oakapple

I wonder — no offense intended — how any of the above differs from the eGullet posts of a guy named JohnL?JohnL's biography and mission statement aren't posted here. He is using a "handle" (specifically, JohnL). He is not charging us for the previlege of reading what he has to say. Of course, this is true of most eGullet Society members, so I am not singling out JohnL for any reason, except that he's the one with a different standard for bloggers. I think tommy (another anonymous eGullet Society member posting under a handle who has not shared his bio or mission statement, or charged money for his insights): Mind you, I'm not suggesting JohnL or tommy should have provided any of these details. What they've done is just fine. I'm just wondering why a blogger would be different.For the record, my real name is on both my blog and this post, which is probably very foolish of me. I don't feel obligated to post my bio, but thanks to the power of google, anyone who wanted to could probably figure out a good deal of it. My mission statement is whatever I want it to be. Because I am not charging for what I do, I don't feel under any obligation to have the same mission tomorrow that I have today. (Not that I am suggesting that anyone would pay for it, even if I did charge.)

The main difference is that my secretary doesn't call for the reservation until I know (or have a pretty good idea) that I need it. This service gobbles up many of the prime-time reservations, holding them in waiting for unknown (and possibly non-existent) diners. Maybe that's okay, but it's clearly different than what the secretary does.And again, there's the dishonesty of it. If it were such a great thing, then it would be above-board — none of this garbage with pseudonyms, and not mentioning the name of the service to the restaurant staff.

Eater has several more posts on PrimeTime Tables, including here, where the service has now issued a vigorous defense: Now, this is a bunch of hooey. If the service is such a boon to the restaurants, why are diners "informed that mentioning PrimeTimeTables at restaurant check-in is absolutely verboten"?

I haven't yet had the pleasure of knowing in advance that I would be comped. A few times, food has arrived unbidden, "compliments of the kitchen." I had done nothing to suggest I was a blogger, or that a review was forthcoming. Are you suggesting I should send the food back in such circumstances?

I'd like to see any serious basis for this, other than servers would like it to be so.Virtually any guide I've ever seen suggests that you should tip on the generous side (25-30%) of what the tip would have been had you paid for the dish. That puts the server in a better position than she would have otherwise been.

Any reputable mainstream media outlet does not permit its critics to accept comps. ← We've covered this ground so many times, it's surprising to me that you'd persist in making such an absolute statement. The New York Times, for example, allows most of its critics to accept comps: the theater critic, opera critic, etc., all get their admissions comped, as do the sports writers.I took it as a given that we're referring to restaurant critics here. I stand corrected on the other points, though.

The usual complaint about the politician is that 99.9% of the people aren't in a position to know that he received the superbox tickets. His biases, in other words, are concealed.The blogger who writes about his meal at Le Cirque, and tells you it's comped, is laying it all out on the table. As noted earlier in this thread, the blogger who was comped at Le Cirque wrote a rather negative review anyway.

Any reputable mainstream media outlet does not permit its critics to accept comps.As a lowly blogger, it happens to me only rarely. When it does, I mention it in the review, and readers can decide for themselves what effect it may have had on my judgment.

He has done it before, though not often. Those few occasions it has happened, I think mentioned it on the Tuesday, rather than the Monday.

I must admit I'm not quite as honorable as Pan or Sneakeater. If someone wants to offer me a comp, I'll take it. That is no guarantee of a positive review, however.

I think I can guess one of the two bloggers you are referring to. In my view, it's reasonably apparent that she is cozy with restauranteurs, and you can take that into account when you read her stuff. A web surfer who just stumbles upon her site via a google search might not realize this, but the surfer is likely to look at other links too, so one blogger isn't going to have a huge effect on public perception—whatever her loyalties may be.So, I don't really see this as a Great Evil to be combatted. It's just a fact that some people are independent critics, and some people have varying degrees of coziness with the industry they're writing about.

Porterhouse? Strip?

On the New York forum, I don't think anyone has questioned the professional critics' integrity. Their knowledge, writing style, or dining preferences, but not their integrity.The diffuse nature of the blogosphere probably makes it difficult to bribe a blogger, even if both restaurant and blogger are willing. A widely read blog is still just one of many. At most, a "bought" post would move the needle only very slightly, and there are probably more effective ways for a restaurant to use their marketing budget.

