jhlurie

Apparently it means "Joyful", although the web translation sites I tried wouldn't acknowledge that (I found it by Google). It also appears to be a surname on occasion. It's also the name of part of Finland, which I doubt applies here.

Heh, often based on tips they see HERE. I suppose you are right. If the goal is to beat the review rush than the sooner the better (as well as for the reasons I already gave about possibly influencing the menu). Then again, if you are like tommy and don't want that role, then you'd have to wait for the post-review rush to ebb--a period which can be from 2 months to never, depending on a variety of factors. Also, the rules might be a bit different with ethnic restaurants. Some of those don't get reviewed for years--if ever.

I too have a lot of trouble believing it's any good. DC with Lemon is one of the true monstrosities of science, and I have trouble believing that the Lime could be much better. And yeah... if Pepsi does a "Pepsi Twist Lime" or something, it will totally kick Coke's ass. Look at the track record, they've done it with both the Twist Lemon product and their Vanilla product. Just to be clear, in not-diet versions I much prefer Coke over Pepsi.

I think, maybe two months in or so is standard. Then, if they show some promise you visit at some later time to revaluate. Of course if you are a big-time "foodie" (Ack! That term!) there's another potential reason to visit early--as early as possible in fact. If they really are shaking out the bugs you can often (diplomatically, of course) make suggestions. Of course this is going to go over much better in a smaller place. I know for a fact that our pal Fink, for example, added a lot of stuff to his menu based on early customer input. I suppose the real question is... are you going as a critic or as a potential regular customer? The attitudes can be totally different.

See, people don't believe me when I say that. My theory is two-fold. First of all, obviously some people are errr... more sensitive. More importantly, I think for a lot of people the "exit" effects are a side-effect of a digestion problem. Whatever is remaining of the spicy food--the capsicum, the oil, whatever... is coming through more intact for them.

I did say I was skeptical. Actually most of my skepticism was formed around my disbelief that the head could be done right in such a closed space. I'm not prepared to argue the pros and cons of all bottled beers right at this moment.

Actually, while poking around the Guinness site, I also noticed the ad archive--ads for campaigns all the way back to 1929. There's some neat stuff there: http://www.guinness.com/guinness/en_US/see..._125902,00.html

Guinness is promoting it's new Draught in the Bottle product with a series of humorous ads: http://www.guinness.com/guinness/en_US/see..._125875,00.html (after an age verification) Also, general info on the product: http://www.guinness.com/guinness/en_US/kno...7451262,00.html The Guinness cans have been around for a while--with the little ball (or widget or whatever they call it) inside--and apparently the bottles have a similar kind of device inside. Unlike the cans, which require pouring to form the proper head, the "Draught in the Bottle" product claims that you can drink it "properly" straight out the bottle. I'm skeptical, but then again I haven't tried it yet.

It's not just you, believe me. Ronald is a clown, a terrifying hamburger eating clown. Look, if the genesis of Ronald McDonald was with Willard Scott, of course he's creepy. I wonder if eGullet has any members who went to Sundance. Hey, c'mon... it's at least possible.

Now you have to agree that Willard Scott on a Moon Rocket would have been a sight to see.

Do you mean Willard Scott? He of the bad Today Show old-person shout outs? EDIT - yes you do. You found your own link.

You gotta love the film's "Fat Clown" poster.

If taken to that extent, it sounds pretty ridiculous. I suppose what's being suggested is that the people most affected by the Holiday would also be the people most likely to misunderstand a "tribute" that could be taken by some as a dig. What complicates things is that a style of eating that is damn near universal in the south is marginalized as "black food" by some in the north instead of simply being seen as southern cooking. That's a problem that goes far beyond these theoretical black students at Northwestern who theoretically might be offended, and into a general Northern confusion about African-Americans, southern culture, where they intersect, and where they don't. EDIT - and.... I see that the alteration of the very post I responded to with the above says something not so different now... "North don't know South"

The Sundance Film Festival (the 2004 version is still going on as I type this) tends to love films which take a wack at Corporate culture. This year, the attack is from the perspective of a customer--a fast food customer. Filmmaker Morgan Spurlock's film "Super Size Me" mounts a very simple assault--Spurlock ate nothing but McDonald's food for 30 days and filmed this disaster. Here's the general Sundance Festival Index page at IMDB. Information about "Super Size Me" is under the January 20th heading (which as of today, Jan. 21, is still the top item--as well as being referenced from the IMDB front page) Reuter's has also posted a glowing review.. Much more detail in this one. Also, a wild guess (none of the articles cite it, and Google couldn't find it) led me to hypothicize that the filmmaker might have been smart enough to reserve the name of his film on the Internet... and he did. http://www.supersizeme.com/ is the official site for the film. {Merged from a different topic into fresco's existing one, at tommy's er... "suggestion"... Yes, I got lazy and didn't use the search engine. Grrrrr! But there are some new articles and web links above.}

if it was being served to me by german-americans i'd wonder if there was a slur involved. (just my jewish NU grad opinion) It's possible that there might be a confusion of messages there: menial cafeteria staff is African-American (look, I don't know this for a fact, but if the analogy of german jews having to serve jewish food is being equated...), MLK is African-American, students are mostly white, cafe staff is "serving" MLK's "food" to the white students. Of course we are only one link short of this on days other than MLK day in that cafeteria. Apart from the issue of who is serving food to who--a timebomb of an issue not entirely food related--one has to wonder how many people EATING in that cafeteria actually noticed. Probably only those who were looking to, and the rest maybe just though "Hey, I love Fried Chicken! Cool!". Certainly the issue here may not relate to food at all--it may simply be an issue of how sensitive Northwestern is to the offense of people not eating the food.

