Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Not to mention their economics flat out don't work without a big subsidy from a landlord that views them as a marketing expense

 

$125++pp wouldn't work for serving family style?? They give you an ice cream scoop for crying out loud.

Doubt serving family style is as big a cost saving as you think. A few less plates to wash I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 304
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

NoMad opened to the public on Monday, March 26th. My blog post is about our "Friends & Family" dinner.

Can I cook my food too?

I dined at the bar at the NoMad last fall (I think it was a Saturday night) and the place was like a mosh pit. Nice food though.

Not to mention their economics flat out don't work without a big subsidy from a landlord that views them as a marketing expense

 

$125++pp wouldn't work for serving family style?? They give you an ice cream scoop for crying out loud.

Doubt serving family style is as big a cost saving as you think. A few less plates to wash I guess.

 

I would expect a cost savings in staffing (both quantity and quality/experience necessary, in both foh and boh), not dishes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention their economics flat out don't work without a big subsidy from a landlord that views them as a marketing expense

 

$125++pp wouldn't work for serving family style?? They give you an ice cream scoop for crying out loud.

Doubt serving family style is as big a cost saving as you think. A few less plates to wash I guess.

 

I would expect a cost savings in staffing (both quantity and quality/experience necessary, in both foh and boh), not dishes.

doubt its that big a number. Maybe a few less runners. In Boh not sure it matters at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Skeptical that family style makes much of a difference in terms of cost. Craft did (still does?) the family style(ish) thing and I doubt that their costs were any lower than at a restaurant serving individual plated portions.

 

The point of putting a restaurant in a hotel is that you decrease that $75, isn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. I was saying this in another thread (Atera? they all blend.) that the only guys who can get the hotel funding are well established, and then we turn around and criticize guys who are "good enough" to get that funding when they open up a small, non-traditional place.

 

It could be worse for you guys though. There are, I think, three high-end, hotel openings in Toronto this year. Two are imports - Boloud and Chang (though Chang is not really a hotel opening, but it's the same landlord on the same property) - and one is this monstrosity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

that the only guys who can get the hotel funding are well established, and then we turn around and criticize guys who are "good enough" to get that funding when they open up a small, non-traditional place.

 

 

Welcome to the movement. Please wear your beret at all times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would expect a cost savings in staffing (both quantity and quality/experience necessary, in both foh and boh), not dishes.

 

There might be a noticeable cost saving if ALL they did was serve family style.

 

But the "family style" tasting menu is only ONE option, which I imagine most customers there don't choose.

 

(It also remains to be seen how much of it is/will remain truly "family style".)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This place is nothing like Ad Hoc; there's no straightforward, craveable food in sight. If anything, most of the menu feels like an adaptation of EMP's simplified lunch menu, pre-"dining dialogue" grid.

 

Instead, this is the restaurant Hotel Griffou dreams of being. Three completely incongruous dining areas lie just past the hostess stand: the center one ("Atrium") is attractively bathed in natural light, courtesy of a large pyramidal glass roof; the right one is fussier, dominated by an ornate fireplace (called the "Fireplace", duh); the left one does its best impression of a velvet-swathed bordello ("The Parlour", but aren't we in America?). At first glance, I didn't get it. After several subsequent glances, I still didn't.

 

You have to walk through the "Atrium" to get to the darkly-lit bar. We didn't linger there, but I did recognize a bartender from Death + Company. Not unexpectedly, the cocktails read well for a restaurant list. Tucked away on the bar's left is the "Library", a puzzling wood-panelled room lined with utterly random books (The NoMad's website blithely calls the "fully curated" collection "eclectic") where people sit around drinking cocktails while eating appetizers, and during the morning hours, where people would presumably sit around drinking coffee and tea while eating pastries. In one corner of the room winds a spiral staircase, imported from the "South of France" (of course), leading to a mezzanine stacked with even more random books, while in another corner lurk several custom-made bottle service trolleys and -- oh god what the fuck is this place.

 

Anyway, the roasted chicken for two, pulled straight from EMP, is pretty good, and the accompanying truffle-flecked mashed potatoes are pretty great, though Robuchon's pomme purée truffée may easily retain its smirk of superiority. By itself, the dark meat fricassée is more interesting than the white meat, as even foie gras brioche stuffing is powerless against the boredom of chicken breast. I'd recommend the Fruits De Mer, which is far more composed than it sounds: sea urchin with apple gelée and caviar, oyster with frozen mignonette, marinated hamachi with horseradish, bay scallop ceviche with yuzu juice and pistachios, lobster claw meat with something or other, strands of king crab meat with...something or other. I forget. It's good, though.

 

I'm sure this place will be great for Sneak.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess what I don't understand is why, all of a sudden, everybody thinks there's something WRONG with a place like that. I think they're a highly necessary category of restaurants (and not just for discreditable reasons). EVERYBODY isn't food-obsessed, you know.

Its not NoMad that's the problem, its the prevalence of that entire category of restaurants, and what that tells people who want to open restaurants about what they need to be able to provide.

 

I would debate the "highly necessary" argument, but places like this have a place (maybe for you?) - but they are a symptom of a greater disease.

I took Sneakeater to be saying that very good restaurants in this genre are highly necessary. I agree with Bonner that there are far too many of them; but most are not very good.

 

I suppose that NoMad is a symptom of the "diseased" NYC restaurant industry at the moment. But it's hard to blame them for making the decisions they did: with that much money on the line, what choices did they have?

 

Not to mention their economics flat out don't work without a big subsidy from a landlord that views them as a marketing expense

I agree with you, but the last time I made such a statement, Suzanne reached across the Internet and ripped out my eyeballs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a week since I ate here. I haven't written it up because I don't really know what to say.

 

I liked it. A lot. So shoot me.

 

I thought The Library was a great place to hang out while we waited for our table. (We got there early for our reservation. They offered to seat us immediately, but I wanted to see what the lounge was like. Although it was pretty much full, they managed to squeeze us in.*) Their cocktail list -- while not as great as EMP's -- looked excellent; the cocktails I and my date had certainly were.

 

The bar (as distinct from the Library, which is a lounge), while attractive, is in a room with a lot of communal counters that seems cramped, dank, and uncomfortable.

 

The dining room is great. Sure it's OTT. But what a great place for a night out.

 

I enjoyed the food a lot. We opted for the tasting menu. With only two people, the "family style" aspect might have been a bit attenuated. But the gimmicky stuff still was fun. One course was served on a sort of cubical lazy susan; for the next course, they lifted the cube and . . . there it was. The "picnic", in which charcuterie is brought to you wrapped in paper as when you buy it, was cute -- and the charcuterie was excellent. In fact, all the food was excellent (at this point, Chef Humm is In The House). The meal climaxed with a rack of lamb that, quite simply, was the best I've had in ages: excellent lamb, perfectly cooked.

 

The food is sort of straightfoward Franco-American. A kind of food that's fundamentally boring, perhaps, but which, when well done, is delicious. And, I keep insisting, necessary: we need good places to take people whose tastes are conservative or unadventurous. (My date didn't have to know what the "tete de cochon" served as part of one course was.)

 

Service is too residually Meyeresque for my taste.

 

The wine pairings were, on the whole, too young. The special "Le Poulet" beer made by Garrett Oliver for them to serve with their roast chicken -- served to us with a chicken soup -- was fantastic: nutty, spicy, foody.

 

I loved this place. I can't wait to go back. I guess that if you don't like this kind of place, you won't like it.

_________________________________________________________________________

* I got the feeling they had ID'd me as someone who had eaten at EMP with RozRapp, accordingly deserving of especially good treatment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...