1880, Bentley Hotel

[Conor]

Just as I dont believe restaurants should be judged on their specially priced du jour lunch menu rather than their a la carte menu, I also do not think restaurants should be judged on a 50% discount menu booked through lastminute.com.

[Scott]

Just as I dont believe restaurants should be judged on their specially priced du jour lunch menu rather than their a la carte menu, I also do not think restaurants should be judged on a 50% discount menu booked through lastminute.com.

are you saying what I think you are??

that Menu & promotion customers don't matter????

I bloody well hope not.

Given the standards I experienced on more than one occasion, this conceit should be filed away under "ill-advised"

[tony h]

Just as I dont believe restaurants should be judged on their specially priced du jour lunch menu rather than their a la carte menu, I also do not think restaurants should be judged on a 50% discount menu booked through lastminute.com.

get real - of coruse they're judged.

its a loss leader the point of which is to entice them back to pay full whack

[Matthew Grant]

Just as I dont believe restaurants should be judged on their specially priced du jour lunch menu rather than their a la carte menu, I also do not think restaurants should be judged on a 50% discount menu booked through lastminute.com.

Are you saying that the 50% discount menu is not as good as the 100% menu. If this is the case surely it is a different menu and shouldn't be advertised as a discount. If you're getting a 50% discount it should be on exactly the same kind of service and food as those paying 100%. Otherwise the promotion should be for "a cheap meal with different food at 1880"

I think your comments were ill advised Connor, I hope the backlash from that comment isn't too severe! I can see the headlines now "Manager says 50% discount customers can't expect good food at 1880"

Edit disclosure : Amended Conors title

Edited September 3, 2004 by Matthew Grant (log)

[Scott]

Just as I dont believe restaurants should be judged on their specially priced du jour lunch menu rather than their a la carte menu, I also do not think restaurants should be judged on a 50% discount menu booked through lastminute.com.

get real - of coruse they're judged.

its a loss leader the point of which is to entice them back to pay full whack

BLH,

the point of a loss leader, is because you're not getting enough punters in at full whack.

at which point you are entirely correct.

[endless autumn]

I was planning to visit 1880 in any case and the fact that there was a lastminute.com discount was coincidental.

It was clear that we weren't receiving exactly the same food as I had read about in reviews and on these boards and that I had seen on the menus outside the restaurant but I accepted that if I had chosen to be a bit of a cheapskate I could expect a different meal.

What I don't think anyone should expect (or tolerate) is a series of dishes which are not just different but inferior, which Conor's comments tacitly admit.

Of course I can judge the restaurant on the food I was given: in the most minimal sense, we have certainly reached the conclusion that you shouldn't order a special offer menu at 1880 as it will not show the kitchen in its best light.

I don't see the point in a kitchen turning out anything which is not of the highest possible standard as it will only serve to piss the customers off.

[Matthew Grant]

Another problem I have is that if 50% off = different then it is not 50% off!

Edited September 3, 2004 by Matthew Grant (log)

[Romaney O'Malley]

Wholly agree with Matthew. 50% off should equal 50% off - and that means what you would normally be paying if you weren't there on a deal.

If you are getting a different menu - then call it that - 'special set menu' or some such.

Incidentally - Mr O and I took up an offer at Putney Bridge through toptable which was so reasonable we couldn't resist, and whilst I expected not to be choosing from the a la carte menu I certainly didn't expect the food to be inferior - and it wasn't it was superb.

Conor - I am looking forward to visiting 1880 and have heard great things but am disappointed at your response - I hope you can understand the reaction to your comments.

[oldschooltie]

Just as I dont believe restaurants should be judged on their specially priced du jour lunch menu rather than their a la carte menu, I also do not think restaurants should be judged on a 50% discount menu booked through lastminute.com.

proper restaurants should be prepared to be judged on everything that they provide to their customers.

50% off deals should apply to the price, not the quality.

[Scott]

I was planning to visit 1880 in any case and the fact that there was a lastminute.com discount was coincidental.

It was clear that we weren't receiving exactly the same food as I had read about in reviews and on these boards and that I had seen on the menus outside the restaurant but I accepted that if I had chosen to be a bit of a cheapskate I could expect a different meal.

What I don't think anyone should expect (or tolerate) is a series of dishes which are not just different but inferior, which Conor's comments tacitly admit.

Of course I can judge the restaurant on the food I was given: in the most minimal sense, we have certainly reached the conclusion that you shouldn't order a special offer menu at 1880 as it will not show the kitchen in its best light.

I don't see the point in a kitchen turning out anything which is not of the highest possible standard as it will only serve to piss the customers off.

Frankly It's just bang out of order to make an offer, and then criticise people for taking it up. which is plainly what is happening here.

Michael Flaherty / Ryanair logic at it's best here - for that price what did you expect?

