Two Men Banned for Life from All-You-Can-Eat Buffet..., page 5

Pages: << 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times

reply posted on 5-10-2012 @ 08:26 AM by thoughtsfull

Originally posted by obnoxiouschick
reply to post by thoughtsfull

So are you saying you think it had more to do with their behavior or was the owner at fault?

Sorry, just edited out my reply.. then saw yours "doh" embarrassed now *blush*

As far as I am aware, it's not a great place to dine, not that the food is bad, but the process of getting food is crappy, so I am not sure either party is innocent..

On the one side it seems to me that the time it takes people to get their chosen meal cooked is designed to put you off going back more than once, not really all you can eat then is it, if it is not designed to be a smooth process it opens the door to people getting more cross than normal when anyone tries to pushing in.

It all feels like this is bound to be the outcome, hence why I avoid such places.

edit on 5/10/12 by thoughtsfull because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 5-10-2012 @ 08:55 AM by obnoxiouschick

reply to post by thoughtsfull

Well if they are slow to put out the ingredients then I can see how that would effect the flow.
It was stated in the article that the guys complained of the size of the bowls and not that the process was slow. So maybe they're both wrong.

I don't get a chance to eat out often since my youngest is a toddler, so when we do it's usually places that are quick or do take out. A buffet where the food is already out works for my situation. By the time I order in a regular restaurant and wait for the food my kid is ready to leave so sometimes buffets are a great convenience. We go to one that is very small but very good quality compared to places that serve endless crap. I can not wait til I can go to a regular restaurant again.

reply posted on 5-10-2012 @ 08:59 AM by Flavian

Both the manager and one of the guys involved were on Radio 2 yesterday afternoon discussing this. From the way the interview went, the manager came across really badly whereas the customers came across very politely and very well. The manager came across very much as a Basil Fawlty type!

Whilst this offers no evidence either way it certainly won't have have helped them in attracting more customers! Honestly, every time the guy made a decent, polite point then manager descended into ranting and raving. Being on radio, obviously you cannot see what the people involved looked like during the interviews. That said, the way the manager was talking i was fully imagining him sitting in a studio with his fingers in ears whilst, basically, shouting the same thing over and over.

reply posted on 5-10-2012 @ 10:02 AM by HawkeyeNation

In most cases all you can eat buffets rip the customer off. Here in IA I'd say you're looking at spending $10-$12 for one of those. Depends on where you go of course but most of the time I don't even think I get my money's worth anymore and I'm 6'2" 225lbs. My wife for example does not eat over the value for sure and I'm sure there are a lot that don't. If they didn't they would not have all you can eat buffets.

reply posted on 5-10-2012 @ 02:02 PM by openyourmind1262

Actually a group should get together. A grope of large very hungry men, should desend upon the restaurant and become Buffet Killers. After a few days of this the owner of the restaurant will have to find another way. All you can eat is all you can eat, Not all you can eat within reason of the owner.

reply posted on 5-10-2012 @ 04:36 PM by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by openyourmind1262
Actually a group should get together. A grope of large very hungry men, should desend upon the restaurant and become Buffet Killers. After a few days of this the owner of the restaurant will have to find another way. All you can eat is all you can eat, Not all you can eat within reason of the owner.

... Hmm.. You lost me..

So to address the 'issue' of a business owner ejecting a couple rude pigs who figure the buffet exists only for their personal eating choices...the solution is to destroy the business owner? I mean that's the suggestion right? Get some guys together who can totally push the buffet numbers upside down and into a hard financial loss for at least a few days?

Damn.... It's one thing to picket out front. It seems quite another to me, to deliberately set out with financial damage to the business in mind as the goal. Remind me not to get on the bad side of some folks if I own a business.

reply posted on 5-10-2012 @ 10:40 PM by openyourmind1262

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

So your saying if a group of large men went into the restaurant which is ALL YOU CAN EAT. And eat all they want each day, that's illegal or wrong? News flash, Its's not. Nothing was said about folks being "pigs" in a restaurant. I did her it was a "cost issue" . If it's not ALL YOU CAN EAT take down the damn sign. The burden is on the owner.

