NY Magazine Critical of Time Warner Restaurants

[Artichoke]

The new issue of New York magazine reviews some of the issues that have surffaced since the opening of the Time Warner building.

While taking into account that it is still in its infancy, I never had high hopes for the space myself. At best I felt there was no way it could live up to the hype at worst I thought it would be an outright flop.

For one thing there are far too many egos under one roof. I have the utmost respect for the cooking talents of the likes Keller, Vongerichten and Trotter. However, having followed their careers since prior to their fame, their sense of themselves is getting out of whack. Whether you are the best chef, neurosurgeon or statesman, maintaining a sense of humbleness is a good thing.

All three of these chef's are spread too thin. I am all for a person attempting to make as much money as possible, G-D bless them. I do not begrudge these chef's one bit for attempting to capitalize on their current fame. However, lets be honest about it, it is hard to see how the food will not suffer.

Secondly, and I say this without the slightest bit of snobbishness, Manhattan is not a mall city. Whether gilded with the finest in shopping and eating or not, a mall is a mall. They have their place in many cities, just not this one. Part of the fun of shopping and eating in Manhattan is exploring her many varied neighborhoods.

Here is the article:

Time Warner Raw

[docsconz]

Very interesting article. The whole project was a big gamble. It is off to a slow start, but I think once the other restaurants come up to speed, they will do fine if they live up to their potential. They have to earn their stars and stripes. If not, too bad. It is still an interesting idea. I didn't know that Trotter had backed out and then came back in.

[oakapple]

Per Se is living proof that the Time Warner Mall isn't a bad venue for restaurants. As far as I can tell, Per Se is full almost every night. The reviews are almost uniformly rapturous — this, of course, is pending El Bruni's verdict this Wednesday. If Per Se is losing money, it's not the venue's fault. You can't do any better than to sell every seat every night, which is about what Per Se is doing.

V Steakhouse's problems seem pretty easily fixable, while on Cafe Gray and Trotter's place we simply can't render a verdict yet.

Masa is another story. This may be the one restaurant in the Mall that is conceptually flawed, and cannot survive without a serious re-think.

[Mulcahy]

I asked Mr. Takayama whether it was a slow night, and he shrugged, saying two parties were coming the next night.

This quote is from this article about Ginza Sushiko, Masa Takayama's establishment in Los Angeles.

It doesn't sound like a largely empty restaurant is a surprise to Mr. Takayama.

As far as V goes, I can't believe how wrong they seem to have gotten things. Prime, JG's Vegas steakhouse, is fabulous. Great apps, good steaks, highly attentive service.

Per Se can't be losing money. I just refuse to believe that.

As for the others, well . . . I guess wait and see.

Edited August 17, 2004 by Mulcahy (log)

[porkpa]

Mulcahy,

Unless they don't have to pay rent and maybe even then, in my opinion Per Se is not only losing money, it is hemorraging it. It has to be one of the most spacious restaurants(space per table) in all of Manhattan. The lounge is large and probably doesn't generate a whole lot of money. The staff to customer ratio has to be one of the greatest of any restaurant in the city. Many of the tables the time I was there didn't get turned over during the evening. We were privileged to be given a tour of the kitchen. The number of kitchen personnel is awesome. The kitchen, or I should say kitchens are truly incredible. It seems there is a different room for most food items. I doubt that it has an equal anywhere. I was there with a friend of mine. My words when leaving were to the effect that if they sold out forever, I didn't see how they could ever show a profit. Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt it.

Porkpa

[SethG]

Keller, the temperamental genius, has a sensitivity to match his taste buds. “You work all your life to reach a certain level, and why don’t people say ‘Congratulations!’? Does anyone say ‘Why does Alex Rodriguez get $25 million, or Tom Cruise?’ Why do people begrudge that? Look at Alain Ducasse. That broke my heart. Everyone says they love him, and then he comes to New York and they beat the shit out of him: ‘Come to New York and we’ll kick your ass.’ ”

This quote demonstrates how little Keller understands New York. His sports analogy is particularly revealing in its wrongheadedness. He thinks sports stars are received as heroes in New York? How many sports stars have come to New York with enormous salaries and high expectations, and found themselves targets of a media frenzy, scrutinized unfairly, and booed every night?

