No Reservations - No, Really: No Reservations

[Waitman]

I don't either. There might be an indirect effect on older people, making them stand there, but you could also say the same about the young and wounded, or the sick. This policy may indeed tend to affect older people more than younger people, but I don't think for a moment that it's "ageist" or discriminatory; it's just part of a business plan.

I'd like to hear other opinions on this - I just don't see it. At the absolute minimum, does anyone really think Johnny Monis or Aaron Silverman are biased against the elderly? Yes, these two restaurants tend to be tailored towards a younger crowd, but so what? Does anyone think Claude Amsellem was discriminatory against the young at Tragara? He is somewhat on the older end of the age spectrum, but that doesn't mean that he wouldn't have embraced younger diners in his restaurant. Yes, they'd have to play by his rules, but I think he would have been perfectly willing to reach out halfway as best he could. The Prime Rib? L'Auberge Chez Franí§ois? Same. We have restaurants tailored for a younger crowd, and restaurants tailored for an older crowd, and that's what makes the world go around. I don't ask for a knife and fork when I dine Ethiopian, and they probably wouldn't offer me one unless they saw I was struggling. The day they serve a knife and fork is the day we complain that they're dumbed down. There are so many examples of this, and I love the variety in today's day-and-age of dining.

A son of someone with arthritic knees and friend to several people who have aged into hip and knee problems -- problems that do not strike the young with great frequency -- I think it's pretty obvious that any seating policy that has people on their feet for an hour or more will have a disparate impact on older customers, the differently-abled, the temporarily lame, etc.  It has nothing to do with the style of the cooking and bringing up L'Auberge is frankly absurd.

Because they're playing with a different business and service model than the rest of the space? What's wrong with that?

Late 50s here also, and I also don't agree with the ageism issue, outside of the "technology first" question I raised above. And I don't really see what a "limited reservations" policy would achieve since it would probably only apply to the times when it's already easy enough to snag a table.

Let's face it: Rose's has chosen to fuck with our accepted norms of doing business, and that is going to drive some people nuts. Period. That doesn't make them arrogant, cynical, inhospitable, or whatever label you want to put on them. Their signature sign (that too many people feel compelled to steal) says "Fuck perfect," and they actually live into that. Deal with it.

Limited reservations policies as practiced by the Red Hen, (the late, great) Dino's and even Babbo means that reservations are taken at all times, not just times when it's already easy to snag a table, but some tables are left open for walk-ins.

"Fucking with norms" is not, per se, admirable.  Fucking with norms by making spaghetti pasta? Admirable.  Fucking with norms by making it (arguably) less convenient to eat there? Not so much.

Props to the collectible signage, but bravado does not justify everything. Sometimes you're being brilliant.  Sometimes you're just being a dick.

(To be sure, I've eaten at Rose's twice and like it.  I'd like it more if I could eat there without screwing up a whole evening, though)

It's possible to get a table without any wait at every single restaurant in DC that doesn't take reservations by picking your dining time carefully. Late dinners early in the week usually work best.

Yes.  It's almost always possible to get a seat at times where it's particularly inconvenient to go somewhere.

[DonRocks]

bringing up L'Auberge is Frankly absurd.

Yes, literally (it's Alsatian, dummkopf). Substitute Inn at Little Washington, then. Try walking in there in a t-shirt and shorts without a reservation - everyone except you knew what I meant.

[deangold]

From my experience at Dino:

% of no shows calling after 5pm on a Saturday or Friday night: 10-20%%

% of no shows calling with less than 24 hour notice on a Saturday or Friday night: 25-33%

% of no shows calling with less than 24 hour notice on a Saturday or Friday night parties of 10 or more: 40%

% of no shows calling after their reservation time on a Saturday or Friday night: 5%

% of parties showing up incomplete:  25%

% of parties showing up incomplete, seated and taking an hour to get fully seated: 33%

% of parties arriving incomplete who get pissed off when they have to wait until they are all there: 25-33%

% of parties requesting a particular time, being told there was not a reservation available at that time but there was one earlier or later, who show up at the time they originally requested and expecting to be seated:  33%

All in all, it is NOT a small percentage of the population ruining it for the rest, but a major part of the population.  I have 17 tables at Dino's Grotto and that kind of percentages will kill me.  Hence our current plan of offering reservations only until 6.15 and making all tables walk in at 6:30.  Not what I want to do in an ideal world, but in my ideal world, no one is 15 minutes late or more and thinks there should be no consequences for it.  Or cancel late or no show and think there is no consequence.

[Waitman]

Yes, literally (it's Alsatian, dummkopf). Substitute Inn at Little Washington, then. Try walking in there in a t-shirt and shorts without a reservation - everyone except you knew what I meant.

Except that it has nothing to do with the physical discomforts that certain seating strategies may or may not inflict pain disproportionately on the aged, thus possibly making them -- de facto, if not de jure -- ageist, which was the discussion underway.

[sheldman]

I would love to know, if anyone can tell me, whether (for restaurants that take reservations) no-shows, late-shows, late-cancels, and similar displays of selfishness are more prevalent in DC than in otherwise-comparable cities.  My guess (consistent with my general view of the culture here) would be yes, much more prevalent.  Anyone know if I'm right?

