"Drink Gouging" Costs Barclay Prime 4th Bell

[Holly Moore]

In his review of Barclay Prime Craig LaBan declared that Barclay Prime's "triple plus" wine mark-ups and steep bar pricing - their "drink gouging" - very possibly cost Barclay Prime a coveted 4th Liberty Bell - "one of the few reservations I had in bestowing a fourth bell ... as close as a new restaurant has come to landing the distinction during its debut."

While I prefer Grease Stains to Liberty Bells as meaningful symbols of excellence, this could effect Barclay Prime down the road. The question is, long term, which will/would make Barclay Prime more successful/profitable - exorbitant beverage prices or being one of the very few restaurants in Philadelphia to boast four LaBan Bells?

[rlibkind]

In his review of Barclay PrimeThe question is, long term, which will/would make Barclay Prime more successful/profitable - exorbitant beverage prices or being one of the very few restaurants in Philadelphia to boast four LaBan Bells?

←

IMHO, gouching on drinks will make more money for Starr at Barclay Prime than four bells from Mr. Laban. Barclay Prime, like most steak houses in downtown business districts, is more geared to the expense account crowd than the local diner.

[herbacidal]

I'm sort of on the fence about this, but I'd probably lean very slightly towards the higher drink prices being more useful than the fourth bell.

[Capaneus]

In his review of Barclay Prime Craig LaBan declared that Barclay Prime's "triple plus" wine mark-ups and steep bar pricing - their "drink gouging" - very possibly cost Barclay Prime a coveted 4th Liberty Bell - "one of the few reservations I had in bestowing a fourth bell ... as close as a new restaurant has come to landing the distinction during its debut."

While I prefer Grease Stains to Liberty Bells as meaningful symbols of excellence, this could effect Barclay Prime down the road.  The question is, long term, which will/would make Barclay Prime more successful/profitable - exorbitant beverage prices or being one of the very few restaurants in Philadelphia to boast four LaBan Bells?

←

In terms of immediate revenue, I think the three bells will do fine. But Starr is creating a brand, and there I think the top-Philly-Steakhouse accolade would have made a big difference.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see the wine list retrofitted, and LaBan acknowledging this with an ensuing bell-tuning.

[herbacidal]

Yea, but I don't think top Philly steakhouse from LaBan has as much relevance as top Philly steakhouse from the patrons via word of mouth.

Even more, I don't think there is a four-bell steakhouse in town.

I think Barclay Prime can get top steakhouse in town on its own.

My general impression is that it already is on/near the top tier of steakjoints in town, ahead of Ruth's Chris, Morton's. Possibly also ahead of Smith & Wollensky and Prime Rib (although the valet parking line outside of Prime Rib will always win it points and the front entrance to the Rittenhouse does the same for S&W). I think Barclay is really competing with Saloon and Capital Grille.

[Rich Pawlak]

In his review of Barclay Prime Craig LaBan declared that Barclay Prime's "triple plus" wine mark-ups and steep bar pricing - their "drink gouging" - very possibly cost Barclay Prime a coveted 4th Liberty Bell - "one of the few reservations I had in bestowing a fourth bell ... as close as a new restaurant has come to landing the distinction during its debut."

While I prefer Grease Stains to Liberty Bells as meaningful symbols of excellence, this could effect Barclay Prime down the road.  The question is, long term, which will/would make Barclay Prime more successful/profitable - exorbitant beverage prices or being one of the very few restaurants in Philadelphia to boast four LaBan Bells?

←

Well, the thing about trendy places like Barclay Prime, and the trendinistas that flock to them, is that they eventually move on, flitting to another trendy spot. Drink gouging catches up with you, IMHO, and 4 bells , or 5 greasestains, has a longer lasting effect than the profit from outrageously priced beverages. I' ve never seen cocktail prices as high as I saw at Barclay Prime, even more expensive than Le Bar Lyonnais, which can also get pretty gougy. BP's wine pricing is absolutely ridiculous, and an insult to anyone who knows wine pricing.

[mrbigjas]

what's the standard markup at high end places? we were at le bar lyonnaise the other night and our host bought a bottle of 2001 ch. rayas ($120 from the state store, and $300 there) and a bottle of 1986 haut-brion ($3something from the state store, $800 there).

that kinda caught me off guard--i thought it was pretty standard to mark up about 100%, but that's more than that.

