Stop Cooking For Yourself

[garball]

It amazes me to see a chef, or neophyte sous, or even a line cook moaning about a customer ordering a med well steak or whatever. Who cares? You are not the one eating it, nor are you the one supplying the revenue that pays your staff. Don't get me wrong, I believe in educating the clientele about their choices and the quality of meat being served; but what is all the hubbub about? I sell Akaushi beef from Yoakum, Tx (look it up) and occasionally grass fed longhorn; both of which don't need to go past med rare. I also sell regular choice CAB, which would be more well suited to their over-cooked decisions. But, why complain in the kitchen? We educate our service staff to educate the guests on the marbling and quality of cut. We create daily specials that are constantly destroyed by our patrons; again, we damn the diner for ordering what they want. It is now common practice to let the patron pick their own wine whether it will match the meal or not. Being in the service industry, when does it fall on our egos to decide what is wrong or right for the customer to order?*



*not necessarily the views of the chef making the post; just a question that arises almost every night

[dracosbrew]

Well, captain I have pretty much given up the fight of trying to decide on what is right or wrong. Mainly because I always lose no matter the level of education they have been given about food. Of course I am in podunk Texas where chicken fried burger and chicken strips would make everyone happy. Why complain in the kitchen, I to me its more of a heartbreak to see someone destroy a perfectly good steak!! I mean what did that cow do to them?

[dracosbrew]

By the way how the hell are you?? and the wife and the pug too????

[ChefMod]

It happens a lot in FOH, too. I served through college in the SLO wine region and remember servers poking fun at guests who ordered white zin. I really didn't care what a guest drank so long as they were in good spirits when the bill rolled around.

We've also had servers change our order based on their own recommendations and it's frustrating as heck. Our son loves grilled chicken, but I recall one waitress insisting that kids love chicken fingers. We said thanks but no thanks--he likes the grilled stuff and it's better for him anyhow. She brought us chicken fingers and insisted we could take the breading off if we were really worried about it.

[lebelage]

I gotta disagree with you Garball, too much of a generalization.
Institutional, corporate, quick serve or other.. sure it's silly.
But for an independant restaurant indentity can be all.

I don't cook for other people. I cook for myself and then allow others to eat it.
I don't cook to have customers, I have customers so I can cook-big difference.

Sure, I could have a place 5x the size of my current place if I was more accomodating (about 1/3 of our potential customers since opening have been told we cannot/will not serve them) but for what?

People say there is no objective truth to cooking... one man's meat is another mans poison, one mans unbearably spicy is another's perfect, one mans well seasoned is another mans inedibly salty. I say there IS an objective truth to cooking. It is what ever I feel like cooking to the objective truth of the best of my abilities so long as enough people with enough money come in to keep my bills paid.

I figure, me being who I am I'm gonna [Censored] off 70% of the people I meet the second I open my mouth anyway. So with that as a given I might as well do what I want to do while doing it.

[lebelage]

At the risk of being overly self-referential here's an article written by a writer for Gourmet talking about the need for more restaurants with vision instead of pandering:

http://www.rootsandgrubs.com/2009/03/22/me-me-me/

[FoodHacker]

At the risk of being overly self-referential here's an article written by a writer for Gourmet talking about the need for more restaurants with vision instead of pandering:

http://www.rootsandgrubs.com/2009/03/22/me-me-me/

Nice comments, to bad there isn't anything like that where I live ... about the only thing around here are chain restaurants.
"sniffs"
Dear lord I have got to get back to Spain someday

[big dog chef]

The “tortured analogy” in question doesn’t hold water IMO. Assuming that the questions were asked POST- purchase of the software, the complaints have validity. Unless there is a disclaimer stating “this is exactly what you are getting; nothing more, nothing less”, then the customer has every right to, at the very least, ask for a refund. Suggesting that I take my business elsewhere, after I’ve already paid my money, is NOT good business, and outright fraud, IMO.

At Tanuki, it is assumed that I am ignorant of the cuisine and that I will take what I get. However, I am told this BEFORE I plunk any money down; totally opposite of the analogy above. Somehow, this makes the customer abuse OK. If I complain about something, not because of the preparation, but because I simply don’t like something, my taste and knowledge is brought into question and I am chastised for trying to educate myself. I wonder if Tanuki will comp my meal if I feel it is not everything it was purported to be? Or is THAT decision left to Tanuki as well?