[deangold]

In my expeience, the problem has grown significantly over the last 5 years.  In LA when I was in the restaurant business from '87 to '94 or so, I don't really recall having no shows much at all except for the TV star business we had being located close to Paramount.  Certain members of the Dynasty cast were notorious for no showing.   

[Joe H]

I have no problem confirming a reservation with a specific amount on a credit card and a 72 hour or greater cancellation notice.

Prepaying an amount on a credit card is a direction we should be seriously discussing.  It benefits those on both sides of the table.

[Pat]

I have no problem confirming a reservation with a specific amount on a credit card and a 72 hour or greater cancellation notice.

Prepaying an amount on a credit card is a direction we should be seriously discussing.  It benefits those on both sides of the table.

Not everyone has a credit card.

[porcupine]

So the fundamental problem is that there are great new restaurants but none of them are all things to all people.  What business ever is?  If you heard that there's a great mechanic at a place called German Auto Specialists would you be upset that he wouldn't work on your Honda?  If you heard that the best barbecue was to be found at a place called Pork Shack would you be upset that they didn't serve beef brisket?  Would you bitch on the internet about not finding a pair of sensible shoes at a place called Sally's Frou-Frou Shoes and Accessories?

I've been to all the restaurants mentioned in this thread.  Each has a business model that's working well (as evidenced by long lines and endless internet discussion).  It's my choice to experience each restaurant on its own terms.  Do I like those terms?  Not necessarily.  But if I want to go, the terms are clear, and it's my choice to accept them or not.  If I'm unable or unwilling to accept those terms, that's really my problem and it isn't fair to blame the restaurants, who are clearly quite successful at pleasing a large number of people who aren't me.

Shame on TS for playing the ageism card.  This whole discussion is on the brink of a very slippery slope.

[DaveO]

From my experience at Dino:

% of no shows calling after 5pm on a Saturday or Friday night: 10-20%%

% of no shows calling with less than 24 hour notice on a Saturday or Friday night: 25-33%

% of no shows calling with less than 24 hour notice on a Saturday or Friday night parties of 10 or more: 40%

% of no shows calling after their reservation time on a Saturday or Friday night: 5%

% of parties showing up incomplete:  25%

% of parties showing up incomplete, seated and taking an hour to get fully seated: 33%

% of parties arriving incomplete who get pissed off when they have to wait until they are all there: 25-33%

% of parties requesting a particular time, being told there was not a reservation available at that time but there was one earlier or later, who show up at the time they originally requested and expecting to be seated:  33%

All in all, it is NOT a small percentage of the population ruining it for the rest, but a major part of the population.  I have 17 tables at Dino's Grotto and that kind of percentages will kill me.  Hence our current plan of offering reservations only until 6.15 and making all tables walk in at 6:30.  Not what I want to do in an ideal world, but in my ideal world, no one is 15 minutes late or more and thinks there should be no consequences for it.  Or cancel late or no show and think there is no consequence.

Those are miserable friggin numbers.  The kinds that put a business out of business!!!

You have to overbook.  Of course when everyone shows you have pissed off a lot of unhappy people who can't get a seat.  That can't work.  Or you have to get late last minute reservations that do show up on weekends, or you have to get walk in traffic.  Or both of the latter.  No matter what you do you have to keep people happy otherwise bad reviews flood in.   Its not easy.

If the weekend last minute reservations or walks in dry up then you are dead in the water.  Its a rough business and industry.  I wonder if those percentages hold up across the industry?

Those percentages destroy any ability to plan on purchases and scheduling from week to week.  That is a rough road.

[DonRocks]

Those are miserable friggin numbers.  The kinds that put a business out of business!!!

You have to overbook.  Of course when everyone shows you have pissed off a lot of unhappy people who can't get a seat.  That can't work.  Or you have to get late last minute reservations that do show up on weekends, or you have to get walk in traffic.  Or both of the latter.  No matter what you do you have to keep people happy otherwise bad reviews flood in.   Its not easy.

If the weekend last minute reservations or walks in dry up then you are dead in the water.  Its a rough business and industry.  I wonder if those percentages hold up across the industry?

Those percentages destroy any ability to plan on purchases and scheduling from week to week.  That is a rough road.

I really think the shift in demographics towards a younger population is pushing us more towards a laid-back Barcelona "tapas" mindset when it comes to dining instead of "Hey dear, don't forget, we have to be at the theatre at 7:30 PM tonight."

Though I rarely hear actual numbers, I've heard many variations of what Dean said. To ease the burden on restaurants, I'm all for credit-card guarantees - even pre-purchasing with a per-diner minimum. The sad truth is that people don't fulfill verbal obligations unless they're financially vested in them (and even if they are, they might not fulfill them (look at all the unused Groupons)).

And as long as we're at it, let's eliminate tipping.

[Pool Boy]

I hate waiting for a table. I very much prefer reservations. I am FINE with giving a credit card guarantee and getting dinged for a no show (of a reasonable amount) and I also agree with losing my reservation if I am more than 15 minutes late (assuming the restaurant tries to work with me if traffic is messing with me and I am proactively calling them about the delay, etc). And I am fine if the number of tables available to be reserved is only a portion of the full restaurant. But 100% walk-in only? Feh. I will deal with it when it suits me, but I will not like it in general.

