurant refuses to seat me, I'm probably not going back there again anytime soon. Of course, I probably wouldn't use PTT again either, which is the restaurant's objective. That's why this would be a rational strategy for the restaurant, assuming that they want PTT out of business. Frank Bruni had a blog post about this a few weeks ago. Many of the restaurants that take credit card numbers don't actually put through the cancellation charge if the customer fails to show up. The reason is that, if you never signed an authorization, the credit card company won't honor the charge if the customer complains. But still, someone who's given a CC number is more likely to honor the reservation, so the restaurant still benefits.Restaurants tend to be serious about CC numbers when there's a high likelihood that the table couldn't be filled. Frank Bruni gave the example of a reservation for 8 at Cafe Boulud. You don't get many 8-person walk-ins, and it's not practical to re-arrange the dining room in the middle of dinner service.

I think airlines get away with it because they have a captive audience. I mean, if you want to get from NY to California without it taking a week, you have to take an airline, and there are only a handful of them. But there are 20,000 restaurants in New York City. There are only a few of them that are so hotly desired that they could afford to make life less convenient for the diner, and manage to get away with it.

Per Eater, many of the city's major restauranteurs (Meyer, McNally) are starting to figure out how to distinguish PTT reservations from "real" ones. PTT is either not allowed to reserve, or the reservation isn't honored. I always had a sense that many restaurants would not be happy with this, and would do whatever they could to put a stop to it. It may be that PTT is filling a real need. But the restaurants probably figure that if there's money to be made, they ought to be making it, not a third party.

I wish I could afford to dine at Chanterelle as often as Rich. But I have been there twice in the last three years, and I think it's terrific. A review of my most recent visit is here.

I think Tabla is better, but as other people have noted, if you object to the fusion concept, then go to Devi.

Bruni is about the last guy on earth to give two stars to a ritual. He's about as unimpressed with ritual qua ritual as anyone. The two stars were for this restaurant. Sugiyama and Kai were reviewed by previous critics, and Bruni gave no indication of having tried either one. Bruni is fairly price sensitive. In his reviews, there's an overwhelming sense that the more they charge, the better it has to be. For $150, you can be sure he was awfully impressed to give out two stars.

I give Bruni some credit here. I haven't been to Rosanjin, so I can't say whether the review was justified. But most of Bruni's rave reviews have gone to places those in-the-know had long ago discovered. To paraphrase the old saying: he didn't lead fashions, he followed them. As far as I can recall, this is the first time Bruni (assuming he is correct) could actually be credited with putting a place on the map.

So, what are your examples? I can name quite a few restaurants that are still running strong (or at least running) long after unfavorable Bruni reviews. I can also name some that aren't, but you can usually give ample reasons for the failure having nothing to do with Bruni.Let's take the most recent example, Varietal, which actually is relevant to this thread, given the similarity between Jordan Kahn and Sam Mason. Bruni was merely the last in line of numerous critics who were underwhelmed. My dinner there at prime time on a Saturday evening, weeks before the Bruni review, found it about half full. Obviously the Bruni review didn't help. But clearly they were already in trouble before Bruni took up his pen.

I think most restaurants are Bruni-proof. Generally, the restaurants that have closed after his reviews were already in trouble anyway.

There has been only one review. Paul Adams in The Sun enjoyed himself, but thought Sugiyama was better at half the price.

The best thing that could happen is they price it low enough that Meehan reviews it, rather than Bruni. ← I don't think it's possible for a place getting this much hype and buzz to fly under the Bruni review.I was joking. I agree, from the descriptions, it sounds like it's in Bruni's territory. If it were a dessert-only place, that would be a different story, but it sounds like Tailor is going to have a full menu.But this isn't the kind of place Bruni has warmed up to. To the contrary, stars are exactly what they're flaunting for. Among other things.

The best thing that could happen is they price it low enough that Meehan reviews it, rather than Bruni.

I agree that this is not the kind of restaurant that will be depending on Frank Bruni to get over the hump. I am not even sure that Varietal was that type of restaurant. The dining room was half-full on each of two weekend evening visits, and most critics were at best lukewarm. Bruni administered the coup de grace, but Varietal was already on life support.

