Restaurant Clientele

[tarteausucre]

I thought I'd start a topic that I've been musing about ever since my last few dining experiences. My intent is not to be provocative but to get us to consider the complexities of Vancouver's overall dining scene.

It seems that every time I go out to eat, my dining companions and I are usually the youngest people in the room (I'm in my late twenties by the way). Moreover, I've noticed that the "ethnic," cultural, and language diversity of the clientele of most higher-end restaurants does not necessarily reflect Vancouver's overall population demographics. I am not implying that mixing does not occur at all, but that this mixing appears to be fairly limited.

First of all, am I imagining this issue and if not, is it a problem?

Second of all, why is this happening? Is this problem just a matter of lack of disposable income? I appreciate the fact that not everyone can afford to eat at Lumiere and West on a regular basis but many of my friends have much higher incomes than I do but for whatever reason, choose only to eat at the most basic of establishments. Is it a difference in priorities (some groups prefer to spend their money on other things)? Are there many "solitudes" within the Vancouver dining scene? Or are the restaurants at fault in any way? Is there something about the decor, the service, issues of language, unfamiliarity with ingredients, cuisine, and/or dining style, or the overall dining experience that makes some people averse to going?

Thirdly, what do you think restaurants can do to encourage a broader cross-section of the population to attend their establishments? Should they be? I recognize that Dining Out Vancouver is one current strategy of getting more people into restaurants that they wouldn't ordinarily frequent.

I am not proposing affirmative action dining; nor am I implying that restaurants are exclusionary. Restaurants do have their target markets - it's good business practice, and certain restaurants do appeal to certain diners. However, I always believe that the more sharing and mixing, the more vibrant the Vancouver dining scene will be. Getting out of one's dining comfort zone is invariably a good thing (and a satisfied belly is usually the end result as well)!

I have my own thoughts on these questions but I thought I'd pose them to my fellow egulletters before voicing my opinions. Looking forward to your thoughtful and insightful responses!

[Chocoholic]

Interesting topic!

I think it is mostly a question of lifestyle. I work for a high-tech company (video games) in Vancouver and a lot of my friends either work for the same company or in the same industry. They are all young (25-35), have comfortable incomes and work and play hard. Yet I only have one friend who regularly comes out with me on dining expeditions around Vancouver. The rest of them simply don't care enough about food to spend more than $40 on a meal at a restaurant. They don't hesitate to drop $200 on a pair of brakes for their mountain bikes however, I have an old clunker bike that mostly sits in my garage gathering dust.

Interestingly enough, when we do make plans to go out, the bar and quality of the drinks is usually more important to them than the food. For me, the opposite is true.

As far as the restaurant scene is concerned, there are definitely different areas around the city where you will find a more eclectic crowd. Last Sunday we had lunch at The Foundation on Main and 7th. The food was great, hearty bowls of vegetarian chili, rice with beans and banana for the little one, etc. This Thursday the wife and I went to West for dinner, and I couldn't think of a more different dining experience and crowd in the restaurant. But lunch for 3 at The Foundation including a pint of beer came to $40. Dinner for two at West, 3 courses with a couple of glasses of wine cost more than $200. This makes a huge difference to a lot of people I know, including ones with 5 figure incomes. It all depends on where people want to spend their money. Quite a bit of mine goes to restaurants!

[nwyles]

It seems that every time I go out to eat, my dining companions and I are usually the youngest people in the room (I'm in my late twenties by the way). Moreover, I've noticed that the "ethnic," cultural, and language diversity of the clientele of most higher-end restaurants does not necessarily reflect Vancouver's overall population demographics. I am not implying that mixing does not occur at all, but that this mixing appears to be fairly limited.

First of all, am I imagining this issue and if not, is it a problem?

What is it that you are noticing ? Most diners in serious restaurants are older ? Or just older than you ?

Diversity ? Ethnic groups are sticking to restaurants within their own ethnic group ? What does that mean? What are you saying ? Only a certain type of French person is going to Lumiere ? Is Lumiere not approachable to all types of French people, be it Europeon French or French Canadian ?

