One night in Alsace

[jayrayner]

Wow. Don't any of you ever sleep? THis has, I think, turned into a grand and impressive thread with as much weight and gravitas as, ooh, the Haeberlin truffle.

A couple of points. one thing that seems to have been overlooked in the discussion of the economics of the three star is the notion of the loss leader. By the time the chef gets to that point they have reached a certain notoriety that allows them to diversify in a way which produces real crash. the flagship restaurant is what gives the rest of the business credibility. In the UK, all the recent three star chefs, bar Koffman I think have worked this way. Ladenis went on to open the simply nico and incognico chains, Albert Roux is renowned for his 'other projects'; Pierre WHite has used the credibility of the original three stars to produce a larger business; Ramsay is now doing exactly the same. It is true there can be a law of diminshing returns here. Pierre WHite has undoubtedly spent the currency his three stars earned him; Ramsay is in danger of doing so. but either way, as I say, the failure of the three star restaurant to make a rpofit is neither here nor there. the same applies wiht the likes of Ducasse and the Haeberlins. they have other, entry level restaurants. they ahve cookbooks. Some of them do television and branded foods. Some of them do catering. That's how they get rich.

THanks to Andy Lynes for reminding you all that I have an article to write. I mean really: if egullet isn't my own perosnal reserahc base what are you for? And thanks to Jaybee for remarking that $100 for a vela chop would be too rich for him. All useful stuff.

[Steve Plotnicki]

I think describing three star restaurants as a loss leader is a misnomer. I don't think any of the chefs you mention operate them at a loss. What you mean to say is that they use them to build up goodwill and then they leverage the goodwill to build a franchise based on their brand name. But they are still profitable. But that only works for chefs in major cities. For chefs in the boonies like Troisgros, Roellinger, etc., they run inns with top quality restaurants. They don't seem to have any trouble making the economics work for them. Considering that the Haeberlin family has owned that property since the year gimel, and that the restaurant and hotel are staffed by the family, I don't see what the big expense is for them to operate the place? In other words, there isn't any economic reasoning you can raise that would justify the pricing of that Cos.

Most businesses operate on simple formula markups. They buy an item for X, and they have a standard way of marking it up. And while the multiple can vary with wine, from say twice the purchase price to five times the purchase price, I've never ever seen it be higher then 5X no matter what. Pricing above that can only be one of two things. A mistake, or a ripoff.

[jaybee]

I think Robert Brown has hit the nail on the head with his last post as regards the nature of the changes in the upper levels of restaurants. When I first began to travel and experience such restaurants (1963), pride of place was considered the most important form of psychic income for everyone who worked at them. Money was, at least overtly, the fuel that kept the place going, but it wasn't the "issue" unless there wasn't enough of it.

Today, someone who has the opportunity to build a cash cow business in any field, restaurants incuded, is looked upon as a misfit if they don't. I think this started in the mid 70s when the taxes of France's Socialist government's began to drive many top chefs to seek business in the US. That was when La Coze came here, and I know that Jean Troisgros, had he not died prematurely, would have made a similar move. The great Jaques Manier was practically driven to a heart attack and his death by financiual troubles caused by the tax man. The combination of unfettered opportunity in the US, punative taxes in France and cash-rich investors looking to buy their way into the glamor of the haute cuisine restaurant business changed it from a metier to another form of commercial aggrandizement. The media hype added to this trend during the reagan years, and has continued unabated. At its highest level, restaurant dining has become part of the entertainment business, with all the attendant high prices. Modestly priced haut cuisine might suffer an image problem. Imagine getting Kristal for $25 a bottle.

That is not to make any value judgements on entreprereneurial chefs who build businesses based ontheir skills and talents. (Bocuse showed the way). It's just a different business. I think Steve P has it right when he says they build up good will and leverage it to create a franchise. Branding works in this field too.

[robert brown]

If certain chefs operate their restaurants as loss leaders, why are they charging so much money to dine there? My understanding is that some of the chefs with the more expensive restaurants in Paris are in a state of panic (one even said, according to Lizziee, that they hoped the situation would improve after this past September 11!!!!). One problem seems to be that all their ventures are related-none of them are hedged--so that when the economy gets bad, the whole empire suffers. No one has also mentioned that these restaurants (and much of the luxury business in general) tread in an illiquid market and are therefore inelastic in terms of price. My experience with the French, both in terms of the art and rare book dealers and the chefs, are pigs on the way up and helpless on the way down. I believe they all raised their prices between 10-35% in the last 18 months or so based on the general notion that "all those Americans" and others had money to burn. Of course being fully booked is some indicator of demand, but they milked this to the max without considerating the possibilities of what would happen when people decided to stop spending. Now all these owner-chefs can do is water down what they can offer, which is why they are in a vicious circle of less business and less reason for people to spend money at their establishments.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Robert - Are you trying to say that people don't think it's worth it?

