Reservations and Regulars at Momos and

[oakapple]

As a customer, I expect that the reservation system that is put in place functions properly on day one.... Of course the system is then continually fine-tuned and updated as the restaurant settles in.

I think the acid test, if there is any, comes long past day one.

Early on, there's a heavy crush of people eager to try The Next Big Thing. It doesn't matter if there are some potential customers who are offended by the sloppy service, because the restaurant has more guests than it can accommodate anyway. The challenge doesn't come until after the initial furore has died down, which can take days or years, depending on the restaurants.

As Steven pointed out earlier, a restaurant rewarding a regular customer is no different than an airline frequent flyer program that gives a number of rewards, or perks as they are more commonly known, to their best customers.  Since the airline business is my business, I'll give a few examples of how we reward our frequent flyers.  And while you may argue that I am comparing apples to oranges, I don't think I am.

←

There's much in your analogy that is relevant. But one huge distinction is the large number of airline routes that are monopolies, or near-monopolies. There are a lot of times when you're stuck with one airline—even one you hate. That just doesn't happen with restaurants.

[Tess]

There's much in your analogy that is relevant. But one huge distinction is the large number of airline routes that are monopolies, or near-monopolies. There are a lot of times when you're stuck with one airline—even one you hate. That just doesn't happen with restaurants.

←

Yes. Often one's put next to no thought into what flight to take or how much money to spend-- not at all like choosing a restaurant, where you may decide (e.g.) to go out of your way, or spend more and thus expect more. With an airline often the only choice is whether to pay for a higher class of service. (Which can admittedly lead to regrets.) Also, restaurant dining is more likely to be an end in itself whereas an airlplane flight is a means to an end. You get where you're going more or less on time; the flight is a success on some level.

I'm married to an airline employee (a different airline) and I've been sitting here thinking of all the ways the analogy is valid vs. invalid. One thing my husband has told me-- and I have no idea if this is true in the restaurant business-- if that people who are truly frequent fliers are usually pretty easygoing and not apt to raise a fuss if they don't get their upgrade or whatever.

[David Ross]

There's much in your analogy that is relevant. But one huge distinction is the large number of airline routes that are monopolies, or near-monopolies. There are a lot of times when you're stuck with one airline—even one you hate. That just doesn't happen with restaurants.

←

True, the customer has more choices of restaurants in a certain city than they have choices over the number of airlines that fly into that city. And yes, we do have some routes in our network where we have little or no competition. But we do not lower our customer service standards regardless of the competition on a specifc route.

We realize there are some markets where people are stuck with only one choice of carrier, but we look at that as a challenge to keep our standards consistently higher than the other guy. You see, we are trying to create an overall "brand" image that distinguishes us on every flight, regardless of whether there is direct competition in the market or not. If people consistently see us deliver on that promise, we'll be successful. Restaurants can learn from this example.

One should never set the bar at just o.k., especially at the level, (and expense), of the restaurants that we discuss here at eGullet. I don't think that we (eGullet members), are necessarily the dining demographic with lower standards, but I do think there is a general malaise among the public when it comes to customer service standards and that is sad. What I try to do with my employees and our customers is to lead through my examples of superior serve and to teach people that they don't have to settle for second-best.

While I have gotten a bit off this direct topic, I am glad that the turn of the discussion has focused on this important issue of customer service expectations and rewarding customer loyalty. It's an important discussion that needs to continue.

[David Ross]

I'm married to an airline employee (a different airline) and I've been sitting here thinking of all the ways the analogy is valid vs. invalid. One thing my husband has told me-- and I have no idea if this is true in the restaurant business-- if that people who are truly frequent fliers are usually pretty easygoing and not apt to raise a fuss if they don't get their upgrade or whatever.

