Would it have been possible to change to a cheaper menu while still keeping the Michelin star? There's plenty of affordable — and even cheap — Michelin starred restaurants.
Maybe, but there still would have been the worry that the star was scaring people away.
Also, I could be wrong but I thing the "Michelin starred food truck" and other cheaper starred restaurants are all outside France, in France there's still much more of a common standard that Michelin starred restaurants feel they need to live up to including experience and price.
And of course, it's much better to renounce the star than to lose it.
This. For example, I talked to the chef of the restaurant that won Le Fooding's best chef in 2017 about his older restaurant and there is a whole movement in France called bistronomie, which is all about serving great creative food, without the trapping of the luxury restaurant. That is no tablecloths, no hierarchy of waiters, just a bistrot, but with Michelin level food.
There’s also bib gourmand ratings in the same guide for exactly that, which is something like half a star. Less prestigious, but still an accomplishment. If he were starred and then started serving similar quality at the lower price point, I don’t see why they wouldn’t give him one, unless they consider the PR we are reading now a disqualifier for further consideration.
What are you thinking of as a cheap Michelin starred restaurant in France? It's important to be specific to the country; standards are different in different places. The French Michelin stars are still very hidebound by things like quality of flowers and number of extra service on the floor.
>> “Maybe the star scared people,” Mr. Mathus said. “I understand. He’s saying, ‘Don’t be scared to come here.’ Here, it’s simple people, with modest incomes.” <<
100+ euro menus in a town of 18,000 sounds ambitious. Above quote from previous mayor sounds about right to me.
Being 5 miles from Windsor castle and also from Eton college might have something to do with it. Heathrow is only 15 miles away on motorway.
Bray has about 300 millionaires and Windsor around 900 [1] (few other villages from that list are also just short drive away).
You can't generalise like that about the whole of Europe - it's a very diverse region. I walked across Europe this summer, from Ireland to Istanbul. Southern Germany is doing fine, but Northern France has been hollowed out. The humdrum little rural towns and villages are not doing well at all. I passed through many places where empty shops had signs in their windows saying things like "thank you for your custom over the last eighteen years, but we can no longer make a living here."
The Ruhrgebiet probably comes close to having the iconoclastic brownfields and abandoned buildings, but don't come close to Detroit's fall. Still, they do have some "rust" areas but have managed better than us.
It would be interesting to know more - a quick google says that's 3,600 miles, and at a very brisk pace of 3 miles an hour 10 hours a day that's 4 months walking. love to know more.
There are only 18,000 people in this town. To hit his goal of 60 diners a day would require the average person in town to visit more than once a year. How many middle class people are going to spend $130 on an entree on an average Tuesday night? I've never spent that much on a meal and my income is too high to be considered middle class in the US.
There are about four Michelin starred restaurants within a 30km radius, there are also other towns within that radius, so its a little more complicated than one town of 18,000 one Michelin starred restaurant. Also menu items started at 30 and went up to approx 110 euros.
You need to count tourists, especially those specifically looking to tour Michelin star restaurants. There's the reason a tyre company is publishing a food guide in the first place.
If you've never spent that much on a meal, you're not a foodie. That's OK: but there are people who do appreciate excellent food, and are willing to pay for it.
Personally, the most I've spent is about $700 on a tasting menu for two at a place in Washington DC. $130 on a meal for two including wine wouldn't be unusual - I have meals like that maybe 10 to 15 times a year.
Michelin starred restaurants are frequently destination restaurants - they will attract people from some distance. That's why Michelin thought up the idea - to encourage people to drive and wear out their tires!
Actually it's more an example of dying of all medium-size cities in France, mostly because of globalisation and the Euro which is killing French industry (800 factories close every year and it has been so since 2003).
We’re fine in France, the downward pressure on middle class salaries have been compensated by good healthcare / a high minimum wage / a decent labor code, unlike in the US.
Sure it sucks if you’re a software engineer but as a minimum wage person you’re an order of magnitude better than in the US.
