RESTAURANTS AS PUBLIC TOILETS

Restaurants are NOT public toilets and it amazes me that the downward challenged think they have a right to use what is in effect a private toilet when they feel the need. These people should put their names on a public database so that any and all can come knocking on THEIR door. We have travelled extensively and like everyone else needed to use a toilet at times but, out of respect for the restaurateur, we became a customer and at least bought a beer so we could use the facility [unfortunately a self defeating cycle - wahoo!] .
Good word, respect.

SURCHARGES - DINING

We just spent $344 for the two of us for lunch and were charged an extra $3.78 surcharge for using a normal bank credit card - including that same surcharge charged on the tip!  This is a grubby little rip off for little dollar value.  Some financially challenged so called junior manager decided to penalise anyone who doesn't keep a bucket load of cash on them when dining - may I suggest no one!  Let me put that into perspective, this charge is the same as adding circa 50c to the cost of say a main course from $48 to $48.5 as we had this day.  It's a hidden charge designed to make the menu seem cheaper - except it doesn't.  My suggestion, join the real world and make people's experience seamless without reputation ruining nasty surprises.  Think the ramifications through instead of trying to grub a few cents over and above an expensive lunch.In our job we have eaten at hundreds of restaurants all over the world and rarely encounter such backward anti-customer charging.

BUSINESS BROKERS

Want to sell your business and be assured the people you entrust to that sale are both knowledgeable and professional?  Don’t we all.

A broker is merely an expensive intermediary between buyer and seller supporting non disclosure between the parties and by validating financial and legal information leading to negotiated contractual agreements.

Unfortunately there are many so called brokers who should be in some other sort of real estate because business broking requires a deft set of learned skills so as not to disadvantage either seller or buyer.  Beware the broker who devalues a business just so they can get a quick sale commission to support their own cashflow.  Indeed, there are international methods of calculating worth remembering that ‘worth’ is not a fire sale but a true and proven financial statement showing value.

Seek the broker who recognises they have a fiduciary duty and can prove education, knowledge and results because without all three they cannot provide valid advice.

Indeed, a business broker must by necessity provide financial [valuation] and legal [contractual] advice on all matters related to both selling and buying a business and, if that advice is flawed because of a lack of education [knowledge] or for whatever reason, both buyer and seller may be severely disadvantaged. 

Brokers charge and accept significant remuneration for a ‘professional service’ being far more than the cost of just lodging an advertisement on some website.  This differentiation is critical because it means a broker has a fiduciary duty to the seller or the person paying the fees to be honest and act in good faith in all dealings.

Buyer beware because there are many ‘brokers’ who pontificate at length about their ability to sell a business yet may not have a clue other than bluster. 

In simple terms a broker must be able to prove the following and if not keep looking for one who does:

1.       Education:  A broker is supposed to be an expert professional in business valuations etc and as such needs to have some sort of financial qualification to offer that advice; at the very least at diploma level but preferably at degree or even masters level.

2.       Experience:  Whilst experience is not as crucial as educated knowledge it is desirable for the broker to have transferred their educated knowledge into sales where both parties are happy;

3.       Industry knowledge:  As a well paid mediator/negotiator it is expected that the broker has extensive industry knowledge to be able to facilitate any sale without misrepresentations;

4.       Client base:  Has the broker a good enough reputation to be able to support clients wanting to sell and buy?;

5.       Working for you:  The obligation on the broker is to represent the seller as they are paying the commission.  It is not their role to act for both sides therefore no kickbacks;

6.       Not quick turnover fire sale:  It’s worth remembering that many brokers work their sales to maximise cash flow in the short term.  Therefore avoid those who devalue a proven valuation just to get a quick sale.  They win, you don’t – a $100k drop in sale price means you lose $100k whilst the broker may lose just $5k but get $20k in the pocket today;

7.       Valuation expertise:  This is the hub of the broker’s input and where they must prove expertise ‘in good faith’.    Ask the broker to explain common terms such as ‘risk based multipliers’ and ‘EBIT normalisation’ and ‘payback’ and ‘capitalised future earnings [Nett EBIT/ rate of return] * 100 +- adjustments’;

8.       Discretionary cash flow:  This is the total owners benefit from the business including lawful tax breaks, goods and services for private purposes etc;

9.       Mitigating factors:  These are the wow and risk factors influencing a sale such as consistent and verifiable profits and hours required to sustain profit and growth potential;

The most crucial figure is proven revenue [BAS *6] from which any professional broker can deduct linked expenses at ATO published rates and wages etal, add EBIT normalisation [this is why BAS expenses are not indicative] and apply a multiplier based on risk and/or calculate worth based on capitalised future earnings and/or by detailed analysis of P&L to get an estimate of worth.  Then it’s up to market acceptance factors.

This is their job and they get paid for doing it.  If they can’t, then find someone who can.

ZOMATO

We have owned and run a boutique restaurant in Fitzroy Melbourne called 'Mon Ami' for some 15 years, have been ranked within the top 2% of restaurants globally and are lucky enough to be full most of the time. 

With the rise and rise of everyone's capacity to post their opinions online there are now a plethora of sites which purport to just publish others comments without bias.  Unfortunately this is rarely the case where defamation is rife and so called 'algorithms' are advertised as perfect yet fail time after time.

Zomato is such a site. 

I have complained to Zomato without success with just the latest below:

Zomato,

In simple terms, you are attempting to separate restaurants on an overall spectrum [bell curve] by arbitrarily [in both senses – your use of unrestrained authority and on the basis or random thought] changing the ranking pursuant to the number of businesses on a ranking rather than independent reviewer scores even though even though the respective businesses may be vastly different.  This is a mathematical nonsense because you are not changing scores based on independent grades but based on your assessment without having been to each establishment.  For example you mathematically compare as equals say a pizza shop and a fine dining restaurant where the offerings are different as are the clients.  A dish which takes 2 days to prepare has nothing in common with a dish which takes 15 minutes, yet you ignore the reviewer and arbitrarily change their score . Undoubtedly, your issue is that you will have a lot of restaurants on 3.5/5 because people tend to vote around the mean.  Instead, separation should be based on a more extensive spectrum [maybe out of 100 in decimals from .1 to 10.0] and mathematically weighted by a number of parameters such as cuisine, service, ambience etc.  All of this without independent mathematical influence by Zomato.

It’s the reviewer which should determine scores, not Zomato.

In our case our score drops to 3.9 when the average of actual reviewers scores is circa 4.5 just because there are others on the same score.  Just common sense says look at the reviews and establish whether we sit at 3.9 or 4.5 [?].

If all this was just esoteric argument then it would be an interesting mathematical exercise but in part our business is affected by Zomato based on their changes.  If a potential clients tipping point is say 4.2 then we would be ignored despite past clients ranking us at 4.5.  This can cost us business and is most certainly inappropriately influenced by Zomato AND it misrepresents our business and is thus possibly unlawful.

In addition, we treasure both professional reviewers and blogging diners and take all comments seriously.  However, we do get annoyed when some disaffected keyboard warrior says nice things to us and ferrets off to anomalously write vitriol.  [Why would anyone do this?]  Thankfully, these cases are very rare albeit there was one quickly refuted [by others] chunk of inappropriate vitriol posted recently on Zomato which we demanded to have modified to remove the defamatory comments.  [What sort of people do this?] 

Note that Zomato are responsible for publishing defamation when they are in full knowledge of content.

This unfortunately gets much more important for a new restaurant depending on public reviews to build business.  Zomato can kill them based on their so called algorithm. 

Not good.

Zomato, you need to deal with your methods.

Regards,

Jon

Opera [house] in Melbourne ..

I wish to thank the Sydney Opera House Trust from a Melbournian’s perspective for their decision to downgrade and make Bennelong restaurant more 'accessible'. 

That pesky Frenchman created a beautiful multi-hat restaurant called Bennelong within our national icon.  A first class affair befitting its status.  Guillaume Brahimi, being  that pesky Frenchman, sought to create something special in the space as has Ducasse who leads the restaurant Jules Verne within Paris’s Eiffel tower.  Little compromise in either ‘wonders of the world’.

However, Australians it seems, according to the opera house trust, want an ‘accessible’ venue similar to the dozens of cafes and restaurants in the immediate vicinity. 

