Guide Michelin comes to NY

[oakapple]

It's my opinion that anyone who would count Michelin arrogant for giving out fewer stars than the New York Times simply doesn't understand the Michelin star system.

I'm not sure if that's in reference to my post, but I don't think anyone has said Michelin is arrogant. You are absolutely correct - the Times and Michelin systems are just different. However, as FG observed, the NYT's system was designed for the New York market; Michelin's wasn't, and past experience suggests it hasn't worked especially well anywhere but in France.

How many restaurants are listed in the Michelin Guide Rouge for Edinburgh? Because a mere listing without a star - with the possible exception of some hotel restaurants - is a recommendation from Michelin. I've sometimes found that restaurants that were merely listed without stars in Michelin guides were quite good.

Oh, there are quite a few of them, and I agree that you can't go too far wrong eating at any of the restaurants listed. But I question the utility of a system that assigns a single star to two restaurants, and leaves the rest an undifferentiated scrum.

[Pan]

It's my opinion that anyone who would count Michelin arrogant for giving out fewer stars than the New York Times simply doesn't understand the Michelin star system.

I'm not sure if that's in reference to my post, but I don't think anyone has said Michelin is arrogant.

Sorry for the nebulousness: The first part of my post was in response to Fat Guy's remark that there would quickly be accusations of "arrogance" on the part of Michelin.

As for your point about the "scrum," it makes a lot of sense for residents, but may be less relevant to travellers, who may be interested in the idea that Michelin supposedly judges all restaurants around the world (or at least in their areas of coverage) according to the same standard.

[bourdain]

This should be interesting--if only to see the Zagat Family reaction.

In Europe, to gain even one star is quite an accomplishment. Zagat, on the other hand, rates hundreds of restaurants, from ADNY to Gray's Papaya. To compare Michelin and Zagat is really apples to oranges---they are doing different things, for very different audiences.

I think you miss my point.

Look for some very aggressive "competition" .

[jhlurie]

The French restaurants will likely do well relative to anyone else. Then again, we may be in for a surprise. It will be interesting to see how they handle restaurants like Craft, gramercy Tavern and Blue Hill.

I wonder more what they will do about top shelf "ethnic" restaurants. And by that, I mean things as high-profile as Babbo or Diwan. Or for that matter, Blue Smoke. Sure, they aren't likely to get a star, but will they even be listed or are they below the notice of Michelin?

[marcus]

I wonder more what they will do about top shelf "ethnic" restaurants. And by that, I mean things as high-profile as Babbo or Diwan. Or for that matter, Blue Smoke. Sure, they aren't likely to get a star, but will they even be listed or are they below the notice of Michelin?

I think that the problem only applies to starred restaurants, they are quite willing to list ethnic restaurants without stars. If you look at the guides to Paris and London, you will see many examples of Asian, Italian, and other ethnic restaurants. In London they even give a star to a Chinese and 2 Indian restaurants as well as to the London branch of Nobu. Where the polyglot problem really manifests itself is with multi-starred places. Although I also find that, though they will give one star, they don't have a process for doing it that they are quite comfortable with, and they tend to jerk these ratings around quite a bit.

[Fat Guy]

Sure, places like ADNY and Per Se are super-luxe and slow-paced, like the three-stars in France, but they're not really part of the New York scene.

Please elaborate.

They are branch offices of out-of-town restaurants, operating in a manner that pursues the Michelin three-star style rather than the home-grown New York four-star style. They don't strike me as incremental improvements over Jean-Georges, Le Bernardin, et al., but rather occupy, I think, a separate category.

[Fat Guy]

I haven't actually counted, but my impression is that among eGullet posters that visit France regularly and frequent the starred restaurants, there has been a strong consensus that Michelin has yielded overall the best ratings.

The consensus is that Michelin yields overall the best ratings for France, where every relevant restaurant is French and where the fine-dining restaurants have some sort of intuitive or perhaps explicit understanding of the items on the Michelin checklist so they pursue those items aggressively in order to achieve given star rankings. Michelin's ratings of restaurants in New York, however, if performed with the same set of assumptions, probably won't seem relevant to anyone outside of France. New York is significantly more "foreign" to France than any of the countries that are now covered by the guides. Transplanting that system to the US will be, I think, a very difficult exercise. And at a time when the top French chefs are looking to the US for inspiration, it seems particularly bizarre to have a French ranking system attempt to enter this market.