[robert brown]

Steve, it seems that fewer people are finding it not worth going out of their way for it or willing to spend what it now costs, which is not to say that if the world situation were dreamy the strong demand would still not be there. I think Mrs. P summed up the feelings of many people, don't you think?

[Steve Plotnicki]

Robert - I agree with you. Where I think we go wrong in this discussion is that we act and think like consumers. If we can all put on our three star chef's hat for a minute, if we owned such an establishment, what would we be trying to say to our customers when we chose our pricepoints. For example, I believe that Vrinat keeps his pricepoints for food and wine at a very reasonable level on purpose. It goes with my story about the tie. In order not to appear to exclusionary, there is this human aspect to the service there. And by keeping the price point reasonable, it also helps them develop new customers. But in contrast, Passard's price point says that you should be willing to pay a large increment for his genius. And I think people are conscious of his statement. In fact I hear te restaurant discussed on those terms all of the time. Another example is Jean-Georges $85 corkage fee. That clearly sends a message to drinkers about who he wants eating there. He wants the guy who is bringing $500+ bottles of wine, not the guy who is brining a perfectly mature, 12 year old Chateauneuf that he originally bought for $15. J-G assumes that the ultimate size of the check will be higher from the person bringing more expensive wine. So to me, the interesting part of the issue regarding the 1994 Cos at 330 euroes is why the hell did they pick that price and what do they think it means to people reading their wine list?

[cabrales]

that chefs do not change their menus to the extent they used to; that certain parts of the meal-- cheese and dessert, mainly—are not the extravaganzas they used to be; and that humble products that great chefs would have treated lightly are conferred a certain status and offered, of course, at elevated prices.

robert -- Note dessert might not be a huge spread for a number of potential reasons, only one of which would be consistent with your intepretation. When I received the spread at Bocuse, I found it silly for so many items to be brought before me and would have preferred a single dessert. An alternative interpretation is that diners no longer expect a huge spread to be brought before them -- they prefer a less diverse range of items for dessert. In addition, spreads may sometimes involve items that are prepared *in advance*. Some might prefer a delicately crafted dessert that is ordered or known in advance, and that is more targeted and less copius, and that is made to order. Touching on a topic of interest to Steve Klc, I could not necessarily explain why dessert trolleys have largely disappeared (with some exceptions, e.g., Buerehiesel, Jamin). However, I wouldn't necessarily attribute such disappearance to negative intentions on the part of cuisiniers.

As for chefs changing their menus, I think there are many explanations for why some chefs might change their menu less frequently or might change fewer of the dishes on their menu. First, there are some places, like Bocuse or L'Ambroisie, where diners expect certain signature dishes to be available (the truffle soup VGE, the bass in a pastry crust, the Bresse chicken in a pig's bladder for Bocuse; the curry langoustine dish of Pacaud). So those would stay on the menu for places that have signature dishes. Could you imagine going to Taillevent intending to sample the seafood (is it lobster?) sausage and not finding it on the menu? Or if La Tour d'Argent kept various duck dishes, but took off its signature duck dish with the blood sauce as the first service?

Second, certain chefs' cuisines are more responsive to seasonal ingredients than others. For example, Lameloise's pigeonneau is generally available year-round, because I doubt that wild pigeon is necessarily utilized. However, some places are more known for products with seasonality, like Regis Macon and his mushrooms.

Third, some chefs are less active with respect to the daily supervision of their restaurants and may utilize certain similar dishes across different establishments, such as Ducasse with respect to ADNY and Plaza Athenee (although I have only had a few meals at either restaurant). I wonder whether the Pourcels utilize some Jardin des Sens knock-offs at Maison Blanche in Paris, for example.

Fourth, changes in menus might only be relevant for a certain segment of the dining population for a restaurant (e.g., those who have dined at the restaurant before). Presumably, if one has never visited a restaurant, apart from issues of the cuisine being traditional or more updated, one would not have sampled any dishes there before and even longstanding dishes would be "new" to the diner.

Fifth, perhaps some dishes for certain restaurants are simply so delicious that the cuisinier would like to keep them on the menu, such that their retention is not an indication of laziness or lack of caring about diners, but might represent a desire to make the dish continue to be available to them. For example, I suspect that Meneau believes, appropriately, that his oysters in a gelee of seawater dish are delicious. His retention of this dish on the menu might reflect the fact that he likes the dish.

