magnolia

It's true that the original rationale behind calling Port from California or Australia or wherever, 'Port' was not to deceive; rather, it was to 'flatter' and give a point of reference to a drink that was an imitation of the real thing. But to call Californian or Australian port (small p) 'Port' without qualifying that it comes from California and not Portugal, and may be made from grapes that are not included in Portuguese Port, and may not adhere to whatever other conditions there are that govern Port - is just as deceitful as calling a perch-like fish from, I don't know, France - 'Walleye Pike'. The origin of all of this is that people around the world tasted Portuguese Port (named for Oporto, the place - and called Porto in Portuguese) as well as lots of other things (in Argentina they still call red wine 'burgundy' no matter what it's made of) and decided to make their own versions. Possibly the first to do this on a major scale was Tsar Nicholas II, whose uncle (and various other in his court) were winemakers and connoisseurs, and travelled the world collecting still and fortified wines and spirits, as well as vines, and brought them back to Crimea where they planted the vines and copied the styles - in bulk - and called them Port, Sherry, Madeira - and all those now-trademarked names. (Incidentally - you can still get these wines, they always come up for auction. But although the labels might read 'Livadia Tokay' or whatever, in the catalogues, they now read 'Tokay-style wine from Livadia' or some such. For good reason. In fact Tokay may be the latest to win the legal right to this name; this pisses off the Friulians to no end, but there it is: the Italians fight their corner too - nobody would begrudge the Tuscans the right to bar others from calling wine Chianti)... Australia, California et al also made their own versions of fortified wine which may be made in the same way as Port - with the same grape varieties (sometimes not even), same machinery, same vinification technique - but it's not Port. The grapes don't come from Portugal; the terroir is not the same; and it doesn't meet a whole host of other conditions discussed herewith. The situation is similar - but not identical - to the one you brought up. Walleye Pike is native to North America (in fact it's perch, an even more generic term, n'est ce pas?). If you were served something called Minnetonka Walleye, if such a thing existed, wouldn't you expect it to come from Lake Minnetonka - and wouldn't you feel you were being deceived if you went to New York and had 'Minnetonka Walleye' that was fished out of Lake George? Fast forward to the late 20th century. This is now an issue, and one that is taken very seriously - not just by so-called wine snobs, but by food types too and makers of other many products. Many people believe that the name of their products and techniques should be codified - just like a trademark or a patent - and with good reason. Sometimes they win their case, as with Greek feta - and sometimes they lose, as with Parma ham. Many of the Port houses are still owned by the English. And yes, the Portuguese word for Port is Porto.

I attended the press conference given by Guasch et al, and it really was fascinating (I'll probably write a couple of articles about it). To address/confirm some of the points mentioned above - it's impossible to determine the varietals as we don't yet have the technology to do this using the residue. But this could change; Guasch herself helped to develop the technique that allowed her to determine that Tut drank red. The other really interesting bit is that the wines were 'labeled' - i.e. the amphorae were inscribed with the year of the reign in which the wine was 'bottled'; the 'type' of wine (there seem to be two or three, possible meaning sweet, dry, whatever); the level of quality; and other details - leading to the conclusion that it was considered important enough to identify and bear a seal. McGovern (a Penn professor) has written a book as well - Ancient Wine: The Search for the origins of Viniculture (which I haven't yet read).

A little corollary to this - 1) I seem to recall that it was the Gault Millau rating with which the Loiseau affair was linked, not that of Michelin (not that it makes much of a difference). 2) Another very fun read (in French) is François Simon's "Comment se faire passer pour un critique gastronomique sans rien y connaître", {How to pass for a food critic without knowing anything (about food)} - a few years old.

Clearly Jan Moir doesn't subscribe to the same policy. See today's review (not yet online...

Which astounds me to no end. Having been a banker myself in a previous life, I know my way around a business plan. But this 'aggressive business sense' seems to disappear when it comes to deciding to investing in a restaurant - a sector that has one of the highest fail rates of any. Knowing several of these HFMs personally, I can tell you - pardon my French - that it's their little brain leading their big one when it comes to funding a restaurant; they want a place to show off to clients, a posh version of Cheers.

