Jump to content

Anthony Bourdain (1956-2018), American Culinary TV Personality, Author, and Host of CNN's "Parts Unknown"


bnacpa

Recommended Posts

It appears he may still be doing work with Travel Channel, depending on how one interprets the following quote:

In a statement, a Travel Channel spokesperson said, “As part of Travel Channel’s strategic repositioning of the brand and its core programming mission, the network has been aggressively developing new talent, new voices and new shows, as announced last year,” adding that Mr. Bourdain “has been an iconic figure at Travel Channel.” The statement concluded: “We are proud of the great storytelling Tony has brought to the network. We congratulate him on his new venture and look forward to working with him on new projects in the future.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bourdain likes the In-n-Out Burger in L.A. I realize there is a helluva cult around In-n-Out Burger that I'm not a member of, and I typically respect Bourdain's opinions, but I wouldn't go out of my way to eat at one. In L.A., I much prefer Habit Burger or up north in S.F., the Buckhorn Grill.

(The Tri-Tip sandwich at Buckhorn Grill blows away almost any Philly cheesesteak I've ever eaten....but now I'm off-topic.)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am in L.A. Right now, and did In-n-Out right outside LAX, compared with Habit Burger in Valencia. Habit Burger wins by a large margin, but the In-n-Out was nicely cooked and had a flavor just above the blandness I've learned to expect from In-n-Out. The fries are silly matchsticks, no rival for Habit's sweet potato fries. Habit's burger is cooked to order and nicely juicy and beefy. I would give In-n-Out a 5 on a scale of 10, and Habit a solid 7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am in L.A. Right now, and did In-n-Out right outside LAX, compared with Habit Burger in Valencia. Habit Burger wins by a large margin, but the In-n-Out was nicely cooked and had a flavor just above the blandness I've learned to expect from In-n-Out. The fries are silly matchsticks, no rival for Habit's sweet potato fries. Habit's burger is cooked to order and nicely juicy and beefy. I would give In-n-Out a 5 on a scale of 10, and Habit a solid 7.

Habit's burger also costs 50 percent more.  Not really apples-to-apples.  It's like comparing Habit to Ray's, Palena, et al. (or to be more geographically relevant, Father's Office or Umami).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with SilentBob but also wanted to say I love In-n-Out. I imagine it's something you have to have history with, along with it being cheap and convenient if not such high quality. As discussed on the Breyers thread this past week, we all have preferences like this, whether Breyers vanilla, Swiss Miss cocoa or In-n-Out. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I won't disagree item by item, I went to Habit today with my daughter, son-in-law and two children. For 3 double chars with everything, two fries, a sweet potato fries, a chicken sandwich, 3 medium drinks and a milkshake, all in, was $34. For the quality, I would make it my regular stop for burgers in the L.A. area, (Not sure I could cross-walk that to In-n-Out exactly, but I doubt there would be more than a 10% difference.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I won't disagree item by item, I went to Habit today with my daughter, son-in-law and two children. For 3 double chars with everything, two fries, a sweet potato fries, a chicken sandwich, 3 medium drinks and a milkshake, all in, was $34. For the quality, I would make it my regular stop for burgers in the L.A. area, (Not sure I could cross-walk that to In-n-Out exactly, but I doubt there would be more than a 10% difference.)

Well yeah, if you're going to lump in fries, drinks, and milkshakes, where the price difference between the two chains is small to negligible, of course the aggregate meal price is going going to obscure the much more significant price difference between the burgers.  That's just simple math.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll let it drop after this point, but for all of two and a half bucks more, you can have the Double Char with cheese meal at Habit, with Consumer Reports best tasting burger in America and superior fries by far for $9.05. But for $6.60, you can have In-n-Out's Double Double meal with its matchstick fries. Of course, most of this Board will gravitate to Habit's extensive menu of sandwiches, like the to-die-for tri-tip, or the extensive menu of salads, or those yummy sweet potato fries. But at In-n-Out, you can save two and a half bucks, unless you get animal glop on your fries....any time you can get change back from a $10 bill, you're in the same ballpark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll let it drop after this point, but for all of two and a half bucks more, you can have the Double Char with cheese meal at Habit, with Consumer Reports best tasting burger in America and superior fries by far for $9.05. But for $6.60, you can have In-n-Out's Double Double meal with its matchstick fries. Of course, most of this Board will gravitate to Habit's extensive menu of sandwiches, like the to-die-for tri-tip, or the extensive menu of salads, or those yummy sweet potato fries. But at In-n-Out, you can save two and a half bucks, unless you get animal glop on your fries....

IMO, all this shows is the unremarkable point made every day on all food/travel/electronics/car discussion forums that "if you spend X more dollars on Y, your [meal/hotel room/HDTV/sports car] will be better."  I can play the same game.  For all of a few dollars more, you can have plenty of better burgers in this country (and particularly, in Southern California) than at Habit.  So what's the point?

All I was suggesting above is that it doesn't make sense to compare two burgers that are at arguably different price points for burgers.  Of course a $2+ difference is chump change in the grand scheme of things.  Now if you want to argue that they're actually part of the same price point, fine, but by the same logic that means an $8 or $9 burger is at the same price point as Habit (hence my "costs 50 percent more" comment).  I'm certainly not disputing your point that Habit > In-N-Out insofar as taste is concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have never been to Habit so no dog in that fight. But, after a few debates recently around the 'pay more/get more' idea, a couple thoughts I hope obvious and largely agreeable:

First, not always true that more expensive is better. The many exceptions being disappointing, rip offs or other, more colorful, descriptions.