Moreover, there is no restaurant-reviewing equivalent of the New York Times in Paris. There are restaurant reviewers in France, but they don't have the kind of relevance they have here. Michelin has never had to compete head-on with serious reviews that actually explain their reasoning and with an entrenched establishment of reviewers, nor has it ever had to enter a market already controlled by Zagat. So Michelin may very well be flanked by the reviewers (who can claim greater depth) on one side and Zagat (which can claim greater breadth) on the other.

It also strikes me as impossible to imagine that the US media and consumers will sit silently for decades without questioning Michelin's methodology. That top-secret shit just won't play here. The Michelin people will be relentlessly hounded for accountability in a way they can't imagine.

[Fat Guy]

It's my opinion that anyone who would count Michelin arrogant for giving out fewer stars than the New York Times simply doesn't understand the Michelin star system.

The shallow charge of arrogance -- "They gave such low ratings to our restaurants, those arrogant French bastards!" -- can easily be dismissed as ignorant.

The deeper charge of arrogance -- that it is arrogant to rate our restaurants on a scale designed for France and French restaurants -- is a bit more difficult to rebut.

[Louisa Chu]

Essex House/ADNY might be in a class ALMOST by itself but it is NOT regarded within the organization as a BRANCH of anything - it is its own restaurant.

Who else thinks it would be fun if Le Guide Rouge - New York et Environs - were first published only in French?

[Pan]

Who else thinks it would be fun if Le Guide Rouge - New York et Environs - were first published only in French?

That would be hysterical!

[marcus]

Who else thinks it would be fun if Le Guide Rouge - New York et Environs - were first published only in French?

That would be hysterical!

All Michelin red guides are published in the native language of the country under review. There are multi-lingual explanations of the symbols, which are the real language of the guide, at the beginning.

[Pan]

I thought Michelin had a standard set of languages for all regions. French, Italian, English, German, Spanish, Japanese, or something like that. No?

[marcus]

Moreover, there is no restaurant-reviewing equivalent of the New York Times in Paris. There are restaurant reviewers in France, but they don't have the kind of relevance they have here. Michelin has never had to compete head-on with serious reviews that actually explain their reasoning and with an entrenched establishment of reviewers, nor has it ever had to enter a market already controlled by Zagat. So Michelin may very well be flanked by the reviewers (who can claim greater depth) on one side and Zagat (which can claim greater breadth) on the other.

7.

I think that the importance of the New York Times and its restaurant reviews are overstated. When the NYT compiles its restaurant listings into a book, which is the relevant comparison to Michelin, it doesn't sell very well. The NYT hasn't reviewed a number of its 4 star restaurants in years and years. Most NYT reviewed restaurants are reviewed only once, period. Despite the fact that some restaurants aren't reviewed more than once every 18 months by Michelin, its still far better than the NYT, and Michelin stated that 3 star restaurants are visited at least 12 times a year.

I would say that Figaro and Le Monde are more active and do more and better restaurant reviewing than the NYT. Zagat is an inferior product and ripe for the taking.

In my view, the US will be a very open and welcoming market for the Michelin red guide, because it will fill a void. The US is probably the only country that Michelin has entered where it isn't facing a strong national indigenous restaurant guide. The Good Food Guide in the UK, Gourmantour and another in Spain, Gambero Rosso and Espresso in Italy. We have nothing equivalent in the US that is serious and respected. In France itself there is Gault Millau, Bottin Gourmand, and others. Zagat is a joke by comparison.

[marcus]

I thought Michelin had a standard set of languages for all regions. French, Italian, English, German, Spanish, Japanese, or something like that. No?

Each red guide is written in only one language, for example, the UK guide listings are in English. However, its really not necessary to be able to read the listings because the majority of the important information is conveyed in symbols and numbers. The symbols are explained at the beginning of the book in a variety of languages, French, German, English, Spanish, Italian, I don't recall seeing Japanese.