Curious sidenote, I wonder if people, having waited 20 30,45 60 minutes or more, choose to stay longer to dine or choose to rush through it? I guess it depends on your plans for after dinner - if you have theater, a movie or a musical performance to hit, my guess is you'll rush, or move on to the next restaurant that does have availability, but you really do not want to have to wander endlessly looking for a place to eat, on the fly, when you already have tickets to see something after dinner. My guess is people will seek out ressies in those situations for the places that will do that. But, if I had waited 60 minutes to be seated, with no plans after dinner, I think I would honestly take as long as I damn well felt for dinner at that point. I wonder what others would do or feel.

[DonRocks]

I hate waiting for a table. I very much prefer reservations. I am FINE with giving a credit card guarantee and getting dinged for a no show (of a reasonable amount) and I also agree with losing my reservation if I am more than 15 minutes late (assuming the restaurant tries to work with me if traffic is messing with me and I am proactively calling them about the delay, etc). And I am fine if the number of tables available to be reserved is only a portion of the full restaurant. But 100% walk-in only? Feh. I will deal with it when it suits me, but I will not like it in general.

Curious sidenote, I wonder if people, having waited 20 30,45 60 minutes or more, choose to stay longer to dine or choose to rush through it? I guess it depends on your plans for after dinner - if you have theater, a movie or a musical performance to hit, my guess is you'll rush, or move on to the next restaurant that does have availability, but you really do not want to have to wander endlessly looking for a place to eat, on the fly, when you already have tickets to see something after dinner. My guess is people will seek out ressies in those situations for the places that will do that. But, if I had waited 60 minutes to be seated, with no plans after dinner, I think I would honestly take as long as I damn well felt for dinner at that point. I wonder what others would do or feel.

Traffic has become more-and-more capricious over the years, and is a legitimate cause of late diners (who I suspect are more often late at dinner than lunch). Similarly, Metro has become less reliable over time.

Another fact is that people eat out much more often than they go to the theatre, or a doctor's appointment. The truth is that dining out has become "less special" than it was twenty years ago - for some, it's part of their daily lifestyle instead of a weekly event (I suspect the amount of people who have dinner out 4+ times a week has increased substantially in the past 5 years), so being 15 minutes late doesn't even get a thought. Diners have more of a tendency to show up when it's convenient for them, whereas restaurants are pulling their hair out at the host stand.

Plus, people suck. Don't forget to throw that one into the mix.

[DaveO]

So the fundamental problem is that there are great new restaurants but none of them are all things to all people.  What business ever is?  If you heard that there's a great mechanic at a place called German Auto Specialists would you be upset that he wouldn't work on your Honda?  If you heard that the best barbecue was to be found at a place called Pork Shack would you be upset that they didn't serve beef brisket?  Would you bitch on the internet about not finding a pair of sensible shoes at a place called Sally's Frou-Frou Shoes and Accessories?

I've been to all the restaurants mentioned in this thread.  Each has a business model that's working well (as evidenced by long lines and endless internet discussion).  It's my choice to experience each restaurant on its own terms.  Do I like those terms?  Not necessarily.  But if I want to go, the terms are clear, and it's my choice to accept them or not.  If I'm unable or unwilling to accept those terms, that's really my problem and it isn't fair to blame the restaurants, who are clearly quite successful at pleasing a large number of people who aren't me.

Shame on TS for playing the ageism card.  This whole discussion is on the brink of a very slippery slope.

Boy, I agree with that first paragraph and I agree with the last section of the 2nd paragraph;  the restaurants without reservations and with long lines are clearly doing the job in pleasing a lot of people.

When I was way younger, younger, and to this day, I've hated waiting on lines for big unknowns.  (possibly one of the few exceptions was when Marvelous Market first opened).    The other thing I found uncomfortable was that the larger the group dining if there is a wait, it was likely one person would start griping and complaining.  Heck, it could have been me.  But once the griping starts it often leads to ruining the dining experience.

I'd rather not go to the places where there is an unknown amount of time waiting or alternatively to have to work to get an unusually early dinner.  But as Porcupine stated, its clearly working for others.   I guess I'll miss those places.

Meanwhile if one simply considers T S's comment about ageism as an observation...I agree.  I don't believe he is "playing a card".  He is making an observation and I think it rings more true for older folks than younger folks.   I don't take it as an offensive or snarky "ism".   Just an observation.

[zoramargolis]

Not only traffic, but parking. Many of the trendy new places are located in neighborhoods where finding a parking place is very dicey.

[The Hersch]

So the fundamental problem is that there are great new restaurants but none of them are all things to all people.  What business ever is?  If you heard that there's a great mechanic at a place called German Auto Specialists would you be upset that he wouldn't work on your Honda?  If you heard that the best barbecue was to be found at a place called Pork Shack would you be upset that they didn't serve beef brisket?  Would you bitch on the internet about not finding a pair of sensible shoes at a place called Sally's Frou-Frou Shoes and Accessories?