I am also French, did you realize that the state keep more than half of your net salary for "la sécurité sociale" (cotisations sociales employeur).
And that you will still have to pay the taxes ("part sociale employé: 20% again for "la sécurité sociale) plus 6% of CSG for "la sécurité sociale/CSG) plus direct taxes like TVA (roughly 20% again nobody knows why anymore, but initialy for "la sécu des vieux").
However after having collecting this stack of whealth, the state still has to borrow half of its revenues to pay its own bills (including "le trou de la sécu", plus recurrents debts from SNCF and banks and Orange).
The US middle class has among the highest disposable income levels on the planet, far higher than France. The median full-time job in the US nearly pays $50,000 at this point, far higher than France.
The person at the median in the US middle class has their healthcare paid for by their employer. The US middle class has in fact seen significant compensation increases that are not accounted for, because their healthcare benefits from employers are not accounted for in salary comparisons.
Whether France has a decent labor code, or actually has a backwards labor code that has severely damaged their economy for decades, is clearly open to debate given the high persistent unemployment rate of France.
France's labor code has not resulted in high wages, the US has higher wages in every regard. It has not resulted in high employment, the US always has a lower unemployment rate. It has not resulted in faster growing wages, US wage growth averages three to four times faster over the last decade. It has not resulted in faster economic growth, US GDP growth is typically four or five times faster.
When US wages grow at only 2% or 2.5%, we wonder what's wrong. In France, wage growth has averaged about 0.4% the last three years; the 0.6% growth level it put in a few quarters ago, was a three year high. If the French labor code is so desirable, why is French wage growth so atrocious?
See: "Wage Growth in France averaged 0.53 percent from 1999 until 2017"
Serious question: does anyone know where to get some good in-depth data which deal with the middle class's fortunes in Europe, and possibly some interpretations?
Thomas Piketty's Capital in the 21st Century is an empirical analysis of wealth distribution in capitalist countries over the long term, as well as a discussion of possible causes and consequences. It's very good.
For anyone who has reached the free article limit for NYTimes, while the article is loading just cancel loading in your browser (this works for me in mobile). The limit popup won't appear and you'll be able to read the article.
Or just thank the newspaper for the former free stuff and stop loading the web this time as they politely ask you; as a sign of respect towards the journalist.
"He could no longer pay for the personnel, produce and precision that go into charging one-star prices." Apparently the NY Times can no longer pay for the precision that goes into subject-verb agreement.
A bit off topic, but journalism thses days is brimming with minor grammatical errors, such as omissions of articles, repeated ‘the’, etc. It seems no one cares enough to hire rigid proofreaders and the software tends to miss little things. Does anyone care?
I'm sure there's a reason, but I always thought it strange that when the subject in singular, the verb often gets an 's' ending (mirroring the plural ending for most nouns) but when the subject is plural (often ending in an 's') the verb normally doesn't get an 's' ending.
The frogs play in water.
The frog plays in water.
Why does the 's' effectively swap locations?
Why not, "the frogs plays in water." Or "the frog play in water"?
Or why not drops the singular/plural distinction from verbs altogether?
The amount that people care is measured in dollars. We can likely conclude that the amount that people care is less than the prevailing wage of a professional proofreader.
A publication may one day be able to accumulate those who care the most as their customer base, and thereby assure the production of grammatically correct ephemera, but for now, other business interests prevail.
Please don't take HN threads into such nitpicky weeds, whether you happen to be right or not. In this case I don't think you were—Muphry's Law and all that—but there's nothing wrong with being wrong as such. Far worse on HN is being snarky.
I've never understood the point of Michelin stars or their relative value, compared to, for example, 500 5-star yelp or trip advisor reviews.
The last thing I care about is advice on food from a tire company. In fact if it wasn't for Gordon Ramsay related conversations, I would have never known Michelin Stars are an actual thing.
