No, but I also don’t see “No Loitering” signs.
We were talking about extra charges, yes?
Is what you responded to
You can have an issue with pretty much anything just for kicks, but it doesn’t make it an actual issue, as others have already said.
1 Like
This is funny. I could have written the opposite and you would’ve disagreed, too.
I just like restaurants where the service is gracious and accommodating. I dislike being charged hidden fees, or being put to a choice of swallowing them or leaving after I’m already there.
Maybe things have changed. I was taught that a hallmark of the hospitality trade was creating an atmosphere where the patron wants to return. Hidden charges don’t square with that, IMO.
Well, when you have to resort to unspecific hypotheticals like “you would’ve disagreed anyway” it probably means the argument has failed and it’s time to move on.
A restaurant charging for things that most people consider reasonable is not the opposite of gracious service.
It’s an establishment that serves and charges for food and drink, so it may be considered reasonable of them to expect that guests will not bring those things from outside and expect to consume them there — at least without being charged.
Doesn’t make them ungracious or unaccommodating.
Would it be so hard to find out if there’s an extra charge for outside food or drink you’re planning to take in? I’ve planned a lot of dinners and events, and I’ve never not asked, even if I didn’t think it was going to be an issue.
At one of our HO group meals someone wanted to know if they could bring their own wine glasses — the restaurant was not going to have to touch them or wash them or serve them or anything else that in your assessment is worthy of a charge. And yet, we asked them in advance, because it also seemed odd to take glasses to a place that has them, and we didn’t want to offend (even though they were specific glasses for the kind of wine someone was bringing).
The social code necessitates graciousness at both ends of a transaction.
Unaccommodating was when I offered to pay cakeage for a birthday cake for a 30-person birthday dinner (in a private room, with prix fixe pricing including dessert we were going to pay for already) and the restaurant refused, and then instead of agreeing to serve the cake they had on their dessert menu as a whole cake, wanted to charge us wedding cake pricing for a specialty cake.
Guess what? As with corkage or any other charge, there’s always a choice: we took our business elsewhere — because it didn’t bode well, not, because we were so desperate for our own cake.
You always have a choice when there is actually unreasonable behavior.
But painting reasonable things as otherwise just for a good rant, well, it’s hard for reasonable people to read that as otherwise.
4 Likes
In fewer words, we have different opinions of hospitality.
You’re right, except the “we” on one end is everyone else here who responded that corkage and cakeage are not the never-before-seen travesty you paint them to be 
2 Likes
Who said travesty?
If you could patronize one of two otherwise identical restaurants, only one having corkage, cakeage, split plate fee, time limit, coffee refill charge, view table premium, and compulsory tipping (now THERE’S a concept), which one do you think “all we here” would choose?
More hypotheticals.
I’ll repeat:
1 Like
More straw man. Of course patrons should behave with grace. No one has said otherwise.
Seeing as this thread started out as a UK thing, it’s perhaps worth me pointing out that I’ve never seen such a thing here. But then, splitting plates would be a very uncommon social practice.
I took to Chez Panisse a bottle of Champagne I got in SFO at a great price, well expecting and willing to pay their corkage fee. The Champagne turned out to be flat (if it seems too good to be true…). The waiter told us they would waive the corkage fee if we ordered a bottle of wine from their wine list, so that’s what we did. I thought it was good of them.
6 Likes
Only in America . . . we want portions large enough for a family and we want to split them while we’re there.
There are a few (very few) restaurants that offer “1/2” portions, which I appreciate. I also appreciate restaurants that offer 6 or 8 ounce steaks.
4 Likes
Today someone posted a receipt from a local pizza place on the neighborhood site. He had placed an order for takeout and when he picked it up noticed a $0.91 charge for “take out service.” He wasn’t taken aback by the amount, but by the fact that this spot had never charged for takeout before and the charge wasn’t disclosed .
1 Like
That might just be the single most important reason why I don’t go to steak houses, where most cuts start at 16oz.
Ugh.
2 Likes
This was a charge for what, the box? I’d be miffed if the charge was a nickle.
Site consensus seemed to be that it was for the takeout material (?), but I can’t see how that would amount to more than the plates, cutlery, service, etc. that it cost them if you dined in. I’d be miffed as well. I used to love the place (pizza wasn’t very good, but their sandwiches and salads are very good) but oddly enough I stopped patronizing them because the owner is a horse’s arse.
That’s what it would take to charge extra for takeout.
Most restaurants with even a decent wine list have a corkage notice on their webpage. Just two random restaurants in SF
Portion sizes tend to be quite different in Europe compared to US
2 Likes
That’s a good trend, then. If you charge it, you should disclose it in advance.
But “most” have web notices? IDTS.
