Lettuce Entertain You

[guajolote]

This kind of started on the Top 5 Chinese restaurants with these comments:

A.W. Brig

Ben Pao in Chicago?

Craig Camp

Is a restaurant like Ben Pao Chinese or some type of Oriental inspired blend? Lettuce Entertain You can be heavy on the theatre and light on food authenticity. I do enjoy Ben Pao by the way.

A.W.

Ben Pao is Chinese.

On Lettuce, I disagree with you partly...

Althou some of their restaurants probably arent wholly authentic..like Cafe Ba Ba Reeba and Scoozi some are tremendous and very true of the cuisine they represent...tru, Everest, Ambria come to mind immediately....

C.C.

Everest and Ambria are authentic in spite of Lettuce because they are the personal statements of Jean Joho and Gabino Sotelino. The Lettuce accountants leave them to their art. Outside of their restaurants Lettuce can get very 'cute' with their food. My question then is Ben Pao authentic or just theater? I am no expert on Chinese cuisine so I think this is a legitimate question. That said Ben Pao is a regular stop for me when I am in Chicago – although since Jackie Shen went to Red Light I tend to head there.

What do all of you think? I agree with Awbrig that Ambria and Everest are great. I also love Brasserie Jo. When the Corner Bakeries started opening I loved going there, but now the quality has slipped and they are overpriced. Maggianos seems to exist only because of their supersize portions. In general, if I can get a similar experience from a non-Lettuce restaurant I'll pick that over the Lettuce restaurant most times.

Edited March 26, 2003 by guajolote (log)

[awbrig]

Do you have a Lettuce card? They are awesome and its easy to rack up points for gift certificates...im bummed that Big Bowl is no longer part of the group though!

[Craig Camp]

Lettuce Entertain You is probably the most professional and structured restaurant factory in the United States – which means in the world. Build ‘em and sell ‘em.

You cannot include Everest and Ambria in the blend. They have always been treated as independent fiefdoms by Lettuce management. They are smart enough to understand that that chefs like Joho and Sotelino make a big PR statement so they leave them alone.

To understand the differences just eat at Brasserie Jo and try to believe that this food is created by the same man that creates genius at Everest. It is not the chef that is different it is the entire philosophy. The accountants and Lettuce bureaucrats run the Brasserie with predictable results.

I would rather eat interesting food than get points.

[Craig Camp]

I also love Brasserie Jo

The choucroute which should be the signature dish at this 'Alsatian' Brasserie is an embarrassment. On the other hand the mussels and the wine list are quite nice.

[Ron Johnson]

Just to balance out the thread, I'll say "against".

[cat lancaster]

If given a choice, I will only go to Lettuce restaurants when that is demanded by my dining companions. I generally prefer restaurants where there is a chef/owner who cares more about the food then the numbers.

That being said - even chef/owners have to care about the numbers too. They want to survive just like everyone else.

But in my eyes, Lettuce is a chain that focuses on numbers & marketing, not good/interesting/quality food.

Small example - a friend of mine who used to be the executive chef at Fox & Obel was up for a senior position with Lettuce. He did a total of 4 cooking tryouts for them with audiences from Rich to some of his VP's. On the last cooking interview he was to focus on seafood. He did four different dishes that were original and interesting.

They didn't give him the job. Their reason - the food was too interesting and what they were looking for was more of a Red Lobster type quality. They wanted to focus on the 20somethings who didn't care about food and wanted a trendy atmosphire. His food was more geared toward foodies and not the average young dining couple.

Cat in Chicago

[Craig Camp]

Strange! I thought as Lettuce Entertain You is the high profile name in the Chicago restaurant business that this thread would draw a big response.

Does this mean that Lettuce is out of fashion and no one cares anymore. Is Lettuce yesterday's news?

[=Mark]

Does this mean that Lettuce is out of fashion and no one cares anymore. Is Lettuce yesterday's news?

I like lettuce on my tuna sandwiches.

[awbrig]

Craig,

I started a thread on LEYE cards a long time ago, and I think it got one response...its just not that interesting of a topic for people to post about, I guess...

[Craig Camp]

Craig,

I started a thread on LEYE cards a long time ago, and I think it got one response...its just not that interesting of a topic for people to post about, I guess...

Maybe for good reason...

[guajolote]

Come on, you two really had it going on. As soon as I started a new thread it died.

Oh well.

TRU is a Lettuce restaurant too.

Anyone ever been to that place in Water Tower? It's supposed to be OK.

[Aurora]

Strange! I thought as Lettuce Entertain You is the high profile name in the Chicago restaurant business that this thread would draw a big response.