[KatieLoeb]

what's the standard markup at high end places?  we were at le bar lyonnaise the other night and our host bought a bottle of 2001 ch. rayas ($120 from the state store, and $300 there) and a bottle of 1986 haut-brion ($3something from the state store, $800 there). 

that kinda caught me off guard--i thought it was pretty standard to mark up about 100%, but that's more than that.

←

Markups are higher at the low end and lower at the high end. For instance, a by-the-glass wine might cost $9/bottle and be served at $8 glass. But there's more waste with glass pours from giving out tastes and from having to occasionally pour some out because the bottle was opened too long. If Le Bar Lyonnaise buys a $300 bottle of Bordeaux, they can't mark it up four times because no one will pay $1200 for it. The higher volume and lower cost of goods at the "low" end funds the ability to purchase spectacular things for the high end and have them sit around taking up space. On average most bottles of wine are marked up between 2.5x or 3x the cost at restaurants.

[Andrew Fenton]

what's the standard markup at high end places?  we were at le bar lyonnaise the other night and our host bought a bottle of 2001 ch. rayas ($120 from the state store, and $300 there) and a bottle of 1986 haut-brion ($3something from the state store, $800 there). 

Holy crap! I want your friends. Trade?

[Andrew Fenton]

I've wondered for a long time: is there any way to actually measure the effect of a bad review? Not just from LaBan, but more generally. I mean, while we all know that people of taste and distinction count grease stains like astronomers count the stars in the heavens, and make their dining plans accordingly, is there a metric for how a review affects a restaurant's bottom line?

You'll see a restaurant like Marigold get a glowing review in the Inquirer, and their reservation book fills up-- but then, they've had lots of good reviews, as well as good word of mouth and reports on the internets. Contrariwise, I never ate at Sammy's after LaBan's review and its naaasty bologna-bite anecdote. It went out of business... but again, how much of that is due to his review, and how much due to other causes?

I suspect that in a large market like Philadelphia there's no evidence beyond the anecdotal and circumstantial. But I may be wrong: any evidence to the contrary?

[philadining]

is there a metric for how a review affects a restaurant's bottom line?

←

that's an excellent question, but I doubt we'll ever know. I'm sure any disappointments or irritations or thrills a critic reports are experienced by other diners as well and would be reflected in word-of-mouth, or likeliness to return, etc.

If a major reviewer totally trashes a place, I'm sure it has some impact. Conversely, 4 bells from LaBan (or 5 grease stains from Holly) probably puts it on a fair number of people's "must go" list. The effects of other gradations are likely too subtle to quantify. Sometimes even lukewarm reviews make a restaurant seem intriguing to me, and I'll go.

Sadly complaints about the drink gouging are likely to fall on deaf ears. Maybe because most restaurants are so freaking LOUD!!! Excessive volume has been one of LaBan's pet peeves, but I haven't noticed any improvement in local spots' acoustic design as a result.

I once heard Daniel Boulud justify wine mark-ups as simply what had to be done to keep the restaurant economically viable. I'm sure that's true to a degree, and in the end, if people will pay it.....

But there has to be a limit, as the wine prices get too high, I increasingly just order a glass. Even if it's a worse bargain, at least the final bill isn't as painful. If the drinks are insane, I skip having a cocktail. If that reduces my enjoyment of a place, I won't go back. I can't be alone. There's some really good cooking going on at area BYOBs, but I think people are also just relieved at not having to sell the family car just to have a nice bottle of wine with dinner.

One would hope that more restaurants would take a lesson from this, but I suspect they will only drop drink prices if people stop paying the high prices, not because LaBan complained about it. I do hope his comments at least plant the idea that things are getting out of hand, maybe it will have an effect. I hope so.

On a personal level, the prices, and wine prices in particular, make ME reluctant to go to Barclay Prime.

(edited to correct grade-school grammar sloppiness)

Edited February 14, 2005 by philadining (log)

[mrbigjas]

katie: thanks for the info. as i get more knowledgable about this stuff, it helps to have a basis on which to judge things.

andrew: i only have one or two friends who can do this sort of thing--one of them lives in saskatchewan, and the other in new york, and neither of them comes to philadelphia very often at all. so this was definitely a rare experience for me. part of the reason i looked up the LCB price of the wine was that i was kinda stunned by the menu prices. i mean, i know the world is expensive and i'm totally ok with that (and with my not being able to afford that), but whoa. $800? i.... yeah.

philadining, or anyone really: is craig laban still doing his decibel rating? i haven't seen it in his recent reviews, but i thought he was reporting on it a while ago.

