You order tasting menu, find out at end of meal that all 7 individual (larger) entrees would've been cheaper to order together, what's your play?

[Dan Druff]

You might think this happened to me. It didn't. I don't typically like tasting menus.

It happened to Mike "Timex" McDonald, and has brought forth a lot of Twitter debate.

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/twt/status/1165105784553799682

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/twt/status/1165324480815591425

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/twt/status/1165324997591588864

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/twt/status/1165325543312519168

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/twt/status/1165326255807295488

For those of you who aren't familiar, a "tasting menu" consists of a number of small-portion items (pre-selected by the chef), where you get a "taste" of a lot of things. Usually it's 4-7 items, and by the end, you approximately end up with one full meal's portion when you add everything up. Needless to say, the portions of each individual item are quite small, and thus a 7-course tasting menu is never equivalent to the cost of seven entrees. Additionally, some restaurants do not even offer tasting menu items as entrees, so as to prevent such comparisons from being made.

Mike McDonald went to do a tasting menu at a tapas place. Tapas entree portions are also smaller, but typically bigger than 7-course tasting menu portions -- approximately double the size in most cases.

When the whole thing was over, Mike discovered that ordering all seven tasting menu courses individually -- which also would have been a lot bigger (probably double the size) -- would have been CHEAPER than ordering the tasting menu!

He also was unhappy that the waiter aggressively pushed the tasting menu, presumably knowing that the restaurant was pulling this trick.

The tasting menu was $130 (Canadian) for 7 tasting-size items, while ordering them individually would have been $116 for the same 7 tapas-size (larger) items. So he paid about 11% MORE to get significantly LESS food!

What would you have done in his shoes?

Keep in mind that Mike McDonald is very rich.

Daniel Negreanu felt that McDonald was sweating the small stuff, and in fact shouldn't even have tried to add up the costs to discover this!

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/twt/status/1165106510881415168

Negreanu got mostly beaten down in response here, including by some other rich guys like Brian Hastings and Haralabob Voulgaris.

Vote above what you would have done in this spot, while dining with your (long term) girlfriend.

[Dan Druff]

Here's how I feel about the situation.

First off, LOL at him saying he felt he needed to press for EVERYONE to be made whole here. What? It's not your job to be the class action lawyer of everyone in the restaurant. (However, he SHOULD let others know via Yelp/Tripadvisor reviews!)

Ignoring that, he was correct to be upset. This was a nasty pricing trick where they're charging you more to get less.

This is no better than the waiter recommended the "large size" or an entree, and then you come to realize that the large size is smaller AND costs more than the medium size! You'd be right to be incensed, as this is highly unethical.

It is likely they pull this trick because they realize that many people who order tasting menus are pretentious fine dining snobs, and most are both unlikely to look up the individual prices and to say anything even if they figure it out. Most fine dining snobs are afraid they will look gauche if they complain about pricing issues, even if they know they're being ripped off.

Provided that the 7-course tasting menu size is really about half the tapas size (which I'm just guessing from previous experience), the correct thing for the manager to have done would have been to both reduce to entree pricing AND cut the bill by 50% beyond that. Why? Because that's charging exactly in proportion with the food received, versus the food received if ordered individually from the tapas menu.

I would also write a nasty review, warning the public about this dirty trick.

[Crowe Diddly]

Provided that the 7-course tasting menu size is really about half the tapas size (which I'm just guessing from previous experience), the correct thing for the manager to have done would have been to both reduce to entree pricing AND cut the bill by 50% beyond that. Why? Because that's charging exactly in proportion with the food received, versus the food received if ordered individually from the tapas menu.

I was with you most of the way, but you can't price food directly to the portions received. No place does that, because the costs associated are not merely the prices of the food. That's an unrealistic ask, IMO. If a small is half a portion of a large, you never get to pay only half, because they gotta pay the gas, electric, rent, etc. I appreciate you asking for such a deal, but to say that that would be the correct thing for the restaurant to offer, that's not reality.

[Dan Druff]

Provided that the 7-course tasting menu size is really about half the tapas size (which I'm just guessing from previous experience), the correct thing for the manager to have done would have been to both reduce to entree pricing AND cut the bill by 50% beyond that. Why? Because that's charging exactly in proportion with the food received, versus the food received if ordered individually from the tapas menu.

I was with you most of the way, but you can't price food directly to the portions received. No place does that, because the costs associated are not merely the prices of the food. That's an unrealistic ask, IMO. If a small is half a portion of a large, you never get to pay only half, because they gotta pay the gas, electric, rent, etc. I appreciate you asking for such a deal, but to say that that would be the correct thing for the restaurant to offer, that's not reality.

I knew someone would raise this point. I should have posted a further explanation as to why proportionate payment is appropriate.

I'll explain now.

He should pay the exact percentage of the portion size he got because he was tricked into ordering the smaller version.

It's not like the waiter said, "You could have 7 tapas-sized portions, or 7 smaller tasting menu sized portions", and he chose the smaller.

