Gilt

[rich]

Sure, it would have been better if the article weren't as focused on Gilt as it was.  But it was a very different type of article than the Del Posto one.

←

Agreed, I think the main issue was the emphasis on Gilt, which will be reviewed in the near future. I believe the article even criticized food (Dover Sole) at Gilt (or am I mixing up columns?).

[rich]

In Rich's scenario, the markup is 700%, not 800%. To calculate markup, you subtract original cost; hence, ($120-$15)/$15 = 700%.

←

Correct OA - was doing the math quickly in my head, forgot to subtract the cost. But I think most places figure six servings to a bottle, at least that's what it was when I worked in a restaurant 30 years ago. Maybe it's five now - still not a bad return.

[Sneakeater]

Sure, it would have been better if the article weren't as focused on Gilt as it was.  But it was a very different type of article than the Del Posto one.

←

Agreed, I think the main issue was the emphasis on Gilt, which will be reviewed in the near future. I believe the article even criticized food (Dover Sole) at Gilt (or am I mixing up columns?).

←

You're not, it did.

But what's so wrong with that? As I said, that's not any different from a pre-review in Diner's Journal.

(To be repetitious, to me, the main difference is a piece based on the reviewer's experience [even if he hasn't written his review yet] and a preview essentially based on press materials and interviews with the owners and staff.)

Edited January 13, 2006 by Sneakeater (log)

[JohnL]

Sure, it would have been better if the article weren't as focused on Gilt as it was.  But it was a very different type of article than the Del Posto one.

←

Agreed, I think the main issue was the emphasis on Gilt, which will be reviewed in the near future. I believe the article even criticized food (Dover Sole) at Gilt (or am I mixing up columns?).

←

You are correct re: the Sole.

also--you have hit it on the head.

The main issue is the emphasis on Gilt. He opens and ends the piece with some very critical observations about Gilt. A reader can't help come away with the impression that Gilt is not worth the money!

This is more suitable for a formal critique or review of the restaurant where Mr Bruni can provide context and perspective. In fact, should Mr Bruni's review warrant more than a mediocre rating (or even an outright pan), readers would be justified in being totally confused as to how much emphasis Bruni places upon price when reviewing restaurants. He is adding to the already large amount of confusion (witness the threads here) over just what the Times' (and Mr Bruni's) standards are? This is not good for a critic.

Bruni is his own worst enemy and the Times ain't helping him either!

[rich]

Sure, it would have been better if the article weren't as focused on Gilt as it was.  But it was a very different type of article than the Del Posto one.

←

Agreed, I think the main issue was the emphasis on Gilt, which will be reviewed in the near future. I believe the article even criticized food (Dover Sole) at Gilt (or am I mixing up columns?).

←

You're not, it did.

But what's so wrong with that? As I said, that's not any different from a pre-review in Diner's Journal.

(To be repetitious, to me, the main difference is a piece based on the reviewer's experience [even if he hasn't written his review yet] and a preview essentially based on press materials and interviews with the owners and staff.)

←

Essentially not anything "wrong" with it, but it pushes the envelope in a journalistic sense. The Diner's Journal is either a pre-review or a mini review of a specific aspect of a restaurant - I think he panned Luger's burgers in one of them.

To take a shot at Gilt, which will be reviewed, in a "newsy" piece on restaurant pricing smacks of editorial "hijinks" - it comes close to the sensationalism (even the headline was "Postish") that's normally reserved for papers such as the NY Post et al.

The NY Times used to be above that. Years ago that piece would have been authored by a non-critic or waited until the review was published. As JohnL said there was no foundation. But this is not the fault of any one reporter though. It's the malaise that lives within the Times once esteemed hallowed halls.

They made a similar mistake last week with the coal miners. Years ago, the Times never would have gone with that story without double confirmation, now it's just like every other paper. Sad, very sad. The Times was once a proud flag bearer of NYC, now it's merely flapping in the wind. Where is the Herald Tribune when you need it?

Edited January 13, 2006 by rich (log)

[Ken]

Finished with the RIBeye for two.

Four story hills farm, grass fed beef........quite incredible for not even being Wagyu.

Super buttery, great texture.

←

Sounds delicious, but did they claim that the beef was from Four Story Hill Farm? The milk-fed Poularde certainly was, but Sylvia Pryzant does not raise beef or veal.

[Vadouvan]

It would be interesting to see if they actually erase the supplements.

Word is that may have happened already.

Disturbing that the "food press" has that much power.

Speaking of "those who can afford it"

Stopped by there for a drink, they were booked for a private party.

Seems someone coughed up upwards of $75K in my estimation.The phrase should be changed from

I love NY to "welcome to NY, there is always someone richer than you"

[oakapple]

It would be interesting to see if they actually erase the supplements.

Word is that may have happened already.

Disturbing that the "food press" has that much power.