The term I used as Buffet Killers actually comes from a football teams offense line a few uears ago, I think at Carolina. They would go into a local ALL YOU CAN EAT in their town, I think it was Chapel Hill and they got the nickname Buffet Killers.

reply posted on 5-10-2012 @ 10:45 PM by Hefficide

Earlier in this thread ( I think? ) I made a joke about this subject being a microcosm of the left/right paradigm and darned if I wasn't spot-on.

Those dirty lefties going into an all you can eat place and practicing their foul socialism by taking from the owner...The sign says "All you can eat"! Not "All you can eat - once per week" or "All you can eat once per month", simply all you can eat.

I managed a restaurant for 8 years and can tell you, no matter how much the two guys were eating, it did not change the reality that the business is likely making about a 28% profit margin. This is really just an overly number fixated owner trying to change a "28.7" to a "28.8". Seriously.

~Heff

reply posted on 5-10-2012 @ 10:52 PM by denver22

Originally posted by Hefficide

Earlier in this thread ( I think? ) I made a joke about this subject being a microcosm of the left/right paradigm and darned if I wasn't spot-on.

Those dirty lefties going into an all you can eat place and practicing their foul socialism by taking from the owner...The sign says "All you can eat"! Not "All you can eat - once per week" or "All you can eat once per month", simply all you can eat.

I managed a restaurant for 8 years and can tell you, no matter how much the two guys were eating, it did not change the reality that the business is likely making about a 28% profit margin. This is really just an overly number fixated owner trying to change a "28.7" to a "28.8". Seriously.

~Heff

My feelings exactly "All you can eat"! customers are right here...

reply posted on 5-10-2012 @ 11:39 PM by Wrabbit2000

reply to post by openyourmind1262

So your saying if a group of large men went into the restaurant which is ALL YOU CAN EAT. And eat all they want each day, that's illegal or wrong?

C'mon... That's not at all what I said and I put your quote I was referring to right in the message. You specifically suggest it be done with the intent of doing harm and "After a few days of this the owner of the restaurant will have to find another way.". Now if I read you wrong, what was it the owner would see and be forced to find another way because of, after a few days? Your suggestion seemed pretty clear...actually. If such a thing is being done with ill INTENT...then, yeah, behavior that wouldn't be wrong in any other context becomes wrong. Intent means everything sometimes.

I agree all you can eat should be all you can eat and if the article didn't specifically mention bad customer behavior toward other customers and the place itself, I'd have replied entirely differently.

We seem to be referring to two entirely different stories or you're missing that the simple amount being eaten was not the cause of being thrown out for good.

edit on 5-10-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: minor correction.

reply posted on 6-10-2012 @ 09:42 AM by openyourmind1262

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Same story, except we have a different take on it. It was a cost issue, pure & simple. Did the other patrons ask that these two be banned.NO. The owner took it upon his self becasue he felt he was being taken for something. He was'nt. ALL YOU CAN EAT, is ALL YOU CAN EAT. The two patrone that were banned should in all do process start a lawsuit against said owner. Which would be more cost than a few Buffet Killers sitting down and eating him out of a restaurant. TAke down the damn sign that say's ALL YOU CAN EAT.

reply posted on 6-10-2012 @ 09:58 AM by denver22

reply to post by openyourmind1262

I remember ringing up for a kebab if you spend over £15 you get a free bottle of coke.
So i rang up and the kebab was delivered minus the bottle of coke when i mentioned where is
the bottle of coke the guy says you never asked for it sir, funny i don't recall having to ask for it
the onus was on the shop to supply me with it via my meal not ask.
It stated i will recieve the free bottle of coke with my meal "FREE"..

This is happenening all over and i have no sympathy for the owners of this buffet layout.

reply posted on 6-10-2012 @ 06:40 PM by obnoxiouschick

If you look further into it you would find the fine print.
On the website under the menu section it says it clear enough.
www.gobibrighton.com...
So that covers the legality of the situation.

Eat All You Like*
Management retains the right to refuse entry
* subject to fair and reasonable usage

edit on 10/6/2012 by obnoxiouschick because: (no reason given)