←

Actually, our frequent fliers are easygoing-up to a point. They expect a high level of service as they well should and if we don't deliver they don't hesitate to let us know. I have attended many lunches that we host for our frequent customers and they consistently tell us they are fiercely loyal, but with that loyalty comes a right to give us constructive criticism. I see the same analogy applying to the customer of a restaurant, Steven for example, who has every right to expect that the restaurant that he frequently dines at will provide him with a measure of reward in return for his loyalty.

I've been in customer service long enough to realize that those of us who are professionals in customer service-whether it's at a hotel, a restaurant, an airline or a department store-all share this common, old-fashioned ethic of service and that's why I think we've endured.

[David Ross]

As a customer, I expect that the reservation system that is put in place functions properly on day one.... Of course the system is then continually fine-tuned and updated as the restaurant settles in.

I think the acid test, if there is any, comes long past day one.

Early on, there's a heavy crush of people eager to try The Next Big Thing. It doesn't matter if there are some potential customers who are offended by the sloppy service, because the restaurant has more guests than it can accommodate anyway. The challenge doesn't come until after the initial furore has died down, which can take days or years, depending on the restaurants.

As Steven pointed out earlier, a restaurant rewarding a regular customer is no different than an airline frequent flyer program that gives a number of rewards, or perks as they are more commonly known, to their best customers.  Since the airline business is my business, I'll give a few examples of how we reward our frequent flyers.  And while you may argue that I am comparing apples to oranges, I don't think I am.

←

There's much in your analogy that is relevant. But one huge distinction is the large number of airline routes that are monopolies, or near-monopolies. There are a lot of times when you're stuck with one airline—even one you hate. That just doesn't happen with restaurants.

←

In all due respect, I have to disagree with a couple of your points. I think the acid test does come on day one. If you choose to run with the thoroughbreds, (other chefs and restaurants in your class), you better come out of the gate quick or you'll be left behind. Of course any new restaurant will go through a number of opening challenges, but that should simply be a matter of adapting to growing pains. To be blunt-your reservations system better work on day one. It better give me the chance to book a table and if I'm one of your regular customers, I should have the opportunity to book tables that are held back for loyal customers. That is the issue that got this topic going.

I agree with you that there is going to be an inherent sense of shock and awe in the minds of some customers who will want to try the "Next Bext Thing" as you describe it. That's a given. What isn't a given in my book, (but trust me, I realize it is the reality), and what I find disappointing, is that any top tier chef or restaurant who would just shrug off the fact that "It doesn't matter if there are some potential customers who are offended by the sloppy service, because the restaurant has more guests than it can accommodate anyway..."

You see, that speaks exactly to my earlier points that we are settling for something less that what we should expect and that is #1) a reservations system that works from day one, #2) everyone should expect a higher level of customer service. That means no potential customer is offended just because there are 350 people standing in line behind them. That attitude only waters down a commitment to good customer service. #3) A regular customer deserves to be given rewards for their patronage.

[oakapple]

In all due respect, I have to disagree with a couple of your points.  I think the acid test does come on day one.  If you choose to run with the thoroughbreds, (other chefs and restaurants in your class), you better come out of the gate quick or you'll be left behind.

I'm a little unsure whether you're stating a philosophy, or whether you're stating how you believe the industry actually operates. The restaurant business isn't a horse race, and a restaurant that comes out of the gate slowly isn't inevitably "left behind". If that were true, there would be no Momofuku Ssam Bar today.

What isn't a given in my book, (but trust me, I realize it is the reality), and what I find disappointing, is that any top tier chef or restaurant who would just shrug off the fact that "It doesn't matter if there are some potential customers who are offended by the sloppy service, because the restaurant has more guests than it can accommodate anyway..."

You may have misunderstood me. I have never heard of a restauranteur actually saying the words you have in quotes. I was suggesting, rather, that in the early days there is sometimes a crush of people eager to try the Next New Thing, and therefore as a practical matter it may not matter terribly that the reservation system isn't yet working perfectly. This is not the same thing as saying that the restaurant doesn't care whether it works.

[Nathan]

I find it absurd that anyone should be taking customer service advice from u.s. airlines.

