Corkage fees

[Wilfrid]

So you didn't buy the cheese/dessert/steak argument?

Sorry, Steven, I honestly can't find it. Is it that people don't have to order dessert, but aren't therefore entitled to bring their own?

[Fat Guy]

Yes.

[Wilfrid]

Of course, of course. In many restaurants the tasting menus are no more expensive than a three course meal a la carte (sometimes less)*, and ordering foie gras - even if you do it every time - is not going to put the BYO'er out ahead of regular wine drinkers in terms of spending. I can see how they might to it in truffle season, but not otherwise.

*Same price at ADNY, Fleur de Sel, cheaper at San Domenico and March, and at Blue Hill it looks like there's only about five to ten dollars difference. So many restaurants offer prix fixe, anyway, that this almost doesn't matter.

[Bux]

And to be honest, I don't see bringing your own food to be any different. If I walked into a place with my own Wagyu beef and said "here make this for me," why not? If the chef is up to it, and I am willing to pay the price for the service why should they care?

You want an honest answer? Actually the Wagyu beef issue is different and requires greater accommodation by the kitchen staff than a BYO Bottle will by the wine staff. Many restaurants will handle the BYO Beef and the cost to the diner will vary. If you're a regular and considered a friend of the restaurant, your dish may be free and garnished without cost by the restaurant--or you may be charged as if the restaurant supplied the beef as well as the service. I see no legitimate moral or ethical reason any diner should not feel free to bring his bottle and expect the restaurant to charge a corkage equal to what they would charge for the wine, if they had it on their list. This is capitalism at its best. Everyone gets sort of what he needs. The restaurant gets a fat profit, the connoisseur gets the ideal combination of wine and food and the cheap guy trying to beat the system gets screwed. I'm the judge of what everyone needs. I'm entitled. Everyone else seems to believe they have the moral high ground here, even those whose arguments are about the right to save a buck.

This whole conversation is not exactly on a solid foundation. For all of Fat Guy's attempts to distinguish policies he feels are relevant at different types of restaurant, we've hardly begun to acknowledge what the court might speak of as community standards. Traditions (and overhead costs) are quite different in NYC than they are in suburban New Jersey or California. Thus I have the feeling that as I read posts, everyone has a dfferent model in mind for a very different situation. In fact I didn't drop in on this thread for some time as my general feeling is that BYO is just not very applicable to NYC.

Perhaps it's just that I know people in the industry and have an inclination to see things from the restaurateur's side, but what bothers me about this thread is the contentious attitude some have towards restaurants. It's as if the restaurant industry owes us some right to demand it change. Some clothing shops charge for alterations. Some don't. Of course I'm free to take my pants and have them shortened elsewhere at my own expense, but I don't gripe that other guys are happy with off the rack lengths. I also don't expect them to let me use their sewing machines to do my own alterations.

You know what? If I were to open my own restaurant, I'd think of some drastically revolutionary ways to price my meals to insure each diner paid his fair share and got a fair break (as I judge it to be fair). Odds are that my restaurant would fail just for breaking with the established pattern of business in my area. (Fat Guy has on other occasions already addressed the other reasons I'm unfit by temperament to host a restaurant.) Restaurateurs are working on a model that works for them. Expectations that they should succumb to any argument you see fit to make about BYO are just irrelevant. Beachfan's attitude seems more than fair. I can't believe any restaurant owner would be offended by what he's posted here and yet I can understand why a restaurant would not be willing to allow BYO at any cost. Any restaurant with a $35 bottle of wine on its list is not going to be ridiculed in the press because it also has wines in the upper four figures. On the other hand, the news that someone paid $200 to drink his own wine at a restaurant will make headlines someplace, regardless of the fact that the diner saved $500 and the restaurant can't move an inventory it's safely stored in air conditioned quarters in a very high rent district for a decade.

When Daniel needs Plotnicki and Beachfan as customers, maybe they'll change their policy. The truth is that collectors of fine wine are a small market and only a very small percentage of those may not eat and entertain at home often enough to consume their collection at home. To the extent that Daniel allows those people to bring bottles to the restaurant, they spite themselves as there's a catering arm of the operation that will come to your home and cook for you or your guests. They are more than willing to fly across the country to serve a couple of diners and you may serve your own wines.

For me, any restaurant is about its food first. For others the wine is foremost. I see no reason a chef can't write off the latter group. He's offering his cooking, first and his cellar next. If you really appreciate his cooking, you'll drink your wine at home and find a bottle in his cellar. If you can do better elsewhere, either you don't appreciate the cooking or you have no reason to appreciate it. Needless to say, the model for a restaurant, at least in NYC and France, is not a place where people drink their own wine. Where you find exceptions, enjoy them for what they are.

[Bux]

One other point. I've always been conscious of the fact the price of a bottle of wine in a restaurant is always way more expensive than a comparable bottle (same producer, same appellation, same vintage, etc.) in a wine shop. While that's always been a sticking point with me, recent posts here on quality and price have been quite convincing that the bottle in the restaurant is just plain better.

[rich]

Bux - all valid points except the bottle at the restaurant being better than at home. That depends on storage.