Sixth, significantly, even repeat diners might wish to resample a dish. Sometimes, I find it amusing to see how a dish evolves ever so slightly over time. For example, one of my favorite dishes sometimes has mini chanterelles included in it. I find it amusing to see how it is on any given day. I also enjoy sampling different wines with a given dish, and determining how that affects the dish. Furthermore, even if a particular dish is the same, if it is taken in the context of a different progression of other dishes during a meal, that can alter the effect of a dish in interesting ways. Thus, a given dish can bear different sentiments during different meals. For me, taking in the same dish over time can be most rewarding.

[Bux]

But that isn't how the three star restaurants in France, especially the ones outside of Paris made their mark on the world. They made it by guys like Bux, Robert B. and I, and all the other tourists who were able to fit their three star meals into the budget of their entire vacation.

After seeing my name used used in vain, I think I have to say I've never been comfortable with "budget' as a concept, although I've generally managed to live with my means. Nevertheless, "budget" applies too much rational thinking. I see my visits to extraordinary restaurants as being paid for with Monopoly money or perhaps gambling chips. I expect a certain amount of the money I have that's over and above what I need to survive in NYC, will be spent on great food. Play money or gambling chips is not a bad metaphor as I view gambling as a waste of one's resources, yet others will tell me that the money they've lost, brought them a fair return on that money in terms of the time they were entertained. I don't know of another way to entertain myself as well for the sheer pleasure, excitement and satisfaction per dollar spent, than eating at a great restaurant. The opera won't do it, neither will a championship sporting event in which my favorite wins. Yet some poor slob will pay more money for a good seat at the superbowl than I might for an incredible restaurant experience.

Jay, I was going to start to answer your question later, but perhaps this was the kind of thing you want to read.

And the higher the cost of those meals, the more people it will exclude. Because indeed people who used to believe that they were worth the price of admission, will stop believing that and they will either stop going, or they will go less. And like my wife said after her nine stars of Paris dining last week, "I don't need to do any of this next time we come to Paris. I'm finished with this, especially at this price. I can be just as happy eating in bistros and having a cous cous." And I doubt she would have felt as strongly if the cost of a meal wasn't in excess of 225 euros per person, let alonw what the meal at Arpege cost which was significantly higher then that.

Yes, of course. At some point we get priced out of doing what we love. Even the gambling addict whose life is in shambles because of his vice, may be rehabilitated. Gastronomic dining offers not just pleasure but discovery. I am quite prepared for the day when I say "I don't need to do any of this next time we come to Paris. I'm finished with this." And yes, I will look at the price and say, but I could do something else with that money, but it may also have something to do with the novelty wearing off. I have a fair amount of sympathy for John Whiting's approach, although it leaves me a need to fulfill. Should I exhaust that need, my approach will change.

[robert brown]

Bux, my approach has already changed. I think during the summer I sent you an e-mail saying that I wanted to start a thread about what I call a new paradigm of food-centered travel. Your post above provides an ideal lead-in. The problem is is that I have a few things to do before I get into it wholeheartedly. Let me say for the moment that it is centered around a de-emphasis of all but the most compelling two and three-star Michelin restaurants of France, a search for discovery of purveyors of classic French meals and products, and a renewed emphasis (for me) on gastronomy in Italy. To a certain extent it is what some of us already do. However, it might be worthwhile if I formalize it later in a dedicated discussion.

[marcus]

Robert, I am going to be very interested in what you discover in Italy. In my experience, the level of cooking in Italy has fallen much further and faster than it has in France. The wonderful, simple Italian restaurants with their fresh foods based on fresh ingredients prepared by ordinary people was an expression of an Italian lifestyle that no longer exists. As the lifestyle has disappeared, so have most of these restaurants. In France, cuisine is a hobby more than a lifestyle choice, and as such it continues to receive a unique focus, with a measure of insulation from the societal changes going on around it. At the high end, the nuova cucina is really French based, and although there may be a few exceptions that I haven't yet tried, overall it is a pale reflection of the best available in France even today.

[Bux]

Robert, I think we've also had a few threads here, in which you're participated that suggest alternatives to the grand gourmet tour. One of my distractions from gastronomic touring in France is to do the same in Northern Spain. One of the benefits is that the tabs are much lower for food and the wine markups are lower as well. The food is newer to me as well so there's ample opportunity for discovery although that can be offset by a lack of appreciation for the finesse or individuality involved, as well as the mistakes I make in choosing restaurants and ordering a foreign cuisine in a foreign lagnuage. I may not be conversant in French, but I speak "restaurant French" fairly fluently.