I've been to all the restaurants mentioned in this thread.  Each has a business model that's working well (as evidenced by long lines and endless internet discussion).  It's my choice to experience each restaurant on its own terms.  Do I like those terms?  Not necessarily.  But if I want to go, the terms are clear, and it's my choice to accept them or not.  If I'm unable or unwilling to accept those terms, that's really my problem and it isn't fair to blame the restaurants, who are clearly quite successful at pleasing a large number of people who aren't me.

Shame on TS for playing the ageism card.  This whole discussion is on the brink of a very slippery slope.

I agree with almost all of this, whole-heartedly. If restaurant owners/managers decide that they can make more money not taking reservations, that's fine, and I wish them well. I won't go to their restaurants, because no restaurant on earth is worth waiting in line for, to me, but if they find a willing public that keeps their tables full, they've probably chosen their strategy wisely.

But more importantly, where can I find Sally's Frou-Frou Shoes and Accessories?

[Barbara]

But more importantly, where can I find Sally's Frou-Frou Shoes and Accessories?

I believe she is referring to this actual place.

I'm guessing you don't have to buy any gifts for young women.

[JPW]

Don,

Can I "like" this whole thread?

[porcupine]

I believe she is referring to this actual place.

I'm guessing you don't have to buy any gifts for young women.

Not consciously! 

I hate waiting for a table....  But, if I had waited 60 minutes to be seated, with no plans after dinner, I think I would honestly take as long as I damn well felt for dinner at that point. I wonder what others would do or feel.

So do I, so I either go at off times or just skip it altogether.  But in answer to your question: I would keep an eye of the bar/host stand/entry, and if I saw that there were still a lot of people waiting for tables, I'd finish in a reasonable amount of time.  I see no reason to punish others for my discomfort.  I'm more of a "we're all in this together, so let's all cooperate" kind of person, even if I'm paying (literally) for the experience.

[Tweaked]

Personally, I think it's silly to wait 2 or 3 hours for a restaurant table, so I've never been to Toki, Little Serow, Rose's...unless I decide to work around that, I probably never will.

Plenty of other restaurants in DC.

[hillvalley]

I've gotta say a lot of you sound old and crotchety on this thread.  Regarding waiting in line, you old people forget what it's like to factor in the time and cost of a babysitter into the mix.   Imagine trying to plan a night out at one of these evil, no reservation taking places while trying to factor in a babysitter.  At least you can now spend money that was once devoted to paying the babysitter on drinks or Uber.

If you are going to brave the waits for Rose's and plan on driving do yourself a favor and avoid Friday nights during the summer.  From now until Labor Day the Marines put on a parade every Friday night.  Parking is restricted on 8th and 9th between G and I.  Construction on the freeway doesn't make things any better. Although the parade doesn't start until 8:45 the restrictions start around 4 and the tourists and their busses start arriving by 6.  It makes for great people watching but a traffic nightmare.

As for Toki, take an afternoon off and go for lunch.  Parking is a breeze, there is no wait, and if it's slow you can have a great conversation with the bartender on the merits of reading the New Yorker online v. paper.

[arleneivana]

The topic seems to have died and I hate to beat a dead horse but three observations:

1. I've never waited hours for a table when I didn't plan for it ahead of time and have a nearby bar strategy in place. At that point it hardly feels like waiting, more like just the first step of a night out. I don't know anyone who spends that time just standing around outside. I agree that sounds like a colossal waste of time.
2. I've had more trouble getting into high-demand restaurants that are reservation-only than I have restaurants that didn't take reservations. When I do get a reservation at these places often the times are no more convenient than if I'd just been allowed to show up and put my name in (i.e. 5pm or 9pm). Often It leads me to wonder who is getting the prime times...and what connections they have that I don't.
3. The inconvenient reservation times becomes less of an issue at places that are no longer "hot" but then the same holds true for walk-in-only restaurants that have lost some of their shimmer. If you insist on hitting up something that is incredibly popular you will probably be inconvenienced in some way or other. That seems to make sense with most things, newly-released movies and winning baseball teams being two examples I can think of where high demand leads to annoying experiences in some form or another (not that DC knows anything about the latter.)

[Josh]

I would love for Rose's to take some reservations.  I think Dean makes a solid argument for why restaurants hate them, but models such as the limited slots available at Toki and Red Hen show that there is an in-between that can work in everyone's favor.

Such a policy would be a welcome change not because I am an egotistical douchebag who must control every aspect of my life, but because I'm a parent, and therefore must engage in at least a minimal amount of planning before heading out for dinner.  I'd love it if Rose's made my life easier for me in this regard, but they certainly don't have to.  Not doing so does not mean they are inhospitable or are prejudiced against those who have chosen to procreate (What would that even be called?  Parentism? Anti-Procreationism?).

Obviously they are good enough to get away with it, given that even with their no-res policy, my wife and I will be spending our anniversary there tomorrow evening.

(Also, the Nats have had a winning record the past 2 years, and are 2nd in the division this year, so there.)

[Pool Boy]

Not consciously! 

So do I, so I either go at off times or just skip it altogether.  But in answer to your question: I would keep an eye of the bar/host stand/entry, and if I saw that there were still a lot of people waiting for tables, I'd finish in a reasonable amount of time.  I see no reason to punish others for my discomfort.  I'm more of a "we're all in this together, so let's all cooperate" kind of person, even if I'm paying (literally) for the experience.