This is different than the Green Guides, which have significant textual content, and are published in multiple language editions. You can buy the French edition or the English edition, etc.

[mongo_jones]

reviewers and food critics may have dumped on adny for all the reasons fatguy outlines but the more pertinent question may be "what has the paying public's response been?" i think we need to separate the investments and anxieties of food-writers, who may be suspicious of methodologies of particular publications, especially one with the weight of michelin, from the interests of potential customers (who i assume already patronize michelin when they go abroad). i suspect the average customer at the top restaurants in new york already subscribes to the ideology that sustains michelin.

that being said, points raised about the ethnocentrism of the michelin guide are probably valid--i would ask to what extent the new york times star-system is innocent of similar practices. how many "ethnic" restaurants get 3 or 4 stars from the ny times? i don't know the answer to this question, it is a genuine one.

[Fat Guy]

i suspect the average customer at the top restaurants in new york already subscribes to the ideology that sustains michelin.

Were that the case, there would be more restaurants in New York like ADNY and Per Se. Yet New York hasn't got a single home-grown restaurant in that category. I suspect the average customer at the top restaurants in New York is firmly in the Zagat camp, and that the above-average customer at the top restaurants in New York has zero use for a New York Michelin guide and would much rather read reviews than unsupported symbols.

[mongo_jones]

and yet home-grown new yorkers sell adny out every night, correct? and will likely do the same for per se as well?

as for my comments about already existing convergences: i was thinking more of the placing of french food and french notions of "fine dining" at the top of the eating out pyramid. do you think the folks who shell out humongous bucks to eat at adny would shell out as much for a chinese or thai restaurant? how many non-french/derived restaurants are there at the top of the nyc food scene? i'm not a new yorker and thus likely uninformed but i can only think of nobu, and that's not exactly a traditional japanese restaurant either.

returning to michelin: my suggestion is that the average sassy new yorker likely to take offense to some jerry lewis loving frenchmen telling them which nyc restaurants are the best is not eating at adny (or even a few steps below) anyway; that there's enough aspirational brand-recognition of michelin that lots of yuppies will go for it.

but i suppose michelin's target audience isn't just the money-bags who eat at the starred restaurants, right? they'll need to appeal to regular folks too--and here too i don't think they'll live or die by their treatment of the top places; most regular folks can't afford to eat there anyway. if they are interested in these people (since there's more of them, they'll buy the most product) they'll need to displace zagat not the nytimes in their heads. this they may or may not be able to do--time will tell soon enough--but where some of their possible success with a part of their audience may be due to franco-philia i doubt any possible failure with the larger regular market will be due to franco-phobia or anything like that. i don't think people likely to buy the michelin guides get worked up about freedom fries. i don't think too many of those people even buy the zagat.

edit to add:

the above-average customer at the top restaurants in New York has zero use for a New York Michelin guide and would much rather read reviews than unsupported symbols.

why can't they do both?

Edited May 5, 2004 by mongo_jones (log)

[Fat Guy]

I think that the importance of the New York Times and its restaurant reviews are overstated.  When the NYT compiles its restaurant listings into a book, which is the relevant comparison to Michelin, it doesn't sell very well.  The NYT hasn't reviewed a number of its 4 star restaurants in years and years.  Most NYT reviewed restaurants are reviewed only once, period.  Despite the fact that some restaurants aren't reviewed more than once every 18 months by Michelin, its still far better than the NYT, and Michelin stated that 3 star restaurants are visited at least 12 times a year.

Michelin doesn't review restaurants. Whatever substantive comments might be made based on the inspection visits are kept secret. For some reason, European audiences are willing to accept that. Some Americans with a when-in-Rome attitude accept it in Europe as well. (I'd be interested to know the numbers, though, given that my wife's guidebook to shopping for furniture in North Carolina has a substantially better Amazon sales rank than the Michelin Red Guide for France.)

I find it hard to believe, however, that Americans will accept that method with respect to New York restaurants, where there is such an information-rich food media already in place. Maybe if the inspectors were known to the public and eminently qualified, maybe if the comments were expanded to include actual reasoning, maybe if Michelin could create a perception that it has embraced the local restaurant scene on its own terms . . . maybe under those circumstances the guide could enter the market with an enthusiastic reception. But that would involve Michelin rejecting all the fundamental elements of its system.