The Utzon hating Ryan Committee of yesteryear seems reborn – ‘don’t bother to create something really special because us Australian’s just want pub tucker – no need for that smancy stuff – just give us another café/bar’.

Nothing special or world leading, just average so us average people can go there and feel, well, average.

As Sydney does not seem to appreciate how to deal with ‘first class’ I wonder if we could shift the opera house to Melbourne where we would indeed laud the brilliance of Utzon and create a world class experience decidedly away from average.

This is not a slight on the successful van Haandels and we wish them well but my question remains, ‘Do we want yet another café / bar and importantly, do we want it in our one-off wonder of the world?’

My thanks, as a Melbournian, to the trust for downgrading Sydney.

Response – ‘Heads on a platter’ by Colman Andrews and ‘It’s a tough job ...’ by Joanna Saville and ‘Food critic’s demise’ by Suzanne Carbonne.

Tuesday’s Epicure in the Age September 25 2012 and Wednesday’s Age in Entertainment 26th September 2012.

It is indeed a pity when self-devotion to the aggrandisement of the self proclaimed professional restaurant critic’s expertise [apologies to Dickens] is toppled by Joe the blogger blob. Food reviewers are crying foul as their level of self proclaimed importance and vitriol is replaced by the equally self proclaimed but now collective vitriol of the unsworn albeit anonymous masses. For years so called food writers have survived on sensation and the negative such as demonstrated by the dubious literary eulogies of ‘Close ‘em down Downs’ [Stephen Downs – since fired] or the recent court case against a Sydney newspaper when they had to pay out millions because of a ‘review’ [Mathew Evans – no longer reviewing] which closed a restaurant. Something about the pot calling the kettle black comes to mind.

If nothing else the Evans case solidified defamation and liable laws where food writers and I suspect bloggers can not just wax lyrical with impunity from their own egomanic distortions of the real world. Say or write something untrue and the doo doo bucket just got deeper. We, the beleaguered restaurateurs, have a precedent!

Coleman Andrews said in his article, “We have to write better and more intelligently...” when referring to bloggers as competition. May I ask, “Why hasn’t this been a guiding principle for any article written about anything, ever?”

We own two restaurants and suffer the same indignities by food writers and bloggers as everyone else yet we still enjoy blogger ratings of 92% and 73% which, in the first case, outranks nearly all the hatted restaurants for a dining experience. We have had extremely negative blogger reviews removed from Google and Urban Spoon from people who never dined at either restaurant - having to do this really sucks. A published review on one of our restaurants a couple of years ago castigated us when the reviewer made some ‘interesting’ claims about a piece of metal the size of a kitchen knife left in his meal but post publication refused to provide any evidence preferring to hide behind a legal wall [He has just been given the flick from The Herald Sun]. Fortunately, after nine years, our business is strong and it made no difference but I wonder what would have happened to a new venture?. If we had a legal precedent then, all would have been different. The key change is that food writers can no longer say what they feel like and feed the malcontents in print just to sell papers. It got harder. The same publisher as the ‘metal in the food’ review named us as one of Melbourne’s best restaurants just two weeks later. Doesn’t say much for ‘professional’ food writers me thinks.

The problem for a reviewer and indeed any ‘food guide’ publication is that bloggers are finding the cracks. If a reviewer gives a restaurant two hats but the blogger collective gives them a mediocre score then who is right? If democracy is alive and well then the bloggers must be heard and perhaps the hat system needs to be revised to remove inconsistencies.

As a restaurateur, my challenge is to provide a ‘product’ consisting of the design of a space where people want to be, service which surpasses expectations and food aimed squarely at our target markets. Add on to that, making a profit and getting time enough to play golf and go on one of those strange things called, holidays.

A ‘reviewer’ [as distinct from a blogger] needs a proven level of expertise, relevant qualifications and must be prepared to take responsibility as does a ‘trouble shooter’ or a ‘consultant’ for what they do. It is not good enough to just feed the face and pontificate in print when the reviewer can destroy a new business costing ‘someone else’ their invested capital whilst they retain their impunity and ignore contributing factors.

The blogger will be with us forever but hopefully will be seen as the uneducated and unprofessional opinion albeit, an extremely important opinion as our efforts as restaurateurs are laid bare by their comments and, others of like mind will listen and make decisions based on those bloggs. The challenge is to remove comments by bloggers of low intelligence or whom have not raised themselves above toilet humour or who think that writing something nasty will bring them closer to nirvana. The answer is that we can’t remove them in total but we must make sure the idiots are seen as idiots and we must also make sure everyone realises that bloggs are manipulated by people seeking advantage – like advertising the more money you spend the greater the impact.

The way to do this is to make sure future professional reviewers are and are seen to be expert, above complicit activity [see article on Downes by Suzanne Carbonne in The Age September 26th] and support restaurateurs, not destroy them [see Coco Roco Vs Mathew Evans].

The newspapers and glossies like Gourmet Traveller along with the rest of us are subject to pressure by media marketing companies and it really is a joke the amount of free publicity some people receive before opening, during opening and post opening their next big foodie venture [see Epicure and Gourmet Traveller current editions]. Or indeed, how the level of advertising in a particular publication translates into positive publicity or the level of kickbacks taken to give a positive review [see article by Suzanne Carbonne].

The reviewer must rise above this underworld of kick-backs, bribery and bulsch [euphemistic interpretation of doo doo] to become a guiding light - not a ‘critic’ but a professional ‘reviewer’. Not a reporter but a journalist with opinions based on expertise, qualifications and a recognisable face. Just saying you have eaten out for 20 years therefore you are a qualified reviewer is not good enough. This is blogger territory.

We don’t need the vitriol, we need reviewers who are seen as honest but supportive and delve into why a particular restaurant is doing what they are doing. The blogger doesn’t give a toss other than what’s put in front of them and neither they should as their experience is one dimensional. [But that singular view is of enormous importance because they are our clients and like it or not they will have very valid opinions albeit not necessarily right.]

The reviewer on the other hand must be ‘three’ dimensional and above the underworld of the holier than thou’s.

Sorry but I’m on a roll now – personally, as restaurateurs, we don’t pretend to offer multi-hat cuisine [with one cook/dishwasher it’s impossible] but we do offer reasonable food, great atmosphere and service. We rank at 93% on blog sites which means 93 people out of 100 liked our total product and had a great experience. Our ‘blogger’ reviews are for the most part,sensational and we are full most of the time. This is despite Mr Downes and despite the fact that neither of our restaurants has featured in any Good Food Guide [nine plus years in business] and we have no media company selling us and we do not give kickbacks and we do not advertise and we grudgingly welcome bloggers.

This is what the reviewer needs to focus on, a total product but from a professional point of view. It’s not all about the food! It’s about an individual restaurateur’s investment in a great experience and the review must be cognisant of the hopes and dreams and indeed strategies of all the people involved in the restaurant.

Let’s take the review up the food chain a few notches! [pun intended].

Jon Langevad MBA

Director Cafe Dansk Pty Limited

Trading as:

Mon Ami Restaurant & Gallery - 144 Nicholson Fitzroy 94173220

Deco Bistro - 49 Beach Street Port Melbourne 96461101

Langhill Consulting - langhill.net

Jon Langevad Photography – jonlangevad.com

BREAKING NEWS: NEW COFFEE PRICES TO REFLECT OUR MONDAY TO FRIDAY WAGE SYSTEM

With the ratification of Fair Work Australia’s award system, pricing for coffee will have to alter.

Now follow carefully.

A normal coffee served Monday to Friday between 7am and 10pm will be $3.80 with a wage component of $1.20. However if that coffee is served after 10pm then add 12c to make it $3.92 and if served after 12 midnight add another 5% or 18c to make the price $3.98.

But, if that coffee is served on Saturday add 30c to give a total of $4.10 and $4.25 and $4.55 for service times from 10pm to 12 midnight and 12 midnight to 7am respectively.

For Sunday add 60c making the normal coffee $4.40 with time allowances altering the price to $4.58 and $4.87 respectively.

Be prepared with your credit card for public holidays because the new price of coffee will be $5.60 plus allowances for times making the sell price $5.90 and $6.05.

Now for each of those prices we need to add meal allowance, uniform allowance and a split shift allowance but as these will be venue specific we cannot include it albeit be prepared to add 23c for a meal allowance, 11c for a spit shift and another 5c for uniform.