Yeah, I would probably do the same, but I would not forcibly truncate my meal if they had lines out the door. I'd still do my meal, but I probably would not linger unnecessarily.

[Mark Slater]

90 minutes. :-)

[cocoagirl]

The lack of thought to the older people in this world makes me ashamed of this website.  People saying they have no problem becuase they are 55- 55! lucky you. Try 65, 75, 85 - oh yeah the elders should not beable to go out for dinner but should just stay  home- maybe lock up all the elders in this city.  I am sure the "greatest generation" appreciates your thoughts.  By the way I am 55 as well.  Milleniums suck.    

[DonRocks]

The lack of thought to the older people in this world makes me ashamed of this website.  People saying they have no problem becuase they are 55- 55! lucky you. Try 65, 75, 85 - oh yeah the elders should not beable to go out for dinner but should just stay  home- maybe lock up all the elders in this city.  I am sure the "greatest generation" appreciates your thoughts.  By the way I am 55 as well.  Milleniums suck.    

[Well, that's just peachy that you're concerned for the elderly, but please display enough acumen *not* to implicate this website in any of your misjudgments because when you implicate this website, you're directly implicating me. By all means, express your opinion like everyone else, but know that "this website" and I disavow any association with your gross generalization, "Milleniums suck."]

[Bart]

The lack of thought to the older people in this world makes me ashamed of this website.  People saying they have no problem becuase they are 55- 55! lucky you. Try 65, 75, 85 - oh yeah the elders should not beable to go out for dinner but should just stay  home- maybe lock up all the elders in this city.  I am sure the "greatest generation" appreciates your thoughts.  By the way I am 55 as well.  Milleniums suck.    

Huh?

Please point to statements that show a "lack of thought to older people" or that "make you ashamed of this website".

I just re-read the whole thread and found no evidence of either.

And where is anyone "advocating that elders should not go out to dinner"?  (I won't even address the silliness of of the "lock them up" comment).

[deangold]

The lack of thought to the older people in this world makes me ashamed of this website.  People saying they have no problem becuase they are 55- 55! lucky you. Try 65, 75, 85 - oh yeah the elders should not beable to go out for dinner but should just stay  home- maybe lock up all the elders in this city.  I am sure the "greatest generation" appreciates your thoughts.  By the way I am 55 as well.  Milleniums suck.    

To be perfectly frank, the problem of partial arrivals, no shows and late cancellations is due to all age groups.  Any age can and does abuse the social contract that is a restaurant reservation.

Right now, we are giving out reservations for the early turn for those who want to come in then and are first come first served later.

[Waitman]

Huh?

Please point to statements that show a "lack of thought to older people" or that "make you ashamed of this website".

I just re-read the whole thread and found no evidence of either.

And where is anyone "advocating that elders should not go out to dinner"?  (I won't even address the silliness of of the "lock them up" comment).

Sietsema writes: "The masses include senior citizens who might not be able to stand for long or don't go out after dark...I smell ageism.'

No one (save me) addressed that observation at all other than to dismiss it.  Therefore, very arguable that there is indeed a "lack of thought to older people."

Just sayin'.

Interestingly, I had a friend coming to town who wanted me to take her someplace interesting as she lives in some boring New Hampshire burg.  I though first of Little Serow and Rose's, but an inability to leave work early to stand in line, the unreliability of her conference schedule and the necessity of dashing around town in traffic or killing several hours in a bar on a school night -- and still not being guaranteed a seat means--  I booked elsewhere.

Not that we'll have a bad meal, and not that their bottom line will suffer and not that they can't run their business as they see fit.

But, on the other hand, I am inconvenienced and my friend will enjoy her trip to Washington less, and those are legitimate considerations as well.

[lperry]

...But, on the other hand, I am inconvenienced and my friend will enjoy her trip to Washington less, and those are legitimate considerations as well. 

Can you please explain further?  I genuinely don't understand why going someplace else causes any of these problems.  A reservation seems very convenient to me because you won't have the stress of worrying about a wait or whether or not you get in, and you'll have a great meal and visit with your friend, which is what the trip is about anyway.  Plus, if you aren't waiting in line, she can hit one more museum or monument, making the trip that much better.  Win-win-win.

[Waitman]

Can you please explain further?  I genuinely don't understand why going someplace else causes any of these problems.  A reservation seems very convenient to me because you won't have the stress of worrying about a wait or whether or not you get in, and you'll have a great meal and visit with your friend, which is what the trip is about anyway.  Plus, if you aren't waiting in line, she can hit one more museum or monument, making the trip that much better.  Win-win-win.

Doesn't seem that complicated, but, let me lay it out for you.  If you can't go where you want to go, that diminishes your delight.  If you can't show your friend a cool restaurant that you think she would like a great deal, and that (likely) has better food than where you got a reservation. that diminishes the quality of your dining experience.  If she can't get to a place she would have liked, it diminishes her dining experience.  And she apparently isn't interested spending her non-obligated time at a museum or monument, which are less conducive to "catching up," as she didn't ask me to take her to a museum, she asked me to take her to dinner.

I'm intrigued by your ability to analyze my stress levels and preferences based on a four-sentence web posting. Even I didn't know that I'd rather go to dinner to where I'm going than to Little Serow until you pointed it out.  But now I feel better about not having options.