I also find it completely not-analogous...not only do frequent fliers often only have one choice for the route and time they have to fly...they also don't care about the price since they're not the one paying for it.

this is also completely inapposite and has no bearing on this discussion.

[weinoo]

I also might add that an airline's choice to set aside, let's say, 1% of its seats for high value customers may actually translate to hundreds of seats a day...whereas at Ko, even 2 seats a day is almost 10% of their total.

[oakapple]

I find it absurd that anyone should be taking customer service advice from u.s. airlines.

←

There's at least one more way in which the comparison is totally irrelevant.

When a regular calls a restaurant at the last minute for a table, the restaurant is only too happy to accommodate them (if they possibly can). Indeed, many restaurants deliberately set seats aside for just that reason. When a regular calls an airline at the last minute for a seat, they are "rewarded" by paying a higher price than they would have paid for a seat reserved long in advance.

When a regular calls a restaurant to change their reservation time, the restaurant is only too happy to accommodate them (if they possibly can). When a regular calls an airline, they are "rewarded" by paying a change fee, ranging from $25-100.

[Fat Guy]

Whenever demand exceeds supply, some system of allocation needs to be employed. Momofuku Ko has chosen a random or persistence-based system of allocation. I believe the superior system of allocation would be to give priority to those who got the Momofuku enterprise to where it is today: the customers who have made it a successful business.

There seem to be the following objections to that proposition:

1. Objection: it's impractical, on account of the size of the restaurant. Answer: set aside a percentage of seats; no problem.

2. Objection: it will make Momofuku Ko into a private club. Answer: no, because only a percentage of seats would be set aside; newcomers would have a chance too.

3. Objection: the sense of entitlement inherent in the demand for special treatment is morally objectionable. Answer: repeat customers who don't expect special treatment are pushovers; they have every right to expect special treatment and, while it's polite, kind and upright to be appreciative of that special treatment it's still something that should be expected. Moreover, in a zero-sum system, those who gravitate towards businesses that give them special treatment are making the exact same choice as those who move away from businesses that don't.

4. Objection: it's the business owner's choice. Answer: yes, it is.

5. Objection: it's not necessary to offer priority in reservations, so long as you offer other forms of special treatment. Answer: you can't have those other forms of special treatment if you can't get in; reservations are fundamental.

[Fat Guy]

I find it absurd that anyone should be taking customer service advice from u.s. airlines.

←

There's at least one more way in which the comparison is totally irrelevant.

←

Of course it's relevant. These are the basic principles of customer service for successful businesses. Needless to say, an airplane is not a restaurant. I think David understands that. His point is broader; the airline information is just an illustration with which he's particularly familiar. But of course you guys knew that.

[David Ross]

I find it absurd that anyone should be taking customer service advice from u.s. airlines.

I also find it completely not-analogous...not only do frequent fliers often only have one choice for the route and time they have to fly...they also don't care about the price since they're not the one paying for it.

this is also completely inapposite and has no bearing on this discussion.

←

I think there are U.S. airlines that do provide good customer service and some of my examples speak to that. And although I am obviously in the minority here, I do think some of the customer service examples I provided cross-over to a discussion of customer service in a restaurant.

Earlier on this topic, Steven posed the question of regular customers vs. frequent customers as a part of the discussion of the new reservation system at KO. A subsequent discussion grew from that point and spoke about customer service and whether or not the loyal customer of a restaurant deserved extra recognition not given to the average restaurant customer.

I used the frequent flyer customer as an example of how our airline rewards our most loyal customers. I wasn't speaking so much to the issue of frequent fliers not having a choice of carriers, but more to the issue of how our business honors the loyalty of our best customers. I still think it is fair to look at an airline frequent flier program in comparison to how a restaurant treats its regular customers. At least it is the foundation for starting that discussion.

