Two entrees - four people

[Malkavian]

Disclaimer: I'm also posting as a "civilian" and if I'm honest with myself, don't really have experience with high-end restaurants so to speak, so if that invalidates my thoughts (also forgive the impending ramble)

Anyway, the situation sorta reminds me of my time working in retail--I had lots of problems with some customers wanting resources that just weren't unlimited. In my case it was my time and instruction, in your case it's your tables. At some point a line had to be drawn, and if they felt snubbed and left us--well, it happens.

My inclination would be to quietly introduce a plate sharing fee, but keep the amuses and whatnot coming for each member of the table--that may seem strange, but if it happened to me (and it never will, i'm too big an eater to split entrees ) I think a small fee would seem reasonable--especially someplace where reservations are the norm, while basing amuses on number of entrees ordered would come across as cheap, especially if they're accustomed to that not being the case. If they take offense, it doesn't sound as if you're exactly strapped for guests.

Also, and if this is out of line then I apologize, but if you have a full house every Saturday, and even if this group comes in *every* Saturday, is moving two fewer entrees (and what, an app and 4 desserts would be the usual?) such a big deal you're putting serious thought into how to compensate? Or is this sort of thing more common than i realize?

[Daniel Rogov]

Speaking both as a person who adores dining out and as a restaurant critic for several major publications, I'd have no problem whatever in a split-portion fee so long as that is clearly stated on the menu.

What I do wonder about is precisely why so many of us have assumed that people who want to split a main course are either "cheap" or "poor". Do please consider that that may be preciselly what they want to eat and no more. Do also consider that in many places in Europe and in parts of the Middle-East splitting a main course is considered a perfectly acceptable social tradition.

The one thing that I will say (bit of anger coming here) is that the restaurant that refuses to do this or in any way humbles or humiliates their clients is going to get a polite but nasty comment in my review.

[Jaymes]

Yet in the end I would hope it all balances out by those diners who go all out in ordering: Tasting menus, extra app. or dessert. Or at least I would like to hope so.

More then anything we can only second guess what someone's situation may be who is sitting in our dining room.

Would your opinion change if you approached the party of four one evening and in conversation one confides they have half their stomach eaten away with cancer and can't finish a whole entree? Or a father's out of work yet really wants to take his family out to raise their spirits? Such is life and we really never know for sure.

For the record.. The restaurant did not eat the loss of the large pizza. I paid for it myself.

Kindness and compassion. That really raises my spirits. Thank you for that.

[andrewB]

As with corkage fees, I think some discretion is appropriate for plate sharing charges. The regular guest who keeps a few special bottles in a locked wine box in your storage facilities, orders pre-dinner cocktails and 3 or 4 courses of food isn't charged a corkage fee, and he likewise shouldn't be charged for plate sharing, on the occasions that he chooses to dine family style.

←

you can do what we do and charge a couvert for the people not ordering mains. its minumal, but it helps to pay for time, water, bread etc...

[andrewB]

here's one which goes into the 'split category' i believe...

had a 4 top in for lunch today and they wanted 2 split salads for apps. my policy is not splits but the GM did it anyway. then the main courses, they ordered 4 but wanted a portion of each dish put on each plate and served as such. i refused and made the GM go out and do it tableside. then for dessert, they had the same sh^t and put cheeses on the plates with desserts.

i would like to hear what people think about this one. personally i hold myself to a standard that doesn't include the poo-poo platter special or a super bowl sampler of my food. but that's just me...

thanks

[munchymom]

What's the big deal? If they want to eat that way, better it be done neatly by a server or the kitchen, than have the customers passing bits around at the table, which could get messy pretty fast.

On the topic of sharing main courses, my parents go frequently to a small restaurant chain which offers half-size main course portions for a bit over half price. Since they often don't want to eat a full-size restaurant portion, they like this option. So do I.