What he's witnessing is a New York phenomenon across the board. It isn't that food people get less respect than masters of other arts. They get the same New York treatment as everybody else: "Mr. fancy pants, you think you're so amazing, I'm going to take you down a peg. And then you'd better prove how great you really are, or I'll eat you alive!"

All of that said, the treatment of Per Se in the article is pretty misleading. The author attempts to create strife out of some pissing matches between Keller and the building management, in order to mask the fact that Per Se doesn't fit with her thesis of a bunch of failed restaurants. Per Se seems to be on its way to being a smashing success (culinarily, I don't know about monetarily), and you can't really blame anybody for the fire that temporarily halted its momentum.

Edited August 17, 2004 by SethG (log)

[bloviatrix]

To me, this article is just further proof that when journalists get a pig-headed idea they will stick with it. Everyone has wanted this venue to fail since it was in the planning stages -- every article I read said "this won't work, New Yorkers don't get malls." They don't want this to be successful and they'll write whatever they have to try to in order to make it a failure.

The night we were at Per Se every table was full (and our reservation was for 9:45 pm). Furthermore, Stone Rose was rocking - and it was a weeknight. Who really cares if the hallways on 3 or 4 are quiet. Ultimately, all that matters is that the tables are full.

[docsconz]

I think it is somewhat intentional for those hallways to be quiet or else it would be too difficult to maintain the aura of luxury in the restaurants.

[Dave H]

I have an extremely difficult time believing that Per Se could be losing money. Its finances should be very predictable. On the revenue side, they fill every seat every night with a prix fixe at a narrow price point range (except for those few who know the magic words to order the VIP 2x4). On the cost side, the expenses referred to above (e.g. high per-diner rent and staff costs) were entirely known in advance, and their ingredient costs should be unusually easy to predict given the comparatively low amount of choice involved with the menu. The only significant variables I can see are the success of the lounge (which I rather doubt was intended to be a primary revenue source) and the fire (the direct costs of which, at least, were covered by insurance, and which is in the past in any case).

More to the point, Thomas Keller did not return to New York in order to turn out fabulous food at a failing restaurant. He already did that once, and by all accounts it is not an experience he would want to repeat, or that he will let himself risk repeating. As the restaurant is clearly firing on all cylinders, the only way it could be losing money is if the financial plan was unsound to begin with. But why would he gamble on an unsound business model to serve food that, at least so far, is basically just French Laundry East?

Sorry, I just don't buy it.

[Jaybert41]

and their ingredient costs should be unusually easy to predict given the comparatively low amount of choice involved with the menu.

Are you kidding me? Comparatively to what?

I have been to Per Se twice and have never seen a menu anywhere else where there are nearly fifty dishes printed, dozens of freebies and VIP stuff, mignardises, and even dozens more that is not even offered to be served but because they have it, it can be.

One guest that I was dining with commented about how much she loved the duck that she had had at The French Laundry her previous visit, and low and behold she was served duck at our table. Keep in mind, duck that was nowhere to be found on any of the menus but they must have had it somewhere.

I don't completely buy your reasons why a restaurant like that should or shouldn't be making money; and suggesting that they have a limited menu is a gross overstatement.

Dave H, have you been to Per Se? The scope of their capabilities is amazing in a way far more than any other restaurant in New York City.

Edited August 17, 2004 by Jaybert41 (log)

[Nathan]

As others have pointed out, it would be hardly surprising if Per Se was intended to lose money (at least in the short run)....being a loss leader for the building could make perfect financial sense -- we won't know what their real expectations are without being privy to information that they would never divulge.

[oakapple]

I don't completely buy your reasons why a restaurant like that should or shouldn't be making money; and suggesting that they have a limited menu is a gross overstatement.

You are probably right about the menu, but Dave H's main point was:

Its finances should be very predictable. On the revenue side, they fill every seat every night with a prix fixe at a narrow price point range (except for those few who know the magic words to order the VIP 2x4). On the cost side, the expenses referred to above (e.g. high per-diner rent and staff costs) were entirely known in advance, and their ingredient costs should be unusually easy to predict given the comparatively low amount of choice involved with the menu.

Drop the final clause, and he still seams dead-on. Per Se was derived from an existing successful model (The French Laundry), and their finances should be predictable. If it's losing money, it can't be a surprise.

