Galvin - Bistrot de Luxe

[naebody]

One aperitif, 2 courses each, a force-feeding of cheese, decent bottle of Gewurtztraminer, glass of Banyuls: £100. I do like Galvin, but with the price creeping up to £50 a head, there are better, more polite options around.

←

Went for a late lunch yesterday, first visit. Pitched up without a booking at 2pm. No problem. I had the set: jerusalem artichoke soup followed by grilled red mullet. The date went a la carte with a dodine of duck then a goat's cheese/onion/beetroot thing, and we shared a cheeseplate to finish. Food faultless. Service polite and efficient. Add in a bottle of very decent 2000 Languedoc and a bottle of Evian, and the bill came out at £62 including service.

I don't doubt the claim prices are "creeping up", and the booze and water mark-ups are at typical London levels. But I still challenge anyone to name a better value, more civilised lunch option inside Zone 1.

[Jon Tseng]

But I still challenge anyone to name a better value, more civilised lunch option inside Zone 1.

←

Royal China along the block

one usually stuffs oneself for fifteen quid

ok, maybe not ticking the civilised box

J

[Rian]

I don't doubt the claim prices are "creeping up", and the booze and water mark-ups are at typical London levels. But I still challenge anyone to name a better value, more civilised lunch option inside Zone 1.

The prix fixe menu is fantastic value, I agree. I was just a little irritated by the service, though I admit that this was largely a function of how busy the place was when we sat down. How busy was it yesterday lunchtime?

Royal China along the block

one usually stuffs oneself for fifteen quid

There is also the newly opened Royal China Club just up the road. It looked more civilised (lots of black wood, fish tank) when I walked past last night, but it also looked devoid of customers. A quick glance at the menu showed the dim sum to be in the region of £4.50 and up. That explains the empty tables, then.

[naebody]

The prix fixe menu is fantastic value, I agree. I was just a little irritated by the service, though I admit that this was largely a function of how busy the place was when we sat down. How busy was it yesterday lunchtime?

Full capacity when we sat down, reducing to about 1/3 by the time we were finished (4ish). The front of house lady was most charming and accommodating, despite myself and the better half looking like we'd been at Fabric until 4am before sleeping it off under a bridge. And our waiter provided entertainment value by saying everything in a brave approximation of a French accent (I think he was from Manchester).

In a place like this, with a very high turnover at the front of house and a proportionate shortage of regular customers, it's probably unfair to be too critical of individual staff. They'll be on minimum wage or below, and working for that fixed 12.5% tronc with nil chance of a cash fillip thanks to chip & pin.

Frankly, until this country recognises that service needs to be paid rather than capriciously rewarded, we should consider it a bonus every time the waiter chooses not to stir our soup with his dangly bits. However, that's another debate for another day ...

[Scott]

Frankly, until this country recognises that service needs to be paid rather than capriciously rewarded, we should consider it a bonus every time the waiter chooses not to stir our soup with his dangly bits. However, that's another debate for another day ...

←

whoa. steady on there. until you establish "who" should be paying the service, and the manner in which it is applied, the debate can't progress any further.

[naebody]

Frankly, until this country recognises that service needs to be paid rather than capriciously rewarded, we should consider it a bonus every time the waiter chooses not to stir our soup with his dangly bits. However, that's another debate for another day ...

←

whoa. steady on there. until you establish "who" should be paying the service, and the manner in which it is applied, the debate can't progress any further.

←

Here's 700 words from AA Gill on Galvin's tronc policy. And obviously, the employer should pay a living wage which would be reflected in the customer's bill, rather than rely on a supposed act of gratuity or charity by the customers.

Can it progress any further now?

Edited April 12, 2006 by naebody (log)

[erica graham]

I think he mentioned his feelings again in his review this week (and if I could only learn how to insert a hyperlink I would do about here!!)

[Matthew Grant]

Dinner here last night, my second visit in the last few weeks. I won't go into too much detail , pressed shoulder of lamb lacked seasoning and IMO was a little too firm, not enough fat involved. Braised veal cheeks was a good dish, rich madeira sauce, melting veal cheeks, what more could you ask? Desserts were hit and miss. Lemon tart was good IMO although one of our table thought the pastry a little soft but this is a bistro not a 3 star restaurant. Rhum Baba was too powerful with Rum! It was poured at the table but the alcohol made it far too difficult to eat. Tarte tatin was not Tarte Tatin I'm afraid, a derisory piece of pastry with a neat pile of apples that hadbn't been cooked enough. A seperate caramel poured on the plate. Good ice cream to accompany. I got quite excited when I saw a Tatin for one person. Apricot Souffle was not as good as last time, Cremem Brulee was judged as good although I didn't try it.

Overall, despite some reservations about the food, I enjoy the restaurant, it has a nice feel to it and it is very busy which is a good sign for the business.

Edited April 13, 2006 by Matthew Grant (log)

[Scott]

Frankly, until this country recognises that service needs to be paid rather than capriciously rewarded, we should consider it a bonus every time the waiter chooses not to stir our soup with his dangly bits. However, that's another debate for another day ...

←

whoa. steady on there. until you establish "who" should be paying the service, and the manner in which it is applied, the debate can't progress any further.

←

Here's 700 words from AA Gill on Galvin's tronc policy. And obviously, the employer should pay a living wage which would be reflected in the customer's bill, rather than rely on a supposed act of gratuity or charity by the customers.

Can it progress any further now?

←

nope.

you just ended it right there, on an entirely different point to the one you started with

[Paul Reynard]

Just found that they have updated their website at last and looks really good:#

http://www.galvinrestaurants.com/

Really do need to get myself down there again.