[Rebecca263]

...had a 4 top in for lunch today and they wanted 2 split salads for apps. my policy is not splits but the GM did it anyway. then the main courses, they ordered 4 but wanted a portion of each dish put on each plate and served as such. i refused and made the GM go out and do it tableside. then for dessert, they had the same sh^t and put cheeses on the plates with desserts.

i would like to hear what people think about this one. personally i hold myself to a standard that doesn't include the poo-poo platter special or a super bowl sampler of my food. but that's just me...

←

I think that is a good thing that you have a GM.

You'd do well to stay in the kitchen and let others handle the FOH.

I don't mean this to be negative, I simply believe that you are in the correct place, and the GM is obviously also in the correct place. You cook, and do it well. Let others serve, and make sure that they do their part well, and you will have content clients, as a rule. Why try to be a duck when you are a chicken? Especially when there is no shortage of ducks.

Edited June 12, 2007 by Rebecca263 (log)

[Busboy]

here's one which goes into the 'split category' i believe...

had a 4 top in for lunch today and they wanted 2 split salads for apps. my policy is not splits but the GM did it anyway. then the main courses, they ordered 4 but wanted a portion of each dish put on each plate and served as such. i refused and made the GM go out and do it tableside. then for dessert, they had the same sh^t and put cheeses on the plates with desserts.

i would like to hear what people think about this one. personally i hold myself to a standard that doesn't include the poo-poo platter special or a super bowl sampler of my food. but that's just me...

thanks

←

I don't know you or your work, or the exact circumstances of the meal in question, so please assume that I'm speaking generally rather than personally, but I have a problem with chefs who find themselves such artistes that they can't be persuaded to accommodate reasonable requests because it compromises the integrity of the dish or some such rot. If it's too much of a pain to do during a busy part of service, or the customer is abusing the system ("I'm allergic to beans, can I just have more steak?") shutting them down gently is appropriate. Otherwise, accommodations should be made. It is called the "service" industry, after all.

[Carlovski]

A few of the replies have mentioned if they did it they would leave a good tip - which is great, for the staff. Not too good for the owner....

[Tess]

here's one which goes into the 'split category' i believe...

had a 4 top in for lunch today and they wanted 2 split salads for apps. my policy is not splits but the GM did it anyway. then the main courses, they ordered 4 but wanted a portion of each dish put on each plate and served as such. i refused and made the GM go out and do it tableside. then for dessert, they had the same sh^t and put cheeses on the plates with desserts.

i would like to hear what people think about this one. personally i hold myself to a standard that doesn't include the poo-poo platter special or a super bowl sampler of my food. but that's just me...

thanks

←

As server or manager I would probably just grin and bear it. As a customer I cannot imagine having the nerve to ask for this. Splitting a salad or an entree, fine, but every single course? If you want a bunch of small plates, got to a tapas bar. There are restaurants that refuse reasonable modifications but then there are diners who are in the wrong restaurant. Other customers are going to suffer by the time being wasted on these people.

[laurelm]

When I go to a restaurant, I expect to do what I want- including splitting meals If I so choose to do so.

I am the patron, I love to eat, but I do not eat huge restaurant portions.

I also often love to get just a few appetizers instead of an entree sometimes- oh no!

And yes I do also go to Tapas places, but hey if you do not want people to just eat appetizers, dont make all the apps look good. (I have actually found this to cost more than entrees sometimes, so in those cases am I making a BETTER decision for the restaurant, by instead ordering appetizers and not an entree?)

Should I get my calculator out when I order a meal and choose the most optimal money making situation for the restaurant?

I did not realize I had to think about the restaurant's overhead when making my decisions about what I want to eat.

This has nothing to do with being cheap, it has to do with

A) I dont eat huge portions and B) I like to try a few things (choosing apps over entree) C) choosing what I feel like eating at that moment (perhaps I should just go to dinner starving)

and for others -D) for those who cannot afford a huge meal but would like to try a restaurant

The large portion size of most dishes in the US is a fact (compared to what anyone should eat according to any healthy diet) btw...