Juan Roca, in Girona, offers a menú degustació of five savory courses plus a chocolate dessert and a fruit dessert for 48.10 euros and a menú sopresa for 57.10 with a few more courses. It's just a two star restaurant and on par with better two stars in France and thus shouldn't be compared with Arpege or Gagnaire in Paris. It's also worth noting that the starred restaurants in Spain are not as numerous and are clustered in Catalonia and around San Sebastian with two three star restaurants in each area and maybe none elsewhere in the country. That could be a hardship for those who are not content with one three star restaurant and variety of one, two and interesting local unstarred restaurants or tapas bars in one week.

[Bux]

Marcus, Europe is less agricultural than it used to be and everyone's life style is changing. The "new cooking," whether you say it in French, Italian, Spanish or English, is more and mor international. If "nuova cucina is really French based," if appears that nouvelle cuisine is less and less based on French tradition. From what I read, top chefs in France seem to have come lately to balsamic vinegar and are stuck there as Americans diners have begun to find it boring at home.

When we ate at the French laundry, I was mistaken for someone else, I am sure, when the wine steward said he wouldn't dream of suggesting a chardonnay to me, but I can't see an American showing up at a three star restaurant in the French provinces and being pleased at finding balsamic vinegar repeated in the meal.

[cabrales]

I wanted to start a thread about what I call a new paradigm of food-centered travel. .... Let me say for the moment that it is centered around a de-emphasis of all but the most compelling two and three-star Michelin restaurants of France, a search for discovery of purveyors of classic French meals and products, and a renewed emphasis (for me) on gastronomy in Italy

robert -- Would this new paradigm be appropriate for diners who have not sampled many of the three- and two-stars, like you already have?

I find myself making a number of revisits to restaurants that I dislike because, among other things, (1) dining and/or traveling companions might not have visited, (2) there might be signature dishes left at these restaurants in which I am interested (e.g., George Blanc's Bresse chicken in a crust of "gros sel" salt; Bocuse's Bresse chicken cooked in a pig's bladder), (3) I might think a cuisinier's style has evolved over time, (4) the restaurant might be "on the way" with respect to a particular other restaurant destination (this is the case particularly in Burgundy), and (5) the restaurants I like more might be closed during the applicable period or on a given day.

[Bux]

robert -- Would this new paradigm be appropriate for diners who have not sampled many of the three- and two-stars, like you already have?

That's really for Robert Brown to answer, but I'd guess it would be an alternate way to tour for any diner interested in food. Part of this discussion revolves around the concept that three star dining may be pricing itself out of business. Of course there have always been those who love to eat, but couldn't affored three star restaurants. It's just that now that number may be growing and there may be more diners who decide that sort of food is irrelevant. We already have talented chefs who have turned their back on that program and who have opened bistros. Look at Robuchon's proposed new restaurant. He was one who several years ago said haute cuisine was becoming too costly to maintain.

[marcus]

Bux, I was really more focused on the Italian regional cooking and only mentioned the nuova cucina as an afterthought. Its in the former, which used to be the glory of Italy, where I believe that the real decline has ocurred.

Balsamic vinegar can't be that new in France, I remember a fish preparation at Aubergade in which Trama featured a very high quality balsamic vinegar along with wheat germ which itself had no flavor and was probably there to make a health statement. I am not a fan of Trama.

[jaybee]

My gastronomic excursions initially followed a path led by my brother-in-law and his wife who preceeded our Francophilia. Interestingly, we all reached the point of three star saturation in the early-eighties and turned to bistros and restaurants specializing in regional cuisines. This change in culinary focus prompted them to write A Guide to Paris Bistros, first edition, over ten years ago. The idea of spending upwards of $600 for dinner was a distinct turn-off, even if we could "afford" it.

We try to fit a "starred" meal into most trips if the place offers us something new, but for the most part, places like Ducloux' Restaurant Greuze in Tournous hold our affections now, (though it too, owns two stars). Invariably meals at small, chef-owner places, many serving traditional or regional dishes are the most enjoyable and memorable of our recent trips. The average bill in such places is somewhere between $75 and $100 a person, for a no-holds barred meal. Rarely have the top places provided a better total dining experience, certainly not one worth three or four times the price.

[Bux]

Bux, I was really more focused on the Italian regional cooking and only mentioned the nuova cucina as an afterthought.  Its in the former, which used to be the glory of Italy, where I believe that the real decline has ocurred.

