Super-Twat

[ian]

I feel the need to apologise to the readers of the thread. It was me who nominated Jamie Oliver.

At this point I should confess that I have a bee in my bonnet about JO. My son worked in one of his 'restaurants' and was worked into the ground, with no consideration for his health. I'd visit him, find he hadn't eaten a meal for 3-4 days (just bits of bread snatched while working), notching up 13-14 hour days 6 days a week.

Most of the issues also existed in many big-chain restaurants, but JO was one of the worst, His chain started out serving good food cooked to order to reheated shite.

They weren't really his restaurants though, they just had his name on them and the sort of notional role that celebrity chefs typically have in these ventures (indeed, a think a number of them were just franchises in the end). Employee conditions in the industry are typically poor, which doesn't excuse them, but I don't think that's the fault of Jamie Oliver, who I doubt had any control over the day to day running of those kitchens.

Ian, you are wrong, dead wrong.

Jamie Oliver was directly involved in the day to day running. He visited individual restaurants, frequently, to check how the kitchen was run, the customer reception, etc. There are photos of him with my son (since he was a senior-enough chef to be in the meetings with JO).

I could say a lot more, but this is a public forum, and the UK has libel laws.

I think there's a fundamental category difference between turning up to do a quick inspection and to show your face to the actual day-to-day operational management of a busy restaurant kitchen. Did your son raise his concerns?

[mrcharly-YHT]

I feel the need to apologise to the readers of the thread. It was me who nominated Jamie Oliver.

At this point I should confess that I have a bee in my bonnet about JO. My son worked in one of his 'restaurants' and was worked into the ground, with no consideration for his health. I'd visit him, find he hadn't eaten a meal for 3-4 days (just bits of bread snatched while working), notching up 13-14 hour days 6 days a week.

Most of the issues also existed in many big-chain restaurants, but JO was one of the worst, His chain started out serving good food cooked to order to reheated shite.

They weren't really his restaurants though, they just had his name on them and the sort of notional role that celebrity chefs typically have in these ventures (indeed, a think a number of them were just franchises in the end). Employee conditions in the industry are typically poor, which doesn't excuse them, but I don't think that's the fault of Jamie Oliver, who I doubt had any control over the day to day running of those kitchens.

Ian, you are wrong, dead wrong.

Jamie Oliver was directly involved in the day to day running. He visited individual restaurants, frequently, to check how the kitchen was run, the customer reception, etc. There are photos of him with my son (since he was a senior-enough chef to be in the meetings with JO).

I could say a lot more, but this is a public forum, and the UK has libel laws.

I think there's a fundamental category difference between turning up to do a quick inspection and to show your face to the actual day-to-day operational management of a busy restaurant kitchen. Did your son raise his concerns?

Please, Ian, stop.

JO was fundamentally involved. He dictated the menus, how the dishes should be cooked. The kitchen setup and staffing organisation. He met with regional managers to discuss policy and operation. He went to individual restaurants to check on how they were run, he had a quality inspection team that reported back to him.

[rafletcher]

I think the Jamies chain restaurants were started with good intent, but like many such ventures, the accountants strip it out. See also Carluccio's amd Petit Blanc.

[ian]

My comments were based on a friend of mine who used to be the overall manager of one his concerns in London (so literally was in charge of the kitchens), late empire (indeed, she was made redundant by the group, but she's made a career out of managing failing restaurant chains). She met Jamie Oliver once (and briefly) in three years. I'll acknowledge that he was probably more involved in the initial years, but it's hard to see that he had any significant operational involvement once the group had grown into a significant chain (at its peak, minus franchises, it numbered 42 branches). But anyway, shitty jobs in catering aren't exactly news.

I am, of course, a bigot. I might sue.

[chrisbainbridge]

I think all of these food outlets where they are named after a person eventually fall down as the bean counters take over.  That is not to criticise bean counters.  There is a big difference between being a brilliant chef and being a brilliant businessman.  You cannot source from a single small farmer when you get to 42 restuarants.  But we generally want the warm and cozy, emotional feel that jamie could pop out of the kitchen and say hello.  Talking with a friend this morning, he reminded me that I am a rational science person whereas increasingly the world is emotion driven.

My view is that if I go to a named chef restaurant, I want named chef in the kitchen.  Otherwise why bother with named chef restaurant. We have 3 local restaurants we eat at, all with a single chef owner.  One has become more popular, taken on a trainee and the wife is now doing the desserts.  It shows in the standards and we have reduced our visits.

I would rather eat at a proper chain restaurant than a faux named chain.  Yo sushi rather than Carluccios any day.

[ian]

Once a chain gets going, you need significant capital and resources to keep expanding, at that point you've got to hand over to the people with that money, and they're paying for the name not for the chef to be in the kitchen.