Therefore a cup of coffee will now be priced between $3.80 and $6.44 to keep in line with the wage structure Fair Work Australia had deemed appropriate.

We are a God fearing Christian country celebrating Sunday as a day of rest and penalising those nefarious and pesky coffee shops and indeed their errant heathen customers for serving anything outside of the church’s reflective hours. Sorry about you Jews but you only get minor penalties, not the full bottle Christian penalties. Also sorry, but the rest of you minor God people don’t score penalties unless they happen to fall on Saturday or Sunday. If they do, then feel free to claim them as your own. Pity about all the other religions; casualty of God’s wage war I suppose.

Please ignore the cost of administering this system as you will end up paying for it anyway by one means or another. Sorry about that but we believe in really complicated wage systems designed to ruin weekend business, destroy tourism and limit casual employment to Christian God fearing hours.

Jon Langevad

Deco Bistro Port Melbourne

An open letter to the Premier of Victoria about Port Melbourne

“Port Melbourne has no soul, why would you go there?” [Overheard from a not so potential tourist]

The Premier

Dear Premier Baillieu,

Please read the following and please don’t fob it off to some paper shuffler whose only objective is to avoid communication and actually doing something. As Leader, Minister for the Arts and an architect please make this happen.

Summary The less than 1km stretch of Beach Street and Waterfront Place between Bay Street and Princes pier including Station pier is a disgrace to Melbourne. Just imagine being an international visitor arriving by ship to Port Melbourne? Not a good look to say the least. Various levels of government have created the face of Port Melbourne and it unfortunately is less than welcoming to the point of shouting, ‘go away – we don’t want you’.

Australian bureaucracy .. Melbourne is one of the great cities in the world, is kid safe, has natural good looks, is extremely liveable and is in a country which led every other country out of the GFC. Yet, there is a dark side. Maybe we need to learn from Greece, Spain and Italy when it comes to scrutinising what all levels of Government actually do. Not what they say they do or are going to do but what they actually achieve for the good of the country and the people depending on those decisions. More importantly, we need to clearly understand just what they have failed to do and the ramifications of those inactions.
At what point do we object to the way elected governments fail to translate our needs into sustainable policy or indeed, even to be able to clearly recognise dysfunction? How bad does it need to be before we realise that our elected officials do not necessarily have the appropriate drive to deliver on the cognisant, positive and essential policies designed to enhance our country?
Unfortunately, it is a fact that there are many of our elected officials who crave public recognition at any cost but not by achieving recognition through positive deeds and actions but by seeking ‘instant recognition’ - more important than the outcome. The obvious example being, politicians wanting to be seen to be doing something by instigating punitive action rather than spending a bit more thought and creating a positive outcome. Punitive is easy.

Port Melbourne .. Our international seaway disembarkation at Port Melbourne is a disgrace to Melbourne, Victoria and Australia. This is the fault and responsibility of several areas of Government - The State Government, The City of Port Phillip, Melbourne Ports and possibly the Federal Government. Given the tourist and international importance of less than a kilometre of coastline encompassing the stretch from Bay Street through to Princes pier and including Station Pier, one would think there would be sustained effort to create something special. Not so. In the last 13 years to our knowledge nothing positive has been achieved. Indeed, the whole area has regressed to a point of dysfunction. As I said above, we need to see what has been achieved and what has gone backwards – not what has been promised or planned or ‘is in next year’s budget’ or ‘we will take it under advisement’ or ‘we are working hard’ or ‘it’s in train’ or ‘leave it to us’. May I say, nothing has been achieved and indeed the area has regressed to a point where insolvencies, bankruptcies and business closures are endemic.
This is a legacy of many current bureaucracies and past governments.
What a shame for Melbourne!

Solution .. The problems are obvious and the inability of multiple levels of Government to deal with these problems is also obvious. Therefore, to save our heritage and reputation, we need to immediately establish a body / consultancy / group without politicians albeit representing the 3 areas of government with enough legal drive to turn this situation around within weeks. That body could be as small as 3-5 people but with enough clout to demand from various government departments immediate action and address known systemic and endemic dysfunctions.

First fix – the obvious .. Immediate action is needed to support tourism and local businesses that depend on destination visitors. This is an easy first fix as all it takes is to reprogram parking meters to reflect reality.
Independent reports on parking commissioned by another council stated that parking fees are only applicable when demand exceeds supply and if that occurs, fees should be set at a figure promoting an 85% fill rate. In this way revenue is maximised, parking availability is maintained and parking supports local business. In the tourist precinct of Beach Street and Waterfront Place, it is mostly empty [less than 23%] being only busy when there are functions in the local restaurants and people have no choice but to park or when something like QE2 or Queen Mary steams into port. There is little demand and as parking is free everywhere else it discriminates against traders on this strip. Big words? No, not when you consider the ramifications i.e. up to 5 insolvencies in the area. The primary reason for the empty spaces is the cost of ticketed parking. We get many many complaints a week from our customers vowing to go somewhere else next time. This is a serious issue for our tourist precinct, the businesses and indeed a serious issue for Melbourne. This is because our sea gateway is seen as empty, dead, unapproachable and undesirable. No critical mass, no people and as people are gregarious by nature it remains empty. There are other reasons for this but parking costs are the first and most easily fixed. Simple, first hour free then $2 per hour from 2am to 7pm with no cap. The message this sends is simple and effective. ‘Port wants you to visit and enjoy what we have to offer and to show that, we have dropped our parking fees. ‘You should see us now’. There is no demand after 7pm as the ferry has gone; therefore there is no justification for fees at all but as the Mayor of Port Phillip believes parking fees dissuade Tasmanian ‘abusers’ and residents park their second and third cars on the streets, then make fees applicable from 2am. Everyone needs 85% occupancy from car parking for tourism, business and indeed promoting our gateway to Melbourne. Fee structure is one easily implementable action to help create a solution. Port Phillip council need to recognise a dysfunctional tourist area and make immediate and definitive change in terms of parking fees.

Second fix – anti-dead .. The second immediate fix is to force the Port Melbourne Business Association, into which all traders are required to donate, to action visual strategic promotion of the area. The ‘PMBA’ need to be forced to develop a professional business plan defining responsibilities reflecting our collective levies with immediate action [as distinct from its present documents and indeed, actions]. For example, why haven’t we got defined entrances with street banners and flags to Beach Street past Bay Street so that tourists feel special about entering the tourist area? Why are the banner points derelict and why are the flagpoles empty – for literally years? Port Melbourne is being whipped by Docklands and it shouldn’t happen. If you are in any doubt, PMBA recently advertised Docklands in a glossy magazine delivered to all of Port Melbourne within which we have a lift out. In effect we are advertising ourselves to ourselves whilst promoting the opposition. Fantastic! The above is the easiest part and can happen within two weeks. These actions will in themselves create an impetus for change and show to the Melbourne population that Port Melbourne wants visitors. Then, we get down to short term remedial actions. Port Melbourne cannot be seen as dying or dead. The closure of the former gym ‘block’ means that the area is empty, hostile and ghostlike. Dead or dying businesses also mean people avoid the area. An empty property has a certain spooky feel and is lifeless and foreboding. Up-lights under the palm trees on Beach Street outside the dead gym are indicative and are also dead and do nothing to alleviate the spooky feel. Not good for Melbourne.

Third fix – the ugly. The truck parking area remains a third world transition border crossing sans the barb wire. This is appalling unless you are a trucker with an avid love of truck spotting. Beach Street and Waterfront Place are turning into truck parking yards at peak tourist times with a marshalling yard designed to expedite truck movements rather than support a tourist precinct. We are aware that truck movements keep the ferry going and are critical to its survival and therefore are critical to maintain. However this does not mean that that goal is mutually exclusive to creating a tourist precinct. For example, the fence surrounding the area is dreadful. A dodgy wire fence with a misspelt sign is not the best look. Trucks do what trucks do within their marshalling area but it doesn’t have to be visible and destructive. There are many fixes for this but the easiest and quickest [think 2 weeks] is a proper fence and gates. The ideal would be a fence where pedestrian tourists say 200m away cannot see the tops of trucks within the yard. A fence designed to hide. [See heritage guidelines for second story additions to homes with an overlay] This not just a chunk of black hessian / plastic wrapped onto the existing fence, but a proper fence of some architectural merit with plantings around the top and base designed to hide everything. Maybe charcoal or dark green would be appropriate. For the entrance gates think wrought iron and Art Deco or go and see the fantastic new-ish gates on the St Kilda Botanical Gardens.