Seriously, what are you looking for - representive portions of the restuarant's guests reflecting the cultural mix within our city? Depends what day and what restaurant in what area of town. Different ethnic groups have different forms of social interaction and how and where that takes place. And it does not always take place in a restaurant. Sometimes, in different groups, family is the foremost social group, and the "dining scene" involves the whole family. It is not really important for the group to be together in a restaurant, but just to be together. Large family gathering are always most comfortable at home. Is this what you are not seeing ? Large family gatherings in the back section of West ? Or are you wondering why some of your friends treat food as "fuel" and give it little attention, where you place a higher value on the surroundings and presentations of the food you eat.

Edited April 16, 2005 by nwyles (log)

[jamiemaw]

I thought I'd start a topic that I've been musing about ever since my last few dining experiences.  My intent is not to be provocative but to get us to consider the complexities of Vancouver's overall dining scene.

It seems that every time I go out to eat, my dining companions and I are usually the youngest people in the room (I'm in my late twenties by the way).  Moreover, I've noticed that the "ethnic," cultural, and language diversity of the clientele of most higher-end restaurants does not necessarily reflect Vancouver's overall population demographics.  I am not implying that mixing does not occur at all, but that this mixing appears to be fairly limited. 

First of all, am I imagining this issue and if not, is it a problem? 

Second of all, why is this happening?

Thirdly, what do you think restaurants can do to encourage a broader cross-section of the population to attend their establishments?

 

←

edited for emphasis

A very interesting topic, tarteausucre.

First, people tend to dine (just as they tend to engage other interests and activities) with their own cohort, i.e. people who look just like them. People are also, especially as they age, creatures of habit. To this mix you must also add the intimidation and cost factors related to fine dining.

Interestingly though, the most commercially viable restaurants, by in large, are those that blur the demographic boundaries and make their menus, decor and price points accessible and broadly relevant.

Example: Suppose I told you and your late 20s cohort that they could eat the food of one of Canada's leading chefs, but at less than half the price of his FD room, with hip decor, big buzz and a strong focus on cocktails and good value wines.

Of course that's all true--at Feenie's. He broke the line between FD and CFD, and today, Feenie's is a powerful profit generator, much more so than the mothership that begat it. Unintimidating, the room attracts a broad demographic, from the Shaugnessy ladies-who-lunch (the so-called 'yummy mummie' demo) to children and their grandparents, and across racial lines too. But there are many other examples in Vancouver of CFD rooms too. (Vancouver chefs invented the small plate sphenomenon in 1997, long before it caught on anywhere else in North America), and I've used the expression here before: Vancouverites have more a sense of taste than one of occasion.

Another cross-over restaurant (chain), Earls, attracts a very broad cross- section, again by age, race and income--it's a denominator based on a solid food and wine program and perceived value.

Just as we pick brands when we purchase anything, we also ask ourselves subconciously if tonight's choice for dining represents what and who we are. As you point out, for some the right brand or type of bike brakes remain much more important than that restaurant choice.

Programs like Dine Out Vancouver do fuzz the line, but then it reverts!

Finally, after spending far too much time in restaurants observing the human condition, I'm convinced that design plays an important role, confirming and even validating choices. So, for example, if you are in your late-20's you might feel more comfortable being described (or even defined) by hipper design, say at Afterglow, the Opus, Crush, Lift: if it's hip so must I be. An older demographic might simply feel more comfortable elsewhere, but it all confirms my earlier point, that people will eat and drink with people who look just like them.

Here's a further discussion on restaurant design and how it affects our choices.

Cheers,

Edited April 16, 2005 by jamiemaw (log)

[Junior]

In the restaurant where I work, the clintele is a group of regulars we see every week at the same time. Doctor Elim on Saturday's, the English Professors on Monday, the guys from the Light place on Friday's, etc. The one thing i noticed is that we have very few 25-35 people who frequent our place, it's mainly people who are above that age category(35 +). Here in Saskatoon, that demographic is one that has the most disposable income to afford a night out at our restaurant.