Edited February 14, 2005 by mrbigjas (log)

[Capaneus]

what's the standard markup at high end places?  we were at le bar lyonnaise the other night and our host bought a bottle of 2001 ch. rayas ($120 from the state store, and $300 there) and a bottle of 1986 haut-brion ($3something from the state store, $800 there). 

that kinda caught me off guard--i thought it was pretty standard to mark up about 100%, but that's more than that.

←

Now *that* is one wrigly can o' worms...

Standard... Well, what Katie said. Additionally, the old-timey rule of thumb was "200% markup on wholesale". Never actually happened anywhere, but that was what we claimed we were looking for. Of course, in Philadelphia, because of the PLCB system, that meant pretty nearly three times retail - and high retail at that.

Reality these days is that many places come in at *over* 200% markup, often by close to 100%. So when I read your question, my first response was "Oh. Decent prices, actually". Not that I would choose to pay them.

[Capaneus]

philadining, or anyone really: is craig laban still doing his decibel rating?  i haven't seen it in his recent reviews, but i thought he was reporting on it a while ago.

←

Yeah, he is. In fact, being too loud was his one other complaint about Barclay Prime.

[KatieLoeb]

I've wondered for a long time: is there any way to actually measure the effect of a bad review?  Not just from LaBan, but more generally.  I mean, while we all know that people of taste and distinction count grease stains like astronomers count the stars in the heavens, and make their dining plans accordingly, is there a metric for how a review affects a restaurant's bottom line?

You'll see a restaurant like Marigold get a glowing review in the Inquirer, and their reservation book fills up-- but then, they've had lots of good reviews, as well as good word of mouth and reports on the internets.  Contrariwise, I never ate at Sammy's after LaBan's review and its naaasty bologna-bite anecdote.  It went out of business... but again, how much of that is due to his review, and how much due to other causes?

I suspect that in a large market like Philadelphia there's no evidence beyond the anecdotal and circumstantial.  But I may be wrong: any evidence to the contrary?

←

Andrew:

Chicken or egg question I think. If a reviewer says a place really sucks he might prevent some folks from ever giving it a try, but it seems if the reviewer is worth his/her salt (so to speak) that the place will eventually collapse on its own under the ponderous weight of their own bad food/inept service/bad concept/lack of hygiene or whatever. Sometimes it doesn't even take very long, as was evidenced with Sammy's. The resto biz is so fraught with peril financially, that having that sort of dirty laundry aired publicly usually only results in the Do Not Resuscitate order being signed faster. Are there examples of restaurants that were deserving of a truly heinous review initially that managed to get their acts together and dig themselves out of the hole? Maybe hire a new chef or better management to improve the food and service? There might be, but I can't think of any off the top of my head. Anyone else?

[wkl]

Four bells over the long run probably is better financially for a restaurant, I would think.The gouging on the wine list will keep me out.Those prices are absurd.

Katie, I can't think of any bad reviews that a place was able to turn around.But, remember Laban's review of "Venus and the Cowboy"? I think that was the name of Alison Barshak's place after she left Stripped Bass.I got the impression his review basicly put that place out of business.

[mrbigjas]

i have another question relating to this review: has craig laban given up his quest for anonymity?

i mean, don't you think that calling the sommelier over and telling him that $65 for a $15 bottle of wine is outrageous, and the guy lowers the price for you, makes you kind of memorable? at least memorable enough that if you were the sommelier and read that review, you'd remember the incident?

or is it just that everyone in any higher-level position in the local industry knows who he is anyway?

[Greg Ling]

i have another question relating to this review: has craig laban given up his quest for anonymity? 

i mean, don't you think that calling the sommelier over and telling him that $65 for a $15 bottle of wine is outrageous, and the guy lowers the price for you, makes you kind of memorable?  at least memorable enough that if you were the sommelier and read that review, you'd remember the incident?

or is it just that everyone in any higher-level position in the local industry knows who he is anyway?

←

Alot of chef's and/or managers know what he look's like ,My friend outs him whenever he sees him

[KatieLoeb]

There's a photo of him and a long list of his known reservation aliases hanging on the bulletin board in the office of virtually every restaurant I've ever worked in Philly. At least the ones where he'd be likely to show up. EVERYONE knows what he looks like. At least in that photograph. Granted if he were wearing a different suit or the Groucho glasses it would be tougher to recognize him...