I think he's still single, magnolia, but he may be too busy to read e-gullet! ←

I've been a French press (cafetière) girl ever since I started making my own coffee. I've always had the "three cup" model (which really serves one) and never minded about the brand. I've only needed two of these in the last 12+ years (and I'm pretty hard on my coffee maker) - the only thing I've ever changed are mesh filter, and of course the carafe when it breaks. But the 'stem' bit has lasted. I should mention that I also have a large Bodum brand model, given to me as a gift - with the chrome 'exoskeleton' which I use when I have a larger crowd. It looks and works exactly the same as the small, no-name brand. Recently, the carafe broke on the little one, and I went to buy a replacement: I looked and looked, and all I could find were Bodum brand carafes for their own three cup model, which are taller and thinner (for the same volume) such that the stem & filter ensemble that I have will not fit. After four days of looking, I broke down and bought a brand new Bodum 'Chambord' three cup model (same volume). I brought it home, and next morning made coffee - noticing that the stem-and-filter bit do not reach down to the bottom of the carafe when fully pressed, in fact they only go about 5/6 of the way, leaving a large liquid-and-grounds-filled gap. It may be my imagination that it yielded a weaker coffee..but it was still odd. I figured my model might be defective, and went back to the shop - took a look at the others, and in fact they're all like this. The stem-and-filter on my old one definitely went all the way to the bottom, totally crushing the grounds and maximising the coffee-ness of the coffee. I feel as if this one is going to make a weaker coffee, meaning I'll have to put more grounds in order to get the same strength of coffee. Why are Bodums different from all other French presses? So I broke down

Well, doesn't that tell you something? It tells me that a) it's such an undesirable, underpaid job that nobody wants to do it, so it's either a job of last resort or one that is a 'plan b' while the person figures out how to do whatever it is they really want to do in life; or b) it's such a highly skilled job, and one that's so difficult to do, there are only a few very special types who can do it well. Most of all, it tells me that something about the restaurant business here just doesn't work. No doubt and I can't wait for you and Magnolia to open your own London restaurant, where the service will no doubt be impeccable and you'll altruistically give meals away at half price to entice customers to try the place. ← Jamie, what do you think?! Maybe - factoring in tips - both your and my wage-per-hour would increase significantly! But you are in fact making excuses. If these ideas are indeed perfectly sensible, then yes, someone will have thought of them - particularly a seasoned, well-funded, experienced restaurateur and marketing genius like Iqbal Wahhab. If they are not serviceable, then it's only that he's decided that for whatever reason, it's not worth his while to carry them out. Service over here is bad because customers accept bad service and then say 'please sir, may I have some more'? We've all been to cities - even countries - where service is a whole lot better, as is value for money. What are they doing differently in these places ?

How is it possible to get your restaurant running smoothly before taking possession of the premises? ← The fact that you asked this question certainly answered mine. ← Sorry if I was unclear. I meant that I was surprised that things were not running smoothly before it was open to the public (i.e. last week), not that they weren't running smoothly before he took possession (i.e. several months ago). I would have thought that even for a soft-opening, a seasoned restaurateur would make sure service was far less tentative than it was. However this is exactly why I asked whether anyone else had a point of view on this. I.e. what is to be expected for a soft opening? I feel it's not unreasonable for a paying customer - even one paying 50% off - to expect that if a restaurant allows you to sit down, they are ready to deal with you. The discount is not meant to compensate for lack of readiness or poor service; it's meant to entice you to try a new place.

Difficult to say because I try to avoid going to restaurants in the first week of opening, even when my professional hat is on. I can say that I was very surprised that someone with Wahhab's far-sightedness and vast experience (I'm aware of much of what has been noted above, which makes him sound cynical when in fact he's a marketing genius and only doing what a good restaurateur who wants to get the punters in *should* do...employing Ben Maschler and plying critics is par - it's the critics you should be lambasting, for accepting freebies and responding with slobber, if that's what they have done - not Wahhab...) would not have had everything exactly down pat before even a soft-opening. I do know that any respectable critic would have noticed at least the bumps I noticed, and there were probably other glitches too. I haven't read the reviews though so I don't know if they were from written from the free meal-and-alcohol-soaked heights of cloud-cuckoo-land...