Jamie's various concerns fell to the same model of rapid, ultimately unsustainable expansion that, almost inevitable, results in eventual demise. But the investors get their payback, even if the suppliers and employees don't.

[Beardy]

There’s a well defined point of failure for entrepreneurial business development, the point at which it is no longer possible for a single person to manage the day to day operations. Appointing the right people and letting go of the right parts of the day to day operations is a skill very different to starting a business and one that may entrepreneurs lack.

Coupled to that, the hospitality industry is renowned for hideous hours, with split shifts and antisocial attendance patterns.

[Mr Larrington]

Colossal bellend Piers “Morgan” Moron opens mouth, inserts foot.  Again.

[Polar Bear]

CBE feeling a bit left out with all the new ST fodder in Apocaliz's new Turd Reich Cabinet of National Salvation grabbing the fascist media headlines ...

[TimC]

My comments were based on a friend of mine who used to be the overall manager of one his concerns in London (so literally was in charge of the kitchens), late empire (indeed, she was made redundant by the group, but she's made a career out of managing failing restaurant chains). She met Jamie Oliver once (and briefly) in three years. I'll acknowledge that he was probably more involved in the initial years, but it's hard to see that he had any significant operational involvement once the group had grown into a significant chain (at its peak, minus franchises, it numbered 42 branches). But anyway, shitty jobs in catering aren't exactly news.

I am, of course, a bigot. I might sue.

The Cock at Beazley End was bought by Jamie's Fifteen Foundation in 2007 (IIRC). I was an irregular visitor when it was just the village pub, and ate there a couple of times when it was under Aaron Craze. It was an unpredictable experience. It returned to being a village pub after a year, and closed for good in 2013.

[ian]

In case people think I'm defending Jamie Oliver, I should state that he is a man who puts mushrooms in Thai green curry and chilli jam in egg-fried rice. Crimes against humanity both. That's probably how Hitler cooked them.

[Feanor]

In case people think I'm defending Jamie Oliver, I should state that he is a man who puts mushrooms in Thai green curry and chilli jam in egg-fried rice. Crimes against humanity both. That's probably how Hitler cooked them.

Yebbut, Uncle Roger was a bit harsh on the chilli jam by just binning it.
It has it's place.

It's an essential ingredient in a Dishoom Bacon Naan Roll, which is the breakfast of champions:
https://www.dishoom.com/journal/dishooms-bacon-naan-roll-recipe/

Of course, you should make your own ( from your own home-cultivated chillies, obv.. ), but I succumbed and bought a jar from Dishoom as I was standing waiting to settle the bill, watching the dude make the naans in the commercial tandoor, which looked not unlike a stainless steel Yankeedoodle stylee top-loader washing machine; the sort that half-heartedly slops your washing back and forth for 20 minutes and declares it done.

I'm not sure if Hitler did Dishoom style cooking, he definitely didn't in the Indiana Jones movies, and that's pretty historically accurate.

[Jaded]

Start a business that is great! The people flock to it. The reviewers love it!

Grow it and think "we could have another branch/shop/restaurant"

Open another branch/shop/restaurant.

You now have operations in which it is only possible to spend half your time, so you need to find someone else like you to run branch/shop/restaurant 2. The chances are that you won't find such a person. So standards drop, but you might not notice, as you are only there half the time. So you open a third branch/shop/restaurant.

Instead of sourcing wonderful stuff and lovingly preparing it, displaying it, delivering it, being a craftsperson, you are now a manager of people and money. Quite different.

[ian]

Did Hitler Like Curry is not the investigative documentary I've yet discovered, but it ought to exist, because I want to know. Maybe he invented currywurst but no one will admit it, because then they'd be ruined, and who doesn't like currywurst? Well, Jews, obviously.

No fan of chilli jam here, jam should be strawberry and fruity things. Jews for Jam has quite a ring to it though.

But anyway, fruit or chilli, not in egg-fried rice. I confess I'm a bit meh on Dishoom, though as chains go, there aren't the worst. I'm not sure I'd queue outside, as seems to be popular these days.

Possible Jack Monroe should start a restaurant chain, though I probably shouldn't give her ideas for another Kickstarter.

[citoyen]

I would rather eat at a proper chain restaurant than a faux named chain.  Yo sushi rather than Carluccios any day.

I wouldn't eat in either through choice, but if forced to choose, I would go for Carluccio's - faux named or not, the food is better than at Yo Sushi IME. And at least it was started by someone who actually knows and cares about food. I remember when Yo Sushi was launched by Simon Woodroffe in the late 90s, a a time when kaiten was a brief fad in London, and it was always a purely commercial venture. Which, to be fair, is probably why it has been so successful (although iirc it has nearly gone under a few times). But it was always inferior to the decent kaiten places, like the excellent Moshi Moshi Sushi - which, apparently, is still going in its original Liverpool St site, though I've not been for many years.

