PrimeTime Tables

[oakapple]

Rich's comments show the power of the Wrong Analogy.

The most telling points are the false name and the caution not to mention where you got the reservation. I leave the legality to the lawyers, but it's undeniably shady. Nothing remotely like that is involved with eBay, critics' reviews, or even tipping the maitre d'.

[rich]

Rich's comments show the power of the Wrong Analogy.

The most telling points are the false name and the caution not to mention where you got the reservation. I leave the legality to the lawyers, but it's undeniably shady. Nothing remotely like that is involved with eBay, critics' reviews, or even tipping the maitre d'.

←

Let's see about that.

Ebay - many scams involving people who register under assumed names, never send items that have been paid for, many scams from people who bid, never pay and can't be found...hmmm

critics' reviews - eat for free, make reservations under assumed names, some write their reviews under assumed names, some go in disguise...hmmmm

tipping MD - silently slipping money to get ahead of a line or get a better table, while leaving people with reservations to hang, money goes unreported into MD's pocket...hmmmmm

Right - nothing shady about those.

[Sneakeater]

I don't see it as illegal or unethical at all. It's no different from queuing up for anything that's free, and then selling that item.

What I think it does do is expose, in a more obvious way than the no-show problem, the idiocy of the current system high-end restaurants use for offering reservations. It's just unsustainable to offer reservations with a cost-free cancellation policy, a weak confirmation policy and no means of policing. It's no way to run a business. Hotels, airlines and many other services have all come up with superior models. Because hotels are part of the hospitality industry, they probably provide the best models. If restaurants don't improve the system, they'll just leave open opportunities for others to benefit from their foolishness.

This isn't a new concept, either. There have over time been several attempts, and it's a pretty standard trick of the trade for private guides who cater to rich tourists. There have also been efforts -- I was involved in one about 7-8 years ago -- to auction prime tables for charity, with the restaurants' cooperation.

←

So, just to make what I take to be an unstated premise clear, you're saying that a (if not "the") primary cause of the scarcity of reservations at "hot" spots is the practice of making multiple reservations and then either no-showing without cancelling or failing to cancel until the last minute?

[rich]

Live and let live I say - everyone has to make a living.

←

The point is, these guys are taking something away FROM ME. Why shouldn't I be pissed off?

←

They're not taking anything from you SE. If you wanted to eat there that bad, you would have the reservation way in advance.

It actually helps you. You enjoy going to places at the last minute - now you have a means (if you choose) to get a table at a prime hour.

[Sneakeater]

Live and let live I say - everyone has to make a living.

←

The point is, these guys are taking something away FROM ME. Why shouldn't I be pissed off?

←

They're not taking anything from you SE. If you wanted to eat there that bad, you would have the reservation way in advance.

It actually helps you. You enjoy going to places at the last minute - now you have a means (if you choose) to get a table at a prime hour.

←

They are, though. I don't make reservations way in advance. (That's why I've never eaten at Per Se, rarely eat at JG, and Ramsay is still a ways off for me.) And they're virtually ensuring that I have to (or else pay a premium). You can say that, since I don't want to pay the premium, it must not be important enough to me to eat at the restaurant. I'd only reply: enough already (with the cost, I mean).

Edited January 19, 2007 by Sneakeater (log)

[Nathan]

"I'm affronted by the fact that this will now make getting reservations -- already much too hard -- even harder."

Here's why you're wrong. It will make getting reservations easier. It will make getting reservations arguably more expensive (though if it takes me two hours to get a reservation to somewhere...than spending 10 seconds and $45 is a bargain at what I bill)...though in many cases it makes them cheaper in terms of opportunity cost.

What's not to like?

[Sneakeater]

What's not to like is that I don't go to the places that take two hours to get a reservation. But this service, if it catches on, will turn just about EVERYPLACE into a place where I have to pay a premium to get a prime reservation.

[Nathan]

"The most telling points are the false name and the caution not to mention where you got the reservation. I leave the legality to the lawyers, but it's undeniably shady. Nothing remotely like that is involved with eBay, critics' reviews, or even tipping the maitre d'."

Tipping a maitre d' isn't done surreptiously? Could have fooled me. (Granted that the classy way to do is to tip him or her on the way out the door..but it's still done under the table -- usually with the cash folded inside the handshake.)

[Nathan]

"What's not to like is that I don't go to the places that take two hours to get a reservation. But this service, if it catches on, will turn just about EVERYPLACE into a place where I have to pay a premium to get a prime reservation."

