Restaurants & Portions

  • ChicagoSteve

    Posts: 1272

    Nov 10, 2015 1:48 AM GMT
    Yesterday, I met a friend of mine for Sunday brunch. We went to a place near my apartment that I had wanted to try. While I was sipping on my first mimosa, I noticed the tables around me that had food, the portions were huge. When our meal came, equally big. Mine was actually a little smaller and more manageable than my friends. He had two huge eggs benedict creations, each with a steak fillet on top. They rested on a base of mashed potatoes. My friend could only eat one, and took the other home in a box. All this leads to my question. When you go out to eat, do you like places that serve huge portions that you can have leftovers to take home, or would you just prefer normal size portions?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2015 2:29 AM GMT
    It depends on how much money I'm spending. Sometimes if I'm traveling and it's not convenient to take half of it home, these big portions make me angry. Although these days, you can always have it boxed up and just hand it to the first homeless person you pass... generally within a block of any restaurant downtown.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2015 4:46 AM GMT
    I've always preferred places that give you lots. Of course I was overweight as well. Now I'm better at not feeling like I need to be gorged before I get up from the table but still, it's nice when you don't feel like they're being stingy. I used to love all you can eat buffets and they'd usually lose money on me but these days not any more.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2015 1:51 PM GMT
    I want value for my dollar. All too often I leave restaurants still hungry after spending big bucks for a meal. You know the places - big on presenting a few tiny pieces of food "artfully" arranged on a plate with a squirt of sauce and sprinkling of spices like a Jackson Pollock painting.

    I only like taking food home if it is conducive to reheating or can be eaten cold or at room temp; otherwise, what's the point?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2015 3:24 PM GMT
    I like a big portion!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2015 3:28 PM GMT
    Woody Allen: "The food here is terrible, and in such small portions!"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2015 4:04 PM GMT
    eat a small portion and ask the restaurant for a box
    or
    order a salad.
  • LJay

    Posts: 11612

    Nov 10, 2015 6:28 PM GMT
    It would be really great if restaurants could serve reasonable portions and also charge less accordingly.

    We have a favorite restaurant here and we know to order for one and ask for an extra plate. A friend, not knowing this, ordered spaghetti at lunch and took enough home for two days' meals.
  • carew28

    Posts: 658

    Nov 10, 2015 10:09 PM GMT
    I appreciate large portions if they're reasonably priced, and I like being able to take some home to use as leftovers for myself, or even to give as a treat to my dog.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 10, 2015 10:54 PM GMT
    UndercoverMan saidI want value for my dollar. All too often I leave restaurants still hungry after spending big bucks for a meal. You know the places - big on presenting a few tiny pieces of food "artfully" arranged on a plate with a squirt of sauce and sprinkling of spices like a Jackson Pollock painting.



    Once I was stuck in San Francisco, on my birthday, for business. So I treated myself to dinner in an expensive restaurant. They served me exactly as you described. I was dumfounded, considering the price. It's my birthday, not April Fools! icon_mad.gif
  • FitBlackCuddl...

    Posts: 800

    Nov 10, 2015 11:12 PM GMT
    ChicagoSteve said. When you go out to eat, do you like places that serve huge portions that you can have leftovers to take home, or would you just prefer normal size portions?


    YES.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 11, 2015 1:51 AM GMT
    When I place my order, I request that half of my entree go directly into a to-go box and the other half on my plate. Do not wait until the end of your meal because it's more likely you'll eat it all if it's in front of your nose. I eat whatever I want and have zero weight problems doing this.
  • bro4bro

    Posts: 1031

    Nov 11, 2015 5:33 AM GMT
    Here's the deal: rent is expensive. Food is cheap. Restaurants have to charge high prices just to pay their bills and stay in business. Giving large portions doesn't cost them much more than small portions, and makes people feel better about spending that much money. They actually expect people to take home leftovers. It's part of their business plan.