We often see "younger" people come in for dinner, take one look at the menu see how much the prices are, and then turn around and leave.

I think the group (25-35) tends to frequent the Keg and Earl's, again a quality of bar and drink over food issue. Sidenote, our Earl's is one of the top grossing restaurants in their chain. Earl's has been in Saskatoon since the dawn of time and I think was one of the second of third one's opened so this restuarant has defined what "fine dining" is in this city for a long time.

We have several very good ethic restaurants here as well and you would be surprised to see very many non-ethic people in them, most people here are not adventerous enough to enjoy eating out of their safety zone. We have a amazing Chinese restuarant here that serves an great dim sum on Sunday's, most times when we are there with family, we are the only non-chinese family there. I think that appiles to us as well, we serve very good french inspried food with the benefit of it being mostly sourced locally.

In Vancouver, a person does not have to travel far to be "educated" in food. It's all around you, great restuarant's, local food markets, the Okanagon, etc. In a province where the time literally has stood still for many generations, our food culture has not drastically changed and probaley never will.

People who have come back here from living in such places as Vancouver miss the food culture and I can not fathom why we do not place more emphasis on it here.

[*Deborah*]

The age question: I'm not in the minority any more (38) but I started my FD career at the age of 5, so I can understand what you mean about being the youngest person in a given room...I have often dragged a friend or boyfriend out to a dinner, and been amongst the youngest in the place. I've always had a "thing" for nice restaurants, though, even though many of my friends couldn't grasp paying more than $100 or $200 () for dinner. Those are the friends who will have nice plump pensions when they get old, when I'll be begging for parfait de foie gras scraps outside Oyama.

There is certainly a class question, or perhaps, better-stated, understanding appropriate behaviour question; a friend of mine works in the brokerage/stocks sector, and she tells tales of people with large amounts of cash throwing it around (along with food, on occasion, if you can believe it) in expensive restaurants, buying the most expensive thing simply because it is the most expensive...I don't even know what to say about that without sounding horribly elitist, but I suppose such people don't know how to behave in McDonald's any more than at Circolo or Le Crocodile.

As far as race goes, I suppose normally it's Caucasian and Asian people in higher end restaurants that I've been to in Vancouver...which seems fairly representative, except I guess for [indians] (I'm sorry, I know there's a something-Asian which is the current correct nomenclature, but I don't remember what it is). I'm guessing that culturally, people from India do not eat out so much? My best friend in 4th grade was Indian, and I don't remember that they ate out much, although economics weren't a barrier. (Her grandmother made us chapattis for after-school snacks, mmm.)

I'll agree with Jamie, and say that the hipper the restaurant, the younger the clientele (and more representative the racial mix). Maybe in 20 years, all of those hip 20-somethings will be the core clientele at the Lumiere of the day, because they are more used to eating out.

Maybe you guys can help with a question: when I was a child (1970s), eating out was for special occasions, unless it was Troll's for fish and chips, or White Spot. My mother used to entertain at home much more than eat out, and I remember her going to dinner parties at people's houses, too. Did people eat out as often and as routinely in the 1970s as we do today? I know I've met lots of people my age who didn't eat out very often, and that would include up to upper-middle-class; I knew some wealthy people who ate out a lot. Now, though, people at a lot of different economic levels eat out just because, rather than just on special occasions, or so it seems to me. It may have something to do with the shoebox-sized condos we now squeeze ourselves into, in downtown Vancouver; it's hard to have more than 2 or 4 guests for a sit-down dinner at home, in my house, at least...actually in my house, 4 people for sit-down is the limit. So if you have a bigger group, you by default go to a restaurant. Of course it's different in the suburbs!

I suppose the fact that in many cases, both halves of a couple work now, when in the 1970s, maybe only one half did, has something to do with the available cash / lack of available time to cook equation.