Fourth fix – Our future The area needs up-market retail to survive. The western side of the truck marshalling area needs to be developed for 8 or so small retail shops above truck height over the yard itself with a boardwalk and utilising existing grassed area. Any up market shop seen as leisure related would be great such as, souvenirs, designer garments, etc. Other fixes include - the wide footpath on the waterfront opposite Nott Street could become a market like St Kilda upper esplanade. Easy to implement through third parties. There are many water related sports which could be promoted for the beaches including kayaking, canoeing, diving, etc. Easily implemented through third parties. Why haven’t we got bollards [Geelong] and/or sculptures all along the area [Bondi] where artists can erect their masterpieces for sale and if not sold within say 6 months remove them and let someone else have a turn? Docklands are killing us in terms of street art yet we have the beaches and should lead the pack! Go figure!. Lastly, our international seaway. This is our huge opportunity to scream ‘Melbourne’. Station Pier is a disgrace to Melbourne and remains as a Gestapo style lock down. It has turned into a barricaded industrial homage for ferry access instead of promoting Melbourne as a city of life with ease of living and a welcoming persona. Imagine our trams going all the way to the end of the pier – imagine an arthouse theatre – imagine the MSO plugged. There are so many opportunities. Once again, for a ‘talented’ architect, the brief to create a world recognised landmark for Melbourne incorporating heritage features, the ferry and all the ancillary things would be sought after with some vigour and it doesn’t have to be the Taj Mahal. Princes Pier has not worked and is currently a homage to design by committee. Yet, it can be fixed. Changing our international arrival point and heritage piers is harder because it depends on several areas of Government working together. But it can happen and can happen quickly. All it needs is some forethought and a desire to actually make something happen along with power to make the changes. I can only imagine these changes happening through multi-level Government interventions because idiot power mongers will want to protect their area of so called responsibility and will not submit to mere co-operation preferring to hold onto power but in effect, do nothing. Therefore we need an independent body to take control of this tourist specific area and turn it around. Notionally, the less than 1km stretch between Bay Street and Princes Pier. May I stress an ‘independent’ body. Why, because multiple Governments have proven their incompetence on an ongoing basis. Especially the local council.

Mr Premier, this letter has been copied to the undermentioned, is published on my blog [nothappyjon.blogspot.com] and is with all the daily and local papers. It is up to them whether or not they consider Port Melbourne worth saving.
Yes, we do have a vested interest because we own Deco Bistro and Gallery at 49 Beach Street Port Melbourne and see the dysfunctions on a daily basis.
We want this tourist area to thrive and be a model for the rest of the world and it can happen quickly given commitment by all vested interests and an agreement to remove politicking.

Jon Langevad MBA

CC. Mr Mark Birrell Chairman
PoMC
Fx: 9683 1570
Included in this request because of his present role as Chair of PoMC and past experience as and especially Minister for Major Projects (responsible for Agenda 21 infrastructure projects like the Exhibition Centre, Museum, City Circle tram, the Regent Theatre, Docklands, Beacon Cove and the Sports and Aquatic Centre) as well as his interest in photography / visual arts. A man who should understand visual amenity and the failings of Port Melbourne.

Ms Rachel Powning Mayor City of Port Phillip
mayor@portphillip.vic.gov.au
Included in this request as Mayor of Port Phillip albeit because of elections this year, of limited tenure.

FOOD BLOGGERS – CURSE OR SAVIOUR A RESTAURATEURS POINT OF VIEW.

Unfortunately there is a perceptual difference between a lowly food blogger and a closer to God professional food reviewer. The reviewer sees the blogger as a threat to their ability to wax lyrical without legal responsibility whilst the blogger sees the reviewer as a bit of a wanker devoid of a real life understanding of the dining ‘experience’.
As a restaurateur, we find the most value in the blogger because they represent our customers with all their foibles, idiosyncrasies and misunderstandings of food. Despite their food knowledge being passé at best they are the people who actually pay the bills. Even if they mistakenly castigate a dish, we must heed their opinion.
Fortunately for our business, my partner locks me in the kitchen when someone inappropriately complains because I don’t deal well with idiots who believe their opinion is sacrosanct. The same for professional food writers - don’t be misguided into believing their opinions. For example, how does a pizza shop score 17/20 [hat territory] or how does a restaurant deemed by another food writer as one of the worst ever receive an accolade by the same publisher two weeks later as one of Melbourne’s best restaurants?
May I make the bold assumption that food writers as a rule have missed the point in that dining out is really a total experience meaning the combination of food, ambience and service dictate a great night. All three have to be present, not just food. The acerbic crap they write is designed to sell news-papers to people who feed on malcontent.
I read Stephen Downs narrative in the Virgin magazine wherein he expressed just how miffed he was that mere customers could offer an opinion on their dining experience and publish same as a dreaded ‘food blogger’. He seemed concerned that the bloggers lack of food education and their me me me attitude should prohibit them from offering an opinion. ‘I mean, how dare they have opinions when I as a food writer should be the only one with the talent and the capacity to write.’ [not his actual words]
All of which quite clearly begs the question, ‘Are food writers still relevant?’ or are they like the carpetbag steak; best forgotten. Many restaurants will not serve food writers because, like politicians, they need to get more and more out there and vitriolic to sell newspapers. They HAVE to get controversial! And, there are indeed many restaurants that seem to have fallen off the wagon in terms of food yet still maintain their multi hat-ted status. Beats me!
Enter the blogger. Judging from most blogs, their level of knowledge is passé at best and they are also very keen on having their words in print, yet, they represent the real customer. But most of them wouldn’t know good food if it bit them on the bum. Albeit Mr. and Ms. Blogger do follow the trendy places so they can be seen to be having fun and being totally cool. They feel pressured to blog blog blog because all their friends are also joy-oh-joying at the same place. ‘One must be gregarious you know, be the first to be in print and agree with all our friends’. OR ‘I want to be seen as different so I will make something up – stuff the restaurant – it’s all about me me me’
Question: ‘Why are holidays so much fun?’ Simple, because we can do something different, pretend we are more than we are, talk rubbish and enjoy sensations away from our normal circles where peer pressure normal y intervenes. Damn good fun because we open our minds to new stuff without the impediment of others knowing what we are really like.
Question: ‘Why is dining out so much fun?’ For exactly the same reasons. We enter an environment created by the restaurateur to move us away from the hum drum, are waited on instead of chasing kids detritus around the lounge room and get to use all our senses when we partake in one of the few things we all enjoy and on which we can and do offer opinions. It’s a bit like psychology, we all have definite opinions but few of us know what we are talking about and indeed rarely get it right.
Whilst we would all love every restaurant to be magnificent in everything it does - it won’t happen. If the total experience is good then enjoy it as value for money. For example, there is one well known hat-ted beachside restaurant we have been to a few times where the food has always been a major disappointment but the room is fantastic and the service professional. Overall good experience. Food is third on the list.
Re-enter the blogger. They can be anyone they like by hiding behind some non de plume, pretend they are expert, offer their opinions and make themselves feel important. A thoroughly healthy and democratic way of life. I have a blog on which I publish various essays about things I find important. I don’t care if anyone reads it but it makes me feel better by transferring thoughts to paper. [nothappyjon.blogspot.com]
However, there is a downside. A vitriolic blogger is the same as a vitriolic ‘professional’ food writer. They are both destructive.
Some places deserve to be castigated and perhaps should not be in business. Many of our well known restaurants fall into this category. They must hate bloggers because there is no possibility of plying the blogger/reviewer with bubbly to iron over that errant cockroach hiding in the soup or providing a junket to somewhere in return for some positive words. But of course this level of corruption never happens because our industry is so squeaky clean. Isn’t it?
Perhaps it’s all about taking responsibility. I chased one idiot blogger in print for posting drivel. I responded to her comments suggesting amongst other things that she learns how to eat before waxing lyrical. The sort of rubbish this girl posted we can do without and indeed has no place in any forum. The idiots need to be curtailed and be held accountable for massaging the truth and defamation. We had a very destructive ‘review’ by a blogger on our Port Melbourne restaurant. Unfortunately he/she got the name of the restaurant wrong, could not have been there on the night they said and offered comments on the decor which had changed some months previously. Obviously they never came in but pretended they did and hid behind an anonymous tag whilst playing me me me at our expense. This entry has been removed and I am pursuing the person.
We can keep professional food writers out of our establishments but we can’t keep the bloggers out. We need to accept both as a fact of life BUT also must pursue those who take advantage of their positions for misrepresentation, defamation and damages.
There is no free lunch and people must be accountable for their actions. All actions have repercussions for someone. An idiot blogger is the same as an idiot reviewer is the same as any other dysfunctional person and must be stopped and held accountable.
However, as a general rule, keep blogging. Enjoy your experiences and tell the world but, if you don’t enjoy it tell the establishment – to do else is spiteful and immature.