←

The supplements are still shown on the Gilt website, although they may not be updating regularly. (Some restaurant websites show menus that are months old.)

Arguably, the Times has considerably less power than it formerly did, because there are now so many more information sources—including the one you're reading right now. But such things do happen occasionally. Alain Ducasse fired Christian Delouvrier after a three-star smackdown from Mr. Bruni.

Edited January 13, 2006 by oakapple (log)

[akwa]

ouch is all i can say

from the sounds of what is being served

to criticize the value of a 3 cs prix fixe wo mentioning the 20 courses extra smacks of targeted reporting;

dont need to jump on the bruni bandwagon, but if he drives this food out of town, ny will be weaker

italian food can be sublime, so can other cuisines

[Nathan]

he didn't "criticize the value" (unless you count the Dover sole comment -- which seems justifiable)...he noted that the advertised price was misleading and the wine pricing outrageous.

that's actually quite different from saying whether the meal is worth it.

I'm beginning to think that most criticisms of Bruni are actually stylistic and not substantive.

[rich]

I'm beginning to think that most criticisms of Bruni are actually stylistic and not substantive.

←

Could very well be correct, but the style confuses the substance.

[akwa]

it is not worth criticizing bruni for style

for substance

eating dinner at a vanderbilt mansion called the palace, and being concerned with the tab seems a bit strained;

criticizing a 92 prix fixe for its supplements

not commenting on the freebies, which at my count are at a dozen, and certainly more generous than any restaurant I have eaten in New York or America for that matter;

to me price gouging is only relative to perceived value, otherwise how could any "worth" be estimated

pre-pre reviewing restaurants with food oped pieces is substantively a conflict of interest

i will refrain from further comment, but i think rampant criticism without comment is very detrimental to the quality level in the hospitality industry.

[docsconz]

it is not worth criticizing bruni for style

for substance

eating dinner at a vanderbilt mansion called the palace, and being concerned with the tab seems a bit strained;

criticizing a 92 prix fixe for its supplements

not commenting on the freebies, which at my count are at a dozen, and certainly more generous than any restaurant I have eaten in New York or America for that matter;

to me price gouging is only relative to perceived value, otherwise how could any "worth" be estimated

pre-pre reviewing restaurants with food oped pieces is substantively a conflict of interest

i will refrain from further comment, but i think rampant criticism without comment is very detrimental to the quality level in the hospitality industry.

←

I haven't read anything by Bruni or anyone else so far that has dampened my desire for visiting Gilt. While the idea of so many supplements is a bit of a turn-off, it is not so much so that I would not go nor would it affect my overall impression of the restaurant. The wine-by-the-glass prices do sound high, but until I go there I can't really say how it might effect my impression.

I generally agree with everything you have said here, Will, except I don't really see the piece so much a conflict of interest as much as it is simply poor form.

[akwa]

imho, the concept of the "review" is stripped of authority when it becomes merely personal taste; therefore, at least the pretension of preliminary neutrality should be maintained.

[oakapple]

Steve Cuozzo has an early look at Gilt in today's New York Post. He has some of the same complaints that Bruni had, although he talks about the food in more depth:

Since he came to New York from London five years ago and worked under David Bouley, Liebrandt has been head chef at two short-lived places — Atlas, where diners practically came to blows over his love-it-or-hate-it green apple-wasabi sorbet with olive oil, and Papillon, where he presided over a tasting menu guests consumed blindfolded.

Gilt is many times more mature. With magical dishes like ocean trout slow-cooked with clementines and sunchokes, it's even potentially great. But it makes you want to call 911 — and not because its $92, three-course dinner prix fixe comes with $18-$28 supplements. No, it's the shakedown wine list aimed at wow-the-babe high-rollers who won't know what to make of Liebrandt's cooking that made me scavenge like a vagrant to find anything under $200.

Yet, Gilt must sell a fortune in wine to cover its rent and astronomical labor costs. It has 90 employees (including a few at the bar) to handle 52 seats, maybe the highest staff-to-customer ratio in town.

In a companion piece, Cynthia Kilian talks about cooking with liquid nitrogen:

Roiling at minus 320 Fahrenheit, it's become a muse of Spain's Ferran Adria and Heston Blumenthal of England's Fat Duck.

The Fat Duck's signature green tea and lime intermezzo "cooked" tableside in the super coolant got Gilt chef Paul Liebrandt percolating about the possibilities.

"It's very fascinating stuff," he says. So he's created a "baguette bonbon" using it, turning sugar, salt and fresh yeast into a puffball that literally melts in your mouth.

Edited January 18, 2006 by oakapple (log)

[tan319]

Re: The NYPost article.

And the knives come out.

Gee, he's 29 and talented and confident...

Hmmmmm.... That = full of himself.

It's that rockstar thing again.

Chefs aren't allowed to be ballsy.

"Aw shucks" works better.

