Some Bribes are Legal?

April 8, 2004 7:20 AM

A few tips for the well-heeled gourmand. But I suspect the technologically oriented MetaFilter member will prefer these tips.
posted by EatenByAGrue (10 comments total)

Disclaimer: both these articles are a few years old, so I make no claims that the suggestions given still work. But, while I've been to my share of fancy restaurants (usually on the company dime) and enjoyed them, I am somewhat amazed that people are willing to pay for the right to dine on a $375 meal. But I'm even more amazed that, near the end, the author was able to get seats without bribing at all, but just from the confidence of knowing he could bribe.
posted by EatenByAGrue at 7:22 AM on April 8, 2004

[this is good!]
posted by shoepal at 7:30 AM on April 8, 2004

Interesting article, but I wonder how much of it is also a sign of the times- late 2000, the tech bubble hadn't quite burst, and people were still spending money like it flowed from the faucets.
posted by mkultra at 7:50 AM on April 8, 2004

Nice article. Also, good point by mkultra - I hadn't noticed it was written in 2000, which may account for why I was a little (but not overly) surprised about the amounts of money changing hands. Then again, I suppose there are plenty of people who would be willing to spend $50 to get in to a restaurant without a reservation. I usually see this sort of practice as being 'unfair' to the others who wait in the queue patiently, but if the system was formalised and you could pay a fixed amount to jump the queue I don't think I would be as bothered - I'm not sure why, when it equates to the same thing, probably it's because bribery requires more skill and confidence (although not that much from the sounds of this article).
posted by adrianhon at 7:58 AM on April 8, 2004

Great article, thanks for the link. The second link wasn't working for me, what was it
posted by Outlawyr at 8:05 AM on April 8, 2004

I thought gourmand was the opposite of gourmet.

Gourmand
(n.) A greedy or ravenous eater; a glutton
posted by konolia at 8:32 AM on April 8, 2004

I think he chose the correct word.
posted by ColdChef at 8:39 AM on April 8, 2004

gourmand: A lover of good food. "gourmet is a person with discriminating taste in food and wine, as is a gourmand. Because gourmand can also mean “one who enjoys food in great quantities” or even “a gluttonous eater,” care should be taken to make clear its intended sense. An epicure is much the same as a gourmet, but the word may sometimes carry overtones of excessive refinement. This use of epicure is a misrepresentation of Epicurean philosophy, which, while it professed that pleasure was the highest good, was hardly given to excessive concern with food and drink."
posted by shoepal at 8:52 AM on April 8, 2004

Outlawyr, the second link is to a Wall Street Journal article about online reservation systems and the use made of them by high-end restaurants. (Note: the article is itself hosted by one of those online reservation systems.)

And konolia, ColdChef is correct that I purposefully choose gourmand, and I did so for the ambiguity that shoepal pointed out.

adrianhon, I perceive that difference as well, and for me, I think it is because bribery imposes a distinction between those in the know and those who don't know that it's possible, while letting everyone know about a fee up front places everyone on an equal footing, knowledge-wise (although not monetary-wise).
posted by EatenByAGrue at 9:08 AM on April 8, 2004

The bummer is that this little dance is much harder for a chick to perform. Or, I'm guessing it is, since I've never had the balls (pardon the expression) to try it. Have any women here had any experience paying off a maitre d'?
posted by CunningLinguist at 1:46 PM on April 8, 2004