Edited to add- I have no problem with split dinner fees

Edited June 12, 2007 by laurelm (log)

[Daniel Rogov]

Not a question of fussy chefs, but thinking about the basic design of many dishes, it would be simply silly to set them up as four mini-portions. If four people each want to sample from each others' plates, no problem - they can simply play musical plates, passing at the appropriate moment from left to right.

The idea of asking a chef to divide a single main course into 4 portions, doing that with 4 separate portions is nothing short of ludicrous. Clients have rights but there is, after all, a limit and this is one example of those limits.

[andrewB]

Not a question of fussy chefs, but thinking about the basic design of many dishes, it would be simply silly to set them up as four mini-portions.  If four people each want to sample from each others' plates, no problem - they can simply play musical plates, passing at the appropriate moment from left to right.

The idea of asking a chef to divide a single main course into 4 portions, doing that with 4 separate portions is nothing short of ludicrous.  Clients have rights but there is, after all, a limit and this is one example of those limits.

←

and on top of it all, to have on the same plate each of those 4 mini portions. its not about being a fussy chef, its about having some integrity and not letting customers clammer for what ever they want. this IS the service industry, not indentured servitude or something of the sort...

[Tess]

The idea of asking a chef to divide a single main course into 4 portions, doing that with 4 separate portions is nothing short of ludicrous.  Clients have rights but there is, after all, a limit and this is one example of those limits.

←

Yes, that's the really absurd part of it. Why would anyone want to do that?

[Busboy]

Not a question of fussy chefs, but thinking about the basic design of many dishes, it would be simply silly to set them up as four mini-portions.  If four people each want to sample from each others' plates, no problem - they can simply play musical plates, passing at the appropriate moment from left to right.

The idea of asking a chef to divide a single main course into 4 portions, doing that with 4 separate portions is nothing short of ludicrous.  Clients have rights but there is, after all, a limit and this is one example of those limits.

←

and on top of it all, to have on the same plate each of those 4 mini portions. its not about being a fussy chef, its about having some integrity and not letting customers clamor for what ever they want. this IS the service industry, not indentured servitude or something of the sort...

←

God help the restaurant industry if customers should start "clamoring" for what they want. Why, they might get it, enjoy themselves and go out to dinner again. And then -- all that work! Just like indentured servitude!

Hey, I think the 4-plate split is odd and would firmly stand by a chef's right to decline to do so in the middle of a a crush. The GM compromise seems fair. On the other hand, taking an ideological stand against on the grounds that taking requests is akin to involuntary servitude strikes me as absurd and not a bit egotistical. Goodness knows, they might have been a bunch of old ladies who find it more gentile to eat that way as opposed to passing plates hither and thither, or a bunch of university kids who didn't know any better. Why not take a moment to make their night more pleasurable?

Yes, that's the really absurd part of it. Why would anyone want to do that?

Why does it matter?

[Tess]

Yes, that's the really absurd part of it. Why would anyone want to do that?

Why does it matter?

←

Not answering for anyone else, just for myself: How do you picture taking four different plates of entree and whatever sides might happen to be on those plates, splitting all that stuff into four and dividing it among four plates? It's hard to imagine a scenario where that would be appetizing at all. Why does it matter? I can think of a number of different reasons. It's going to have to be pretty time-consuming, and it's (IMO) likely to result in something that's not going to be attractive. I don't think a chef has to be a hopeless prima donna or have a resentful attitude towards customers to be unwlling to present a meal that way.

It's a continuum here, in my opinion, between a kitchen that won't change things one iota and one that will try to cook up anything anyone asks for. It's all in how a restaurant chooses to define itself. There's room for everything. As a customer, I think it's silly to go into a restaurant and ask them to be something they are not.