Second, isn't the good, useful and generally interesting thing opinions on value versus cost or price?

Speaking just for myself, a big part of what I love about this website is the ability to get quality (often differing) opinions about such a wide range of food, drink and spots. Whether a few-buck burger/cup of coffee or a stratospherically expensive tasting menu, we're able to inform our decisions to the questions: "Will it be worth it?" and "Will I spend time or money in this way?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another trip to L.A. under my belt this past weekend, and another visit to Habit Burger (Santa Clarita) and In-n-Out (San Diego). I still vastly prefer Habit Burger by a wide margin -- and you can get a similar meal at both places and receive change back from a $10 bill, so they are in the same economic ballpark.

Some interesting differences were apparent on these visits. First, In-n-Out caters to a decidedly teeny-bopper crowd. It is jam-packed with high schoolers and college kids. The larger variety of menu items on the Habit Burger menu make it more of a family place than In-n-Out.

Second, if you have a hankering for a non-burger meal, then you have to opt for Habit Burger. Anythng from fresh salads to tri-tip sandwiches to sweet potato fries, and many more high-quality items, are available at Habit.

Third, and maybe the most stark difference, is that In-n-Out is NOT fast food. From placing an eat-in order to actually receiving it is a good 15 minute wait.

Fourth, the french fries at In-n-Out are embarrassingly bad, even worse than McDonald's. You would think that a chain that prides itself in conquering the southwestern market can solve this problem with the swipe of Lynsi Snyder's billion-dollar pen.

In the end, whenever I visit southern California I will probably take one meal at each place, but these differences are real and apparent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was born and raised in San Diego but fast food has never been my thing. The only times I eat at In-N-Out when I am "home" is either when I have a traveling companion with me who wants to check it out or if I get back on a late flight and the only options available are fast food. Unless there is a long line, I have never had to wait 15 minutes for an order. And In-N-Outs do have drive thru windows, so I would put it firmly in the fast food category. In my view, In-N-Out beats McDonalds, Carl's Jr., Jack In the Box, etc.

On the other hand, I don't love and crave In-N-Out as other Californians, especially those who have moved to the East Coast, seem to. I think a lot of it has to do with nostalgia. Ten or twenty years ago, the burger craze isn't what it is now. For fast food, In-N-Out was the way to go. So I think the nostalgia, the hype, the hype about the nostalgia, all rolled into one create this idea that In-N-Out is a MUST if you ever set foot in California. And I still think a burger there is good, it's just that there are a lot of other options now for a good (or better) burger.

Would I recommend In-N-Out? Let's just say that if you were my friend and we were going to San Diego for a week, In-N-Out would not be on the agenda. However, if you wanted to go, I wouldn't advise against it. I would even go with you and devour a double double animal style.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless there is a long line, I have never had to wait 15 minutes for an order. And In-N-Outs do have drive thru windows, so I would put it firmly in the fast food category. In my view, In-N-Out beats McDonalds, Carl's Jr., Jack In the Box, etc. 

I've been 3-4 times now, and I have to agree: In-N-Out is fast food. It may technically fall into the fast-casual, quick-serve category since everything is cooked to order, but I know, for example, that BGR (Burger Joint) aims for less than 10 minutes per order, usually closer to 5.

The difference between fast-food (which means your food might have been cooked before you even arrive) and fast-casual or quick-serve (which means your food is cooked and/or assembled to-order) is growing smaller and smaller as the fast-casual / quick-serve models become more-and-more refined. The two types of businesses are converging, and ten years from now, you might not even be able to tell the difference between them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been 3-4 times now, and I have to agree: In-N-Out is fast food. It may technically fall into the fast-casual, quick-serve category since everything is cooked to order, but I know, for example, that BGR (Burger Joint) aims for less than 10 minutes per order, usually closer to 5.

The difference between fast-food (which means your food might have been cooked before you even arrive) and fast-casual or quick-serve (which means your food is cooked and/or assembled to-order) is growing smaller and smaller as the fast-casual / quick-serve models become more-and-more refined. The two types of businesses are converging, and ten years from now, you might not even be able to tell the difference between them.

This would be a more compelling observation if, at the same time, the McDonald's and Hardee's and Burger Kings of the world just vanish completely as a result of the convergence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This would be a more compelling observation if, at the same time, the McDonald's and Hardee's and Burger Kings of the world just vanish completely as a result of the convergence.

"Compelling" is a matter of individual perspective. The McDonald's, and Hardee's, and Burger Kings of the world are not going to vanish; they're going to change. In other words; they're going to be part of the convergence, which will be bi-modal: Fast Casual will move towards being Fast Food, and Fast Food will move towards being Fast Casual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Pat said:

I thought that was Bourdain, but I checked anyway... :(

Boy, I remember buying and reading "Kitchen Confidential" when it first came out - it was a very "insider-y" book that was only taken seriously by people deep, deep inside the industry (I personally wasn't deep inside the restaurant industry then, but I was deep, deep inside the wine industry).

Some things have aged better than others ("Never order sushi on Monday," for example, hasn't).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...