Can you? I thought yelp and google were very aggressive about burying businesses for this sort of thing. Maybe you could go on fiverr or something and collect a few, but there's no way that yelp doesn't catch 500 fraudulent reviews. They are way too aggressive with false positives as is, such that a good third of my actual reviews are hidden.
I am missing something. The chef believes that in order to maintain his star he must do something different to what he was doing to achieve the star in the first place?
I am not an expert on Michelin guides, but that seems unlikely.
I wonder if his new menu will be cooked well enough to earn him a star?
He has cut his prices and is offering a more down-to-earth cuisine of stews, including the classic blanquette de veau, and serving cod instead of the more expensive sea bass.
From what I always heard, the Michelin Guide has very very particular demands on your service. It has to be so and so. It's not only how it tastes, but also the formality with which it is served. (This has to be checked though.)
It's indeed strange about the hawking stall, but I suppose the standards are not the same abroad as domestically - or for a stall for that matter.
Having been to 1-star restaurants thrice, and to gastronomic restaurants a few more times, I have to say the distinction isn't that helpful, and didn't reflect the quality of the food or service. For contrast, Trip Advisor is a better discriminator for lower-level establishments, even if it has its faults as well.
No. While it’s impossible for imperfect humans to completely separate the meal from the overall experience, Michelin claims that its star ratings are solely based on the cuisine.
On the other hand, diners often have a certain level of expectation of the service and ambiance surrounding a meal that costs as much as is typically required to economically produce Michelin-ranked cuisine.
He believes the star hurts him because it signals high prices, which scares away potential patrons. So he asked the guide to take the star down, and is now offering more ordinary and traditional recipes.
It should also be noted that many French people are extremely conservative and dislike anything invented after 1950, so the blanquette may please them more than fancy nouvelle cuisine.
From the article his restaurant cannot continue to afford to pay for the personnel, produce, and percision that the star requires.
So even if his new menu with economical ingredients was star worthy, it's likely that the level of service in the restaurant won't be the same. Waiters serving more tables, no dedicated sommelier, that type of thing.
Also its likely that they won't put as much effort into the visual design of the plates in the kitchen.
Readit News
Also, I could be wrong but I thing the "Michelin starred food truck" and other cheaper starred restaurants are all outside France, in France there's still much more of a common standard that Michelin starred restaurants feel they need to live up to including experience and price.
And of course, it's much better to renounce the star than to lose it.
Deleted Comment
100+ euro menus in a town of 18,000 sounds ambitious. Above quote from previous mayor sounds about right to me.
[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10054043/Top-te...
Personally, the most I've spent is about $700 on a tasting menu for two at a place in Washington DC. $130 on a meal for two including wine wouldn't be unusual - I have meals like that maybe 10 to 15 times a year.
Michelin starred restaurants are frequently destination restaurants - they will attract people from some distance. That's why Michelin thought up the idea - to encourage people to drive and wear out their tires!
Here is the chef's website, with various menus and prices: http://www.jeromebrochot.com/fr/cartes-et-menus.html
It goes as low as 21€ for the Winter menu (starter, main course, dessert): http://www.jeromebrochot.com/media/original/575147df7d79e/me...
Up to 110€ for the New Year's Eve menu (170€ with drinks included): http://www.jeromebrochot.com/media/original/575147df7d79e/me...
That $130 is most likely for an entire several course meal, not an entree.
I think most middle class people go out to nice dinners a few times a year for anniversaries and birthdays.
Sure it sucks if you’re a software engineer but as a minimum wage person you’re an order of magnitude better than in the US.
And that you will still have to pay the taxes ("part sociale employé: 20% again for "la sécurité sociale) plus 6% of CSG for "la sécurité sociale/CSG) plus direct taxes like TVA (roughly 20% again nobody knows why anymore, but initialy for "la sécu des vieux").
However after having collecting this stack of whealth, the state still has to borrow half of its revenues to pay its own bills (including "le trou de la sécu", plus recurrents debts from SNCF and banks and Orange).