I don't know about "unsustainable," given that the system has worked this way since...forever.In a sense, the restuarant and hotel industries are converging. Most hotels, it is true, require a credit card to hold a reservation. But in most cases, you can cancel within 24 hours, without your card getting charged. It is pretty much cost-free to reserve and cancel, unless you've booked a package tour, or something like that. Many restaurants already require a credit card for some high-demand holidays (New Year's, Valentine's Day, Mother's Day). Per Se and Masa require it every day of the year. I suspect this trend will become more widespread. The airline analogy is problematic. There are 20,000 restaurants in New York. If a few of them started treating their customers the way airlines do, I think a lot of customers would take their business elsewhere. There is so little competition in the airline industry that they can get away with Draconian change & cancellation fees.

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'.

On the Gordon Ramsay thread, Nathan wrote: Babbo is not mediocre...and certainly deserving of its three stars. Bruni does have an Italian bias (I ate at A Voce last night and couldn't make up my mind if it was a three star restaurant or not...it's close but maybe not quite). But he gave four stars to JG, which is contemporary French and four stars to LB, which is French. He also gave four stars to Per Se, which is definitely French-inspired. He's given three stars to Picholine and Atelier. Neither of those are four-star restaurants so he hardly knocked them down. So I disagree that "everyone knows", I certainly don't. ← As I noted in my reply there, a bias is merely an inclination. It doesn't mean he is completely unable ever to give a favorable review to a French restaurant.There are currently five 4-star NYT restaurants. Bruni demoted two French restaurants, replacing them with a French-inspired (Per Se) and a Japanese (Masa). I suppose he could have demoted JG and LB, and failed to award four stars to Per Se. That would have left only Daniel and Masa, which wouldn't really be credible. You can't have the 4-star category practically empty. Daniel could be hanging by a thread. In December 2004, this is what he wrote in a Diner's Journal piece about Café Boulud: That reference to "starched self-consciousness" is vintage Bruni, and could well find a home in one of his patented smackdown reviews. I am not predicting that Daniel will get smacked down, only that it isn't beyond the realm of possibility. It is the only remaining four-star venue that he hasn't reviewed.

A bias does not mean that he invariably over-rates Italian places, and that he never appreciates French places. It's just that: a bias.Had he not re-affirmed four stars four JG and LB (which were re-reviews), and given four to Per Se, the highest rating would be down to two restaurants: Masa and Daniel, with the latter sure to fall once he gets around to it. Obviously that is untenable.

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

I am not suggesting the Times review lacks relevance. Clearly it is relevant, especially for a restaurant like The Little Owl that most readers probably hadn't heard of until Frank Bruni spotlighted it.I am merely suggesting (and clearly, Bruni himself is too) that the printed review no longer has the all-encompassing importance that it once did.

And the "bribe" in this case didn't really work. When you read the latest post, and its thorough explanation of the circumstances behind the meal, are you much more favorably disposed towards Le Cirque than you were before? The inescapable fact is that he had to have a terrible experience, and blog about it, before the Maccionis paid any attention to him. And in the return visit, he still wasn't impressed by the food.

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. 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.

A few months ago, blogger Amateur Gourmet posted an entry called "Only A Jerk Would Eat At Le Cirque." It told of a dismal meal he and his family had at the venerable restaurant. A few weeks after he posted the review, his family received a handwritten note from Sirio Maccioni with an autographed copy of his book, inviting them to return and "experience Le Cirque as it should be." They did indeed return, received the royal treatment, and were comped the meal — all because he blogged about his experience. In a new post called "The Power of Food Blogging," the same blogger writes about his second visit. (The food, he notes, was "less than dazzling," even though they were treated well.) He also quotes Frank Bruni on the importance of blogging: (This also confirms my view that Bruni's own reviews are less important than the Times reviews used to be, in part because there are so many other information sources available.)Regina Schrambling suggests that every restauranteur should either be reading all the bloggers, or paying someone to do it for them. Dan Barber of Blue Hill says he does this, viewing blog posts as "a more sophisticated version of a comment card." For what it's worth, I've twice been contacted by a restaurant after I'd blogged about them. In both cases it was just to say thanks, since the reviews were favorable. I haven't yet been offered a complimentary meal, though. One of them offered to buy me a drink the next time I come in, but I didn't actually bother to take advantage of it.

The menu on the GR website says: Your $8 covers tea and coffee too, not just bon bons.

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.

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.