[Dave H]

I haven't yet been to Per Se, although of course I've eagerly followed it here and elsewhere. I certainly did not in any way mean to denigrate the place by noting that it is a reasonably direct copy of what's by pretty common acclaim the best and most important American fine-dining restaurant of the past decade. (No, I haven't been there yet either.)

My point about the menu was not that the resources of the kitchen are anything other than extraordinary, but that the orders coming in should be unusually predictable ahead of time. This should mean plenty of visibility when purchasing ingredients, and even extends back to forming the business plan. Moreso, I maintain, than with most other restaurants.

The willingness and ability to serve two substantially different 9-course menus for a table of four is obviously impressive, but presumably many of the substituted items were in the kitchen because they appear on tomorrow night's tasting menu; and in any case the kitchen reserves the right to decline the request, and has in some cases related on the Per Se thread. Similarly with Jaybert's duck story--it's very nice, but the kitchen was under no obligation to produce that duck. And I'm sure the duck had a reason to be in the kitchen--just because duck wasn't on the menu the night you went doesn't mean it wasn't planned for tomorrow. Or maybe they had a few ducks in back to play with in planning a new dish. I rather doubt they keep extra ducks around just in case someone comes in and asks for it.

While there's no doubt that Per Se has proven itself exceptionally willing to send out extra goodies or accomodate requests or substitutions, the fact is that a very large portion of their customers (going by the discussion on egullet, a majority) order the straight nine course tasting menu exactly as they have it set out on that day's menu. And I think that makes their ingredient costs more predictable ahead of time than if their menu was structured differently.

Thomas Keller is by all accounts an almost obsessive perfectionist, and a chef who takes the planning and sourcing and cost control parts of the profession as seriously as the cooking--a look through The French Laundry Cookbook or The Soul of a Chef will tell you that. The only thing he can't control is whether the seats are filled, and as we all know they are and will be for years to come. If Per Se is indeed still generating negative cash flow, then presumably that is according to plan.

[Fat Guy]

Do we have any evidence that the restaurant is a loss leader? Here's what we do know:

- French Laundry in Napa grosses $7.5 million per year

- Per Se is doing 1.5 turns and therefore 100+ covers a night, more than French Laundry does

- Per Se has extensive banquet facilities that French Laundry lacks

- Per Se has a liquor license; French Laundry does not

- Per Se will be baking for a Bouchon Bakery property and realizing revenue from that synergy

No expert am I, but plenty of industry people have estimated informally to me that Per Se could easily do $2 million more in dining room sales than French Laundry on account of wine, liquor, and extra seating, as well as $3 million in banquet sales, plus $1 million from the bakery.

The New York Magazine writer's thesis is extremely weak, and all this anti-mall propaganda is tiresome. This is perhaps the greatest collection of chefs ever to have restaurants together in a single venue. It's an historic moment in American cuisine, one that deserves more than a little bit of respect. There have been mistakes, there are things to criticize, and no restaurant is perfect, but condemnation of the project for reasons of sensationalism, politics, or anti-mall snobbery is shameful.

[Fat Guy]

The reviews are almost uniformly rapturous — this, of course, is pending El Bruni's verdict this Wednesday.

Whenever the Bruni review appears, it will not be a verdict. The institution of New York Times restaurant reviewer has been so eroded, and Bruni has done so little to reverse course after his single promising first review, that he has no standing to pass judgment on Per Se. Rather, those who have dined at Per Se, and those who already know what everybody is saying about Per Se, will be passing judgment on him. Anything less than a four-star review for Per Se would be such a major credibility-destroying move for Bruni that he would never be able to recover. If he gives Per Se four stars, it won't be a verdict either: the market has already decided that Per Se is a four-star restaurant without any help from the Times. The Times dropped the ball on Time Warner. It was a golden opporunity to reclaim pole position and leadership in the restaurant reviewing community. Instead, a series of disastrous reviews, starting with the Asiate "go to Jean Georges" embarrassment, moving on to the "???" failure even to muster the confidence to award any star rating at all to Masa, and continuing through a bizarrely punitive and uncompelling review of V, have left the Times with nothing more than a bunch of eggs to unscramble, credibility to rescue, and an incoherent message about the past, present, and future of dining in New York.

[tommy]

i wasn't going to post about this anti-mall thing until i saw fat guy was on board. who in NYC really cares about this "mall" issue anyway as it relates to fine dining etc? stand up and be counted. no one? ok then.