“It is what ever I feel like cooking to the objective truth of the best of my abilities so long as enough people with enough money come in to keep my bills paid.”

I once knew a Chef that would have stopped this sentence after the word “abilities”. I guess attitudes and ideals change with the daily grind of business. It’s all good – there is room for BOTH ideals in this great industry we choose to make a career of. I’d LOVE to eat at Tanuki, (perhaps I already have…), simply for the experience of trying something different. But, if Tanuki doesn’t want my money, I’d be perfectly happy to take that money elsewhere.

Both sides of the “analogy” have one thing in common. And that is that both businesses do not avail themselves of one of the most important marketing tools there is; customer feedback. Why? Because both businesses assume that the customer don’t know squat.

As far as the steak temp question goes; perhaps the ultimate solution to this would be to NOT ASK for a temp from the customer. Then, when they ask you to cook it a little longer, you can throw them out of the restaurant, throw a perfectly good steak in the trash, and go about your business of losing MORE money. Cooks trashing a customer for steak temp is all in good fun and makes the day go by faster. Refusing to cook that steak to a customer’s specifications should have them kicked to the curb…

[lebelage]

Al, so glad you took the time away from selling beef concentrate as demiglace to come and play!
I see you've stayed nice and bitter about anyone who didn't feel the need to make the same choices you did- that's just super!

1)Actually the company in question does state exactly what it does and tells customers to get bent that want something they don't do but want to complain about it anyway. They do NOT misrepresent what they sell or refuse to refund faulty product.

2) Your statement about my business is as presumptuous as I have come to expect any remark made toward me to be BigDog. ("Why? Because both businesses assume that the customer don’t know squat.") I don't assume anything about the customer. I do a specific thing. They want it or they don't. If they want anything beside what I personally want to offer they go elsewhere.

As to your insinuation that perhaps you've secretly been to my place.. what? Really? Am I supposed to be quaking in my boots that maybe you didn't like it and will expose me for an over-hyped fraud? You've either been here or you haven't. I can't imagine someone like you would enjoy my place but if you did I'm glad you got your money's worth. If not- then it was a shame I didn't recognize you at the door so I could refuse to serve you, saving you the money and trouble.

As to a business losing money by picking who exactly they want to serve that is a very infantile view of business. Some places, yes, more business means more money, some actually are more profitable by severely restricting business. This sounds like some kind of size issue to me...

Anyway, I'm glad I gave you the opportunity to come out and flail around trying to insult me.
I insulted no one and in fact STATED FROM THE BEGINNING that in many business models people-pleasing is the best way to go but that Garball's original statement was too general.

In case you were wondering, I'm quite profitable thank you. While the "yes-taurants" around me were closing I stayed open and did well. With an electric hot plate.

But, since we're going there. As a matter of fact I do happen to believe that "yes-taurants" operate as such because deep down the chef knows they lack the talent to get away with having any personal vision or integrity. Please note that by this I mean places where people complain endlessly about the compromises they "have" to make. Not people who say this works for my market and I'm going to do it because it makes sense.

I think your cans & powders are getting lonely, dude.. but see ya soon 'k?

PS- I don't take temps on any of my proteins.

[lebelage]

On serious note though what in this...

" There’s a discussion board where people frequently post to say that Backpack doesn’t have the features they want, and what is 37signals going to do about it? The answer is: 37signals is going to suggest that you use something else. That’s because the company doesn’t build products to please their customers; they build exactly the products they want to use and assume there are people out there who are looking for the same thing—hopefully enough people to keep 37signals in business."

...made you think the company was committing FRAUD?

Do you actually READ anything before you spew?

[garball]

As a matter of fact I do happen to believe that "yes-taurants" operate as such because deep down the chef knows they lack the talent to get away with having any personal vision or integrity.

Geez, I hope I am not being lumped into this category

to clarify, or make the topic less general, I have been working in hotels and now a private club for the past nine years. I started off in a stand alone, but have never had any monetary stock in any of the places in which I have worked. In the stand alone, we would politely tell anyone who complained about the wait list or the music to go find carnal knowledge of themseleves, but at the same time, my boss, the owner, would get on to us about biatching about steak temps simply because we were not eating the steaks, the patrons who paid our wages were. If I did own my own place, I would probably agree with snugly Janis on this one.