It won't. The business model only works for the places where it is really difficult to get a reservation. People aren't going to pay $45 for ordinary places. And it already appears that this is geared towards tables for 4 and the like (the hardest reservations to get).

We all know that the easiest way to get a two-top at a difficult to get into restaurant is to call the afternoon of the day you want to dine, to grab a cancellation or even a table from the hold-back-for-possible-celebs-or-regulars supply.

This service ends at noon the day of. (i.e. right before the confirmation calls). if anything it might increase the number of tables available the day of (for free).

[rich]

Live and let live I say - everyone has to make a living.

←

The point is, these guys are taking something away FROM ME. Why shouldn't I be pissed off?

←

They're not taking anything from you SE. If you wanted to eat there that bad, you would have the reservation way in advance.

It actually helps you. You enjoy going to places at the last minute - now you have a means (if you choose) to get a table at a prime hour.

←

They are, though. I don't make reservations way in advance. (That's why I've never eaten at Per Se, and why Ramsay is still a ways off for me.) And they're virtually ensuring that I have to (or else pay a premium). You can say that, since I don't want to pay the premium, it must not be important enough to me to eat at the restaurant. I'd only reply: enough already (with the cost, I mean).

←

Not going to dispute the cost factor, but isn't it nice to know it's there, if you choose?

As I said upthread, if I'm spending $400 another $40 isn't going to make a difference.

This service is great if you're going on a special date and want to impress, forgot to make that reservation a month ago for your anniversary, came into town at the last minute and want to try a great spot, etc... In those instances wouldn't everyone be willing to pay a 10% premium to get a last minute reservation?

I just don't see the harm, but I see a lot of positives.

Edited January 19, 2007 by rich (log)

[Fat Guy]

So, just to make what I take to be an unstated premise clear, you're saying that a (if not "the") primary cause of the scarcity of reservations at "hot" spots is the practice of making multiple reservations and then either no-showing without cancelling or failing to cancel until the last minute?

←

The scarcity of reservations occurs because demand exceeds supply.

The free, no-cost-to-cancel, no-enforcement reservations mechanism creates additional headaches, for example it's the main reason why people don't get seated on time (because restaurants have to overbook to compensate).

[oakapple]

What I think it does do is expose, in a more obvious way than the no-show problem, the idiocy of the current system high-end restaurants use for offering reservations. It's just unsustainable to offer reservations with a cost-free cancellation policy, a weak confirmation policy and no means of policing. It's no way to run a business. Hotels, airlines and many other services have all come up with superior models. Because hotels are part of the hospitality industry, they probably provide the best models. If restaurants don't improve the system, they'll just leave open opportunities for others to benefit from their foolishness.

←

I don't know about "unsustainable," given that the system has worked this way since...forever.

In a sense, the restuarant and hotel industries are converging. Most hotels, it is true, require a credit card to hold a reservation. But in most cases, you can cancel within 24 hours, without your card getting charged. It is pretty much cost-free to reserve and cancel, unless you've booked a package tour, or something like that.

Many restaurants already require a credit card for some high-demand holidays (New Year's, Valentine's Day, Mother's Day). Per Se and Masa require it every day of the year. I suspect this trend will become more widespread.

The airline analogy is problematic. There are 20,000 restaurants in New York. If a few of them started treating their customers the way airlines do, I think a lot of customers would take their business elsewhere. There is so little competition in the airline industry that they can get away with Draconian change & cancellation fees.

Edited January 19, 2007 by oakapple (log)

[Fat Guy]

I agree that the hotel system is not burdensome. It's a good example of a reasonable system that works to the benefit of both the hotel and the consumer. Restaurants should use it.

As with many things that seemed sustainable "forever," the current restaurant reservation system is likely to become more and more tortured until it is wholesale revised. Certainly, 99% or more of the restaurants out there will be just fine with their current procedures (most don't take reservations at all, or only reserve half and save half for walk-ins, etc.), but for the tiny percent of a percent of restaurants that have overbooking and no-show problems, it's just going to get worse going forward (as it has been getting worse for about, I'd estimate, 20 years).

[BryanZ]

Here's an unexciting update. After yesterday's Eater/Urbandaddy release, I still haven't heard back to have my registration confirmed. I'm guessing they're overloaded with requests and might be screening potential members (they did ask who I was referred by in the registration form).

It seems that one needs to invest a significant amount of time to be able to pay for a reservation. How ironic.