Here he ordered the tasting menu because it was assumed to be far cheaper than ordering 7 tapas-sized portions (and this is a very reasonable assumption), and then he found out that not only did he pay 11% more, but he probably got half the food. Also note that the waiter pushed this tasting menu on him -- he didn't find this on his own and conclude that was what he wanted, versus the other menu options.

So he never really got to make a portion size decision.

Let's go back to my "medium and large" example.

Let's say I ordered a "large" sized pasta dish for $20, at the waiter's urging, and then found out later that the "medium" version of that same dish was both double the size and only $18.

Let's say that the meal was over and I had to leave, so it wasn't a matter where I could ask for more food to make up for it.

I would very clearly say, "I got half a portion of the $18 dish, so I should pay $9."

That's because I was tricked into ordering the more expensive smaller size in the first place. At that point, my concerns about the restaurant's overhead costs are nonexistent. I was tricked into ordering a half portion (for more money, too), so thus I should pay half. Simple.

On the flip side, I agree that, just because a large portion is double the medium portion, it doesn't mean that the medium should be half price on the menu, for the reasons you stated.

However, when trickery like this is involved, all of that goes out the window, and at that point you should be paying exactly for what you got, and nothing more.

[Crowe Diddly]

Let's say that the meal was over and I had to leave, so it wasn't a matter where I could ask for more food to make up for it.

I would very clearly say, "I got half a portion of the $18 dish, so I should pay $9."

That's because I was tricked into ordering the more expensive smaller size in the first place. At that point, my concerns about the restaurant's overhead costs are nonexistent. I was tricked into ordering a half portion (for more money, too), so thus I should pay half. Simple.

On the flip side, I agree that, just because a large portion is double the medium portion, it doesn't mean that the medium should be half price on the menu, for the reasons you stated.

However, when trickery like this is involved, all of that goes out the window, and at that point you should be paying exactly for what you got, and nothing more.

I know YOUR concerns about the restaurant overhead are out the window, but you phrased it as what is the correct thing for the manager to do, and it sure as hell isn't give you the entree/2 price. I understand that that is what you would ask for, but even as you state that you should only pay for what you get, you still get service in a restaurant with electricity, gas, cooks, managers, the plates and utensils still have to be washed, the floors vacuumed, tablecloths washed, etc. Instead of them screwing you, you are trying to screw them in return. That's a valid outlook, but it's not particularly realistic or fair one, IMO. I'm not saying you might not get it if you make a real hard case, but its not based in any real numbers that make sense.

What would be more fair is what Mike wanted to do but didn't, which is get a fair deal for everyone in the place, which would hurt the restaurant a lot more than one table's meal priced to please.

[Texter]

Just would never go back..maybe a yelp review if I was pissed

[Dan Druff]

Let's say that the meal was over and I had to leave, so it wasn't a matter where I could ask for more food to make up for it.

I would very clearly say, "I got half a portion of the $18 dish, so I should pay $9."

That's because I was tricked into ordering the more expensive smaller size in the first place. At that point, my concerns about the restaurant's overhead costs are nonexistent. I was tricked into ordering a half portion (for more money, too), so thus I should pay half. Simple.

On the flip side, I agree that, just because a large portion is double the medium portion, it doesn't mean that the medium should be half price on the menu, for the reasons you stated.

However, when trickery like this is involved, all of that goes out the window, and at that point you should be paying exactly for what you got, and nothing more.

I know YOUR concerns about the restaurant overhead are out the window, but you phrased it as what is the correct thing for the manager to do, and it sure as hell isn't give you the entree/2 price. I understand that that is what you would ask for, but even as you state that you should only pay for what you get, you still get service in a restaurant with electricity, gas, cooks, managers, the plates and utensils still have to be washed, the floors vacuumed, tablecloths washed, etc. Instead of them screwing you, you are trying to screw them in return. That's a valid outlook, but it's not particularly realistic or fair one, IMO.

What would be more fair is what Mike wanted to do but didn't, which is get a fair deal for everyone in the place, which would hurt the restaurant a lot more than one table's meal priced to please.

How is that not a fair or valid outlook? You were tricked into ordering half the food for a higher price. As I said, at that point, concern for the restaurant's well-being is out the window. Sure, the manager may not WANT me to pay half price, but that's all I'm paying, and that's what's fair to pay. This is because I was tricked into ordering something with a smaller portion for a higher price -- basically a scam. So then I'm paying for the food I received, and nothing more. I don't care what they normally would charge for the smaller portion. I would tell them I was paying half, and they could sue me if they didn't like it.

If Mike decided to make a scene and make all of the patrons aware of it, I wouldn't fault him. But it's not like he's going to get anything changed. The restaurant would simply scam the next people who walk in after he's gone, even if they made it right for everyone else. Personally, I would opt for the more effective option of hammering them with reviews (probably from multiple accounts) until they gave up with this trick.

[Crowe Diddly]

How is that not a fair or valid outlook?

I literally said, word for word, "That's a valid outlook." You quoted it, for god's sake. I then explained why I didn't think it was fair.

Then you restated what you already said, so re-read my post above if you wonder what my response would be.