I guess what I have to say is that I want to provide a dining experience to all of my guests. Who is better to say what the perfect meal is besides the guest? Do I get upset when I make a special or a prix fixe and the guest ruins it with their alterations; of course I do. But, what do you do? Tell them they are wrong?


Re dracosbrew: the wife and pug are great. It will be sooner than I thought before we all live under one roof again.

[lebelage]

"But, what do you do? Tell them they are wrong?"

Of course not, I just tell them "no".
They can come to their own conclusions from there.
If you read my post, Gar, you can see I'm not lumping you in that category. I stated clearly that corporate, institutional and chains are of course needing to do what the consumer wants. I also agreed with you that if one is taking a temp on a protein to begin with one is an ass for making fun of the customer that takes advantage of the opportunity to ask you to ruin the meat. When you quoted me you left off an important part "Please note that by this I mean places where people complain endlessly about the compromises they "have" to make. Not people who say this works for my market and I'm going to do it because it makes sense. "

My problem with your original statemnt/heading is that it was too general, as you yourself noted "when does it stop?"
Stop cooking for myself? The day I stop doing it for me is the day I never pick up a pan again.. even if you do take temps, make substitutions, etc you still should be doing it for you.

Philosophically what I am talking about is the "immovable mover" theory.

It takes all kinds. Anyone who uses cool products that weren't around or were hard to get a few years ago, or new techniques owes a debt to the places who throw it out there that "this is what we do, take it or leave it".

Its the take it or leave it places that tend to be the innovators. Major gains in knowledge, technique, product and theory generally don't come from cooking schools, hotel dining rooms, chains or banquet facilities.

Those gains come from stubborn cooks who live a certain vision and then it trickles down from there.

For every place with a crudo, or tartar or tataki or sashimi or whatever now the beginning was (besides obviously the cultures these came from) a chef who put raw fish on a plate and, when the guest said "I want that dish but I need you to cook the fish first" said "No. If you don't want raw fish don't order that dish. Period."

[Chef_m_yaeger]

couple of things-

Isn't it funny that customers tend to pay more for the food that they have no control over???
Second if I understand you Janis, I believe that is right, I couldn't agree more. You have to cook to your market always but if your market supports it stand on your ideas. Don't give them a chance to become a pain, you ask for temps on food and you will always invite problems.

Finally to Big dog- refusing to bend your ideas works in the right setting. Look at the French Laundry, I know please forgive me(Janis I in no way am implying that your are anything like Thomas Keller, before I get my self in trouble), they are going to serve it their way and they have a line out the front for customers and one out the back for cooks.

It is all in the market that you serve! But if you are going to cook that way you need to be good. And IF you choose to go the other way then no stop whining about them ruining your food and do the best with what THEY want.

[lebelage]

I believe we understand each other Chef M.

As to any insult w/the TK remark.. haha.. apologize to him not to me.
I'm a cruddy lil hack w/a hotplate that shows soft core Japanese porn in my dining room.
But this, more than this... I do it my way >>>falls down stairs on top of Sid Vicious<<<

[ChefJune]

I gotta disagree with you Garball, too much of a generalization.
Institutional, corporate, quick serve or other.. sure it's silly.
But for an independant restaurant indentity can be all.

I don't cook for other people. I cook for myself and then allow others to eat it.
I don't cook to have customers, I have customers so I can cook-big difference.

Sure, I could have a place 5x the size of my current place if I was more accomodating (about 1/3 of our potential customers since opening have been told we cannot/will not serve them) but for what?

People say there is no objective truth to cooking... one man's meat is another mans poison, one mans unbearably spicy is another's perfect, one mans well seasoned is another mans inedibly salty. I say there IS an objective truth to cooking. It is what ever I feel like cooking to the objective truth of the best of my abilities so long as enough people with enough money come in to keep my bills paid.

I figure, me being who I am I'm gonna [Censored] off 70% of the people I meet the second I open my mouth anyway. So with that as a given I might as well do what I want to do while doing it.

I have to say, Janis, that I am quite excited about the opportunity to finally dine at Tanuki next April when I'm in Portland for IACP. As you know I subscribe to you philosophy, and now I have a few friends excited about dinner at your place, too.