[rich]

Here's an unexciting update.  After yesterday's Eater/Urbandaddy release, I still haven't heard back to have my registration confirmed.  I'm guessing they're overloaded with requests and might be screening potential members (they did ask who I was referred by in the registration form).

It seems that one needs to invest a significant amount of time to be able to pay for a reservation.  How ironic.

←

They probably think you're Rachael Ray's shill.

[docsconz]

I'd rather pay an upfront reservation fee to the restaurant that would be applied to my bill. Better yet, I'd want that fee to be refundable upon cancellation reasonably in advance of the reservation - say 24hrs. Better yet, have no upfront fee, but leave a credit card with a penalty for no-show or late cancellation. I could deal with any of those, however, I do resent a "service" that prevents me from being able to make my own reservation because they have gobbled up all the tables for re-sale. Perhaps unethical is too strong a word. Dishonorable (if that still has relevance) might be more appropriate.

[Fat Guy]

Well that's the problem with relying on the honor system in a dishonorable world: people aren't going to behave just because it's the honorable thing to do.

When demand exceeds supply, something has to happen.

One thing you can do is adjust price until supply and demand even out. Restaurants already do this to some extent: they charge more for dinner than for lunch (sometimes for the exact same food), they have early bird specials, they charge more on holidays. This could of course be extended to charging more for 8pm tables on Friday nights, either through a supplement or higher menu prices or a higher minimum price.

Another thing you can do is ration. Restaurants are practicing a form of rationing when they make people jump through hoops to get the reservations in the first place; it's rationing by attrition. They could raise the level of rationing to something a little more egalitarian if they, for example, took all the requests made between X and Y date and then did a random drawing. But of course people would put their names in multiple times, using home, work and cell numbers.

There are lots of things you can do. The one thing you can't do -- unless you've been living under a rock -- is be terribly surprised that, if you give something away for less than it can fetch on the open market, somebody else is going to sell it and make money on it instead of you, unless you mobilize the entire law enforcement apparatus of a nation to put a stop to it and enforce it with the death penalty.

[docsconz]

Well that's the problem with relying on the honor system in a dishonorable world: people aren't going to behave just because it's the honorable thing to do.

When demand exceeds supply, something has to happen.

One thing you can do is adjust price until supply and demand even out. Restaurants already do this to some extent: they charge more for dinner than for lunch (sometimes for the exact same food), they have early bird specials, they charge more on holidays. This could of course be extended to charging more for 8pm tables on Friday nights, either through a supplement or higher menu prices or a higher minimum price.

Another thing you can do is ration. Restaurants are practicing a form of rationing when they make people jump through hoops to get the reservations in the first place; it's rationing by attrition. They could raise the level of rationing to something a little more egalitarian if they, for example, took all the requests made between X and Y date and then did a random drawing. But of course people would put their names in multiple times, using home, work and cell numbers.

There are lots of things you can do. The one thing you can't do -- unless you've been living under a rock -- is be terribly surprised that, if you give something away for less than it can fetch on the open market, somebody else is going to sell it and make money on it instead of you, unless you mobilize the entire law enforcement apparatus of a nation to put a stop to it and enforce it with the death penalty.

←

Someone has certainly seized an opportunity, but that doesn't mean we have to like it or support it. I certainly don't intend to even if it means that I may not be able to get a reservation for some fashionable restaurants. I also won't encourage others to support it. Instead I will do as I am doing here and discourage it even if my voice is lone and unheard.

[Fat Guy]

I just don't think that's going to be as effective as the death penalty, John!

Seriously, there's just no reason to think a campaign of disapprobation will have any effect. The closest analogy I can think of is to ticket scalpers. There are some differences, like the fact that scalpers have to lay out cash, and also there's this distinction between licensed ticket brokers/agents and black market scalpers, but fundamentally it's all about selling marked up tickets for admission to one kind of show or another.

There has been a whole heck of a lot written about ticket scalping. Economists love to write about the subject because it demonstrates so many principles in play around such a seemingly simple phenomenon. And there have been an incredible number of attempts to stamp out scalping, including through arrests and prosecution. None of it has worked.

Really the only thing that works is to capture that market. Licensing and regulating scalpers is one way to approach it. That's only going to work if the licensed industry can provide the same service as the black market. The most effective way to eliminate scalping, though, would be to use demand-based pricing at the outset and then release tickets in bunches over time at an auction price or something along those lines.

[jsmeeker]

the name thing WOULD bother me.