The sommelier is a fool if he's charging $65 for wine that's a regular listed product in PA. Anyone could walk down the street to the store and see the price differential. Of course the PLCB website has the info too, but most folks don't check their Blackberry while perusing the wine list. It's rude.

The real question is has the restaurant provided a wine list with several price points and a decent selection of different varietals and styles of wine from various geographic wine regions. Did you enjoy the wine you paid $60 for, regardless of what the restaurant's cost was? Was it well matched to your food, if you asked for that sort of advice? Does the wine list compliment the cuisine that the restaurant is serving? If you can't answer these questions affirmatively, then you should always go to a BYOB establishment and you won't be dissappointed.

My goal is to have the best under $75 wine list in the city by the time the next Best of Philly rolls around. And to accomplish all of the above as well.

[mrbigjas]

that's an admirable goal, and if i know you at all you'll succeed. and i'll come and drink it.

i just believe that there are markups and then there are MARKUPS. and marking a $15 bottle of wine up to $40 or something is fine, and to be expected. but when a place marks everything up so high that the only thing a diner can get for under $45 or so is bully hill 'love my goat' or something they pour out of a box in the back, then it's doing its diners a disservice.

i guess it's what you're saying about 'several price points,' really. as someone who tries to drink half-decently on the lower end of the scale the majority of the time, i appreciate it when a restaurant makes the effort to have something for someone like me.

(edit: disservice, not misservice)

Edited February 15, 2005 by mrbigjas (log)

[cinghiale]

Are there examples of restaurants that were deserving of a truly heinous review initially that managed to get their acts together and dig themselves out of the hole?  Maybe hire a new chef or better management to improve the food and service?  There might be, but I can't think of any off the top of my head.  Anyone else?

←

Turning that Q around: How about those places not (well, IMO anyway) deserving of a heinous review from Laban? I'm thinking here of aliwak's late Bella, now home to Meritage (I think). I ate there three or four times, once even taking clients. I thought the food was excellent, FOH was competent, ali herself the epitome of hospitality. Then Laban smacks the place with one bell, and the typical "newcomer struggling to make it" is shuttered shortly thereafter. Granted, there may very well have been other factors at work, but that, to my mind, vastly undeserved review surely didn't help -- and (who knows?) may have even precipitated the restaurant's downfall.

[philadining]

... but when a place marks everything up so high that the only thing a diner can get for under $45 or so is bully hill 'love my goat' or something they pour out of a box in the back, then it's doing its diners a disservice. 

←

I had posted earlier with a tongue-in-cheek defense of "Love my Goat" recalling that the irreverence, and borderline psychotic weirdness of Bully Hill had gotten me interested in wine in the first place. There's something about showing up at a party with a bottle of "Space Shuttle Red" or (I'm not kidding) "Missing Children White" whose label bore a photo like you see on the side of a milk carton, that was sure to start a conversation! So that Goat Red has a special spot in my heart (although I can't say I like drinking it much anymore...)

But I spaced-out on the quite reasonable site rule about not posting copyrighted images and impulsively included one of their typically odd labels for reference. if you're not familiar with their vibe, you can get a sense on their website. Most of the wine's not that great, but they're an amusing bunch...

But of course I agree completely with the actual point of the post. I have occasionally jumped in and ordered a bottle that was priced way higher than I wanted to pay, and I have even occasionally thought it was worth it. But by and large, I would really appreciate a few reasonably-priced bottles on any list, we all know they exist. But the restaurants rely on that margin, so although I don't like it, I can't blame them too much for pushing it as far as they can.

This just came up in conversation the other day: the mark-ups generally made on soft drinks and coffee at any restaurant, not just swanky ones, are WAY more insane than even the worst offenders in the wine category, but it's incrementally so small that we don't get too worked up about it. But the theory is the same, it's how restaurants make money, they mark stuff up. I've paid 6 bucks for coffee in a nice restaurant.

The fact is that we'd likely scream louder if the wine was cheap but entree prices were even higher. So some marketing-types figured out that making drinks, and wine, and apps and desserts more expensive would be less offensive. There must be a middle ground, and I'd prefer not to have to do as LaBan did and haggle over the price of the wine. So I hope his complaints might help restauranteurs realize that there's a point at which people will resist the mark-ups, or just be dissuaded from eating at that establishment. Until then, I'm going to BYOBs more!