What is happening at Port Melbourne? Basically nothing.

Maybe there are monsters roaming the streets which remain just out of sight but everyone knows they are there so no one dares venture out at night, lest they be torn limb from limb.
We own a restaurant [Paris Grill] opposite the beach which we opened a few months ago expecting to take advantage of a veritable avalanche of customers enjoying our beautiful bay for both summer and winter.
Great theory, but absolutely wrong.
Quiet would be an understatement. Not just for us but for nearly every one of the restaurants within coooee. We do a walk around each night to gauge how everyone’s doing and sad though it be, staff often outnumber customers for some of the larger, well known and GOOD restaurants.
There are only four major considerations for a profitable restaurant – décor, service, food and customers. All eight of our immediate beachside restaurants look good, provide good service, serve great food at acceptable prices but just don’t have enough customers.
Our other restaurant in Fitzroy [Mon Ami] is over-full most nights with the same food, same service and a similar feel, yet in Port Melbourne we are surprised to see someone walk past after dark.
What happened to winter evening promenades by the beach? Where are the 4 million Melbournians? What has Port Melbourne done to reap the wrath of so many? Is someone not telling us we have collective BO?
Who is responsible?
We personally have seen big chunks of the world where people celebrate their sea, river, lake or indeed any puddle. Paris has the Seine, Chamonix has its beautiful grey blue glacial river, Sorrento has the Tyrrhenian Sea and Cassis the Mediterranean, but none have the waterfront or beaches to match Melbourne.
Yet we ignore the sheer pleasure of being able to winter promenade along the beach in Port Melbourne where we have action – ferries, ships, restaurants, trams, views, wine, coffee, lunch, dinner, wind, cold, excitement, sunsets and its all here at Port Melbourne all the time.
Where is everyone?
In other parts of the world strolling and chatting followed by some sort of repast is an art form yet in bayside Melbourne we seem to stay at home and watch TV. Go figure.
Get out of your air-conditioned cocoons and enjoy the winter-scape which our beautiful Melbourne does so well. Embrace the cold as if it was your long lost sister – enjoy the warmth of a relationship with the elements whilst looking forward to an embracing Aquavit or Gluhweine or dinner or coffee or even a splash of icy seawater on the face.
Aren’t we lucky.

Food – ‘Fine dining wank to street side woofing’.

I do in fact feel sorry for some people because they obviously miss out on one of the great pleasures readily available to nearly all people on a regular basis. We all eat to live but most of us actually enjoy the look, smell, texture and taste associated with eating. Not as one so called journalist wrote “..shoving it in [our] deluded gobs..”. This rather quaint turn of phrase seems to remove her from us mere and deluded mortals who enjoy nearly everything we eat. This is true all the way from woofing a ‘dimmy’ covered in soy sauce standing on a street corner at 1am to sipping on a fantastic local merlot whilst tootling through say 5 courses of some degustation repast that a chef has spent a reputation producing.
The fact is we are all different and that is the beauty of enjoying food, whether that be as a visual treat, a perfect aroma, a textural balance and/or a taste sensation. All four or just one, it’s still a treat.
Take the ‘dimmy’, open the double layered bag, close your eyes, smell the aromas of dodgy product and soy sauce and look into the bag to the white-ish blob dribbled with black stuff and let the thought of all that flavour wash over your ‘what is it’ fears. Squeeze two fingers into the bag and try to come to grips with a very hot lump. The path from bag to mouth is quick to avoid blistered skin only to transfer that risk to tongue and teeth. But once the dimmy is firmly in place, all that salt in the soy sauce erupts the saliva which in turn helps cool the super tasty chunk of indeterminable but super tasty substance. A couple of bites and woof, it’s gone. Wow.
How do I know? Because we did just that last night on the way home after closing our very well known fine-ish dining restaurant and we followed that evening sensation with a jam doughnut. Fantastic.
Incidentally, for our dinner earlier we had a fine Italian risotto created with locally grown red onions, freshly cracked black pepper from Madagascar, pink Malden sea salt, house ‘Danish’ cured King Salmon from New Zealand, beautiful Canadian sea scallops and Manuka smoked salmon all drizzled with slow roasted house made vegetable nage and gelatinous seafood stock made from the bones of contented fish.
See, both sides of the culinary divide from fine dining wank to street corner woofing.
May I suggest everyone enjoys all aspects of this simple and delightful past time all the way from people who like to pontificate at length with words none of us have heard before to dimmy munchers using only single syllable utterances such as mmmmm.