I don't see how the New York Times guidebook is relevant, except to show how hard it is to compete with Zagat. Whether or not the Times publishes or sells guidebooks, the reality is that New Yorkers speak in terms of New York Times stars. Not just eGulleters, but also the mother-in-law in Connecticut can be heard to say "It got three stars from the Times." Getting people to switch from a familiar and accepted system to "It got two forks and spoons and a little Michelin-man head" seems like a challenge on the order of getting a leopard to change his spots.

[Fat Guy]

and yet home-grown new yorkers sell adny out every night, correct? and will likely do the same for per se as well?

Lord knows I love ADNY, but it has not resonated with the New York fine-dining population at large. Nor is it selling out every night. I think Per Se will do better, in part because Keller has some New York street cred and in part because it's at least an American restaurant (and there are several other parts as well). But of course it's too early to tell. Either way, I see Per Se as a restaurant operating outside the standard New York system.

the above-average customer at the top restaurants in New York has zero use for a New York Michelin guide and would much rather read reviews than unsupported symbols.

why can't they do both?

They can. The question is why will they bother? What informational value will Michelin offer to an already-knowledgeable New York diner? The already-knowledgeable New York diner derives heavy informational value from the Times reviews, even from the ones with which he disagrees. That same diner finds tremendous convenience in the Zagat guide's layout. Where does Michelin fit in?

[Pan]

that being said, points raised about the ethnocentrism of the michelin guide are probably valid--i would ask to what extent the new york times star-system is innocent of similar practices. how many "ethnic" restaurants get 3 or 4 stars from the ny times? i don't know the answer to this question, it is a genuine one.

A search for All Restaurants, All Locations, All Prices, 3 Stars or better, All Meals on the New York Times website produced 43 results.

Aquavit is Scandinavian - sort of, anyway.

Babbo is Italian.

Biltmore Room is "Asian," but

The chef, Gary Robins...shows himself a citizen of the world.

Bolo is Spanish.

Danube is "East European, German."

Fiamma Osteria is Italian.

Honmura An is the first Japanese listing, by alphabetical order.

Later, Kuruma Zushi Restaurant appears.

L'Impero is another Italian place.

Next Door Nobu and Nobu both make the list.

Patria is listed as "Latin American."

Of course, there's the infamous Spice Market.

Sugiyama and Sushi Yasuda are next to each other in alphabetical order.

They are followed by Tabla, described as "New American, Indian."

The rest of the listings are "French," "New American," "Seafood," etc.

If we discount the idea of any European styles being considered "ethnic" in New York nowadays, we're left with the strikingly prominent representation of Japanese restaurants in the 3-star category.

I'd note, though, that when I restrict my search to 4-stars only, everything disappears except five French restaurants: Alain Ducasse NY, Bouley, Daniel, Jean Georges, and Le Bernardin. Perhaps Bouley may lose its 4-star rating, but it seems like a real possibility that Per Se may be awarded 4 stars. I wonder how Bruni will treat Italian restaurants in New York, given his years of residence in Italy, but that should probably be discussed elsewhere, or better, we can simply wait and see.

[Bux]

A lot of good stuff has already been said. I think Marcus comes closest to making many points I could support. I think there may be a few things I can try to add from my perspective of losing considerable faith in Michelin in light of recent revelations of just how often (not often, not necessarily every year) all restaurants including top restaurants are visited in France, and from the perspective of someone who's been traveling more in Spain than in France for the past several years and comparing the Michelin guide to the competition in a country mutually foreign to Michelin and me.

Michelin has grown over the one hundred some odd years of its existence, but it started out as, and still is, primarily a guide for travelers. That's inherent in its attitude and in its structure. Sure it's used by locals, but that's not the impetus for its being. It has always been as important to me as a place to find a lunch stop or hotel on a road trip on a day between the starred dining rooms, as it was in planning an itinerary of the stars. Many of us forget that and speak of Michelin restaurants as if it meant haute cuisine.