[stephenc]

Are there examples of restaurants that were deserving of a truly heinous review initially that managed to get their acts together and dig themselves out of the hole?  Maybe hire a new chef or better management to improve the food and service?  There might be, but I can't think of any off the top of my head.  Anyone else?

Figs was absolutely trashed by LaBan, and to my knowledge is still going strong.

[KatieLoeb]

... but when a place marks everything up so high that the only thing a diner can get for under $45 or so is bully hill 'love my goat' or something they pour out of a box in the back, then it's doing its diners a disservice. 

←

I had posted earlier with a tongue-in-cheek defense of "Love my Goat" recalling that the irreverence, and borderline psychotic weirdness of Bully Hill had gotten me interested in wine in the first place. There's something about showing up at a party with a bottle of "Space Shuttle Red" or (I'm not kidding) "Missing Children White" whose label bore a photo like you see on the side of a milk carton, that was sure to start a conversation! So that Goat Red has a special spot in my heart (although I can't say I like drinking it much anymore...)

But I spaced-out on the quite reasonable site rule about not posting copyrighted images and impulsively included one of their typically odd labels for reference. if you're not familiar with their vibe, you can get a sense on their website. Most of the wine's not that great, but they're an amusing bunch...

But of course I agree completely with the actual point of the post. I have occasionally jumped in and ordered a bottle that was priced way higher than I wanted to pay, and I have even occasionally thought it was worth it. But by and large, I would really appreciate a few reasonably-priced bottles on any list, we all know they exist. But the restaurants rely on that margin, so although I don't like it, I can't blame them too much for pushing it as far as they can.

This just came up in conversation the other day: the mark-ups generally made on soft drinks and coffee at any restaurant, not just swanky ones, are WAY more insane than even the worst offenders in the wine category, but it's incrementally so small that we don't get too worked up about it. But the theory is the same, it's how restaurants make money, they mark stuff up. I've paid 6 bucks for coffee in a nice restaurant.

The fact is that we'd likely scream louder if the wine was cheap but entree prices were even higher. So some marketing-types figured out that making drinks, and wine, and apps and desserts more expensive would be less offensive. There must be a middle ground, and I'd prefer not to have to do as LaBan did and haggle over the price of the wine. So I hope his complaints might help restauranteurs realize that there's a point at which people will resist the mark-ups, or just be dissuaded from eating at that establishment. Until then, I'm going to BYOBs more!

←

Actually Bully Hill is quite a respected wine maker, even <gasp> for one from New York State. Given that the terroir and climate of that latititude are probably not as ideal as other places, they do a respectable job under the circumstances.

And you're quite right about the other mark ups no one questions. A cup of coffee costs a restaurant pennies to make yet no one flinches when it's $3.00 on their bill. An espresso costs about 25 cents to make and can be marked up 1200%, yet nary a complaint. It's a matter of degrees. The amount of time that I spend crafting a beverage program, meeting with wine purveyors, tasting different products, and doing online research to provide my staff with product information for new wines is infinitely greater than the amount of time required to call in the order for a few cans of Illy espresso pods, yet I'm criticized for being greedy if I'm to try and achieve an industry standard Cost of Goods percentage of 25-35% overall. Doesn't seem right somehow, does it?

[philadining]

Actually Bully Hill is quite a respected wine maker, even <gasp> for one from New York State.  Given that the terroir and climate of that latititude are probably not as ideal as other places, they do a respectable job under the circumstances.

←

I know this is veering off topic, so I'll stop after this, but yes, Bully Hill makes some good wines, and deserve props for promoting a local growers and craft oriented method, experimenting with hybrid grapes, fighting the big corporate machine, and being generally silly. Sadly in recent years, especially since Walter S. _____ passed away, the place has gotten a bit slick and schticky, the label artwork isn't as good, and the wine seems a bit more tourist-pleasing. But they do still have a few good offerings hiding among the chaff. And heck, Love My Goat is great on a picnic.

And for terroir, Dr Konstantin Frank is just a couple hundred yards up the road, and they make vastly superior wines in general, at least the white ones. And Heron Hill is just another stagger north, and they make a couple credible wines from similar dirt and rain (and occasional sun.)

I've ordered Frank's Gewurtz at both Farmicia and Tangerine, and it wasn't too savagely marked-up, so maybe the margins vary with perceived hipness too...

And that's just it, there are plenty of little wineries from here and abroad that offer good, crafted wines that would still offer value even at triple mark-ups, and I hope to see a bit more of those on winelists. But then one probably doesn't go to Barclay Prime for bargains.