I suppose that's debatable. He was offered the presidency of Israel and turned it down. He was one of the first Jews who was respected world wide without any apparent stigma based on his religion--he was iconic DESPITE it, which made it all more important in a way for a representative of a people who were never allowed to have that seperation. But back to the basic topic. Does the food itself have the insulting racial connotations some assume? I don't think so, but then again at the same time I could see some idiot who was subject to bad parenting sitting in the Northwestern cafeteria making some moronic joke about watermelon and Dr. King. Then again... can you really protect the world from idiots?

You could look at it this way. Let's say that Albert Einstein's birthday was turned into a holiday and, because he was Jewish, Matzo Ball soup and Brisket were served... Does that toe the same line? Let's assume for a moment that it's a known fact that Einstein liked those items (I have no idea).

Dave, there is no proper English spelling of that word. "Sichuan" is the one I see used most often these days, but the favorite changes every few years. Shanghai is a decent place.

I suppose this is a case where you can look at it two ways: 1.) What foods did MLK really like in real life? 2.) Is it wise to feature those foods in some kind of celebration?

Brooks, I made a typo and corrected it above. I meant damage to the LANDLORD--it SHOULD be present and I'm not sure it is in the slotting situation. In the real estate model, a landlord has to risk a consequence to excessive greed--they have to balance a need to maximize their profit with that risk. If you remove the consequence, you remove some of the self-regulative elements of real estate. In the slotting system, the store as a whole is a large enough pool, that I don't think there's much "risk" involved in getting greedy. There will always be another willing vendor, a potential quick change in shelf-space, or something else to absorb the consequences. I'm basically saying that there should be risk, there should be "damage" (only when merited), there should be consequences, and that's what I don't see.

While I largely buy Steven's logic that the system works (because groceries ARE cheap in the U.S.), I'm not sure I completely buy the comparison to real estate. Even if you are talking about the version of real estate which has to do with the rental of commercial space--the closest analogue I can think of--there's a consistency to real estate which doesn't seem to be present in slotting. Also, with real estate, there's a far more direct punitive penalty to the landlord if he or she gets too greedy--their space can remain unrented and beyond that can lose it's core market value or desirability if this goes on for too long. I'm not sure that I see a direct analogue to that in the grocery store.

Assuming we accept the concept that slotting fees are legitimate business, what about regulation? Are they regulated or controlled in any way, or is it assumed that the forces of competition--the fact that another store nearby with lower fees probably exists--are enough to negate the need? I do know, thanks in part to that recent Washington Post article on slotting ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2004Jan17.html ) that the FTC has largely accepted slotting fees as legitimate, but knowing that doesn't answer the question of whether they've placed any limits on them. The article suggests not...

In many cases manufacturers find that it's cheaper to outsource. True, brokers add an extra layer of cost for the consumer but a manufacturer need only pay a percentage to a brokerage company to greatly reduce the costs associated with an internal sales force. On top of that, broker commissions are almost always volume-based so the costs shrink if volume does. Someone has to sell the products to the retail outlets and there will be costs for that regardless of who handles it. I'm not saying I necessarily believe in the validity of the 'broker culture' only that a reasonable argument can be made for its financial sensibility. Of course the idea of a manufacturer communicating directly with a store manager is a warm and fuzzy notion, but not a very practical one in the current landscape. =R= Yes, but don't some chains have a rule that they will ONLY deal with brokers--and on occasion only a specific list of brokers who have er... purchased that consideration?

Jon, I think the pizza that Pan and Docsconz are referring to is Neapolitan pizza -- as it's found in Naples. Pan made the remark that the pizzas he had in Naples didn't lend themselves to the NY fold-and-eat-standing-up treatment. They were more suited to knife and fork. Damn, I'm getting hungry. Chad Okay... pardon my confusion since we are in the NY pizza thread and NY pizza is often (inaccurately, I know) called Neapolitan. As for knife and fork with the real deal NY... it's fine if you are sitting down, there are plenty of toppings (as we've said... a rare circumstance with what we are talking about) and you are having dinner conversation where a big greasy triangle in front of your face is intrusive. Otherwise... it's more a sense that it's a waste of time to use a knife and fork than outrage. To me it's like using a knife and fork with a Peanut Butter & Jelly sandwich. You can do it... but why? Feeding kids can be another exception I guess.

That great purveyor of wisdom, Paul Newman (can you sense the sarcasm? ) seems to think that food brokers aren't even necessary. Remember, they get a cut too. He seems to think that a manufacturer should be able to get a store manager on the phone and dicker with him directly.