You can't lump all frequent fliers into one category and say that they don't care about the price of a ticket because they're not the one paying for it. Any number of frequent fliers are small business owners and they are in fact the passenger paying for the ticket. They have to watch the bottom line like anyone else. If we don't provide them good value at a fair price, we lose that customer. Is that not a fair comparison to the frequent customer of a restaurant? If you feel that the restaurant isn't rewarding your loyalty and giving you the quality you expect for the price you are paying, wouldn't you go elsewhere?

[Sneakeater]

2. Objection: it will make Momofuku Ko into a private club. Answer: no, because only a percentage of seats would be set aside; newcomers would have a chance too.

←

Two related problems.

If by setting aside seats each night they make it too difficult for the unconnected to ever get into Ko, the unconnected may stop trying. (I recognize that this is a problem even now; I'm suggesting that their might -- and I admit I don't know -- be a tipping point that hasn't been reached yet.)

Moreover, if it ever becomes apparent to the unconnected that scarce seats are being set aside, they may become sufficiently pissed off that they will stop trying.

Either of these things would increase the tendency toward Ko's becoming a private club.

I'd be curious to eat at Rao's, but I would never consider calling them to try to make a reservation.

[David Ross]

I also might add that an airline's choice to set aside, let's say, 1% of its seats for high value customers may actually translate to hundreds of seats a day...whereas at Ko, even 2 seats a day is almost 10% of their total.

←

Yes, that is the case if you are speaking in general terms. But our business is more complex than that when it comes to setting aside "seats."

We look at this issue in terms of the number of seats on the aircraft, the day of the week and the route flown.

So for example, we know that flights to Mexico tend to be largely made up of pleasure travel and we don't need to set aside as many seats for our frequent fliers.

On the other hand, in the market I fly daily, Seattle-Spokane, we know it is heavily made up of business travellers, many of whom fly almost as much as I do. We know the 7am flight is more preferable to our frequent fliers than the 930am flight and we adjust our ability to serve their needs accordingly-more preferable seats.

If a restaurant knows that most of their loyal diners want tables on a Saturday night at 7pm, can they not make adjustments in their reservations system to accomodate those requests, yet still meet their financial targets?

In my earlier example, I used a 37 seat, small, turboprop aircraft. If we set aside 3 seats at row one with extra leg room and 4 seats at the exit row at row 4, that is 18% of the total seats. Could Ko set aside 18% of its seats for loyal customers every night? Probably not. But using your example, could Ko's financial planner find a way to insure that setting aside 10% of their seats nightly would still allow the restaurant to be profitable AND reward their loyal customers. It could happen.

[Simon_S]

So FG, is it your contention that Ko will *have to* adopt the "FG" method in order to survive and flourish, or is it your contention that they *should* adopt your method in order to survive and flourish?

It's my understanding that you're arguing the former, and I'm still not sure I agree, even in light of the various well-made points in the thread. I am of the opinion that Chang can do what he has said he's going to do and have a full restaurant for many years to come.

Ultimately, even if you set aside 2 seats per night, enough people are going to be pissed off either way by the whole reservation process, whether regulars or newbies. I still think there are plenty of people left who will have no problem with the system, and whether you consider it "good" customer service or not, if there are enough people willing to forego reservations favouritism, then Chang will continue to have a business. It sounds to me from this thread that there are plenty of such people among the regulars, and since the non-regulars don't even come into this discussion, it's possible we're already seeing evidence contrary to your own opinion.

This is one of those rare occasions where "popular opinion" really can win the argument over industry insight, because popular opinion is all that's really at stake here. Do you believe there's no chance whatsoever that the egalitarian model COULD, in this case at least, be successful?

Edited March 18, 2008 by Simon_S (log)

[David Ross]

I find it absurd that anyone should be taking customer service advice from u.s. airlines.

←

There's at least one more way in which the comparison is totally irrelevant.

When a regular calls a restaurant at the last minute for a table, the restaurant is only too happy to accommodate them (if they possibly can). Indeed, many restaurants deliberately set seats aside for just that reason. When a regular calls an airline at the last minute for a seat, they are "rewarded" by paying a higher price than they would have paid for a seat reserved long in advance.