I really don't want to dine under any sort of "false" pretense. Oh, sure, for a one time meal at PerSe, I could show up and say "Hi, I'm Joe Smith" and claim the reservation I paid for, But then they would call me Mr. Smith, and I would feel "weird". When I went to pay, I would whip out my Amex card that had a name other than Joe Smith on it. That *could* be awkward, maybe.

But what if I wanted to do as Fat Guy suggests and develop a relationship with a good restaurant. Go there many times. I can't keep doing that with a different name each time, can I? They may recognize my face, but I would always show up with a different name. Again, that would make me feel weird.

If the restaurant did this directly, then I would be OK with it.. If more charged a no-show fee, I would be OK. Of course, I think a lot of people DON'T show and skip out on a reservation (maybe even a confirmed one) because they KNOW restaurants DO overbook, will have walk ins, and have probably had many reservations NOT honored at their appointed times..

[Fat Guy]

People dine in restaurants under assumed names all the time, for many reasons. Sometimes celebrities and politicians want to be treated like royalty; other times they don't want the attention. They also have their tablemates make the reservations when they don't want to be noticed. And restaurants are certainly accustomed to having person X make the reservation while person Y pays -- the bigger the table the greater the chance that the person paying won't be the person who made the reservation. Nor will the restaurant find it scandalous that you "used a friend's reservation." It's not going to poison the relationship or even affect it.

Of course, if you already have a relationship with a restaurant, you shouldn't need to buy a reservation. Most restaurants in the category we're talking about will hold back a substantial portion of their prime tables for preferred customers. (Those tables, by the way, are not going to be available to the scalpers.)

These reservation scalpers had better have a whole mess of different phone numbers to work with. So long as they do that and are relatively clever about their other procedures, it's not going to be easy for restaurants to catch them.

[Nathan]

What FG is essentially describing is yield pricing...essentially what airlines do.

As he noted, the pricing differentiation between lunch and dinner is an obvious example. Another one is that some restaurants serve a late night (i.e. after midnight) menu that is cheaper than the evening menu.

Some offer a Sunday night menu that is cheaper than other days.

Some restaurants essentially offer a ten dollar discount for reservations booked at less than prime time (they offer a 1000 points on Open Table for certain reservation times).

[jsmeeker]

People dine in restaurants under assumed names all the time, for many reasons. Sometimes celebrities and politicians want to be treated like royalty; other times they don't want the attention. They also have their tablemates make the reservations when they don't want to be noticed. And restaurants are certainly accustomed to having person X make the reservation while person Y pays -- the bigger the table the greater the chance that the person paying won't be the person who made the reservation. Nor will the restaurant find it scandalous that you "used a friend's reservation." It's not going to poison the relationship or even affect it.

Of course, if you already have a relationship with a restaurant, you shouldn't need to buy a reservation. Most restaurants in the category we're talking about will hold back a substantial portion of their prime tables for preferred customers. (Those tables, by the way, are not going to be available to the scalpers.)

These reservation scalpers had better have a whole mess of different phone numbers to work with. So long as they do that and are relatively clever about their other procedures, it's not going to be easy for restaurants to catch them.

←

Hmmm... Maybe you are right. My post was just my initial reaction. It seemed a little "underhanded" to me. I'm not sure if I can equate it to ticket scalping, though.

[oakapple]

Eater has several more posts on PrimeTime Tables, including here, where the service has now issued a vigorous defense:

Due to the growing frustrations of making reservations our service has become a necessity for busy individuals and especially corporate executives. Nine out of ten restaurants today have a computerized answering system where callers are asked to leave their name and number and hope someone will get back to them. Nine times out of ten, callers are put on hold for an exorbitant amount of time and when they do get through they are told tables are available at 5:30 or 10pm. Prime-Time-Tables takes away that frustration by doing the "leg work" for our members. We are NOT selling tables at restaurants, we are selling the service of providing reservations for the most desired time. This service not only benefits our members but it is also a positive and free service to the restaurants as it eliminates the diner's direct contact and ultimate frustration with the challenges of making a reservation.

Now, this is a bunch of hooey. If the service is such a boon to the restaurants, why are diners "informed that mentioning PrimeTimeTables at restaurant check-in is absolutely verboten"?

[Fat Guy]

Would anybody have an objection to the service if it did things in a different sequence:

- You call the service and say "Please get me a reservation at Daniel at X time on Y date."

- The service speed dials, waits on hold, etc., negotiates the reservation and gets back to you with the information.

- You pay $50 to the service.

That would of course be no different than having a secretary make the reservation. Nothing wrong with that at all.

It seems the difference is that the service makes the reservations first, then sells them to clients. But is it really all that different?