LLV AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT

One of the appalling excuses used by both Governments and bureaucracy led business is that ‘change takes time’. This excuse is absolute rubbish but is still used by people who are unable to make decisions. Nothing happens except talk.
But an even more dysfunctional change is driven by people more suited to detail work [the block people] rather than those capable of a broader vision [the jigsaw people]. The block people’s changes are riven through the community because they can’t see the consequences of actions outside of their own narrow perspective.
Hence we all suffer at the hands of these people because single lone voices of discontent mean squat when compared to a major organisation whose senior management can’t make decisions and whose block people can’t vision the results of their changes.
Unfortunately it seems that Liquor Licence Victoria has, through community pressure, panicked and set their ‘Block’ people to the task of creating change. This they have done but in the process have alienated every liquor licence holder as well as the public and, far worse, have created an internal quasi police force that wastes time and money and simply cannot engender the changes they seek to make.
How a caravan park, selling $5k worth of bottled booze a year [6 bottles a week], can be deemed to be a threat to the public and subject to an increase of licence fee from $100 approx to $6,000 is beyond anyone’s imagination. How increasing licence fees can make any difference to street crime at all is a nonsense. How a small suburban restaurant with a 10pm licence can be deemed a risk to the public and have the cost of their ‘on-premise’ licence double and a licence, designed to allow diners only to purchase wine to take home, increase by 400% is also a nonsense. There are many more examples of this gross stupidity.
How long must the people of Victoria put up with the expensive, dysfunctional attitude and policies of LLV. Remember we as Victorians, pay for their mistakes. For eight of the last ten years LLV have been a delight to deal with but over the past two, someone inside LLV has reverted its thinking to early 19c norms. For example, why do LLV send their own police out to venues to see if licensees have bits of paper stuck on a wall? Do LLV think this will reduce perceived violence on the street? I really hope not.
Perhaps some LLV block people have thought, “Got to be seen to be doing something, don’t want to think too much, don’t want any open communication and most of all I want my own power base with my own police and I want to be feared”. Farfetched? Maybe and maybe not.
This whole mess is another Labour Government screw up. Under Liberal, LLV ‘worked’ and most licensees did the right thing. This Government is taking Victoria backwards as has also been proven by its return to a 19c ‘Monday to Friday 9 to 5 thinking’ [instead of joining the real world of 24/7].
Labour seems to want to return to a ‘big-brother’ highly regulated environment where quasi-police inspectors run rampant across our public transport and now our entertainment environment. Instead of dealing with the problem, these people just address the result – after the horse has bolted.
I wonder what international visitors think when they see dark-clothed people burst into a fine dining restaurant during service, flash a badge [albeit whip it back into a pocket before any real identification can be made] and proceed to demand that the manager stop dealing with customers to prove to them they have a liquor licence and that four bits of paper are pinned to a wall. I can tell you what they think because it happened to us. People were horrified and disappointed that Victoria has gone so far downhill towards a ‘jackboot’ state.
The same can be said for public transport inspectors. Draconian and failing to remedy the problem. As an example, we sometimes catch a tram from St Kilda to Fitzroy. We have never seen more than 5% of customers purchase and/or validate a ticket. Once again, the inspectors are not fixing the problem and, in this case, they are not even addressing the dysfunctional result. The amount of money lost to Victoria is staggering - $270 for one trip on one tram that we know about.
Visitors think we are a police state yet these inspectors are not police but do have powers of detention. Is Labour determined to build their own Government led quasi-police force? It seems so.
It’s a bit like we are heading back to the strike prone public transport anarchy [a state of lawlessness and disorder usually resulting from a failure of government] of the 1960’s. No wonder Mr Kennett had to sell management rights of our public transport system – if for no other reason but to squash the anarchy that had developed through years of bad Government. Same reason we got those dreadful ticketing machines.
Now we are seeing the same thing develop with Liquor Licence Victoria. Our Government has failed to address rising levels of unease in the community because of a perception of uncontrolled violence. To be seen to be doing something they have created a jack-boot system where both LLV and public transport management seem to believe they are close to God and must be obeyed or the wrath of the inspectors will rain down. Give me a break.
Hasn’t anyone told the Government that it’s better to work with people so they want to do the right thing rather than penalise them for any errant behaviour? The first is harder but works whilst the second is used by people who don’t want to think too much but want to be seen to be doing something - and doesn’t work.
A perfect example of a major change handled well was when the Federal Government and the ATO brought in GST. There were teams of people out there talking to small business helping them with systems, support and general help and advice. These people had a great attitude, were a delight to work with and really squashed the old image of the ATO as a draconian organisation destined to ruin your life. They worked with us to do the right thing and it worked. Ring the ATO and see for yourself the massive change in attitude compared to even 10 years ago.
This brings us back to the LLV and public transport.
No one wants a return to a strike prone union dominated public transport system but removing the human element is very dysfunctional for Victorians and for visitors; both perceptually and for safety. Just as the human element worked for the ATO, it can work on public transport. Perhaps, bring in roving and singing conductors to sell tickets [remember the paper variety?] and convince people to do the right thing by education and shame rather than penalty. Perhaps a few singing drivers would also differentiate our trams from the rest of the world [?]. Secondly install videos in all carriages etal and prosecute violent people to the nth degree. But this requires the same sort of attitude change that the ATO achieved.
LLV need to scrap their current program because it’s rubbish and cannot achieve the changes required. They too, can take a lead from the ATO. Get rid of the jackboot inspectors and send out supportive people to help licensees do the right thing. Just inspecting bits of paper wastes everyone’s time and money and makes LLV a joke. Just see the current publicity to see how badly they have failed. Once again install cameras in known trouble areas and prosecute bad people to the nth degree. Booze is only a catalyst – bad people do bad things with or without a catalyst. Good people don’t do bad things even with a catalyst. LLV inspectors checking bits of paper on a wall will not and cannot change bad people. Simple logic.
Personally, I would send offenders to look after detainees at Christmas Island so they can learn respect from people who have done it tough and need support to survive.
The whole inspector ethos needs to be addressed and fixed. LLV need to get rid of their current system and actually think globally [jigsaw thinking] before creating even more angst and dysfunction. Public transport needs to be cost effective and safe and fun. Not haemorrhaging money, dodgy and frustrating. Bring back some of the human element and actually address the problem.
I don’t think this Government is capable of addressing these changes as they are proven to be heading inexorably in the wrong direction – as did the previous labour government.

STEPHEN DOWNES AND THE HERALD SUN

We own a restaurant. Mon Ami Restaurant and Gallery is an ‘awarded’ restaurant which has been fortunate enough to enjoy a 90+% average occupancy for the last 6 years and has been subject to a number of very positive reviews including ‘Melbourne’s Best’ by the Herald Sun on the 31st of May 2009. Our website [monamirestaurant.com.au] has several of these reviews/awards listed.
We had never had a negative review until Mr. Downes went to press in the same Herald Sun.
Contrary to every other review or opinion, Mr. Downes defamed and castigated our restaurant, my partner and me by name, when he published his opinions on the 31st March 2009. It is so malicious and vitriolic and so opposite to any other review or customer opinion that it beggars belief. We can’t help but assume some other motive other than a desire to produce an honest and balanced report.
Our customers who read the Herald Sun dismiss Mr. Downes as a joke but there must be others who read his words and believe them or, even if they don’t trust all the comments, are dissuaded from booking at Mon Ami. Worse, because of the way the internet works, Mr. Downes’ vitriol is inexorably and permanently linked to my name and our restaurant.
Even the Herald Sun seems to treat Mr. Downes as a joke. As mentioned, just eight weeks after his review, within which he labels us as possibly the worst restaurant of all time, the Herald Sun through another review summarised us a ‘Melbourne’s Best’.
Unfortunately, the print thieves then take Mr. Downes words, in whole or in part, and republish them on their own website. This exacerbates any misrepresentations and indeed further damages our previously excellent reputations. Mietta’s website is one such example.
It is appalling that the Herald Sun [HWT – News Corp] supports Mr. Downes and his views by publishing his material and providing him with legal counsel to fend off subsequent objectors.
This complicity by HWT is evident by the fact that Mr. Downes reported within his review that he found a 12cm piece of metal in the food – as long as a small kitchen knife! The legal counsel for HWT refused to provide the object and photos of it in situ despite having already gone to press and accusing us to a reading audience of 1.5 million people. We contacted the health department and asked them to investigate Mr. Downes’ claim and we have also involved Police in the matter.
If such an item ever existed we needed to know. If something had disintegrated in the kitchen without our knowledge then it was Mr. Downes’ responsibility as a professional [sic] reviewer to inform us so that we could ensure others were not similarly affected. His negligence put others at risk. We believe he wanted to go to print for self gain as both victim and saviour.
We are disappointed that people accept the Downes’ style of journalism when overwhelming evidence from other reviews and customers shows his words as wrong, malicious and defamatory.
Our society does not need this low level of journalism.

PRINT JACKALS

What sort of world do we live in where people try and live their past glories by merely transcribing other people’s written work? Take the internet. Someone writes something, right or wrong, then the ink-jackals steal that work and republish it on their own website. They may even try to justify this theft as ‘doing a service’ in the interests of ‘spreading the word’ and indeed hope that people will read their website and give them credit by association. Sad people.

But what happens if the original material is wrong, defamatory and/or creates disunity or sedition? Does the ink-jackal escape scrutiny and punishment because he or she is just re-publishing others work? One would hope not.

In my opinion, the actions of the print-jackal are far worse than the original perpetrator. The author may be guilty of defamation, negligence at torte or even endeavoring to create dysfunction or riot through misrepresentation but, the print-thief is far worse because he or she doesn’t have the knowledge or the plain guts to research or write something themselves but instead chooses to hide behind someone else’s persona and just re-publish others works.

It is a sad indictment on our society that we accept this drivel.

In our case we do not accept it and will force remedy by exposing the theft and shaming the thief.

Respect

RESPONS E TO ‘LAWS A LICENCE FOR VIOLENCE’ PAGE 1 THE AGE SATURDAY APRIL 25TH 2009

No one under 60 should be allowed to have a drink, smoke, be able to cuss in public or go out with loose persons of the opposite gender. Otherwise, fear capital resolution by big brother.
Please.
How can people be so wrong about the reasons we have a degree of violence on our streets? If I may be so blunt, alcohol is not the problem, it is merely the catalyst! I am 61 and admit to having been mildly whacked on a few occasions in my life [as have most other brain dead boys] but I have never hit anyone nor lost my cool nor done anything except lie down and become vaguely incoherent. Booze has never been the ugly demon which incited me against my will to carve my initials into someone else’s head.
Most people have a drink or lots with no harm to anyone. However, with some people, their inherent life problems surface with the consumption of perhaps just a couple of anti-inhibiting drinks. Likewise there are groups of sad people for whom going out to create trouble is seen as a valid night out; and they may not have even had a drink! Indeed, prohibition in America proved that controlling the ‘catalyst’ was a failure.
What’s left? We could shoot all people accused of heinous alcohol fuelled crimes, but then who decides heinous and who’s going to shoot them? We could close down Melbourne and turn it into a fourth world city with machine guns and arm police with portable small range nuclear weapons? We could put up checkpoints on the city fringe where you have to show positive psychological profiling results to be able to party? We could put up pictures of Brumby and Kennett at the city entrances so that people could expel their anger by throwing a few missiles at their politician of choice?
But on the other hand, we could teach our society to respect everyone and really enjoy the diversity. Enjoy the yobbo, enjoy the bogun, enjoy the poonce, enjoy the bum, enjoy the bigoted argumentative dropkick, enjoy the ‘my poo don’t smell’ silver spoon irrelevant and, hardest of all, enjoy the accountant [just kidding].
It all starts from respect. Everyone has a different trigger to fire off that ‘ah ha’ moment wherein we realise just how important it is to respect everyone.
Mine happened when I was playing golf with a slow old codger about 40 years ago. Being young, fit, angry, pushy and without patience I somewhat less than subtly urged him to move his ass a little quicker. Sometime later I found out that he had ‘no’ legs but played on tin equivalents. In an instant, I learned respect.
The key is to recognise and enjoy respect. It’s nice to be humble.