When a regular calls a restaurant to change their reservation time, the restaurant is only too happy to accommodate them (if they possibly can). When a regular calls an airline, they are "rewarded" by paying a change fee, ranging from $25-100.

←

I am not sure if you are a member of a frequent flier program and which airline it may be. So if you are a frequent customer and have had the experiences described above, if it were me I would be on the phone to that airlines frequent flier customer service people to voice my displeasure.

I can only speak about my company's program of loyalty for our best customers and the examples you mention above are not always the standard that we follow.

We do have many flights where we set aside seats on a daily basis for our MVP Customers. We are happy to accomodate them if we can with a seat. Just like the restaurant. It is not just a given that we will gouge them for the cost of a "walk-up" ticket at the last minute. We recognize that they are good customers and want to provide them exceptional service by selling that last minute seat at a reasonable price. Yes, that is a bit of a different pricing structure than you would find at a restaurant, but it isn't necessarily the exceptional high price you suggest.

While airlines have a "Change Fee" for passengers who make last minute changes to their reservations system, we rarely follow that procedure when it comes to our frequent fliers wanting to change to another flight. So like a good restaurant, we recognize the loyalty of the frequent customer and accomodate their last minute change of plans.

Back to my daily commute example. We fly every hour between Seattle and Spokane and we regularly have frequent customers walk up to the boarding podiums wanting to fly earlier. We accomodate them without taking a change fee because it is the right thing to do. The Ticket Agent doesn't have the time nor is it expected of them to collect a $25 change fee from the customer. This customer has paid far more in tickets over the long run and they deserve the courtesy. They might have bought a ticket on a later flight for a cheaper price but they want to fly at a peak business time, which would be priced higher, without the hassle of paying a change fee. We accomodate them because it's the right thing to do for our best passengers. Again, I think a similar comparison to Steven's earlier points on Ko, or any restaurant, rewarding it's best customers.

[Fat Guy]

So FG, is it your contention that Ko will *have to* adopt the "FG" method in order to survive and flourish, or is it your contention that they *should* adopt your method in order to survive and flourish?

←

None of the above. They should give priority reservations to regulars (which is of course not "my" system) because regulars deserve it. Sure, it's also good for business, but that's not my concern. In addition, I think preferential reservations treatment for regulars is most likely inevitable, in which case at least a few of us will have a good laugh.

It sounds to me from this thread that there are plenty of such people among the regulars, and since the non-regulars don't even come into this discussion, it's possible we're already seeing evidence contrary to your own opinion.

Maybe, but there are a few additional factors to consider: First, a lot of the regulars have been invited to previews so they have the luxury of defending the egalitarian system without yet having to feel its sting. Second, it's early on the timeline; again, it's entirely possible that the regulars will get sick of the 10am mouse-clicking game. Third, the various partners in the restaurant may eventually decide that a given reservation request is important enough to warrant bending the rules -- if they haven't already. So we'll have to see how the line holds.

[slkinsey]

How long before someone codes up a bot to make the reservation for them at precisely 10 AM?

[Daniel]

I just don't understand what the big deal is.. The guy wants to have a small restaurant with seating like this.. He is creating a buzz that is driving everyone crazy.. He is saving money on a reservationist and phone lines.. Let the man do what he wants..

This thread is bordering on creepily obsessive..

Edited March 18, 2008 by Daniel (log)

[Dryden]

Better this than at La Merenda in Nice - there, you have to make the reservation in person!

[oakapple]

Maybe, but there are a few additional factors to consider: First, a lot of the regulars have been invited to previews so they have the luxury of defending the egalitarian system without yet having to feel its sting.

I think there's also a lot of Chang-worship here: he thought of it, so it must be good.

Second, it's early on the timeline; again, it's entirely possible that the regulars will get sick of the 10am mouse-clicking game. Third, the various partners in the restaurant may eventually decide that a given reservation request is important enough to warrant bending the rules -- if they haven't already. So we'll have to see how the line holds.