[lperry]

I'm intrigued by your ability to analyze my stress levels and preferences based on a four-sentence web posting. Even I didn't know that I I'd rather go to dinner to where I'm going than to Little Serow until you pointed it out.  But now I feel better about not having options. 

No offense was meant, although it seems to have been taken.  An internet risk, I suppose.  I still don't really understand why there is such desire to go somewhere that makes it difficult to get in, no matter how good the food is.  Dinner is the entire experience, and I'll simply go elsewhere.  To those who choose to be angry, frustrated, put out, or offended, well, carry on. 

[Joe H]

No offense was meant, although it seems to have been taken.  An internet risk, I suppose.  I still don't really understand why there is such desire to go somewhere that makes it difficult to get in, no matter how good the food is.  Dinner is the entire experience, and I'll simply go elsewhere.  To those who choose to be angry, frustrated, put out, or offended, well, carry on. 

An excellent post.

[zoramargolis]

Let's see. I know what I want and anything else is by nature a step down in my hierarchy of desire, and so is not as good. VS. There are lots of places I consider worthy, so if one is less available to me, I can find another that will satisfy me equally.

As we used to say back in the day: "different strokes for different folks," or these days "whatever floats your boat," both particularly apt expressions in this case, with one of the involved parties having a penchant for rowing.

[lion]

As we used to say back in the day: "different strokes for different folks," or these days "whatever floats your boat," both particularly apt expressions in this case, with one of the involved parties having a penchant for rowing.

Would add, "There are no shortcuts to any place worth going. -Beverly Sills"

[Tujague]

There are plenty of restaurants around town that are not particularly friendly to seniors or those with physical limitations for reasons that aren't restricted to not taking reservations. Indeed, even those that do take reservations may not be able to guarantee a comfortable or accessible space within which to wait if there's a delay, or a table that is easily accessible, or in a space where noise isn't an issue. I find it curious that throughout this issue of "hospitality," no one has actually documented a case where anyone at Rose's was directly inhospitable to a prospective diner, which indicates to me that they are pretty clear-eyed about their policy and handle with it relative aplomb, given the crowds. I find it sad that this gets focused so much on one restaurant, or pits one against another, which feels more like a resentment of popularity than a truly substantive criticism that goes beyond issues of personal convenience.

And, anyone who is sentimental about the "better" behaviors of seniors should go to the weekend movies at the National Gallery of Art, where it's the older viewers who are far ruder and more talkative than the younger generations.

[deangold]

Doesn't seem that complicated, but, let me lay it out for you.  If you can't go where you want to go, that diminishes your delight.  If you can't show your friend a cool restaurant that you think she would like a great deal, and that (likely) has better food than where you got a reservation. that diminishes the quality of your dining experience.  If she can't get to a place she would have liked, it diminishes her dining experience.  And she apparently isn't interested spending her non-obligated time at a museum or monument, which are less conducive to "catching up," as she didn't ask me to take her to a museum, she asked me to take her to dinner.

I'm intrigued by your ability to analyze my stress levels and preferences based on a four-sentence web posting. Even I didn't know that I'd rather go to dinner to where I'm going than to Little Serow until you pointed it out.  But now I feel better about not having options.

This touched a nerve from my former life as an economics grad at U of C.  I can't afford to go to Fiola Mare because I simply don't value the dining experience by what a meal there will cost me.  By not going there, I am expressing economically that I don't want to go there given the price.  If it were free, or if Charles were to take me to listen to more of my economic genius, I'd be there in a heartbeat.

Charles can't afford to go to Little Serrow, or to Rose's Luxury, because some of the price is the lost time and the uncertainty the no reservations olicy created.  His not going shows that he doesn't want to go there given the total cost of the experience, no matter how will he is to pay the cash value of the cost.

My favorite philosopher, Dan Savage, speaks of the "Cost of Admission", usually in terms of a relationship.  Is what you don't like in a partner worth more to you than what you do?  If so, you are not willing to pay the cost of admission and you should DTMFA.  But what is true in annoying habits, sexual kinks, infidelity or lack of reservations, if it ain't worth the full cost of admission, DTMFA.  But focusing on not being able to go as if it's strictly the business' fault neglects the two way nature of any transaction.

[IanBoden]

As the chef of a restaurant that doesn't take reservations please allow me a moment.

The reality of reservations for a restaurant my size (26 seats) is that it costs us money in more ways then just no-shows.  The cost of a reservations system is prohibitive for us, opentable which in my opinion is the only system worth using is around $300 per month plus a per person charge from $.25 - $.75.  In addition to this, I would need to hire someone to be at the restaurant to deal with reservations, as I'm the only person in the restaurant till around 3pm.  As far as dealing with pre payment or credit card guarantees, some folks get offended by them while others will go to the credit card company and have the charges overturned.  I've dealt with this in the past and it takes up a lot of time, and no one ends up happy.  Once again, with a small operation things become a lot more complicated when it comes to reservations.

I hope this sheds a little like on this issue from a small restaurant prospective.

