> Why? Because you don't like the way it feels as an experience?
Yes. Exactly.
Imagine if you took the menu of the French Laundry and served it in a McDonalds. The exact same food. Would you still pay $300 a plate?
Yes. Exactly.
Imagine if you took the menu of the French Laundry and served it in a McDonalds. The exact same food. Would you still pay $300 a plate?
I disagree that restaurants that use a ticketing system lose their incentive to deliver the best experience they can. These aren't one-off encounters. Repeat business, reputation, reviews, and word of mouth are all based on the actual experience. If the food or atmosphere is bad, then a fine dining place won't last, regardless of the payment dynamics they have.
I am not saying that this has happened, only that the pay-in-full-in-advance model removes one of the incentives that keeps it from happening. It may be that the removal of this incentive won't actually change anything, I don't know.
> These aren't one-off encounters
In the case of high-end restaurants, they often are. Not very many people can afford to be regulars at the French Laundry.
> If the food or atmosphere is bad, then a fine dining place won't last,
Maybe. But at the extreme high end, a restaurant can let things slide and coast on its reputation for a pretty long time.
You are implicitly believing in their reputation by selecting the fine dining establishment. I don't really do fine dining so excuse me if this is ignorant, but it seems to me you don't really have recourse after the fact.
Problem is that there are millions of potential customers all who may or may not be flakes. When business could be make or break by one reservation backing out, they have much more to lose way more often than you having an awful experience at a reputable establishment. Tock makes sense in this scenario but you seem like you're being completely unempathetic to the economics of the situation.
The one time this actually happened to me we walked out before we actually got any food. But yes, we didn't pay (obviously). If we'd paid ahead it would have been a real problem.
> Problem is that there are millions of potential customers all who may or may not be flakes.
Yes, I understand that, and I am not unsympathetic to the restaurant's need to mitigate this risk somehow. But fobbing 100% of the risk back onto the customer is not the right answer IMHO, and any restaurant that does this is not going to get my business. There are lots of other possibilities (50% up front, no-show fee, reputation tracking) that I would be happy to sign up for, but not that.