←

I think the three possibilities are something different:

1) The "Momofuku chic" becomes self-sustaining, thanks to glowing four-star reviews. Two years from now, we'll still be talking about the 10:00 a.m. daily ritual, sustained by those who still haven't gotten in, and the regulars who feel that the clicking game is part of the allure.

2) The buzz dies down to normal levels, which means that people can get in fairly easily, without having to be ready to pounce at precisely 10:00. Whether Chang treats his regulars differently will become irrelevant, because getting into Ssam Bar will no longer be a big deal.

3) Chang admits that he screwed up, issues a mea culpa, and the rules change.

All of this assumes that the claims of egalitarianism are true, which they may very well not be.

[Sneakeater]

FG, are you saying we'll all eat crow if they give preferential reservations to a very few superregulars, or are you saying that'll happen when they start setting aside seats for ordinary regulars like, say, me?

If the former, I'm sure it's happening already. And I don't begrudge it.

If the latter, I think Oakapple's correct that, by the time that becomes possible for them, it won't matter.

I don't agree with your statement that those of us who were invited to F&F will eventually feel the "sting" of not being able to get easy access to Ko.

First, there are a lot of excellent restaurants in New York, so I don't see how not getting into this one is going to have much effect on my happiness. I've been able to live a fairly happy life without access to table service at Babbo.

Second, the foregoing is especially true when I can still get into Ssam Bar. Maybe this'll change over time, but for now, Ko and Ssam Bar simply aren't so distinct that Ssam Bar isn't a reasonable substitute. Even to the extent that Ko is better, Ssam Bar is still great enough to satisfy my craving for "that type of food."

Third, people apparently somehow are getting into Ko. I don't know how hard it's been, since I haven't tried. If it were important enough to me, I would.

Edited March 18, 2008 by Sneakeater (log)

[Fat Guy]

FG, are you saying we'll all eat crow if they give preferential reservations to a very few superregulars, or are you saying that'll happen when they start setting aside seats for ordinary regulars like, say, me?

If the former, I'm sure it's happening already.  And I don't begrudge it.

Chang has said "No phone. No favorites. No exceptions." If it turns out that there are exceptions, Chang's statement will be false. That would leave two options: come right out and announce a policy change, or continue to claim "no favorites" while actually playing favorites. Whether or not either of those scenarios makes anyone feel the need to eat crow is an open question.

If the latter, I think Oakapple's correct that, by the time that becomes possible for them, it won't matter.

I'm not sure that's an accurate restatement of Oakapple's point.

[Sneakeater]

That's the way I read possibilities Nos. 1 & 2 (although I can see how "possible" wasn't the best word for me to use):

1) The "Momofuku chic" becomes self-sustaining, thanks to glowing four-star reviews. Two years from now, we'll still be talking about the 10:00 a.m. daily ritual, sustained by those who still haven't gotten in, and the regulars who feel that the clicking game is part of the allure.

2) The buzz dies down to normal levels, which means that people can get in fairly easily, without having to be ready to pounce at precisely 10:00. Whether Chang treats his regulars differently will become irrelevant, because getting into Ssam Bar will no longer be a big deal.

←

[Sneakeater]

Chang has said "No phone. No favorites. No exceptions." If it turns out that there are exceptions, Chang's statement will be false. That would leave two options: come right out and announce a policy change, or continue to claim "no favorites" while actually playing favorites. Whether or not either of those scenarios makes anyone feel the need to eat crow is an open question.

←

Come on, though. Every restaurant plays favorites while denying it. I think we're dealing here with a question of scale and emphasis.

I don't expect Chang to deny preferential Ko reservations to someone who could do his business serious harm if alienated. I don't even consider giving such reservations to be a violation of "policy" if the policy is otherwise generally adhered to.

Edited March 18, 2008 by Sneakeater (log)