[Nathan]

here's one which goes into the 'split category' i believe...

had a 4 top in for lunch today and they wanted 2 split salads for apps. my policy is not splits but the GM did it anyway. then the main courses, they ordered 4 but wanted a portion of each dish put on each plate and served as such. i refused and made the GM go out and do it tableside. then for dessert, they had the same sh^t and put cheeses on the plates with desserts.

i would like to hear what people think about this one. personally i hold myself to a standard that doesn't include the poo-poo platter special or a super bowl sampler of my food. but that's just me...

thanks

←

As server or manager I would probably just grin and bear it. As a customer I cannot imagine having the nerve to ask for this. Splitting a salad or an entree, fine, but every single course? If you want a bunch of small plates, got to a tapas bar. There are restaurants that refuse reasonable modifications but then there are diners who are in the wrong restaurant. Other customers are going to suffer by the time being wasted on these people.

←

speaking from the non-demanding customer's perspective...that's the real issue. special attention for others...usually detracts from normal attention for me...unless we're talking about a $300 a person four-star with a surplus of FOH and kitchen staff.

[Nathan]

I also often love to get just a few appetizers instead of an entree sometimes- oh no! 

The large portion size of most dishes in the US is a fact (compared to what anyone should eat according to any healthy diet) btw...

←

I don't think any restaurant has a problem with someone ordering several apps instead of an entree. it's probably a little more work for the kitchen but also more money for the bottom line.

as for large portion sizes...I didn't think this thread was discussing chain restaurants.

[Porthos]

Speaking both as a person who adores dining out and as a restaurant critic for several major publications, I'd have no problem whatever in a split-portion fee so long as that is clearly stated on the menu. 

What I do wonder about is precisely why so many of us have assumed that people who want to split a main course are either "cheap" or "poor".  Do please consider that that may be preciselly what they want to eat and no more.  Do also consider that in many places in Europe and in parts of the Middle-East splitting a main course is considered a perfectly acceptable social tradition.

The one thing that I will say (bit of anger coming here) is that the restaurant that refuses to do this or in any way humbles or humiliates their clients is going to get a polite but nasty comment in my review.

←

Civilian comment:

I have good friends who split entrees as a matter of course. They do order individual salads and such and have no problem when there is a second-plate fee. Why do they split entrees? She had gastric bypass surgery and can't begin to finish even a "normal" portion and her husband is rather diminutive (he says he's 5' 2" on a bad hair day). So they are not trying to be cheap. Taking home left-overs isn't an option many times because they are traveling and have no way to re-heat the excess food. As far as I know they tip well, and they generally order drinks. So they are not being cheap, they are ordering what they can reasonably eat.

I have a grown daughter who orders off the appeitizer or kid's menu sometimes because there isn't an item on the regular menu small enough for how she eats.

Me, I will probably never be splitting a plate 'cause I love food way to much...

[Busboy]

Yes, that's the really absurd part of it. Why would anyone want to do that?

Why does it matter?

←

Not answering for anyone else, just for myself: How do you picture taking four different plates of entree and whatever sides might happen to be on those plates, splitting all that stuff into four and dividing it among four plates? It's hard to imagine a scenario where that would be appetizing at all. Why does it matter? I can think of a number of different reasons. It's going to have to be pretty time-consuming, and it's (IMO) likely to result in something that's not going to be attractive. I don't think a chef has to be a hopeless prima donna or have a resentful attitude towards customers to be unwlling to present a meal that way.

It's a continuum here, in my opinion, between a kitchen that won't change things one iota and one that will try to cook up anything anyone asks for. It's all in how a restaurant chooses to define itself. There's room for everything. As a customer, I think it's silly to go into a restaurant and ask them to be something they are not.

←

I suppose I can't provide a detailed description of the plating not knowing what the dishes in question were. I do know, however, that chefs are very good at putting food on plates rapidly, and that -- while the aesthetics would surely suffer and no patron has the right to expect otherwise -- the amount of additional time would likely be marginal. The people who ordered it appear not to be too sensitive about these things, so whether you or I could picture it being appetizing is not important. And I think a chef should be flattered that his food or her food appeals not just to the culinarians (as it were) among us who know how these things are "supposed" to be done, but to unwashed masses as well.