The BYO issue in controversial and while I do it on special occasions, I often wish I had done it when looking at wine list prices. I am totally in favor of restaurants making a fair profit, but some look to make more than a fair share.

If the argument at the high end is storage of fine wines, that's acceptable to a point. But when you see a $20 bottle of wine selling for $60+, that borders on criminal enterprise. Those $20 bottles didn't cost much to buy and certainly don't have the type of "shelf life" to warrant extensive storage expense.

And if the counterpoint is the less expensive helps pay for the more expensive, then who needs to subsidize the restaurant or its wealthier clientele?

[jordyn]

And at the same time they want to eat at the restaurant, which can't exist without the expensive program. This is why I place it in the category of free-rider problems.

Okay, now you've shifted from a line of reasoning that I was perfectly comfortable with to one that is less compelling to me.

Before you made the argument that "wine programs are expensive, which justifies high markups". Fine. Now, you suggest "wine programs are essential to the survival of the restaurant". The second statement may or may not be true (I have no idea), but it's a significant departure from the first and I can see why it would upset serious collectors.

Bux makes a broader set of arguments which do a better job of justifying why restaurants ought to be able to disallow BYO altogether or charge whatever they want. I continue to be very comfortable with the idea that restaurants are entitled to charge whatever they want, and to offer whatever services they want. But I wonder if Bux is in the Fat Guy camp when it comes to taking advantage of restaurants that have made the conscious decision to allow BYO. Should Beachfan feel guilty that he's taking the restaurant up on its generous offer? Taking this one step farther, if I'm not a collector, and I take $1000 of wine to a restaurant to save another $1000 or $2000 in markup, should I feel more guilty than someone who just happened to have the same bottles lying in their cellar?

[Edited for prettiness.]

[rich]

Jordyn - could you further explain the statement about the $1,000 wine - I'm not clear on it. Sorry for the inconvenience, my mind isn't what it used to be.

[Fat Guy]

Would you be willing to take another crack at explaining why you think I've somehow betrayed my own argument? I'm having trouble following your reasoning. Seriously.

[jordyn]

Rich: I'm just asking if there is a moral difference between a collector bringing in expensive bottles versus someone just trying to save themselves a (potentially considerable) amount of money.

Fat Guy: Assuming you're addressing that question to me, I don't believe you're betraying your argument. I just think you added a second argument that has not been well supported thus far, and even if it's true, it seems like a reason that is much more likely to make serious wine drinkers unhappy.

[Wilfrid]

When I instigated this thread, I did consider posting it on the New York board, as the issues are clearly very different from city to city and country to country.

Sticking to New York, I do wonder if Bux is overlooking something. I agree with just about everything he says, including his theme that restaurants can do whatever they like, as can tailor's, as can retailers in general. But the message I get from this thread - and from BYO discussions in general - is that a lot of us are not particularly satisfied with what we get for our money from restaurant wine lists. That's why it's different from food, clothes, or whatever.

In a good restaurant, I can rarely find the kind of wine I like to drink for under $100, and when I pay over $100 I am still often disappointed. Now, I sometimes have a lousy meal too, but there's no consistent pattern of disappointment with the food. I would like better wine for less money, and BYO seems to offer that.

[rich]

Jordyn - Thanks.

I think there is. If the person is just trying to save money and the restaurant offers the same wine, I don't think it's ethical to bring in the wine. If the wine is too much $$$ at the restaurant, I'll find something else or drink beer.

However, if the person is bringing in something the restaurant doesn't have and its value is currently $1,000. I don't believe the restaurant has the right to charge a $1,000 corkage fee - or anything close to that.

[jordyn]

Which guy is the accountant? Get him on the line here.

That's glenn, right?

Glenn? Glenn?

[MartyL]

Fat Guy suggested above that restaurants could not survive without the high mark-ups on their wine lists, but I wonder whether this hypothesis has ever been tested.

I wonder whether any restaurant in NY has ever tried the model of offering a good variety of fine wines at significantly lower mark-ups (let's say 30-50% depending on the price point) and failed. Isn't it possible that a restaurant like this would sell a lot more wine and perhaps even sell more covers generally?

Perhaps the reason there is basically no competition in wine pricing among top restaurants is that the barriers to entry are so high that these restaurants can tacitly agree among themselves to hit the consumer with what is essentially sucker pricing.

[Wilfrid]

Any chance of an anti-trust suit on that basis?

[MartyL]

Nope. I'm not suggesting that there is a monopoly or actual price-fixing, in fact, I'm suggesting the opposite---the opportunity is ripe for somebody to come in and undercut all the price-gougers. Why can't NY have a restaurant like Beaune's Ma Cuisine or Paris's Willi's Wine Bar? Obviously geography plays a role here, but our restaurants could still do much better then they are doing now in terms of wine pricing.

[Bux]

If the person is just trying to save money and the restaurant offers the same wine, I don't think it's ethical to bring in the wine.

You're starting to clarify a point and it's one I raised earlier. Does it make a difference why the diner wants to bring his own wine? Does it matter how the restaurant justifies it's policies on corkage? We're not all talking about the same thing and a restaurant has to establish a policy that covers all points. I think there's a great need for a restaurant to have a consistent policy. This means that the policy may not make sense to some from their perspective as their reasons are so much more compelling to them.