Does this mean that Lettuce is out of fashion and no one cares anymore. Is Lettuce yesterday's news?

It's not that LEY is yesterday's news, it's just that much of what is going on there is not news TO US -- yesterday or today. Everest, Ambria and Tru are the exceptions for reasons already discussed. Most of us have been-there-done-that, and we will continue to go back when we are overtaken by that pang for a stairway of caviar. There has not been much discussion of Everest and Ambria on the boards, but we have Tru'ed eGullet to death.

For LEY, which lives and dies on marketing, having several high-end "venues" allows them to have an interest in multiple levels of the dining spectrum. Rich Melman can lay claim to having high-profile chefs -- with television shows, cookbooks, and Beard nominations -- in his arsenal, and essentially, the sun will never set on Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises. Everest, Ambria, and Tru are top-rated restaurants. Here the LEY philosophy understandably takes a back seat. From a marketing perspective, they are left to do what they do without applying that telltale LEY touch. In these three examples, LEY must almost operate in reverse and hide all signs of corporate formula to attract the foodie demographic. There's a reason why none of us post about phenomenal experiences at places like Maggiano's, Ben Pao and Café Baba Reba (sp) to name a few. Those places tend to repel diners like us, because the experience is one of equation with a predictable end result. That is phenomenal to a lot of people, but our interest in food makes us more exacting (no, not snotty), and anticipatory of creativity, authenticity, and surprise. For the most part, LEY operates from a completely different perspective. In terms of what we categorize as an amazing dining experience, most serious foodheads won't leave many Lettuce Entertain You restaurants with more than an assurance of decent leftovers for tomorrow's lunch.

Because of our steadfast focus and undying love for food (not to be confused with our income brackets) and all that goes with it, we really aren't part of the LEY formula. We're in the mix, but we bear little resemblance to LEY's core representation. Still, Everest, Ambria and Tru are nice win-win consolation prizes for everybody, aren't they? In our dining, we seek out original, expertly, lovingly prepared cuisine that allows us to briefly get into the chef's head. When we dine seriously, the experience is humbling, unifying, and therefore elevating, and experiences like that can be found in all price ranges all over the world. The intensely food-focused experience is not what LEY is going for. Of course they want you to enjoy yourself and have a good time, and you will, but it won't go much beyond that in terms of delivering the type of gustatory adventure that we aim for and discuss in countless threads.

I certainly don't mean to disparage LEY. From a business perspective, it's a great gig. It works and will probably continue to do so for a very long time. OK, criticisms about one restaurant or another flying under the LEY umbrella aside, they turn out a good, consistent product. When dining at a LEY restaurant, one knows what they are going to get, and that expectation is generally met. End of story. Cat's post underscores a LEY philosophy and approach that is primarily focused on attracting the young, in-crowd. It's not about the awe inspiring multi-course meal, and that's OK. There's a reason why the enterprise is called Lettuce Entertain You. Rich Melman knows what he's doing, and he clearly knows who he's doing it for. He's packing in pouty-mouthed 20-somethings, tourists, and day-tripping suburbanites -- none of them leave unhappy. They return again and again and they bring friends. That will probably never make LEY the focus of intense discussion within the pages of Saveur, Food Arts, or F&W, but you can read all about it in Fortune, Business Week and Forbes. Forbes doesn't do much to energize my food lust, but it makes the business woman in me say "right on!"

Obviously, the LEYE card is great deal for the regulars. For the offerings that attract me, I don't frequent them enough for the card to be of any real benefit. Occasionally, I do head to Corner Bakery for the Mom's Chicken Salad and a few slices of olive chibatta. True, Corner Bakery is everywhere. I pass five of them on my way to work (including the one in the building where I work). Starting in August, the one going up in my bathroom will be open for business, so the opportunity to gain points abounds. But hey now? How much chicken salad can one girl eat even while taking a bath? Certainly not that much if a frequent dining program is my aim. I like to eat for reasons that extend far beyond acquiring gift certificates. As good as it is, there are endless offerings that eclipse the Mom's Chicken Salad. In those instances, LEYE points be dammed.

When Lettuce Entertain You really gives us something to write about, we write. For now, I guess we're waiting.

[Craig Camp]

So I was right. No one cares.

Still it is hard to ignore a company so completely dominating the Chicago dining scene. For better or worse Lettuce defines the fine dining scene and most of the other dining scenes in Chicago and Lettuce Entertain You represents a gigantic slice of what the outside world thinks of Chicago fine dining.