    Would you rather pay high prices and get only a little?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2015 9:13 PM GMT
    One thing I do (to keep my abs and weight in check): If the portions are too big, I eat only up to the point where I begin to feel like I've had enough. Then I just say - I'm done. Have them wrap up the rest and take it home to your refrigerator. In a day or so, enjoy the rest of it. Why keep eating to the point where you're in some discomfort?
  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4433

    Dec 03, 2015 9:38 PM GMT
    bro4bro saidHere's the deal: rent is expensive. Food is cheap. Restaurants have to charge high prices just to pay their bills and stay in business. Giving large portions doesn't cost them much more than small portions, and makes people feel better about spending that much money. They actually expect people to take home leftovers. It's part of their business plan.

    Would you rather pay high prices and get only a little?

    This is the deal but honestly, especially at lunch, I'd rather they shave their prices by 20% and put half on the plate. I hate that to get good food for lunch, the standard is getting to be about $12-15 plus tip. Maybe in NYC that sounds like a deal but it seem high to me. For lunch.

    Dinner, I really would prefer smaller portions but each bite be amazing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2015 10:56 PM GMT
    I prefer normal size portions because I'm not big on taking meals home. I'm not big on these places that serve huge portions. The biggest culprit I can think of that does this is the Cheesecake Factory. I saw this skinny woman order dessert and when it arrived, I swear that dessert was bigger than she was.

  • badbug

    Posts: 800

    Dec 04, 2015 4:52 AM GMT
    I find it terribly difficult to find anywhere that has food i would actually consume. If i am not concerned about what's on my plate, it's how they cooked it and the the sh(t they used to clean the shit they cooked it on.


    So when i go out, i don't give a fuck about my portions cause i am just drinking water or coffee anyways.


    So yeah, between health concerns and financial concerns, i just feel there is less of a value to eating out than ever. I also find it's harder and harder to find restaurants that aren't pumping music like they're a nightclub or something...even just at lunch.


    Of course, if it was a magical place that i trusted, i would want as much food as possible. I am half dutch. icon_smile.gif
  • SilverRRCloud

    Posts: 871

    Dec 04, 2015 7:53 AM GMT
    No one takes food home from any of the premier class restaurants round here. We just do not do this. icon_biggrin.gif

    The prices are tame, and the portions are usually reasonable. They rarely go into any excess either way.

    Their game is to be generous with drinks. A glass of wine or cava often comes 'on the house', the dessert wine at the end of the meal comes 'on the house', too, quite often. A bottle of herbal liquor comes for free rounds at the end of the business meal. Naturally, 'on the house'.

    Yup. Guys still drink a glass of wine or two with their lunches here, and no one thinks that there is anything wrong with it.icon_razz.gif

    Restaurant business is extremely competitive here. Great food and wonderful service are standard defaults that everyone takes for granted. So, the restaurant owners are digging into their pockets, and are virtually buying their patrons' loyalty through freebies.

    SC

  • Fireworkz

    Posts: 606

    Dec 04, 2015 11:52 AM GMT
    I prefer quality over quantity.

    As long as don't leave a restaurant hungry I'm fine.
    But I find the restaurants where portions are large tend to be where the taste is bad so it's not worth taking the food home.

    I object over huge quantities of meat that restaurants serve up. Especially the Brazilian and Argentinian steak houses. How many cows do you need to kill to feed a person? This is just contributing to global warming. We would have a more sustainable planet if meat proportions were sensible. I'm not a vegetarian btw.
  • Apparition

    Posts: 3516

    Dec 05, 2015 4:47 AM GMT
    i would prefer restaurants where you dont have to interact with other people at all, and thus not pay them for 3 seconds of work, i could have done myself. i dont really enjoy "the experience" of eating with other people, i am happier if i can lick the icecream bowl out and eat with my hands (although i usually use chopsticks with other people around), and it is not a training thing since my current table looks like this:
    11041579_10153671732765115_3807708308224
    . I like when there is slightly more than you want to eat available, rather than less.

    I detest the jackson pollack restaurants with a passion, supertasters pretty much hate restaurants because they put too much flavour in things. I am pretty much terrified of the nightshade family which just hurts. I like to eat at home.