I'm not sure where the decline has been greatest in France, but there's also been a precipitous drop in the middle. I think jaybee's post is interesting in that I believe thirty or forty years ago there would have been less need for a guide to bistros since there were so many dependable ones. Of course many people tell me I'm ignoring the fact that my own taste has changed and maybe we're all guilty of just not accepting that our own interests naturally change as we grow older and get jaded by what we already know. It's possible that a person who spent twenty years eating in bistros and who could now afford multistarred restaurants would now be excited to move on just as much as others who have done that, now find delight in traditional food in bistros and that the status of the food in the various levels of restaurants might only play a small part. Maybe all this is another thread, but Jay Rayner couldn't have expected more than a two percent on target response after all the time he's spend here. Sorry about that Jay, I'd like to run a tight ship, but it would make for boring threads and alienate the best posters.

[Steve Plotnicki]

I am skeptical that Robert B.'s "petite tour de gastronomy" is something that will be appealing to the point that it will make people jump on planes. It's one thing for Robert already starting in Nice, but I will have a hard time convincing Mrs. P to get on a plane to eat all "small meals" of local ingredients. Yes if it was combined with a few larger gastronomic statements that would be one thing, but I can't see that we would find the schlep worth it for just for the food at the scope we are describing.

We have said this before on this site, what made three star dining in France desireable was that it conveniently coincided with a trip to France. The level of culture, shopping, sightseeing, wine tasting etc. that you could combine with a few three star meals, and a few bistro and brasserie meals is overwhelming. This is one of the reasons that we are slow to make the switch to Spain. Six days on the Costa Brava just to eat doesn't sound like fun to a lot of people. And that we always struggle and bemoan the decline of French cuisine really says more about how we enjoyed traveling to France then anything else.

[robert brown]

Steve P., patience please. I am not about to propose a "petite tour gastronomique", although you still have to be a Francophile and like food while bopping around France.

[jaybee]

Steve Plotnicki:  We have said this before on this site, what made three star dining in France desireable was that it conveniently coincided with a trip to France. The level of culture, shopping, sightseeing, wine tasting etc. that you could combine with a few three star meals, and a few bistro and brasserie meals is overwhelming. This is one of the reasons that we are slow to make the switch to Spain. Six days on the Costa Brava just to eat doesn't sound like fun to a lot of people. And that we always struggle and bemoan the decline of French cuisine really says more about how we enjoyed traveling to France then anything else.

Absof**kinlutely right on target, Mr. P. Couldn't 'a said it better. And also why we bemoan other things that are occuring in France of late.

[Lesley C]

Boy, what a thread.

Getting back to Jay's original question...

I can't quite relate to opinions on this subject offered by people who can afford to frequent three-star restaurants on a weekly, monthly or bi-yearly basis. You folks have money to spare. And I have to admit, working as a restaurant critic, I get to eat all kinds of fabulous meals for free. After a while you forget what it's like to pull out your own hard-earned cash and pay for a $40 slice of foie gras, a $50 veal chop, or -- God forbid-- a $15 dessert (no dessert is worth $15).

But what about the people who save up for the starred restaurants only to walk away feeling ripped off, regretting they didn't use that money for something like a new roof or a down payment on a car. The important part of the how-much-is-too-much equation is customer satisfaction. I paid $400 (for two) for a crappy meal at The Square and $800 (for three, no wine) for a crappy lunch at Michel Trama's restaurant. Last year I forked over $300 (for one) for Tetsuya, and it was one of the worst meals of my life. In those three cases it was too much, and I was furious. When I ate at Bocuse (for about $400 for two), I walked away satisfied -- not wowed, but not ripped off. After many such experiences, I just don't care to take that risk anymore -- because that's what it is, a bit fat gamble. As much as I love searching out mind-boggling gourmet experiences, if someone said "Let's save up for Gagnaire," I wouldn't hesitate to answer "No thanks!"

[jayrayner]

THank you to everybody. It's been excellent and Bux, I really didn't expect everyone to be on target. It has raised a huge bunch of issues - particularly on the viability of french 3 stars - and I will now try to make it look like I came up with them all by myself.

I particulalrly liked the gambling analogy. once in Las Vegas I spent 20 hours over a weekend playing poker at the Luxor. Eventually I lost the entirety of the $300 I had allowed myself but it seemed to me serious value fun at $15 an hour. Then again as I was in vegas to interview John Wayne Bobbitt maybe I was just searching for distraction.

[Bux]

THank you to everybody.

Well it's been fun. Happy to have you stop by and start a conversation anytime. I'm surprised no one made any allusions to how free loading journalists raised the ante for the rest of us just trying to get a good meal at a good price. Someone has to cover the inflated cost of doing three star business.

[Fat Guy]

To the contrary, feeding a freeloading journalist is one of the best investments a restaurant can make. Much, much cheaper than any other form of advertising or public relations.