I don't think these people were asking the restaurant to be something it wasn't. They didn't go into a Chinese restaurant and ask for French food; they didn't hunt for a vegetarian tasting menu in a steakhouse. The just wanted to share what they apparently believed would be an excellent dining experience.

As a customer, I think it's silly to go into a restaurant and expend them to be so rigid that that they won't do odd little favors for you every now and again if you ask politely and tip well.

As a youth, I had the opportunity to work FOH for a couple of excellent restaurants for chefs that showed up in national magazines from time to time. Never did they shy away from honoring special requests if at all possible, to the point of keeping a bottle of ketchup in the larder of the most expensive French restaurant in town.

special attention for others...usually detracts from normal attention for me...unless we're talking about a $300 a person four-star with a surplus of FOH and kitchen staff.

Very slippery slope here. You're saying that restaurants should never give special attention to others?

[Jaymes]

And here's the thing I don't understand. You've got a sort of average per table per sitting. So in comes a party of four and they order appetizers, cocktails, expensive mains, desserts and a couple of big reds. Now you're WAY over your average.

And then you've got a four-top that orders two mains and splits them, and one dessert that they pass around.

And as others have pointed out, who knows exactly why...

But...um... Isn't that the cost of business? Doesn't it average out? Isn't that the way the retail industry (not to mention most of life) works?

Edited June 12, 2007 by Jaymes (log)

[piperdown]

I was reminded of this thread the other night as I was working. It's Berkshire Grown week here in the Berkshires and participating restaurants are featuring a three course menu for 20.07, with the courses being made from locally grown or produced food. anyway it makes us busy, but the nightly receipts usually are poor due to the low cost. Now it's not too big a deal, it's only for the week, and it highlights local farmers and producers so it's kind of fun (the wait staff might have a different opinion though).

Anyway the point of all this is that a four top comes in, and after eating the mains, complains a bit to the server that the portions were a little small. Now at our restaurant mains are usually $20-30, so for $20 I don't know what they were expecting. The chef got a little mad at the comment but bit his tongue. The funny part was when the server got back and said he people had ordered 2 cups of coffee and were sharing them among the four. We were laughing our ass off over that one. Are they cheap, not too thirsty, or afraid of too much caffeine? who knows, but it made up laugh, and was the joke of the kitchen all night.

[Nathan]

Very slippery slope here. You're saying that restaurants should never give special attention to others?

not at all.

if it doesn't detract from my service...then I could care less.

if it does "hurt" me...then it's a sliding scale of merit.

legitimate medical reasons, advanced seniority, that sort of thing...all good.

while faux food allergies and vegetarians should never be accomodated.

[Rebecca263]

←

...legitimate medical reasons, advanced seniority, that sort of thing...all good.

while faux food allergies and vegetarians should never be accomodated.

←

[Busboy]

Very slippery slope here.  You're saying that restaurants should never give special attention to others?

not at all.

if it doesn't detract from my service...then I could care less.

if it does "hurt" me...then it's a sliding scale of merit.

legitimate medical reasons, advanced seniority, that sort of thing...all good.

while faux food allergies and vegetarians should never be accommodated.

There's the rub, as the Melancholy Dane once said after a particularly bad batch of herring and vodka. Every second of time the waiter and chef spend on me, is taken from your account, and vice versa. If we are at adjoining tables, must we poll one another if, say, one of us wants another bread basket? More water? Well done beef? A substitute side dish? Our pasta course split in half? After all, all of these things take time and add nothing to the restaurants coffers. What if we're just in the mood for a special wine and end up taking a few minutes talking about the Burgundies rather than just barking out "bring me the Mersault?" Matter of fact, we'd all save time if customers just bossed orders at waiters and waiters just flung the food onto the table without art or grace.

Or we could put the stopwatches away and, as we used to advise our customers at Le Pavillon (not the Le Pavillon), "sit back, relax and enjoy." And restaurants could accommodate special requests and customers could become loyal and we'd all grow old, prosperous and happy together.