I used to go to the original Harry Ramsden's in the early 90s. Given that the original Harry Ramsden died in 1963 and apparently sold the business in 1957, he wouldn't have had much day to day involvement when I was visiting. It had already been taken over by Barnes & Richardson by then and was starting to expand, but only had a few branches, and the original still felt like a proper fish and chip shop - and was very good indeed.

It would take a lot of persuading to get me to eat in a branch of Harry Ramsden's now.

Also used to eat at the original Wagamama in Lexington Street, when it was a one-off. I remember the kerfuffle when they opened their second branch. Surprisingly, though, Wagamama still seems to be fundamentally the same as it always was - though it's certainly possible that my memory of the original has been dulled over time and maybe the current incarnations are a pale imitation of the original. I would still eat in Wagamama though.

[ian]

Wagamama's is one of those safe-bet chains, I think. I can't say I've had a bad meal in the couple of times I've been. Though I prefer the Hare and Tortoise, which did briefly spread from the original at Brunswick Square (I'm old enough to remember when it was a gloomy bit of brutalism), though judging by the closed outpost by Blackfriars at the weekend, has now contracted. By and large I prefer singular restaurants, even if it's a bit more hit-and-miss. I've never minded the Côte brasseries, which seem to be everywhere. Not so sure about the rash of Ivys, I always figured the original to be a bit overrated, but someone else was paying the bills.

Absolutely huge queues for the Dishoom in Convent Garden at the weekend. I don't believe in queuing for restaurants. That's the world gone wrong, where we reserve tables in pubs (fuck you, Sophie 7pm, fuck you) and queue for restaurants.

[chrisbainbridge]

We tried Dishoom in Edinburgh at the recommendation of friends and were distinctly underwhelmed.

[Basil]

We've given up asking for recommendations here.
"Great food" always means the quantity of the food; never the quality.
We've also given up making recommendations.
"Well, we went to that restaurant you mentioned.  We only got half a plateful.  It was a disgrace."
"And it was twice the price"

[Kim]

We've given up asking for recommendations here.
"Great food" always means the quantity of the food; never the quality.

Have you accidentally moved to USAnia?  Popped out for a bag of sugar sort of thing...

[sojournermike]

We've given up asking for recommendations here.
"Great food" always means the quantity of the food; never the quality.
We've also given up making recommendations.
"Well, we went to that restaurant you mentioned.  We only got half a plateful.  It was a disgrace."
"And it was twice the price"

The only outside food that hasn’t left me underwhelmed in the last few years was from Van Zeller in Harrogate (now closed) and House of Tides in Gateshead (starred the day after I visited as luck would have it). Both singular with the chef in the kitchen. Eating out is rarely worth it for the food in my experience. It may be worth it for the company and lack of washing up, or to support business relationships - and even then I have to keep quiet about my view of the food, service and general atmosphere.

I know, I’m a curmudgeon.

[orienteer]

Never going to get a memorable meal in a chain restaurant. Last time I tried Wagamama the steak was inedibly tough. At least the till operator deducted it from the bill after I responded negatively to her question as to whether I had enjoyed my meal.

[citoyen]

Never going to get a memorable meal in a chain restaurant.

I've had a couple that were memorable for the wrong reasons...

[ElyDave]

Never going to get a memorable meal in a chain restaurant. Last time I tried Wagamama the steak was inedibly tough. At least the till operator deducted it from the bill after I responded negatively to her question as to whether I had enjoyed my meal.

Whereas my experience at a great little bistro in Aberdeen, they kind of forgot our mains, we gently prompted them. The bill came without drinks on it
"you've forgotten the drinks"
"no, we took those off because the mains were late, sorry about that"

I left a decent tip.

[ian]

Recommended Indian restaurants are often the worst, they're usually terrible, a variety of pre-cooked meats in red or brown sauce, which if you're used to have a decent Indian restaurant nearby, are dismal. You can replicate the experience with a jar of supermarket curry sauce. The recommenders are always wasn't it nice and you have to, for politeness sake nod, yes. We got dragged to one in the Cotswoldian area once, our hosts were gushing about it, best Indian they'd had apparently. Honestly, I've had better at a Wetherspoons curry night.

[spesh]

Recommended Indian restaurants are often the worst, they're usually terrible, a variety of pre-cooked meats in red or brown sauce, which if you're used to have a decent Indian restaurant nearby, are dismal. You can replicate the experience with a jar of supermarket curry sauce. The recommenders are always wasn't it nice and you have to, for politeness sake nod, yes. We got dragged to one in the Cotswoldian area once, our hosts were gushing about it, best Indian they'd had apparently. Honestly, I've had better at a Wetherspoons curry night.

Well, that's your upper middle-class Remainer cred busted.