October 11, 2001

2:40 PM

Eat out, Give to charityMembers of the National Restaurant Association are donating proceeds from today's sales to the American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund. Tonight just might be a good night to take those you cherish out to eat to show them you love them.
posted by yangwar (23 comments total)

Sorry if this is a double post. I'm in a bit of a rush and a quick search revealed nothing.
posted by yangwar at 2:42 PM on October 11, 2001

linkee no workee
posted by Kafkaesque at 2:42 PM on October 11, 2001

The cynic in me scoffed at this notion when I first heard it, because it came on the heels of business being down significantly at restaurants since 9-11. I trust they are genuine about their intentions to donate to the cause, but I also feel they will net more money today than they did last Thursday.
posted by msacheson at 2:43 PM on October 11, 2001

linky winky
posted by bargle at 2:50 PM on October 11, 2001

Dine for America

I've only posted to Metafilter a few times before and have no idea how to edit my post. *sigh* Nothing like not being able to figure out something simple to make you feel incompetent.

I feel a little cynical about this too, but I checked the list of restaurants and most of them are contributing 100% tonight. PR stunt or not, I'm going to take my love out to eat tonight.
posted by yangwar at 2:53 PM on October 11, 2001

Eat out, Give to charity

*cough*

I, ah, had an entirely different subset of associations when I initially read this.
posted by Skot at 2:57 PM on October 11, 2001

crass commercialism

if you want to donate - give to the red cross
if you want to eat out - eat out

by mixing the 2, even if they give more than 100% of the profits to charity, they're hoping to get some spillover effects, and to link themselves to goodwill

oh well as if it were important
posted by yesster at 2:59 PM on October 11, 2001

I, ah, had an entirely different subset of associations when I initially read this.

I thought the same thing, Skot! Especially just now when yangwar said, "I'm going to take my love out to eat tonight." Ordinarily I wouldn't have thought anything of that sentence, but given the link title....

*awkwardly lugs mind out of gutter, dusts it off, puts back into place*
posted by Karl at 3:12 PM on October 11, 2001

i was told today by a usually reliable source that the red cross has turned over large sums of money directly to the corporations which had space/lost people in the attack. meanwhile, the families of those who never came home that day are in many cases without income or needed support. can anybody offer input on this? are we ensuring the 'holding harmless' of our corporate entities and letting the worker bee's families fend for themselves? can anybody shed some light on this rumor?
posted by quonsar at 3:14 PM on October 11, 2001

is there a list of participating restaurants anywhere?
posted by howa2396 at 3:37 PM on October 11, 2001

The problem, I think, is that the Red Cross is helping people vs. giving them money and the overflow will just go to the Red Cross' war chest - their CEO makes $500,000/yr.
posted by owillis at 3:46 PM on October 11, 2001

If you're in a major Canadian city, particularly the Vancouver area, this site has a listing of participating restaurants.
posted by jess at 3:48 PM on October 11, 2001

I just had (a late) lunch at Chili's in Phoenix, there was a flyer there stating that all of their parent's restaurants, Chili's, Macaroni Grill, and On The Border, were donating 100% of profits today to the Red Cross.
posted by pnevares at 3:59 PM on October 11, 2001

gah -- some of the cynics here just cannot be appeased. is it not enough that they're giving a large amount if not all of their proceeds today the red cross? should they perhaps give ALL the profit over the next 6 months? would that be enough?

bitchbitchbitchbitch ...
posted by aenemated at 4:08 PM on October 11, 2001

let me say this: I knew a girl whose apartment building caught fire. she and I were very surprised that the red cross provided her with a place to stay, gave her vouchers to buy new clothes and household articles, and gave her money to help her get a new apartment.

in other words, they really helped her get set up again. I started supporting the red cross after that happened.
posted by rebeccablood at 4:08 PM on October 11, 2001

What do we have to eat out?
posted by hellinskira at 4:15 PM on October 11, 2001

These guys have a bunch of restaurants that are participating in a charity event that benefits the families of victims that worked in the food service industry in the WTC, SF and NY restaurants are participating.

(and nope, i have no affiliation with em, just like em)
posted by zeoslap at 4:54 PM on October 11, 2001

Sorry, I'd like to help out the restaurant industry as they scramble for their own market share from "patriotism", but I just purchased a new Dodge Ram Charger mega pickup/SUV at 0% APR ("keep America rolling...we're doing our part"), bought something at every single local store that advertises with an American flag background (true patriotism always brings a tear to my eye and a cheerful cha-ching to cash registers everywhere)...and I just sent part of my last $20 to each of the television networks so that they could purchase acetone to un-super-glue their lips from Condoleeza Rice's butt.

How in hell am I supposed to "eat out"? I guess I'm just not a patriot.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 4:55 PM on October 11, 2001

so that they could purchase acetone to un-super-glue their lips from Condoleeza Rice's butt.
thats the goddam funniest post i've seen here in a month. thanks! :-)
posted by quonsar at 4:58 PM on October 11, 2001

Windows of Hope is also sponsoring a global dine-out, with the charitable contributions going to the families of WTC foodservice workers.
posted by tamim at 6:31 PM on October 11, 2001

Since the Windows of Hope dine-out is being supported by independent restaurants, is this any more or less greed-oriented and evil than the dine-out conducted by the BIG SATANIC CORPORATIONS?
posted by darukaru at 8:55 PM on October 11, 2001

And I though*I* was cynical.

I work at a participating restaurant and what went on tonight was good. Our establishment sold nearly $12,000 in sales tonight, all of which go directly to the American Red Cross (not *just* the profits--the whole kit). At the end of the evening, hosts and servers who never had the funds to donate, felt that now they had helped in some small way.

Many of the servers and bartenders tonight donated all of their tips (an average of $90 a piece) along with the restaurant sales money. No one was instructed to do this, not even encouraged--but the broke-ass college kids who make up most of the staff added $817 to the final total from tonight's earnings.

That makes me proud.

(So, piss off all you naysayers :)
posted by brittney at 11:56 PM on October 11, 2001

I don't know about the Dine for America bit, but Windows of Hope was started in coordination with the surviving management of Windows on the World, the restaurant at the top of WTC1, which lost 70 people. Michael Lomonaco, the head chef, was on Charlie Rose last night promoting this -- too late for me, unfortunatley, to make plans -- and said he had realized soon after the disaster that not only had his own friends lost their lives, but there were hundreds more people employed in the food industry in both Towers who now had no jobs, and likely had no job security. The Windows of Hope promotion was to allow the restaurant industry to help its own. I suppose one could take the cynical view and call it crass, but nobody's making you go out to eat at one of those restaurants, either.

Owillis, you know why the CEO of one of the biggest national nonprofits gets a $500,000 paycheck? Because they can't give her stock options. Really. Non-profits have to compete for the best talent, too, and at that level, there are not that many people with the wherewithal to manage an organization that size. What, you thought it was a volunteer position?

As someone who grew up in the non-profit world I get really pissed at people who thought that my dad should have raised his family while working for free.
posted by dhartung at 1:42 AM on October 12, 2001