If Mike decided to make a scene and make all of the patrons aware of it, I wouldn't fault him. But it's not like he's going to get anything changed. The restaurant would simply scam the next people who walk in after he's gone, even if they made it right for everyone else. Personally, I would opt for the more effective option of hammering them with reviews (probably from multiple accounts) until they gave up with this trick.

No reason not to do both.

[Dan Druff]

I literally said, word for word, "That's a valid outlook." You quoted it, for god's sake. I then explained why I didn't think it was fair.

Then you restated what you already said, so re-read my post above if you wonder what my response would be.

If Mike decided to make a scene and make all of the patrons aware of it, I wouldn't fault him. But it's not like he's going to get anything changed. The restaurant would simply scam the next people who walk in after he's gone, even if they made it right for everyone else. Personally, I would opt for the more effective option of hammering them with reviews (probably from multiple accounts) until they gave up with this trick.

No reason not to do both.

I misread part of your post.

Anyway, in my experience, when you try to stand up and fight for everyone in a situation like this, most people want to remain willfully ignorant and find you obnoxious for trying to "help" them, even if you mean well. This is especially true in fine dining scenarios, where people ordering tasting menus like to believe that they're above worrying about price.

Sadly, a lot of people will shrug their shoulders and think, "I got what I thought I was paying for, so I'm good."

So I probably wouldn't have made a scene and tried to get others credit, though I might have quietly mentioned it to anyone I saw nearby who was also having the tasting menu.

100% I would have written a review pointing this out, though. Perhaps several under different accounts.

[FRANKRIZZO]

McDonalds has waiters?

[Dan Druff]

So I finally clicked through on the link to look at the menu.

First off, I noticed this was in Canmore, Alberta. Canmore is a little bit south of Banff, and is a common location for tourists to stay when they can't get a room in Banff (a very popular Alberta tourist area).

So that's part of the reason they're willing to run this scam. They probably don't care much about repeat business, nor will they have many regulars who will catch on to this.

They do have very good reviews on Tripadvisor (4.5 stars, 971 reviews), with only a handful of 1 stars.

I haven't found anyone yet who caught onto the scam which Mike figured out.

The closest is this: https://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowUser...y_Alberta.html

... but that reviewer only claimed that the tasting menu was thrust upon them, and that it was too small.


What a racket.

[Krypt]

[Dan Druff]

Pretty sure you wouldn't have said anything had you noticed this.

You would have gone home, ordered a hooker, and forgotten about it.

[GrenadaRoger]

why bother asking us? Tell Mike McDonald to ask his brother Ronald--he knows the restaurant business

[Tellafriend]

Pretty sure you wouldn't have said anything had you noticed this.

You would have gone home, ordered a hooker, and forgotten about it.

You mean he never would have seen the bill his parents paid.

[BeerAndPoker]

I feel like this is likely a popular tactic in higher class restaurants where they tell their waiter staff to offer such a thing to customers perhaps even giving them an extra incentive if they sell them and that as a smart. rich person who has probably been around the block Mike McDonald should have at least asked more questions when ordering this meal or figured it out prior.

To put it another way I feel like if they offered this to Druff being the person he is he would want them to be completely specific with portion sizes prior to ordering and he would figure it out before getting rolled.

As for Negreanu he is a goon who admitted on Mike Matusow podcast that since Stoli vodka is a sponsor for the Vegas Knights so you can buy a drink with that at the game for like 7x cheaper then with Titos Vodka but since he loves Titos he pays the 7x or whatever it is price because that is what he wants. While this is different where Daniel knows what he is getting here and not necessarily does Timex (although he's probably naive in this spot) the point is Negreanu isn't the best guy to chime in with things like this and his reaction don't shock me as he clearly don't care for the best value for his money all that much.

So in summary it's a dirty tactic for a restaurant to do, especially if they get on their waitresses/waiters to offer it this way but it feels like something Mike McDonald should have been aware of and I have a hard time believing he hasn't seen something like this before in his life. It's the old famous fool me one time shame on you fool me twice shame on me scenario.

As for the "I was with my girlfriend and didn't want to take it too far" argument I get that if it's a new relationship but if you've been together for a while wtf cares? If anything she should support you on the matter and think your an idiot not to argue it but again I think Timex was naive here since I'm sure he has done plenty of fine dining in his life.

[Jayjami]

Would have paid the bill. Then told the waiter that if he wants his tip, redo the bill with the cheaper prices, and voila, there you go, have a nice night.

[gut]

Next this Mike guy gonna complain about getting sick after eating the fish special on Sunday night.

If the guy didn't care enough about figuring it out beforehand (or at least asking what the price was) he can't bitch about it after. Chalk it up to lesson learned and move on.

[Crowe Diddly]

If the guy didn't care enough about figuring it out beforehand (or at least asking what the price was) he can't bitch about it after.

except he can, he did, and he got a price break for it.

[ShawnFanningsLimpDick]

Negreanu: "Theoretically you should not be looking at any prices when eating out, ever."


I'd do what Timex did, query it with the manager and accept a modest discount. If no discount then no tip or further business from me.