[Waitman]

No offense was meant, although it seems to have been taken.  An internet risk, I suppose.  I still don't really understand why there is such desire to go somewhere that makes it difficult to get in, no matter how good the food is.  Dinner is the entire experience, and I'll simply go elsewhere.  To those who choose to be angry, frustrated, put out, or offended, well, carry on. 

I was a little pissy and apologize.  But, when I'm annoyed, being told why I shouldn't be annoyed, is kind of annoying.  I will respond after my snit has passed next time.

In an age where we expect Amazon to zoom hair care products to our doorstep overnight, the internet to give us music instantly and free, restaurants to give us a napkin that matches our outfits lest a thread of lint pollute our ensemble, and urgent care personnel to send us a "get happy" card to us after our collar bones are set, I remain a bit baffled as to why asking a restaurant permission to be served at a certain time is considered particularly demanding.

Let's see. I know what I want and anything else is by nature a step down in my hierarchy of desire, and so is not as good. VS. There are lots of places I consider worthy, so if one is less available to me, I can find another that will satisfy me equally.

As we used to say back in the day: "different strokes for different folks," or these days "whatever floats your boat," both particularly apt expressions in this case, with one of the involved parties having a penchant for rowing.

Sometimes, I'm pretty flexible. (Although the closest restaurant-rich environment to my current abode is 14th Street and none of the good restaurants there take reservations, thus giving me the option of inconveniencing myself, spending more than I want, or pinballing from joint to joint to see if there's await of less than an hour.  A challenge compounded if there are more than two people.)

But, sometimes, I want to go where I want to go, and not being able to do so in a convenient manner does cause the boat to float less well.

I find it sad that this gets focused so much on one restaurant, or pits one against another, which feels more like a resentment of popularity than a truly substantive criticism that goes beyond issues of personal convenience.

I have no idea where this comes from.

But focusing on not being able to go as if it's strictly the business' fault neglects the two way nature of any transaction.  

True.

[RWBooneJr]

The outrage (or whatever you'd like to call it) aimed at popular restaurants that don't take reservations is basically of the same species as the resentment of the "popular" kids in high school.  People don't like to feel left out.  Rose's Luxury is "inaccessible" only to those who choose not to wait for a table.  Corduroy is inaccessible to anyone who is in a wheelchair or otherwise can't climb a flight of stairs, yet nobody here complains.

[DaveO]

So many interesting perspectives and wonderful articulation.  The thread is interesting to read.  BTW:  I had to look up DTMFA in urban dictionary.  Great philosophy.  I could have/should have used it in the past.  Though that is history.

I don't like waiting in line with a a completely unknown arrival time.  Just don't like it.  But to each his/her own, and it doesn't kill me that it renders going to Rose's and some other restaurants highly unlikely.

[Waitman]

The outrage (or whatever you'd like to call it) aimed at popular restaurants that don't take reservations is basically of the same species as the resentment of the "popular" kids in high school.  People don't like to feel left out.  Rose's Luxury is "inaccessible" only to those who choose not to wait for a table.  Corduroy is inaccessible to anyone who is in a wheelchair or otherwise can't climb a flight of stairs, yet nobody here complains.

This analogy only makes sense if a) it's other restaurateurs complaining that some "popular" restaurants get lots of business while treating their customers like dirt -- like the quarterback who treats all the girls badly but still always has a hot date -- or, b ) if people are complaining that the "cool kids" are using their popularity to line jump while the rest of us have to kill three hours.

[DaveO]

As the chef of a restaurant that doesn't take reservations please allow me a moment.

The reality of reservations for a restaurant my size (26 seats) is that it costs us money in more ways then just no-shows.  The cost of a reservations system is prohibitive for us, opentable which in my opinion is the only system worth using is around $300 per month plus a per person charge from $.25 - $.75.  In addition to this, I would need to hire someone to be at the restaurant to deal with reservations, as I'm the only person in the restaurant till around 3pm.  As far as dealing with pre payment or credit card guarantees, some folks get offended by them while others will go to the credit card company and have the charges overturned.  I've dealt with this in the past and it takes up a lot of time, and no one ends up happy.  Once again, with a small operation things become a lot more complicated when it comes to reservations.

I hope this sheds a little like on this issue from a small restaurant prospective.

Aside from the attitudes and concerns there is a strict business perspective.  How does this issue affect the bottom line and ability to earn a living, pay the staff, purchase food, purchase every other danged thing you need for the business.  For some businesses it doesn't make sense.

On the other hand, as a business I sure would like guarantees, if in fact reservations were "guarantees" or even a "social contract between reservation maker and the restaurant" as one writer put it.

But they aren't a social contract, as evidenced by the volume of reservation no shows and the volume of reservations made without ever cancelling a reservation.  It appears they are a "tool" to protect one's own interests and damn the restaurant in the eyes of too many.  It seems to me the last thing they are is a "social contract".

[lperry]

I was a little pissy and apologize.  But, when I'm annoyed, being told why I shouldn't be annoyed, is kind of annoying.  I will respond after my snit has passed next time.

No harm done, and, as a youngest child, telling people what to do isn't really my schtick.  I do, however, genuinely want to understand why people behave very differently than I would in the same situation.  If you read my post and hear the voice of a confused Mr. Spock in your head, you'll get a decent sense of my demeanor.