Bread at the table

Where does bread fit into a meal?

In short, bread has no part in a real meal. Controversial?
We continually read so called ‘critiques’ of restaurants wherein the reviewer castigates the chef/proprietor for not providing substantial free bread of such quality that some deity would feel comfortable returning to the flock just to sample the heavenly aroma.
Unless one is woofing a sandwich and needs to keep the middle bit actually in the middle, bread is a waste of stomach space. Space, which should and could be used for real food.
Bread is a filler, a carbohydrate packer, something to have if you have run out of dinner and need to ‘fill up’. My ex-wife’s mother-in-law used to trot out the bread, butter and jam after the meal so that all those hungry farmer types could fill every crevice to overflowing.
Bread is in part responsible for our current obesity problem. People are encouraged to quaff packers, such as bread, on a constant basis to fill-up and avoid that terrible threat to sanity – feeling peckish. May I suggest that feeling a ‘little’ hungry is a good thing! At the very least, it shows the body is working and consuming calories.
In my opinion as a restaurateur [obviously not shared by advertising companies], one should endeavour to ‘dine’ by consuming enough food and beverage to firstly remain relatively sober and secondly to be able to repair to the after event without the aid of a fork-lift.
Good food does not require bread unless it’s part of the dish.
Unfortunately, we are all weak when some ill informed restaurant puts good bread in front of us. We eat it.
At our little restaurant we make our own bread without preservatives and serve it with house-marinated olives and some variety of pesto. No fat. However, we do not give it away but list it as a side dish. There are no complaints, bread consumption has dropped dramatically and people are asking for more entrees. All proving that we don’t really need it.
Bread is just a filler when you can’t afford the real thing.
Savour the flavour of real food. Don’t suck the rest of the gravy with bread, ask for a teaspoon! Enjoy cheese on the merest cracker. Don’t inhale a chunk of bread with a little cheese flavour – that’s a waste the cheese. Don’t fall victim to societal norms, which dictate bread must be consumed with things such as pate de fois. We currently serve pate with sauté mushrooms and walnuts. No bread!
Finally, show some constraint when awaiting your entrée; don’t woof the table. Maybe request a little bowl of olives and perhaps savour a super dry sherry. Let the flavour of the olives and the sherry roll around your tongue and sparkle the taste buds for the first event.
Savour things in small quantities for their flavour, texture and endorphin releasing pizzazz. Enjoy the eating experience, don’t woof it.
[On the other hand, a ‘chip butty’ is really really yummy]

Restaurants as public toilets

Why do people assume they have the right to enter onto private property and use the toilet just because that toilet is located in a restaurant?
Perhaps it’s all part of the me-me-me society in which the only thoughts some people seem to have concern their own needs and wants whilst showing little respect for the needs or indeed rights of others.
Considerable sums of money go into buying and or building restaurants to attract customers who pay for the services the restaurateur provides. Part of those services is use of amenities including toilets which the proprietor pays to have cleaned or indeed clean themselves. The simple fact of life is, that cost needs to be returned through customer purchases.
When a person has the temerity to walk in to a restaurant just to use the toilet they not only demonstrate a complete lack of thought for the restaurateur, they clearly label themselves as me-me-me people.
Restaurateurs are not evil people holding the world to ransom over using a toilet, just sick of people without thought for others assuming they have the right to access private property for their own bodily functions.
The solution is simple. Buy something – anything. Become a customer! Either that or advertise your own residence as a public toilet.

Buying a restaurant

[Response to article by Mark Abernathy]

Reference: Article written by Mark Abernethy in the November – December Restaurant and Catering Australia magazine titled, ‘Sale Away’.
“Jon Langevad specialises in the hospitality industry having spent some 30 plus years advising to and working within businesses to build strategic directions, re-establish spatial orientation, build marketing plans, develop financial imperatives, set customer service initiatives and put in place staff training. Currently he and partner Ulla Hiltula acquire restaurants in trouble and turn them around before on-selling. Their current business is Mon Ami in Fitzroy. They practice what they say in buying and selling businesses, owning and working in restaurants as well as advising others through a consulting approach.”

There are many very high profile Chefs who have managed their businesses to closure [and continue to do it again and again seemingly with the medias blessing], just as there are many dreamers who know little about the restaurant industry but also take many innocent people with them into bankruptcy. With so many restaurants and so little average margin to play with, it takes a great deal of expertise to make a profit. Sure, there are always exceptions but exceptions do not create a trend.
Therefore the NUMBER ONE thing a person contemplating buying a restaurant business should consider is whether or not they have the expertise in all areas of the business. It is not good enough just to be able to cook or just be nice to customers or just to be good with numbers. Most of the time restaurants are very small businesses and demand of the owner a high level of multi-skilling. Generally the businesses are too small to buy the expertise needed thereby requiring a hands-on approach. Obviously being able to commercially recognise and/or cook something edible is pretty important for a restaurant as is the ability to provide the environment where people will want to eat that less than burnt offering as is the ability to continually control cash flow. So, given these critical predetermining factors, what’s next?
There is always a balance between the cold hard accountants view of a business and the wildly optimistic ‘lifestyle’ view. In short, if you focus exclusively on the financial building blocks of a business then you will not succeed. If you focus on the lifestyle a business may provide, you will not succeed. Mr Abernethy’s article seemed to focus on the ‘building block approach’ as key to success. I personally do not believe this to be the best way.
Firstly, do not focus on the bottom line! Sounds strange doesn’t it, but it’s true nevertheless! Instead, focus needs to be on the things, which create the bottom line. Good systems do the rest. We are not computers; we are people capable of much greater things than continually focussing on individual financial components. Sometimes it’s comfortable to discuss minutia but discussing the qualities of a raisin does not make a good fruit cake.
Secondly, do not focus on the lifestyle things, which a prospective business may provide to the owner if successful. Although obvious it’s hard not to and is as bad as the ‘block people’ approach. You know what you want out of life and what that will cost. Figure it out then leave it in some accessible corner of your mind until the things, which will create the opportunity to realise your desires, are in place and working.
Thirdly, accept that life is too short to do anything, which creates little passion. So yes, buying and running a restaurant business is about passion and desire and making mistakes and enjoying life. But doing it with one’s feet absolutely grounded in reality.
A restaurant is one of the trickiest businesses to establish, run, buy or indeed sell because nearly one hundred percent of the time it’s personality driven. The personality of the owner [even if the business is managed], the personality of the manager, the personality of the sommelier or indeed the personalities of anyone with whom clients interact. People go out to enjoy the experience of dining, it is not a personality free retail purchase and this makes the value of the business directly linked to people. Indeed, personality can also be extrapolated to a physical environment as when we take over a restaurant we tend to change it to reflect us and what we think will be more successful.
Therefore, the fourth decision to be made is, ‘If I buy this business will it be successful with my personality stamped all over it?’ Instinct is a marvellous thing, it must feel right. The challenge must be palpable.
Now comes a little broad but telling number crunching albeit we are yet to delve into any number nitty gritty; this will come later. Fifthly therefore, figure out what you think the business can do with you at the helm. Be realistic if not a trifle pessimistic. Here, you are planning for success, not failure nor wishy washy I’m not sure or maybe thinking. At this point ignore what the business is currently doing albeit basic costs, style of menu, client numbers, pricing structure and opening times are important. [A customer buys once whereas a client is loyal and buys many times. Always focus on clients.] Be prepared to walk away if the results dont feel right or wont enable your chosen lifestyle.
Now, sixthly, establish what the business is currently doing. If there is not a significant gap between what you believe the business can do and what it is currently doing, walk away. The risks are too great for a ‘personality driven’ business. There must be significant potential.
I can’t stress this enough. Because you are buying a ‘personality driven’ business, potential is the mega purchasing criteria. What the business is currently taking in revenue is merely an indication of potential and unfortunately is directly linked to the current owner. Be careful of goodwill components. There is nothing inherently wrong with goodwill [it’s what we all develop in our respective businesses as a saleable quantity] but it is a pointer to revenue, not a guarantee. As personality is also linked to a physical environment, changing the way a business looks effectively invalidates so called goodwill making potential even more important. Despite the above paragraph, there is nothing wrong with buying a business’s potential! This is the punt we all take whether establishing, buying or selling a business. Just be aware that there are no guarantees and no free lunch [pun intended-sorry].
So, the first few questions you need to ask are:
· Does it feel right?;
· Am I going to enjoy the challenges?;
· Will my personality create success in this business?’;
· Will the projected figures enable my desired lifestyle?;
· What is the potential of the business over its current takings?;
· What are the risks?.
If you are still passionate, then comes the due diligence. Things like the lease with its terms and conditions, normalised books, exact and individually itemised bills of sale, changeover periods, inventory, client lists, etc. This is the boring bit but also critical. [We advise on, buy, work and
sell restaurants for a living and in order to make the ‘boring bit’ more palatable have developed a little spreadsheet which takes into account most of the variables including risk, ROI, COS, EBIT, staff and comes up with a business valuation. In our own business we complete a P&L inclusive of trend analysis every week. Broad brush maybe, but critical.]
If the seller or the agent can not answer all questions, walk AWAY.
I believe the emphasis on buying a business needs to move away from the ‘block people approach’ to ‘the jigsaw people approach’. [Block people build business success by creating solid foundations whereas jigsaw people create business success by bringing together the various elements of success ã] The jigsaw first approach is infinitely more suited to buying a restaurant than the block first approach. Unfortunately it is also harder, more intuitive but very satisfying. It’s a bit like playing golf. The block approach to golf can be likened to honing skills on the driving range – important, intrinsically satisfying and restorative because of
its simple and singular focus. [If life gets a bit much consider the therapeutic value of smacking the crap out of a couple of hundred golf balls at the local driving range] The jigsaw approach to golf focuses on the golf course as the challenge with all the variables such as wind, rain, grass, sun, bunkers, roll, etc all needing to be taken into account to be successful.
We all need both approaches in our lives depending on the situation. Restaurateurs need both in abundance but, when buying a business, need to be jigsaw people ‘first’. The intensity of competition will not allow a block approach.