If the restaurant has la Mouline '89, but not la Turque, would I be justified in bringing the latter? Just how unique must my bottle be?--or for those who don't appreciate degrees of absolutes--what makes my bottle unique? Leaving aside everyone's natural desire to beat the system and save a buck, a restaurant is a place of business selling food and drink. It will do what it has to do to make a profit and to maximize profits. It will do what it feels is best no matter what any of us says, unless we can provide a better model. If diner "A" won't eat at restaurant "X" whose loss is it?

I've long argued that a restaurant with better wine pricing would encourage me to dine there more often and spend more money on both food and wine. Both Gramercy Tavern and Eleven Madison Park are perfect examples of that. Unfortunately I've seen the bottom rise considerably as of late at GT. The problem is that most diners are oblivious to the wine prices when deciding where to eat, while they consider the price of a main course or of a three course meal. So, we encourage high markups on wine by what we do as opposed to what we say. Obviously that's an editorial "we" and we may not be the "we" I'm talking about.

[Bux]

Nope.  I'm not suggesting that there is a monopoly or actual price-fixing, in fact, I'm suggesting the opposite---the opportunity is ripe for somebody to come in and undercut all the price-gougers.  Why can't NY have a restaurant like Beaune's Ma Cuisine or Paris's Willi's Wine Bar? Obviously geography plays a role here, but our restaurants could still do much better then they are doing now in terms of wine pricing.

I've been to wine bars in NY. The suck you in with bargains on the bottles and then charge outrageous prices for little tasting plates. Now if I could bring in my own food and pay a nominal charge for a clean plate and fork, it would be a different story.

[jordyn]

Bux: Sorry, your last post confused me a bit. Are you arguing that once the restaurant creates its consistent, the motivations of the diner do not matter? (If so, I'm inclined to agree; if not, what are you saying?)

[Bux]

Bux:  Sorry, your last post confused me a bit.  Are you arguing that once the restaurant creates its consistent, the motivations of the diner do not matter?  (If so, I'm inclined to agree; if not, what are you saying?)

Well, I have mixed feelings here as I'm as cheap as the next guy, and my intentions are to raise issues as much as argue for one side--I think the marketplace will decide what lolicies restaurants will take on this. What I believe I said was that restaurants have to establish consistent policies. If they don't, they chance running afoul of the law on discrimination charges as well as risking bad publicity. So yes, after the policy is set, the motivations of the diner should matter little. There are always exceptions.

In determining the policy however, the restaurant should consider all the ramifications of the policy and the reasons diners might want a corkage policy.

[Steve Plotnicki]

This issue comes down to who needs who more? Does the restaurant need the BYO business more than I need to eat at a place that doesn't allow it? I can tell you right now, they need me more than I need them. Especially since they have a large percentage of tables each night that drink iced tea or water. So all this business of is it a privilage? Do they have the right to say no? Who has the moral high ground? All non-issues. This is a business deal. You allow it at a fair price or I take my business elsewhere. I think I laid out why they are better off calculating a fair price and letting me do it. But if they don't see it that way, c'est la vie. I'm perfectly happy taking my business elsewhere and I will just eat there less or not at all. I used to go to J-G all the time but I haven't returned since they made the corkage $75. And I didn't go to Lespinasse between the time Kunz left and this past May because they don't allow it. And there are empty tables at Lespinasse every night.

[Wilfrid]

I can tell you right now, they need me more than I need them.

It's the humility that's so moving, isn't it?

(Although, dammit, I agree with him this time.)

[cabrales]

I can tell you right now, they need me more than I need them. . . . . You allow it at a fair price or I take my business elsewhere. . . . I'm perfectly happy taking my business elsewhere and I will just eat there less or not at all.

Steve P -- Your reasoning predicated on your ability to take business to another restaurant assumes that restaurants do not offer a distinctive cuisine that is not obtainable elsewhere (or at least that there is a high degree of substitutability among restaurants). For me, that is not the case. Le Bernardin (which I assume is non-BYO?) offers the experience that only Le Bernardin can offer; as does Bouley (which does allow BYO). Granted, Le Bernardin and Bouley are to a *limited* extent substitutes for another, and they are competitors for diners' business. However, going to Le Bernardin less because of the absence of BYO appears *to me* to be rather a drastic response.

[Beachfan]

Beachfan -- Apart from the restaurants already mentioned in this thread, are you aware of NY restaurants at comparable levels that permit BYO?   I do not have a cellar, and might purchase 6-8 bottles from time to time to drink at home and occasionally to bring to restaurants (increasingly so). It's still worthwhile, depending on the wine involved.

I believe the print version of the Vacuous Gourmet's Phone Book (aka Zagat) has a list in back. At least my older version did.

You can add Tabla to the list above.

[Beachfan]

To the extent that restaurants are not obligated to allow BYO, but offer it anyway, why should one feel guilty about taking them up on their offer, even if only to save money?

Do you acknowledge a difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law?

I do. And I would probably not go to places that weren't welcoming to me, even though I could within the "letter of the law".