Restaurant Portions Are Too Big, survey shows

[Foodie_Penguin]

story here

Gifted Gourmet, completely nonprofessional surveyer, asking now for your opinion ...

Would you opt for a restaurant with half-sized portions if it was offered?

Are you satisfied with the options as they are now presented?

Given the cost of a meal in a restaurant, is it going to be worth the money to have a smaller meal?

←

Personally, I don't return to restaurants that serve me entrees that I consider too large.

Maggiano's is a good example. This chain offers half size portions but even that's too big for me.

The prospect of having a doggy bag of leftover food for another meal is not an incentive to dine at any particular establishment.

Value for money to me is not how much food I can get for my money. I'm more interested in the quality of the ingredients more than the quantity.

Even set meals don't appeal to me that much either.

I've been known to deconstruct meals when there's too much food. This especially true of overstuffed sandwiches, too much bread, and too much meat.

Just my 5 cents.

Foodie Penguin

[Free Martha]

Restaurants could offer" small plates" as an option, also split plates for a small charge, or half portions on pasta courses.

Half portions in general could really do damage on the guest check averages, Never the less the waiters salary.

This is a real concept dilemma, but I guess they can always raise the beverage prices.

[simdelish]

I agree with much of what has been said. I would rather have smaller portions. Usually several bites, even of something fantastic, is enough for me. But then I'm interested in trying something else, a new taste, -- not just filling up on one thing. That's why I like tasting menus (but not the extremely long ones -- I regret those for days later! )

I must share a story: I was out with my elderly parents not too long ago. Not a chain, but not ultra-fine dining either... in the middle, nice ambience, white tablecloth, wine list. The menu had several entrees marked with an asterisk, noting at the bottom that those items were available in "senior portions." When my mother ordered the senior-salmon, I inquired what the price diff was (yes, tacky me, but i was in protect-o mode for my parents). The server said, "oh, none. It's just that many of our older customers find that the portions are too large, and much of the food on their plate goes back to the kitchen(getting thrown out). We now offer the smaller portions so as not to waste."

I said, "well, Mother, if you are paying for it, you might as well get the full portion and take the rest home, or perhaps Dad might like a bite or two." And that was that.

I was astounded by this "policy" that did not reflect a change in price! Perhaps patrons don't want to be seen taking doggy bags home - that I understand... but they are just making extra money! I should mention that this was actually a private club. So maybe they take suggestions more seriously than the average restaurant. But, at the same time, most private clubs are not-for-profit. (Entrees at this club are not cheap -- $22-36). So why not a lesser price?

[Dr. Funk]

When your food cost is 28% of your menu price, it's hard to give a big discount on a half order. After all, all your other costs are still the same so to expect a 50% discount is silly. I've had half orders in many restaurants and it's usually 25%. Fine by me, I wasn't going to eat it anyway. It is true that portions are getting insanely large. I haven't been able to eat a 24 oz Porterhouse since I was 18, why would I want one at 57? I don't even have a dog.