I ate lunch at Roast yesterday. It's a gorgeous space, and I had a nice meal but it's going to get skewered by critics and diners alike if it doesn't shape up really fast. It just finished its first week, during which there was a 50% discount off the menu. I felt as if I were a "guinea pig" (not in a terrible way, just in a frustrating one), that the FOH & waitstaff were in the midst of being trained and were not at liberty to use their own judgment about anything. I'd be interested in hearing from restaurant professionals as to whether my experience is typical of the first week in the life of a restaurant. Here's how it went...four friends and I at Borough saw a sign for a new restaurant. We found the lift (in a semi-contruction zone) and went upstairs. Greeted by two courteous young ladies behind a counter. Asked a few questions - who's behind the restaurant, what meals will you serve, what are the hours, etc. Then asked if we could see a menu. "Can we have breakfast now?" (it was about 12h00) "We're serving lunch at the moment." "Can we see a menu?" "We don't have a menu this week, as it's our first week and we are trying different things". "Well can we see today's lunch menu?" "I'll check..." (In the meantime, we figured we'd give it a punt no matter what as it looked like a really pleasant space; she returned) "There are no extra menus at the moment". Figuring the place was packed, and that all menus were spoken for, so I said, "Any chance of a table for four right now". "You want to eat lunch now?" (as if surprised) "Yes - is there room?" "I'll check..." She returns..."There will be a table in a few minutes. I will show you to the bar... " She takes us to a very nice bar area, which overlooks the market. Comfortable, low chairs, sofas and tables, great for lounging. The however the spot she has chosen has remnants of someone's coffee...but we stay, figuring someone will clear this away and ask if we want coffee as well. This doesn't happen, even though there are plenty of staff working behind the bar. Nor does anyone come by to show us to our table. After about 10 minutes, one of us gets up and goes to the FOH again and asks if our table will be ready soon...and is told yes, and someone will be back to show us. I should have mentioned that you can't really see into the restaurant from where we were sitting. Eventually someone comes by to take us to our table, and lo and behold, only one other table in what seems to be a large restaurant, was occupied. I felt as if the staff had been trained to show all guests automatically to the bar - whether or not tables are ready. This would have been fine if anyone had offered us a drink, or if our table wasn't ready. But neither one of these was the case...Also, she showed us to a table in the centre of the room rather than one with a view - even though none of the tables was occupied - which also seemed 'automatic', part of the protocol - and she seemed flummoxed when we asked if we could sit by the window. The room is really lovely, airy, bright and the tables are large and well spaced. Excellent views of the market on three sides, and a view into the restaurant (and kitchen) on the fourth side. A waiter appeared and asked if we wanted water, we opted for a bottle of sparkling and one glass of tap. Then someone else came over and asked if we wanted wine (before we were given either a wine list or a menu) - so we asked to see the wine list and menu, which were promptly brought over. The menu is as described - kind of a gussied up St John, i.e. lots of offal but with sides and sauces. Gentler prices, too: I didn't keep a menu or take notes but I seem to recall that starters are betweeen £5-10; mains £10-20 or so; puddings £5. Wine list pretty uninspired, and it was the first meal of the day so we just ordered mains...: roast chicken; two smoked haddocks w/cheese on a bed of spinach; skewered, marinated mushrooms (the one concession, among the mains, to vegetarians). We were encouraged to order sides but we declined. These took about 20 minutes to arrive, in the meantime we had some very nice bread and butter. While we were waiting, someone kept coming over to pour the bottled water even though the glasses were not empty. This drives me absolutely bonkers. The food was very good: a decent-sized steak of smoked haddock, not too salty, with melted cheese; a very generous piece of roast chicken with jus (I think this was the winner) and what I was told were very good mushrooms -but a tiny portion, really, a starter size. While we were eating, a waiter tried to deliver two items which were not ours (by now there were three other occupied tables). Another bottle of sparkling water appeared unsolicited - and we said so, but were told it was on the house. After we had finished and the plates were cleared, the menu appeared again, for dessert. There were about eight or nine desserts - not a single one with chocolate :-) - but that didn't really matter, we were eager to get back to the market. There was indeed a 50% discount, making it a bargain. So - an odd experience. Things were perfunctory in a way, but not well-timed or smooth...I can see there might be two sides to the situation: they want to train the staff with real clients, so they open for a soft launch so that the staff can learn to handle different situations - but the other side of it is the annoying little glitches, like not being able to see a menu, having to wait for a table when it was obviously ready, etc.etc... I'd like to go back: this could be a great breakfast and lunch place (though I could see it being pretty depressing at dinner: the market is not very attractive when empty - in fact it's a bit creepy...) and the menu is interesting, the dishes (except the mushrooms) good portions and well-excecuted. But as mentioned, I think they're going to get panned by the critics who have an experience similar to mine...

Nope. Magazines are not a public service. They have no 'responsibility' to anyone in the way you define it. Their job is to find a readership, keep publishing and produce enough revenue to make that viable. Whether you want to be a part of that readership is an entirely different matter. ← And with this in mind, I seem to recall the initial purpose of Restaurant Magazine was to funnel business toward the company's hospitality recruitment business...

The Mandarin Oriental does a great afternoon tea (come to think of it, their lunch is excellent as well) Not Foliage, the other dining room. I'd recommend a day in the spa, followed by tea...