Michelin reacted too late to GaultMillau's early championship of nouvelle cuisine, and in my opinion has over reacted. I believe it is far easier for a young creative chef to get Michelin's attention and a star than it is for a highly talented chef working in a more traditional idiom. Someone such as Dufresne should get their attention quickly. Soy sauce, balsamic vinegar and lemon grass are no longer things that leave French inspectors scratching their heads. French food is no longer very French and that's not only at the starred restaurants.

I don't really know how the locals regard Michelin in Spain, but Spanish chefs are quick to note their stars in their promotional material and while many of the gastronomes I've met, don't rely on Michelin for their restaurant choices, they all seem to know who has how many stars.

I wish I were a regular in most of the four star restaurants in New York to sound totally authoritative, but I have enough experience to express the opinion that a good many tables are always filled with out of towners and plenty of those come from Europe, Asia and South America. My guess is that these people are enough of a target audience for the publisher. Local sales may never account for the bulk of the NYC Red Guide. I often suspect the French guide sells better in the UK, Belgium and Switzerland if the license plates in front of the Relais Gourmands are any indication.

I'd love to poll (and get a really honest answer ) the top chefs in NYC and ask if they'd prefer three Michelin stars to four from the NY Times. Michelin has fallen in esteem recently, but somehow it hasn't taken its stars along for the decline (yet?). On the other hand, I think the importance of the NY Times stars has steadily declined since Craig Claiborne. People are all too aware than the currently held ratings come from several different reviewers. I'm loathe to predict financial or editorial success or failure right now for a NYC Red Guide, although give me a drink and a good argument either way and I'll take the other side for sport.

[Fat Guy]

Michelin has grown over the one hundred some odd years of its existence, but it started out as, and still is, primarily a guide for travelers. That's inherent in its attitude and in its structure. Sure it's used by locals, but that's not the impetus for its being. It has always been as important to me as a place to find a lunch stop or hotel on a road trip on a day between the starred dining rooms, as it was in planning an itinerary of the stars. Many of us forget that and speak of Michelin restaurants as if it meant haute cuisine.

If they sell one copy to everybody who takes road trips around Manhattan, they should be able to move 12 or 13 copies a year.

Manhattan Road Trip Log, Day 1

Mile 3, Minute 9: Driving on a curiosly broad way named, aptly, "Broadway," I found myself desirous of a meal. Having never heard of this town, I pulled out my trusty Michelin Red Guide and saw that the restaurant Gallagher's was near my location and was designated by a knife, fork, corkscrew, Michelin Man head, three squiggly lines, a blue triangle, a red square, and a purple pentagon. As luck would have it, the restaurant was open and I was able to secure a table.

Mile 6, Minute 143: Driving on an avenue with a park-like median named, aptly, "Park Avenue," I again felt famished. Unfamiliar with my environs, I again relied on the Michelin Red Guide to tell me I was near a restaurant called Gramercy Tavern. What a unique discovery this place turned out to be! It was surely worth a detour, as the guide had promised.

[menton1]

What informational value will Michelin offer to an already-knowledgeable New York diner?

As we have discussed at length on a recent long Michelin thread, there just isn't that much information in Michelin anyway. I would much prefer a newspaper review where the prose can be descriptive of all aspects of the dining experience. The little blips and symbols of the Michelin Guide are greatly overrated in Europe, the recent Michelin publicity suggests they place a lot more weight on reputation rather than facts, and, as has been discovered, don't expect them to show up more than once every 3 years or so.

[Louisa Chu]

You know what will really suck? Is if Michelin starts CHARGING on their website. I don't own my own Guide Rouge but I use their website all the time. And again - as usual - the focus is on the three-stars - what's a discovery - even in Paris - where people are - uh - kind of known to care about food/dining - are the Bib Gourmand listings.

What I like about Michelin is that it's written in a consistent but not overly personal voice. Not too many "quotes with exclamation points!" - but not so "well, personally, I don't care for this dish, but if you like that sort of thing" or "I don't like the room/service/crowd" etc.

How about a culinary Celebrity Death Match between Tim Zagat and the Michelin Man?

[oakapple]

What exactly does the Bib Gourmand symbol signify?