I am of the opinion that many people hesitate to take up pre-theatre / early bird offers or other discounts for fear that they will not be treated as well as other customers. Actually, much has been written in Caterer over the years on this very subject.

I find it greatly offensive, that Conor would try to mitigate your concerns by suggesting that as it was on offer you had to temper your expectations.

Matthew's point is absolutely correct, though you wonder what precisely is being reduced by 50% - Price/standards/expectations/service? one or all?

If I breathe deeply for a moment, and give Conor the benefit of the doubt I suspect he did not overtly mean his comments to be so demeaning, but perhaps they give insight to what he and his team really think deep down.

[Andy Lynes]

Playing devils advocate - I think its reasonable to assume that if you are getting a tasting menu at a restaurant of the quality of 1880 for £22.50, you can expect the menu to be somewhat amended from the usual offering. But maybe the menu should have been published online or made clear at the time of booking.

When I was in New York last year, it was restaurant week and many places were offering a set menu for around $20. I spoke to Danny Meyer (clang! - name dropping ahoy) who said (and I'm paraphrasing wildly here) that it can be a difficult time for the trade with people who rarely eat out wanting to get every last penny's worth of value , demanding glasses of wine for free when its not part of the offer for example.

His approach however was not to change the food or severly limit the customer's choice, but to show off the restaurant at its best in order to bag the one or two customers who really appreciate the place, will keep coming back and tell their friends what a wonderful restaurant it is.

[Scott]

Andy,

for me, the problem is that you're not really playing devils advocate - what you say is entirely reasonable.

It was conor who brought up the subject of the promotion, and the required attitudes to accompany it. Restaurant week in NY is like a better, more refined version of the FT offer each year. No one is claiming it's anymore than a good value open house in either case.

When you offer a 50% off promotion, I don't think it's reasonable to then require the customer to read between the lines to get at what you really mean - and then criticise them for misunderstanding!!!!

Moreover, I don't really understand the point Conor is making from a technical standpoint. Surely you should expect the same standard of cooking in a cheaper menu, just less pricey ingredients. I don't see where lower standards of execution and concern fit into the equation.

Bottom line, he made a stupid comment without thinking - it happens. My issue is the underlying attitude that this reflects.

[Jon Tseng]

To be fair I think Conor trying to make a genuine point which was that food so-so vs. expectations of nine-course gastronomic extravaganza.

As is often the case this comes down to semantics. If the offer was for half price on the normal menu crit is unjustified as food should be as good as normal. anything otherwise reflects badly on professionalism of outfit.

If the offer was for a special cut price menu a la all those bloody ft lunch for a fiver deals Conor has a geniune point about expectations perhaps being set a little to high by the diner.

Personally I always thought those cheapo special menus are designed to be as horrific as possible in order to force bargain-hunting diners onto the a la carte (they ALWAYS have salmon and ALWAYS have goats cheese!) ;-)

J

PS have dined at 1880 on half price lastminute offer in past and been very happy with the food and service (thought professionalism was commendable as we were blatantly cheapskates and weren't ordering any wine) - had the Chef Turner Surprise Menu that time

[oldschooltie]

Playing devils advocate - I think its reasonable to assume that if you are getting a tasting menu at a restaurant of the quality of 1880 for £22.50, you can expect the menu to be somewhat amended from the usual offering. But maybe the menu should have been published online or made clear at the time of booking.

Agree completely.

We had the lastminute deal and weren't disappointed in the slightest at getting a different menu - it was well designed, beautifully executed and the service fine. Having been a satisfied customer (both for the cheap deals and full whack stuff), I'm a bit disappointed by the attitude that punters should have to put up with something that the restaurant itself seems to be prepared to regard as second best (or worse).

When (if ever) they're fully booked months in advance, perhaps they can afford to be so snooty but, even then, probably not too smart to publicise it so widely.

[Conor]

All weekend i regretted the comment i made!!!

But i think it stemmed from two directions.

If everyone is totally honest they know that if you are buying the du jour menu at a restaurant it will not be as good as the a la carte. It does not incorporate all the ingredients that fit on the full menu and also the cuts of meat/fish are different. This is why inspectors do not eat du jour/pre theatre menus as opposed to the a la carte. In any industry you know that if you are paying a far lower price for a product there has to be a reason why. Maybe i'm the only one being honest here.

The other direction that made me make an unsubstantiated comment like i did is a bit of pride and hurt! I do not like my restaurant criticised just as anyone else doesn't like their work questioned. When i read comments about there being too many staff so we had human tables, it is annoying. These are called commis waiters and are used by every restaurant in the world. My sommelier has been criticised for his wine list while no one has been of aware of the constraints that we created the wine list under. This is of course not waht people should be aware of, but then again, noirmally people aren't writing half baked restaurant reviews on the back of one visit tryng to be A A Gill.