Screw 'em, hate their bullshit ( papers)

[oakapple]

Screw 'em, hate their bullshit ( papers)

←

Bruni and Cuozzo are about as different as can be, but they have very similar complaints. In my view, this gives credibility to both.

[tan319]

Screw 'em, hate their bullshit ( papers)

←

Bruni and Cuozzo are about as different as can be, but they have very similar complaints. In my view, this gives credibility to both.

←

Could be but, why does someone like eG member bryanZ ( amongst others) review it swell, talking about how much extra food ( amuse wise, etc,) and didn't mention the wine controversy until it hit the papers.

bryanZ is a pretty even handed, enthusiastic, supportive gourmet.

Reviewers who still have to drag out the old tired "blindfolded dinner" at Atlas or Pappillon are like rock writers who still mention the "Bat Biting" incident when they write something about Ozzy Osbourne, boring.

Question... is Gilt REALLY the ONLY restaurant in NYC who are hiking wine prices up?

Also, Liebrandt having a staff of 92 for a 54 person dining room says that he is trying to give an experience on par with France and Spains best and most starred high end restaurants, IMO.

[Vadouvan]

Its just all Whiny BS.

Gilt isnt ripping anyone off.

Its an expensive place, dont want to go ?

There are lots of other restaurants on the island.

The fact that two people in the same industry have the same opinion isnt a definite barometer of credibility. I am suspicious of food writers in general and I dont really think they reach independent conclusions. I am sure cuozzo read Bruni's article last week, its just as possible he may have been influenced by it.........as it is that he reached his own independent conclusions so that theory does not work.

happens all the time.

Every high end restaurant in NY has incredible markups on wine.

Every high end restaurant in NY peddles bottled water.

Its hypocrisy using GILt as a scapegoat.

They do the same thing at Ducasse, Per Se, JG, daniel,Marche, Cru, Bernadin ect ect.

[oakapple]

Why does someone like eG member bryanZ ( amongst others) review it swell, talking about how much extra food ( amuse wise, etc,)  and didn't mention the wine controversy until it hit the papers.

bryanZ is a pretty even handed, enthusiastic, supportive gourmet.

Well, I've no quarrel with BryanZ, but it's just one data point.

Every high end restaurant in NY has incredible markups on wine.

Bruni said that, even judged against the handful of restaurants in its peer group, Gilt's wine list sets a new standard for extravagant expense. Quoting Bruni:

Gilt may present itself as comparable in price to Jean Georges and Le Bernardin, both of which charge $95 for three savory courses and dessert. But tack on the surcharges and a glass or two of white — at Jean Georges you can get one for $9, at Le Bernardin for $13 — and Gilt has lofted you to unexpected stratospheres of spending.

Edited January 18, 2006 by oakapple (log)

[Megan Blocker]

Gael Greene has a quick blurb about Gilt on nymetro.com this week...

Edited January 18, 2006 by Megan Blocker (log)

[tan319]

Still think it's about his past rep and a "how dare he!" attitude.

[robert40]

We are in the day of age where it is no longer relevant how much talent a young chef has. Cooking a carrot perfectly ala Robuchon is no longer enticing to the majority and chefs and restaurants are forced to invent some type of gimmick to draw attention to themselves to stand out from the pack.

Chef's now must be able to foresee the future and predict the next thing that will excite an ever easily bored customer. And these gimmicks are always a gamble when it comes to how the press is going to perceive it.

Problem is chefs must push the envelope more and more to be noticed.

In a more extreme case an example is Chef Liebrandt's blind folding customers and in a more simple case Ducasse's box of pens. In both cases the press trashed them and are still unrelentless to this day.

Of coarse then you have Batali's orange sneaker and shorts gimmick that draws a pubic relation's pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

Chef's spend years developing their talent and career and after all that sweat and sacrifice their ship finely comes in only to have to gamble on what will be the next attention grabber. Only to be sunk by some critic.

It's a shame that it all comes down to a roll of the dice in the end.

[oakapple]

Chef's spend years developing their talent and career and after all that sweat and sacrifice their ship finely comes in only to have to gamble on what will be the next  attention grabber. Only to be sunk by some critic.

It's a shame that it all comes down to a roll of the dice in the end.

←

Launching a restaurant is indeed a roll of the dice, but not for the reason you state. A single critic can't make or break a restaurant these days. You have mediocre places like Café des Artistes and One if by Land that aren't adored by any critic, but are consistently packed, year after year. And you have places that fail, like Laurent Tourondel's late lamented Cello, despite rave reviews.

Gilt will have plenty of press—three critics have already written about it, and it's been open less than a month. A welter of negative criticism would be damaging, but I see no sign of that happening.

[docsconz]

Gael Greene has a quick blurb about Gilt on nymetro.com this week...

←

I couldn't really tell if she liked it or didn't. She certainly wrote some positive things, although the tone came across to me as negative.