You can count me among those who didn't know the term "Grower Champagne" before Varietal. However, I am not a paid professional, and hold myself to a lower standard. There is no doubt in my mind that Bruni was previously unfamiliar with the term. I entirely expected him to have this reaction. Bruni clearly doesn't know much about wines, and he reacts negatively to restaurant marketing practices that he finds prissy, highfalutin, or artificial. I myself was mildly offended by the grower champagne list at Varietal, and it takes much more to offend me than Bruni. Bruni isn't fond of food that you have to "think about." No surprise, then, that he didn't care for the desserts. As for Jordan Kahn's resignation, I suspect it has been in the works for a few weeks. The dining room hasn't been full, and most critics haven't been wowed. They had to have known that the Bruni review was the last chance to generate some positive buzz. But Kahn had to have been thinking about his other options.

The Richman review is one of several that have appeared lately. So far, I can't find anyone who thinks GT is as good as it was in the glory days. It all begins in the kitchen, and it's sounding like Meyer got the wrong guy in Michael Anthony. The service lapses are harder to explain.

The Richman review is one of several that have appeared lately. So far, I can't find anyone who thinks GT is as good as it was in the glory days.

The distinction is this:The fancy restaurants that serve slow, leisurely meals, are nearly always aspiring to serve very upscale, high-end cuisine. Whether they succeed is a matter of critical judgment, but you're just not going to find a burgers-and-fries five-hour tasting menu. At the other extreme, however, the fast/casual restaurants are usually not aspiring to serve upscale, haute cuisine. The whole alleged "new paradigm" seems to be about the fact that, nowadays, there are a few who do. But it is still a comparative rarity. Even places like La Grenouille have pre-theatre menus. We had dinner at Daniel over the weekend, and the server asked if we needed to get out in time for a show. Picholine, with its Lincoln Center proximity, does it all the time.

I've no objection to the notion that, sometimes, we want serious food, and we want it quickly. I was in just such a mood last night. I went to Bouley Upstairs, and was out of there in about 45 minutes. What I do object to is the suggestion by some critics that today's diners, categorically and collectively, are no longer interested the kind of leisurely meal that the better restaurants offer. Not necessarily a 5-hour extravaganza, but not 45 minutes either.

However, I think there are more NYC restaurants that offer tasting menus than there were 10 years ago.

All I meant is that they're fancier than Nish has now become. I do agree, as I indicated, with the fact that there's a decades-long trend of decreasing formality in just about everything we do. It's a little surprising that Bruni is only just now noticing this.

Bruni, as much as any critic, has shown he is willing to bend the "traditional" star system. Unfortunately, the way it currently operates, you can't tell if he thought the food alone was worth three stars. The fact that any one of us may think it is, does not mean he thinks it is.In any event, as long as you have one overall rating that takes multiple factors into account, you must live with the fact that restaurants like Ssam Bar are going to be rated lower than the food alone might justify.

Whether he's correct depends on the "trend" he purports to have identified. Society in general, and not just dining, has been getting more casual for a long, long time. The fact that Bruni keeps writing about it in the restaurant context suggests that, in his mind, there is a very specific and recent trend that he thinks is worth spilling so much ink about.I think there are significant counter-arguments to this purported trend. Major restauranteurs continue to open big-budget "white table cloth" restaurants. In roughly the last three years, we've had Asiate, Per Se, Alto, Gordon Ramsay, Country, The Modern, Cru, Del Posto, and Gilt — a rate of about two or three a year. About half of these were instant successes, which anyone will tell you is a pretty good batting average in the restaurant industry. The other half have made various adjustments, and as far as I know, have no plans to close or "Nishify" themselves. How many restaurants in that genre have closed during the same time period? A handful come to mind (Biltmore Room, Atelier, Ducasse, Le Caravelle), but certainly fewer than the number that have opened — and supposedly Ducasse is going to re-open. This certainly suggests that the demand for traditional luxury restaurants hasn't abated — even if that "tradition" is adapted to contemporary sensibilities.

That isn't just the "hook" of the Nish review. It's the "hook" of Bruni's entire tenure as restaurant critic. He doesn't miss a chance to tell us that, in his opinion, diners no longer want "mannerisms" and "white linens," which he finds "prissy."

I guess that means we should rate Peter Luger based on the salmon, and Le Bernardin by the strip steak.

My g/f and I ordered the tasting menu on Friday night. The langoustine was included, and it was the least satisfying item we had. We were seated on time, but our reservation was at 6:30 p.m., so we were probably the first turn. We had the same pair of seats that tupac had, right in front of the pass. The tasting menu came with the apple tart, and it was the second-least impressive item (after the langoustine).