Corkage - charging the customer

[Response to RCAV and Minister]

After reading your article about the Minister requesting a meeting to discuss corkage, my initial and overriding impression was to be wary of the politician seeking an avenue to garner votes by ‘inventing’ a contentious issue about which he/she can pontificate at length.
The issue is, enough ’pontificating’ and a perceived problem will develop into a real problem - to the detriment of the industry. My advice, for what it’s worth, is to dissuade any ‘beat up’ of the BYO issue by anyone, because it’s really a non-event.
Why? Because any corkage charge is a commercial decision by an independent operator to retrieve some of the costs involved with BYO. Whatever that charge happens to be, it’s no one’s business except the operator and their customer. If the customer perceives the BYO charge to be excessive then they will go somewhere else! It is a free market, a free economy and end of story. Our little restaurant doesn’t allow BYO because we have invested a great deal of money and time in selecting appropriate wines, methods of service, advertising, etal and want a commercial return from selling booze.
On the other hand we may bend that rule a little if a person has a ‘special’ bottle we can’t replicate. In this very rare instance we charge $15 corkage per bottle because those are our full costs and on this we make little money.
Restaurants need revenue from the sale of booze to survive!
An opinion, judging on years of experience and in general, people who want to make BYO an issue don’t want to pay for wine in a licensed restaurant yet they want the restaurant to except them. Those people should buy a BBQ for their back yard and stay there.
Wendy, I am sorry to say that I believe the whole BYO ‘issue’ is dribble [no pun intended], albeit dangerous dribble unless people are made aware of all facets of the argument. What politician has ever made an argument transparent? We are professional restaurateurs with a significant investment in premises, food, booze etal and, most importantly, are a private business. We decide what we serve and the dollar value of that product. If customers like it they will come on in. Politicians may try to make a name for themselves by suggesting a popular price [without knowledge] and offering some glib comment like, “Well, if a restaurant charges more than $5 corkage I believe it to be wrong – go somewhere else”. In this case I believe a case could be argued that the politician would be responsible for his/her popularist dribble and indeed for any bankruptcies and/or angst caused through such an irresponsible comment.
Wendy, for better or worse, my background is in finance [MBA etc] and have consulted around the world to business’s challenged by stupidity. Personally, we survive the quiet times by controlling what we do and offering value added services, including food and booze. We are not here as a philanthropic institution offering our place for nothing – as we would if we offered BYO. We also offer our expertise to others silly enough to try and make a quid through food and booze with one of our axioms being not to price compete but to add value through other means such as service, premises, etc. Following on from this tenet, everyone needs to charge an appropriate rate for all services, actions and products given costs, location, etc. If a customer doesn’t like it or can’t see the value they will go somewhere else.

Corkage

[Response to RCAV and Minister]

After reading your article about the Minister requesting a meeting to discuss corkage, my initial and overriding impression was to be wary of the politician seeking an avenue to garner votes by ‘inventing’ a contentious issue about which he/she can pontificate at length.
The issue is, enough ’pontificating’ and a perceived problem will develop into a real problem - to the detriment of the industry. My advice, for what it’s worth, is to dissuade any ‘beat up’ of the BYO issue by anyone, because it’s really a non-event.
Why? Because any corkage charge is a commercial decision by an independent operator to retrieve some of the costs involved with BYO. Whatever that charge happens to be, it’s no one’s business except the operator and their customer. If the customer perceives the BYO charge to be excessive then they will go somewhere else! It is a free market, a free economy and end of story. Our little restaurant doesn’t allow BYO because we have invested a great deal of money and time in selecting appropriate wines, methods of service, advertising, etal and want a commercial return from selling booze.
On the other hand we may bend that rule a little if a person has a ‘special’ bottle we can’t replicate. In this very rare instance we charge $15 corkage per bottle because those are our full costs and on this we make little money.
Restaurants need revenue from the sale of booze to survive!
An opinion, judging on years of experience and in general, people who want to make BYO an issue don’t want to pay for wine in a licensed restaurant yet they want the restaurant to except them. Those people should buy a BBQ for their back yard and stay there.
Wendy, I am sorry to say that I believe the whole BYO ‘issue’ is dribble [no pun intended], albeit dangerous dribble unless people are made aware of all facets of the argument. What politician has ever made an argument transparent? We are professional restaurateurs with a significant investment in premises, food, booze etal and, most importantly, are a private business. We decide what we serve and the dollar value of that product. If customers like it they will come on in. Politicians may try to make a name for themselves by suggesting a popular price [without knowledge] and offering some glib comment like, “Well, if a restaurant charges more than $5 corkage I believe it to be wrong – go somewhere else”. In this case I believe a case could be argued that the politician would be responsible for his/her popularist dribble and indeed for any bankruptcies and/or angst caused through such an irresponsible comment.
Wendy, for better or worse, my background is in finance [MBA etc] and have consulted around the world to business’s challenged by stupidity. Personally, we survive the quiet times by controlling what we do and offering value added services, including food and booze. We are not here as a philanthropic institution offering our place for nothing – as we would if we offered BYO. We also offer our expertise to others silly enough to try and make a quid through food and booze with one of our axioms being not to price compete but to add value through other means such as service, premises, etc. Following on from this tenet, everyone needs to charge an appropriate rate for all services, actions and products given costs, location, etc. If a customer doesn’t like it or can’t see the value they will go somewhere else.