While we may be above them they cannot be ignored and are worthy of discussion. Lettuce Entertain You's marketing machine has driven more than one fine Chicago restaurant into extinction. So while it may not be cool to discuss them, it is a relevant issue to any serious Chicago diner - no matter how jaded.

Like it or not Lettuce Entertain You is dining in Chicago to most people - both in and out of town.

[Aurora]

Craig -- I think you're right, but I don't believe our reasons for not discussing Lettuce Entertain You are motivated by a sense of what is fashionable and what isn't. I also don't think it's a question of ignoring or discounting LEY, or considering them unworthy of discussion.

I will say, in answer to your original question, that eGullet members don't really discuss LEY because LEY doesn't offer many of the things that eGullet members like to discuss. Sorry for the oversimplification, but I think that's the truth. Lettuce Entertain You does not put on any pretense about the fact that it is a money-making business, and that seems to come before anything else. Of course all restaurants are businesses, but the money-making aspect gets overshadowed because the food comes first. Talk of LEY as a corporate enterprise always weighs more heavily in discussion, and the food-driven aspect is secondary. eGullet tends to be far more food-driven with all else being secondary.

LEY and its powerful grip are certainly relevant of discussion, but the way in which it is truly relevant (business first, food second) doesn't seem to inspire much on the boards.

Any in-depth eGullet discussion of the food industry from a business perspective is rare in general. If "Food Industry As Business" was a more aggressively approached topic, LEY would be up there.

It's a golden opportunity to start a new forum. Here's hoping that you and I are not the only ones discussing.

[indiagirl]

So I was right. No one cares.

No, I think it's an interesting thread. I just don't know anything about Chicago dining and so cannot comment on LEY. Besides the fact that it is a clever name!

However, a more general discussion of the idea of "restaurant companies" would indeed be an interesting thread, as mentioned above.

[Craig Camp]

Perhaps the interesting part of the Lettuce Entertain story is not Lettuce itself, but what it is doing to other creative restaurants. Lettuce takes such a big chunk out of the available customers that it does damage to the independent market in Chicago.

[Rail Paul]

Wasn't Rich Melman also a founder of Fuddrucker's in the early 1980s?

Whatever you want to say about his food, he can make money by the bushel crate!

[Craig Camp]

Wasn't Rich Melman also a founder of Fuddrucker's in the early 1980s?

Whatever you want to say about his food, he can make money by the bushel crate!

Over the years he has had to change to bigger boxes because the bushel crates won't hold it anymore.

[Rail Paul]

Talk of LEY as a corporate enterprise always weighs more heavily in discussion, and the food-driven aspect is secondary.  eGullet tends to be far more food-driven with all else being secondary. 

LEY and its powerful grip are certainly relevant of discussion, but the way in which it is truly relevant (business first, food second) doesn't seem to inspire much on the boards. 

Any in-depth eGullet discussion of the food industry from a business perspective is rare in general.  If "Food Industry As Business" was a more aggressively approached topic, LEY would be up there.

It's a golden opportunity to start a new forum.  Here's hoping that you and I are not the only ones discussing.

Aurora - This point has surfaced on several occasions during various eGullet threads. Food as a business doesn't have much sexiness for many readers, and it doesn't get much wind on eGullet.

Part of that may result from the focus on the purity of the food experience, all else is separate. Many diners don't really want to look behind the kitchen door, the only relevant interest is on your plate. I'd bet most diners have no more interest in butchering their own dinner as understanding the finances of the restaurant in which they are dining.

Paul

[indiagirl]

I guess there are really two parts to this debate:

What are restaurant corporations (henceforth termed as RC's) doing to local restaurant businesses?

What are RC's doing to the quality of food being served?

The former, I believe, is a discussion of social responsibility. There are a couple of chain restaurants on the Main St. of my smallish town. I refuse to contribute to their profit base. Also, three, perhaps four, of the restaurants on that same street are owned by the same "restaurant management" company and while not a chain, they are, I suspect, quite similar to LEY. Whether to eat at these places or not is a frequent point of discussion in my life - I have no idea how much conversation they would stimulate on eGullet.

The latter, now, I think would be much food for thought on eGullet! Do RC's affect the quality and creativity of the fine dining experience. And how?

[Steve Klc]

There's alot here, I want to thank all for contributing and prompting me to read the Heartland. I'll try to take the other side--the side not seemingly so sympathetic on this thread. You raise one interesting point Indiagirl when you try to link social responsibility to "restaurant corporations" and the effect on the local scene.