Thanks for all of this !

It has been awhile since I read the book, and I can't put my hands on it at the moment. What does the phrase "Like Water for Chocolate" actually mean?

I think Divertimenti must make a lot of money on their workshops; they 'co-brand' cooking classes; demos; and workshops with high calibre (IMHO) partners, often after hours - which extends the revenue generating time beyond their regular business hours. There's usually one, possibly two, employees on hand so the staff costs don't go up much just for keeping the place open late. This also entices people who might not otherwise shop there, who pass by all the goodies on their way downstairs and then perhaps return to buy at another time.

Very interesting. Aga Buys Divertimenti

I went on Friday night and had a very good meal. 1) house Champagne @ £8 2) On the shortish menu, there were at least 3-4/7 or so starters I'd have liked to try, and 3/7ish mains. I opted for starter of pithivier of pigeon, E orders the dorset crab 'lasagne' - both of which were mention in the FM review. Other appealing dishes were an assiette de charcuterie and a pumpkin soup with girolles (which I decided will be on the menu for awhile). From the mains, I chose the confit of duck, and E. the oxtail & black pudding. Pithivier was lovely - if even a bit too generous of a portion size! - a hockey puck of puff pastry filled with lovely, smoky pigeon and sprinkled with chestnuts. Only better pithivier I've ever had was home-made by one Moby. Lasagne was more like deconstructed ravioli, and less generous than mine but still good. Homemade pasta squares al dente (yay!) and very fresh crab. I only got to taste a crumb... My duck was excellent. Two huge, crispy legs filled with moist duck meat, falling from the bone - atop a bed of lentils and bits of sausage which had been mixed with a bit of mustard to give it some heat. The only other confit of duck that has come close in the UK was Hotel du Vin's, which serves it theatrically in a cast iron pot. Again, a more generous portion. E's oxtail and black pudding terrine was layered over mash, and was rich, unctuous and very naughty. This was a better match for the wine - an Argentinian Malbec/Corvina blend from Veronese winemaker Masi, which was too interesting to pass up - and at £26, a cheap bet: I didn't even know they grew corvina in Argentina, it's one of the grapes in Amarone (which is what Masi is known for) and the wine makes me wonder whether they could do an Amarone-style wine in Argentina: this was squid-ink black, luscious but just dry enough. As mentioned, not ideal with my duck but excellent with the black pudding and oxtail. No room for dessert if you can believe it, and I forget what the desserts were... All told, a really pleasant meal - staff were genuinely interested in our opinions, asked where we normally ate, etc. - and knowledgable about the food and wine. All for £40+ a person. If they hold the prices, this could become a semi-local.

Any update on this? And what's the current info (if any) on l'Oursine?

This is great, I've got a boondoggle to Paris on Monday and might try one of these. Just a very quick correction for anyone who's trying to find a bit more scoop on the bar a truffes...it seems to be called "Une Journée à Peyrassol". What a difference a day makes...

Oh my, how could I forget Nando's and Prince of Teck (where is Teck, anyway?) I guess I was being a bit harsh. Fi, I didn't realise Al-Dar XXXIII had landed in Earl's Court. The wine bar/restaurant/off-licence empire that looks well worth a try is called Brinkley's, at 51 Hollywood Road. http://uk2.multimap.com//clients/browse.cg...dq&siteArea=edq

Sorry to hear it because unfortunately Earl's Court is sort of a culinary desert. You've hit the highlights gastropub scene (you can add the Ifield). That said, I did have drinks at a very cute winebar not far from Earl's Court, that was completely booked for dinner that night, so I didn't eat there...but would have if there had been space, as the menu looked interesting and the wine list was good. I will find out the name/location as I'm drawing a blank. By the way the good Thai place on Upper Richmond Road is Talad Thai. Worth the trip from Earl's Court I think ! Ma Goa is still open. (I passed by there in a car awhile back and almost had a heart attack because it was 'under renovation' which is usually resto-speak for 'closed' but it really was being renovated.)

Or some restaurants just stink, and they all happen to be able to afford the high rent on the same spot...

Rojerk - I'm going to Croatia at the end of the summer, Dubrovnik & Orebic - so if you happen to be reading this and happen to have eaten well in either of those places - please post !

I can confirm it was the best dim sum I've ever had. There were six of us and I lost count of how many dishes we ordered...and it still came to the usual £12 a head ! Some surprising highlights were the vegetarian dishes (none of us were vegetarian) and the 'sweet' items which I don't normally go for (aside from natas). The pastry on these and the pork buns was superb.