The US middle class has among the highest disposable income levels on the planet, far higher than France. The median full-time job in the US nearly pays $50,000 at this point, far higher than France.
The person at the median in the US middle class has their healthcare paid for by their employer. The US middle class has in fact seen significant compensation increases that are not accounted for, because their healthcare benefits from employers are not accounted for in salary comparisons.
Whether France has a decent labor code, or actually has a backwards labor code that has severely damaged their economy for decades, is clearly open to debate given the high persistent unemployment rate of France.
France's labor code has not resulted in high wages, the US has higher wages in every regard. It has not resulted in high employment, the US always has a lower unemployment rate. It has not resulted in faster growing wages, US wage growth averages three to four times faster over the last decade. It has not resulted in faster economic growth, US GDP growth is typically four or five times faster.
When US wages grow at only 2% or 2.5%, we wonder what's wrong. In France, wage growth has averaged about 0.4% the last three years; the 0.6% growth level it put in a few quarters ago, was a three year high. If the French labor code is so desirable, why is French wage growth so atrocious?
See: "Wage Growth in France averaged 0.53 percent from 1999 until 2017"
https://tradingeconomics.com/france/wage-growth
vs
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/wage-growth
And that can be confirmed by simply Googling "french wage growth" and looking at dozens of recent news sources.
Your order of a magnitude claim is very obviously wrong.
A lot of top chefs don't want the pressure of a star. And all michelin restaurants are fully booked in Belgium.
We in tech(I presume most people in this community is in tech) thrive because of good contents. Might as well pay for them. :)
Dead Comment
The method you've described works on AFR.com though
How do you think it ought to read instead?
I'm sure there's a reason, but I always thought it strange that when the subject in singular, the verb often gets an 's' ending (mirroring the plural ending for most nouns) but when the subject is plural (often ending in an 's') the verb normally doesn't get an 's' ending.
The frogs play in water. The frog plays in water. Why does the 's' effectively swap locations?
Why not, "the frogs plays in water." Or "the frog play in water"?
Or why not drops the singular/plural distinction from verbs altogether?
A publication may one day be able to accumulate those who care the most as their customer base, and thereby assure the production of grammatically correct ephemera, but for now, other business interests prevail.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
how much do the stars impact a restaurant's business? i usually just talk to people (even strangers) and ask for personal recommendations.
The last thing I care about is advice on food from a tire company. In fact if it wasn't for Gordon Ramsay related conversations, I would have never known Michelin Stars are an actual thing.
I am not an expert on Michelin guides, but that seems unlikely.
Consider the recent news of the street hawker getting a Michelin star: https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/singapore-cheapest-mi...
I wonder if his new menu will be cooked well enough to earn him a star?
He has cut his prices and is offering a more down-to-earth cuisine of stews, including the classic blanquette de veau, and serving cod instead of the more expensive sea bass.
It's indeed strange about the hawking stall, but I suppose the standards are not the same abroad as domestically - or for a stall for that matter.
Having been to 1-star restaurants thrice, and to gastronomic restaurants a few more times, I have to say the distinction isn't that helpful, and didn't reflect the quality of the food or service. For contrast, Trip Advisor is a better discriminator for lower-level establishments, even if it has its faults as well.
On the other hand, diners often have a certain level of expectation of the service and ambiance surrounding a meal that costs as much as is typically required to economically produce Michelin-ranked cuisine.
He believes the star hurts him because it signals high prices, which scares away potential patrons. So he asked the guide to take the star down, and is now offering more ordinary and traditional recipes.
It should also be noted that many French people are extremely conservative and dislike anything invented after 1950, so the blanquette may please them more than fancy nouvelle cuisine.
just curious if there is something specific to 1950
So even if his new menu with economical ingredients was star worthy, it's likely that the level of service in the restaurant won't be the same. Waiters serving more tables, no dedicated sommelier, that type of thing.
Also its likely that they won't put as much effort into the visual design of the plates in the kitchen.