LA: Sushi Zo

[Fish]

We love Sushi Zo. Or should I say, we used to love it. While we live in Seattle, we're in LA a few times a year and for the couple of years or so, Sushi Zo has been our big treat to ourselves. We've sometimes eaten there twice in one day. The fish is incredible. But after our last visit last week, I'm not setting foot in the place ever again.

Here's what happened: I called to make a reservation for dinner. They asked if we were going to have Omakase, and I said no: there are quite a few things we don't eat, so it's easier to order ala carte, and we've ordered ala carte at dinner before any issues. The person on the phone (whose English wasn't good) told us we'd have to wait. "Wait for what?" I wondered. "15, 20 minutes." That didn't sound too bad.

We arrived right on time for our reservation. The waitress once again asked us about Omakase, and once again we politely declined. Again, the "you'll have to wait" business, with no explanation. The place wasn't full, and I saw a table with a "reserved" sign on it. While the waitress fussed, another waitress came over, greeted us and then seated us. So much for having to wait. We sat down, were warned about a 5 piece per person minimum, ordered drinks and miso (and tried to order edamame: the waitress responded with a sharp "no edamame!") and waited. A few minutes later, the miso arrived, and we ordered fish. And then we learned what they meant by "you have to wait", because 45 minutes later, no food had arrived. When we asked what was going on, we were told we'd have to wait for all the omakase tables to be served, and then we'd get food - maybe another 30 minutes? Whaaa? No food for us until they're all done? At that point, we got the check and walked out.

Now, I had have no problem with their requiring you to order the omakase menu - that's their prerogative. But to not require it, and then treat anyone who doesn't order it as a second-class customer? That's just not OK. I know we're foodies here and we're willing to put up with a lot to get the best - I drove 100km out of my way for caramels, so I'm fine with that - but (and I know this will sound like heresy to some of you) it's still just raw fish on rice. Is the whole "sushi Nazi" part of the fetish for Los Angelenos? I don't get it. Treating people badly is never, ever OK, and I really hope someone explains that to the chef one of these days.

- S

[savvysearch]

We love Sushi Zo.  Or should I say, we used to love it.  While we live in Seattle, we're in LA a few times a year and for the couple of years or so, Sushi Zo has been our big treat to ourselves.  We've sometimes eaten there twice in one day.  The fish is incredible.  But after our last visit last week, I'm not setting foot in the place ever again. 

Here's what happened: I called to make a reservation for dinner.  They asked if we were going to have Omakase, and I said no: there are quite a few things we don't eat, so it's easier to order ala carte, and we've ordered ala carte at dinner before any issues.  The person on the phone (whose English wasn't good) told us we'd have to wait.  "Wait for what?" I wondered.  "15, 20 minutes."  That didn't sound too bad.

We arrived right on time for our reservation.  The waitress once again asked us about Omakase, and once again we politely declined.  Again, the "you'll have to wait" business, with no explanation.  The place wasn't full, and I saw a table with a "reserved" sign on it.  While the waitress fussed, another waitress came over, greeted us and then seated us.  So much for having to wait.  We sat down, were warned about a 5 piece per person minimum, ordered drinks and miso (and tried to order edamame: the waitress responded with a sharp "no edamame!") and waited.  A few minutes later, the miso arrived, and we ordered fish.  And then we learned what they meant by "you have to wait", because 45 minutes later, no food had arrived.  When we asked what was going on, we were told we'd have to wait for all the omakase tables to be served, and then we'd get food - maybe another 30 minutes?  Whaaa?  No food for us until they're all done?  At that point, we got the check and walked out.

Now, I had have no problem with their requiring you to order the omakase menu - that's their prerogative.  But to not require it, and then treat anyone who doesn't order it as a second-class customer? That's just not OK.  I know we're foodies here and we're willing to put up with a lot to get the best - I drove 100km out of my way for caramels, so I'm fine with that - but (and I know this will sound like heresy to some of you) it's still just raw fish on rice.  Is the whole "sushi Nazi" part of the fetish for Los Angelenos?  I don't get it.  Treating people badly is never, ever OK, and I really hope someone explains that to the chef one of these days.

  - S

←

There's only one sushi nazi in LA and that's Nozawa. What you experienced is just really poor service. The chef there is supposed to be really nice and personable. That's one of the reasons why it's so popular, aside from the food. I just can't imagine the chef ranking customers like that. Maybe the woman had no idea what she was doing or how to explain the situation? I wonder why the wait.

Edited January 4, 2008 by savvysearch (log)

[Fish]

There's only one sushi nazi in LA and that's Nozawa. What you experienced is just really poor service. The chef there is supposed to be really nice and personable. That's one of the reasons why it's so popular, aside from the food.  I just can't imagine the chef ranking customers like that. Maybe the woman had no idea what she was doing or how to explain the situation? I wonder why the wait. 

←

I'd seen people stomp out of the restaurant before, but we'd always been treated fine. Sure, the waitresses could have explained the situation better, but that still doesn't excuse the treatment. Must be great to have a restaurant which is so popular that you can afford to alienate customers and not give a damn.

- S