I do agree with the common theme i have provoked, if you are paying a price, whatever price, you should get the standards at the same level as "normal". But i honestly feel that 1880 provided the same standards on that occassion.

As a footnote, i am a little bit dissapointed with some people for the reaction to my comment. I am not stupid enough to post a commen to incinuate that standards were lowered to fit to price but yet still i expected my response to provoke a few questions but still i am suprised at the way some people have taken hold of it and created an incident of this extreme.

[Suzi Edwards]

As a footnote, i am a little bit dissapointed with some people for the reaction to my comment. I am not stupid enough to post a commen to incinuate that standards were lowered to fit to price but yet still i expected my response to provoke a few questions but still i am suprised at the way some people have taken hold of it and created an incident of this extreme.

←

[Jon Tseng]

As an aside, I find going cheap and ordering tap water is an excellent test of service in post restaurants. The best places handle it with grace and charm e.g. Capital plenty of ice and lemon and constantly kept topped up.

cheerio

J

[Scott]

~ poorly expressed ~

Edited September 7, 2004 by Scott (log)

[Conor]

the point of a loss leader, is because you're not getting enough punters in at full whack.

For once Scott you are exactly right. The idea of the promotion was to attract diners during August which is a historically quiet month in London for virtually all restaurants. I only allocated 3 or 4 tables per night and it was to provide more of an atmosphere for regular guests.

And again i reiterate the standards were not and are not lowered for lower paying guests.

[Andy Lynes]

I bumped into Andrew Turner at the recent Harprer's awards and he told me that, after a year of less than enthusiastic comments about the current 1880 dining room, he will soon be getting a brand new, ground floor restaurant that he feels sure will be more to his customer's tastes. I'll keep you informed of developments as I get them.

[howardlong]

Went there for the first time a couple of weeks ago on a Friday night for dinner.

Called up at lunchtime to make a reservation, and I was repsonded to with a sharp intake of breath, and 6:30pm was all that was offered - so I took it.

Arrived at 6:30pm, and guess what? There was only one other person in the restaurant. By 10:00pm when I left, only four tables including mine had been used.

The tasting menus all looked good, but I took the Sommelier's surprise menu. Although nice enough, I found the food itself rather single-dimensioned: like a tin of Ronseal, 'does what it says on the tin', or on the menu in this case. But nothing really made me excited. BTW, the Sommelier's menu merely seemed to take a selection of taster dishes from the other tasting menus.

Although I took the Sommelier's selections with the menu, I did take a look at their wine list. It has a good selection in the low to mid range. Booze markup is average. Not much selection in the upper ranges, and if you're a sweetie lover, beware there's no Sauternes on there at all.

Bread selection was good - loads of bacon in the bacon bread!!!

Cheese trolley selection, although lauded up by the waiting staff, was OK, but not _that_ great.

Still, £100 for the eight or so courses including wine was not excessive, although I'd rather spend another £25 and do the same in Le Gavroche.

Service was a bit strange. They were definitely trying, but it was far from seemless and certainly not at all polished: for example, one dish arrived but there was no cutlery.

The Sommelier was a strange chap indeed. Although not patronising or arrogant, he seemed rather aloof and disconnected. Certainly trying to hold a conversation with him was not going to happen. Still, his selections were not bad, but again, not a patch on what Le Gavroche could offer for a bit more.

In short, it was OK, but I'd rather spend my money elsewhere.

Cheers, Howard

[Gary Marshall]

I bumped into Andrew Turner at the recent Harprer's awards and he told me that, after a year of less than enthusiastic comments about the current 1880 dining room, he will soon be getting a brand new, ground floor restaurant that he feels sure will be more to his customer's tastes. I'll keep you informed of developments as I get them.

←

sounds like his bosses disagreed, you've made the news page of restaurant mag with turner saying it's going to be a 'deep clean', whatever that entails.

cheers

gary

[Andy Lynes]

I was quite amused about that, although when Restaurant magazine phoned me I didn't realise they were going to run the story in quite that way and quote me as saying that 1880 is "quite an ugly room." Sorry chef!

We'll just have to see how this develops as, although I'd quoffed a fair bit of free Moet by the time I spoke to Turner, I was still in full use of all my faculties and it wasn't until a bit later that I smashed a glass and managed to spill champagne all over another guest. All I can say in my defence is that I wasn't even as remotely drunk as one or two other people that night. But we'll gloss over that part shall we?

[Suzi Edwards]

what andy failed to add was that tracy emin and oliver reed were on the guest list as well...

[Matthew Grant]

Now I always enjoyed Tracey Emin's art but taking a dead man to a party is taking things a step too far

Incidentally Tracey is easing off the booze as well!