Sorry...end of ramble! and no conclusion, as usual

[Feedbag]

I get the intent of the topic, and because you're curious

about ethnic groups who don't dine out regularly isn't

implying anything negative, for those who are leaping to

that conclusion.

It's true; glance around a restaurant next time you're out

and you usually see a sea of whites (Chinese restaurants

excluded). For that matter, glance around a pub next time.

I have Indian friends and Chinese friends who say

one reason for this is they don't hold their liquor well.

They'd rather have a coke or tea than a beer or glass of wine

and don't feel comfortable ordering that in a bar.

My Indian friends also tell me their mothers/wives make

better Indian food than the restaurants. Don't know why,

on the whole, they're not interested in other cultures' food.

And the socializing in other places - homes, temples,

churches - is more comfortable. (Which doesn't explain

the popularity of restaurants in India....)

Of course these are generalizations, but worthy of note.

[mangez]

Putting food into one's mouth is a very personal thing, it's very hard to generalize based on age, income, ethnic and cultural background.

Edited April 16, 2005 by mangez (log)

[jamiemaw]

Putting food into one's mouth is a very personal thing, it's very hard to generalize based on age, income, ethnic and cultural background.

←

Not unlike women.

[3WholeCardamoms]

Putting food into one's mouth is a very personal thing, it's very hard to generalize based on age, income, ethnic and cultural background.

←

I agree that eating is a very personal thing and the danger of generalizing in this thread is potentially messy (and telling). However, I would like to add that we can't ignore how our desires and choices are greatly influenced by culture, class, ethnicity and gender. The rooms we enter and the places we patronize say much about us. As does what we order, how we share and prepare food, and how we talk about it later. I think these are personal decisions that are also under the influence so-to-speak.

As one example: Doesn't the concept of the 'food adventurer' who is willing to try the stuff deemed strange and adventurous eminate from a cultural perspective which is presumed the norm/centre?

And Jamie, What do you mean when you say we dine with someone "who looks like us"? Do you mean the person we arrive with or the people we can reasonablyexpect to see in the room? If it's the former, can you say more cuz it doesn't make sense to me and my experience.

3WC

edited to death

[mangez]

Putting food into one's mouth is a very personal thing, it's very hard to generalize based on age, income, ethnic and cultural background.

←

I agree that eating is a very personal thing and the danger of generalizing in this thread is potentially messy (and telling). However, I would like to add that we can't ignore how our desires and choices are greatly influenced by culture, class, ethnicity and gender. The rooms we enter and the places we patronize say much about us. As does what we order, how we share and prepare food, and how we talk about it later. I think these are personal decisions that are also under the influence so-to-speak.

As one example: Doesn't the concept of the 'food adventurer' who is willing to try the stuff deemed strange and adventurous eminate from a cultural perspective which is presumed the norm/centre?

And Jamie, What do you mean when you say we dine with someone "who looks like us"? Do you mean the person we arrive with or the people we can reasonablyexpect to see in the room? If it's the former, can you say more cuz it doesn't make sense to me and my experience.

3WC

edited to death

←

I believe the key to make this all fun is to be open minded. I always find it fascinating to try out different things, yet it does not mean we cannot learn and find joy from those who prefer to stick to their favourites who are far less adventurous.

Jamie raised a very good point about people wanting to dine with someone "who looks like us". May I suggest that some may like to dine at places with folks whom some may want to become, or be associated or be seen with. Absolutely nothing wrong but clearly there has to be a reason why people hang out at these clubs or hip places with unimpressive food yet at rocket prices?

It's all very personal.

[jamiemaw]

Putting food into one's mouth is a very personal thing, it's very hard to generalize based on age, income, ethnic and cultural background.

←

And Jamie, What do you mean when you say we dine with someone "who looks like us"? Do you mean the person we arrive with or the people we can reasonablyexpect to see in the room? If it's the former, can you say more cuz it doesn't make sense to me and my experience.

3WC

edited to death

←

The latter. Unless the former defines the latter.

Edited April 17, 2005 by jamiemaw (log)