I'm still casting a vote for the restaurants of excellent food and least resistance.

[astrid]

If you want to be sure of a first seating to Rose's Luxury or Little Serow, just have someone in your party line up 30 minutes before the door opens.  We've done this on Saturdays and were always able to get in (even as larger parties of 4 or 6).  They're popular restaurants, but hardly comparable to NYC cronut lines.  We were at Rose's last Saturday and I think everyone who got in line before the door opened got a table or got seats upstairs.

[Joe H]

As the chef of a restaurant that doesn't take reservations please allow me a moment.

The reality of reservations for a restaurant my size (26 seats) is that it costs us money in more ways then just no-shows.  The cost of a reservations system is prohibitive for us, opentable which in my opinion is the only system worth using is around $300 per month plus a per person charge from $.25 - $.75.  In addition to this, I would need to hire someone to be at the restaurant to deal with reservations, as I'm the only person in the restaurant till around 3pm.  As far as dealing with pre payment or credit card guarantees, some folks get offended by them while others will go to the credit card company and have the charges overturned.  I've dealt with this in the past and it takes up a lot of time, and no one ends up happy.  Once again, with a small operation things become a lot more complicated when it comes to reservations.

I hope this sheds a little like on this issue from a small restaurant prospective.

Welcome, Chef Boden!!!  I don't think that some others recognize your name but your restaurant is The Shack in Staunton which I mentioned in another thread.  It is an honor to have you on here.  Also, congratulations on being a semi finalist for a James Beard Mid Atlantic Award this past year!

Your restaurant is different.  When we were there last Thursday night, at 5:45PM, there were a total of 14 people at the 7 tables.  When we left around 7:30 the same seven tables hosted a total of 19 people.  You literally have no room for no-shows.  If one table of four doesn't show up it could be 25% of the revenue for one service.  (six tables X 2 + 0 at the seventh table).  On Wednesday and Thursday night you also do not offer the prix fixe menu you have on Friday and Saturday.  Your's is a different kind of restaurant; for some, perhaps for many on those nights, your's is a very casual destination given to impulse, not to reservation.

My criticism of another restaurant is based on the total capacity of probably eighty to one hundred including bar seats.  I believe in that kind of situation there is an opportunity to hold a handful of tables for a very early reservation.  If people do not show up, fifteen minutes after opening, someone in line (if there is one) could take their place.  You are on a side street in Staunton.  There is very little foot traffic-you are strictly a destination,  I believe your situation is different.  Plus, with 14-19 actual diners in the restaurant there is no possibility of having someone on a phone.  You were the only person in the kitchen when we were there and both in the dining room were totally involved with diners.  A larger restaurant is different.

Again, an honor to have you on here!

Here is the thread for Chef Boden's The Shack in Staunton.

[B.A.R.]

I would also like to know who in the neighborhood has the time to stand in line enough to be a regular?

My brother-in-law. Eats there all the time, usually at the bar, lives four blocks away and loves it.

I think the rules that Rose's Luxury put into place makes a lot of sense for them and is quite reasonable for enough of the people who actually patronizes them.

Like my brother-in-law and his wife. As residents of the neighborhood ( BTW, which is probably the target demographic of Rose's), if the wait when they get there is too long, they just walk (or ride their bikes) someplace else.

The Red Hen does strike a nice balance and I appreciate it.

Having been to both, I think the Red Hen is a better restaurant, but you can't really make reservations at Red Hen either.

[Joe H]

My brother-in-law. Eats there all the time, usually at the bar, lives four blocks away and loves it.

Like my brother-in-law and his wife. As residents of the neighborhood ( BTW, which is probably the target demographic of Rose's), if the wait when they get there is too long, they just walk (or ride their bikes) someplace else.

Having been to both, I think the Red Hen is a better restaurant, but you can't really make reservations at Red Hen either.

Red Hen accepts very early (i.e. 5 or 5:30 depending on when they open) and very late such such as 9:30 or 10.  Their website currently notes they are not accepting reservations through e-mail or social media but suggests calling for availability.

Absolutely love Red Hen!

[southdenverhoo]

This seems like one of those situations where we need to turn to wise women for guidance, in this case, the Marvelettes, from 1964:

Don't want nobody that don't want me

(too many fish in the sea)

Don't need nobody that don't need me

(too many fish in the sea)

or Mr. Jagger:

You can't always get what you want...

May I point out, without pissing anybody off, that--hey, look: the Waitman don't wanna wait!  (it's one of them irony things, unless I've mixed up my tropes, a la Ms. Morissette)

I'm 60 now and I'm probably not going to stand in line at a no reservations place for more than a half hour to 45 minutes, so I get where Waitman (not-gonna-wait, man!) is coming from. If bar dining is not available, abundant, and quicker, I'm usually just gonna have to wait (not in line but, like, elsewhere) until the hot restaurant of the season cools off over the period of a couple years...or go at off peak hours.  Waitman knows this, his posts over the years indicate he's neither stupid nor is he entitled, he's just saying, in his opinion, it sucks.  I don't hear him blaming the restaurant, or suggesting they ought to change to fulfill his expectations--just saying it's off-putting to him personally, and when replicated throughout town, an off-putting trend, an opinion he certainly has the right to hold.