Edited August 18, 2004 by tommy (log)

[oakapple]

The reviews are almost uniformly rapturous — this, of course, is pending El Bruni's verdict this Wednesday.

Whenever the Bruni review appears, it will not be a verdict.

Steven seems to have taken me seriously. Sorry I didn't include the smiley face, or put "verdict" in quotes. I totally agree with him that the market has already decided that Per Se is four stars. Bruni will either confirm what we all know, or demolish whatever credibility he had.

....a bizarrely punitive and uncompelling review of V....

I'm dining at V tonight and will draw my own conclusions, but when I look at the range of comments about V, I can't say that Bruni's rating was unreasonable. New York Magazine doesn't do stars, but its "verdict" was about on par with Bruni's.

[Ocean_islands]

I just have to weigh in on this topic.

First of all, there is no such thing as a 'mall city'. Most malls are in the suburbs. If they are not then they are in the country. But Manhattan has had malls for years, including the Manhattan Mall for the poor and Trump Tower for the rich. Now we have the Time Warner Center for the -- blasé?

But really, don't you think a restaurant mall is an original idea? I think it is -- I just don't particularly want to go to a restaurant mall.

Now that the Louvre in Paris, France, has a mall, all this business about looking down on malls is just a bunch of hooey.

The truth of the matter is that most US malls are poorly conceived, poorly executed, isolated if not isolating, and boring. We can blame the mall developers for that, and I can't imagine why a restaurant mall would be any different, but I am willing to concede that it might be -- depending upon what you find inside. The fact of the matter is that a restaurant's neighborhood is a big part of its identity. Would someone be saying this was a great moment in American cuisine if all these restaurants opened at the same time in different neighborhoods of Manhattan? I don't think so. That is why the restaurant mall is more likely to be a great moment in restaurant history than in the history of American cuisine -- but there's nothing wrong with that, per se.

Let me add, though, that the grocery store in the TWC basement is tops (and if it weren't there then that is where the mall's food court would be).

Edited August 18, 2004 by Ocean_islands (log)

[oakapple]

First of all, there is no such thing as a 'mall city'. Most malls are in the suburbs. If they are not then they are in the country. But Manhattan has had malls for years, including the Manhattan Mall for the poor and Trump Tower for the rich.

The Manhattan Mall is less than twenty years old, and at the time it was built the mall was a well-entrenched concept elsewhere. In relation to the population, malls in Manhattan are scarce.

But really, don't you think a restaurant mall is an original idea?  I think it is -- I just don't particularly want to go to a restaurant mall.

There is a crucial difference. The marketing concept of a retail mall is that you pop in and out of stores, visiting several of them per trip. I mean, if you're going to visit just one store, then the mall offers no benefit to the consumer — and therefore no economic advantage to the developer or the merchants — over the detached stores that can be found anywhere else.

A restaurant mall doesn't fit this concept. It's not as if you're going to have cocktails at Masa, dinner at V Steakhouse, and dessert at Per Se. Nor are these restaurants going to attract much walk-in traffic, the way a traditional mall food court will do. So, the fact that they're in a mall, and located within footsteps of one another, is economically irrelevant, except in the sense that it makes a good story. Other than that, these restaurant will succeed or fail individually, because the association of being together in the same mall doesn't really confer any benefit.

The truth of the matter is that most US malls are poorly conceived, poorly executed, isolated if not isolating, and boring.

To the contrary, most malls are extraordinarily successful, which is why developers keep building them. Quite simply, they work. To call them "boring" is a typical New York reaction, which is one reason why so few malls have been built here, and is why Time-Warner has been so vigorously pooh-poohed when malls generally are welcomed elsewhere.

[bilrus]

Do we have any evidence that the restaurant is a loss leader? Here's what we do know:

- French Laundry in Napa grosses $7.5 million per year

- Per Se is doing 1.5 turns and therefore 100+ covers a night, more than French Laundry does

- Per Se has extensive banquet facilities that French Laundry lacks

- Per Se has a liquor license; French Laundry does not

- Per Se will be baking for a Bouchon Bakery property and realizing revenue from that synergy

No expert am I, but plenty of industry people have estimated informally to me that Per Se could easily do $2 million more in dining room sales than French Laundry on account of wine, liquor, and extra seating, as well as $3 million in banquet sales, plus $1 million from the bakery.