You say you refuse to contribute to their profit base--why? By doing so you are failing to reward companies who usually--usually--provide a little more security, better pay, better benefits and insurance, vacation time, cleaner safer work environments to their employees--than what I assume you classify as the other local restaurants--the mom and pop individually-owned small businesses. Where do think the abuses, the failure to pay taxes, the failure to adhere to reporting and INS standards are more likely to occur as far as employees--in a restaurant group and larger RC or in the small business? Answer--small business, at least from my limited personal experience. Who is more likely to be strapped for cash? Again, not the group or corporation. Who is more likely not to know what they are doing? Again, not the corporation or group.

One of the ways restaurants get to be "restaurant management groups" is they learn how to do it right for their customer base, with sustained interest over a period of time, and sustained sound financial accountability. Isn't this a good thing locally--virtually anywhere?

Aren't all the employees "local" anyway? Wouldn't the very first line of socially responsible thinking be the welfare and outlook of the labor pool and the jobs created as a result of this industry? And to get a better picture of that you'd have to get into things like employee loyalty, pay raises, promotion from within, etc. But then this would involve looking beyond the food on the plate and behind the kitchen door as Rail Paul says. I'm game if you are--I've seen immigrants treated as veritable indentured servants in local/individually-owned fine dining restaurants, with pay witheld and resident alien status used against them, with no SS or tax witheld, no respect for hours worked--why? Because the owner "could." I think everyone of these employees--all quite skilled, quite energetic and grateful for the opportunity to work--would have been better off in a restaurant group or an RC like Lettuce or in my area large restaurant groups like the Lebanese Taverna, Rio Grande, Austin Grill, etc.

I'm also really glad there are restaurant groups offering safe affordable consistent somewhat interesting food--at a better level--than was once available. Where systems and recipes and standards have stringently been worked out. Why is this necessarily seen in opposition to local individually owned restaurants? I've had excellent food in chains and inedible food in fine dining restaurants. I guess I just hesitate to equate or link the two in any way in terms of social responsibility.

I think we also have to be careful about even linking RC's with "fine dining." Most operate below the level of what most eGulleteers consider fine dining. But since no one has said it I will say it--as I've written elsewhere on the site: I think many restaurant groups, chains, franchises, corporations are doing a good job, a better job than most people think. Foodservice has been getting better, there is something to be said for corporate accountability which translates--sometimes--into better customer service and better treatment, better valuation of the guest experience.

Call me a sucker but rather than indifference, pretension or attitude, I really prefer having my water glass and iced tea refilled when it is empty. Guess where that happens more often to me? In chains and restaurant groups similar to Lettuce. There's something positive to be said for getting basic things right more consistently--and therein lies broad appeal.

[Rail Paul]

There's an article in today's Wall Street Journal today's touching on some of Steve Klc's points. The article discusses some of the most appreciated corporate benefits.

Adoption assistance, tuition reimbursement, assisted daycare, medical insurance help, pension plan, 401k, group auto insurance, all play a role in retaining and motivating employees. These benefits are unusual in smaller firms, and probably rare for most restaurant employees in smaller businesses. In addition, the security provided by sexual harassment policies / ombudspeople, promotional opportunities outside your current worksite, and formal review and development policies tend to be rare outside larger, more structured firms.

The real key, of course, is to find a mix which allows your people to grow, to innovate, and to produce the solid profits which give others the incentive to step up and do more. Lettuce seems to have done that

[nerissa]

While I would agree with Steve's assertion that service(filling water glasses, checking on your meal) is often better in corporate owned restaurants, I wouldn't say that just because it is corporate owned, the owner can't or wont' cheat/treat poorly his employees.

It is often up to the individual...the general manager, the owner.

Anybody read Barbara Ehrenlick's Nickled and Dimed in America...where she talks about her experiences working for large un-named chain restaurants?

Yes, there is a difference between Shoney's and Maggiano's, in terms of prices and food... but, what else?

[bilrus]

Isn't there something to be said for restaurants that bridge the gap between the Olive Garden's / Chi Chis / Friday's of the world and 'fine dining'? Being from DC I am thinking about the types of places that Steve Klc mentioned - Rio Grande, the Clydes restaurants, etc which I assume are similiar to the LEYE places. Places with better ingredients, preparation, etc (and at slightly higher prices). It is more realisitc for a Friday's customer to go to one of these places and learn to like that and appreciate the difference and then maybe branch out to the fine dining level, rather than jumping straight into the fine dining establishments. It bears pointing out that alot of people find fine dining a little intimidating.

[sammy]

Is LEY really that much different than what Emeril, Charlie Palmer or Jean-Georges are attempting to do? LEY has a name for their company as opposed to being identified with a name chef.