The New York Magazine writer's thesis is extremely weak, and all this anti-mall propaganda is tiresome. This is perhaps the greatest collection of chefs ever to have restaurants together in a single venue. It's an historic moment in American cuisine, one that deserves more than a little bit of respect. There have been mistakes, there are things to criticize, and no restaurant is perfect, but condemnation of the project for reasons of sensationalism, politics, or anti-mall snobbery is shameful.

On the other hand, aren't the expenses much higher in New York in general and the Time Warner Center in particular. And this was a start-up rather than an ongoing entity.

I'm not saying that this is enough to make it a money losing proposition, but it likely offsets some of the advantages that Per Se has over French Laundry.

[Fat Guy]

Operating expenses are surely higher. I have no idea if Per Se will be profitable at all, or more or less profitable than French Laundry. I'm just saying that if you look at the huge gross numbers this place is going to do and you assume some reasonable percentage of profit it's not hard to see it paying back a $16 million startup investment.

As for the mall, I'm sure I'm not the only person posting on this thread who has been to Asia. You know all those cities that have risen to global prominence, like Singapore and Hong Kong, and that threaten to leave America and Europe in the dust? Guess what you'll find in those cities? Malls. Lots and lots and lots of malls. If the Time Warner Center is to be derided for dragging luddite New Yorkers into the future by giving us our first truly modern Asian-style urban mall, so be it. There are always plenty of New Yorkers willing to speak out against progress, so it's no surprise to see a regurgitation of that bad old habit.

No, we wouldn't be celebrating this as an historic moment in cuisine if all the chefs had opened restaurants around the city roughly within a year of each other. Guess why? Because without the Time Warner Center there wouldn't likely be a single one of these restaurants. Would Keller have opened here? Would Kunz have found investors? Would Masa have been enticed to come here from California? Would Charlie Trotter have felt the same kind of peer pressure? The alternative history doesn't work: the Time Warner Center is the cause and the developers are the visionaries, it's not just some building in which a bunch of restaurants randomly opened. It's extreme urban density and critical mass in action.

Not to mention, the views.

There was a time, in the '70s and '80s, when hotel restaurants in America were a joke. Today, three of the four four-star restaurants in New York are in hotels. Chefs, hotels, and other investors got it together to follow the European model of having many of the best restaurants be in hotels. New Yorkers got used to it. Just as Parisians walk through the Plaza Athenee's lobby to dine at ADPA, Americans walk through the Essex House to dine at ADNY. New Yorkers will get used to malls as well, and the city will be better for it.

[robert40]

I can't help but be bewildered every time I hear criticism of the Time Warner building. Walking threw the mall to Per Se did not faze me nearly as much as trying to find a place to park.(78th street)

Visiting Whole Foods in the basement makes me feel like a child in Disney World. Just looking at the fish display I can't help but wonder if the fish in my local supermarket, in upstate New York is even safe to eat.

Believe it or not, I have to make a 3 hour round trip to Adams in Kingston to find some quality fish. As all the fish in my area is a lovely shade of brown.

And as for the restaurants, I can count the good ones on one hand within an 100 mile radius. Fine Dining is considered prime rib and baked potato. My wife and I have gotten to the point where we believe we are wasting money on mediocre restaurants in the area.

Dare I say I can't help but think that New Yorker's are a bit spoiled. At least you have Per Se in your mall. As I only have Ruby Tuesday's in mine.

[Stone]

I don't know that New Yorkers want or appreciate a 4 hour meal.

And I find it hard to believe that New Yorkers care that outside the door to Per Se is a door to V. Outside the door to most restaraunts in New York are piles of garbage waiting for the morning pick up.

Edited August 18, 2004 by Stone (log)

[robert40]

I don't know that New Yorkers want or appreciate a 4 hour meal.

Another common complaint that baffle's me.

From the very first press release Thomas Keller made it well know that this restaurant would not be focused toward the business crowd.

How now are these 4 hour dinners a shock to anyone as it was common knowledge way before the name of the restaurant was even released.

If diners are still surprised at this point by the long meals they must have been in Attica for the last three years.

[Fat Guy]

Ruby Tuesday's has it all over Per Se on the salad bar front, though.