I'd heard anecdotes of people being asked to leave all-you-can-eat buffets because, well, they eat too much, but apparently it's starting to happen (or has been happening, and I just haven't heard about it). I found this article via Clever Dude, and apparently there was some flak between some customers and a restaurant owner when the restaurant charged two gentlemen each twice the regular price for an adult buffet, a waitress at the restaurant allegedly said that they ate too much and were fat, and the accountant for the restaurant owner said that the two were charged twice because they headed for the expensive food.
I'd like to say to the restaurant owner, “What did you expect?” And I'd like to say to the customers, “What did you expect?”
One thing I learned from my economics professor (brother of this man) is that when price goes down, more is demanded. Or, in this case, if you offer any quantity for a fixed price, larger quantities are demanded. All-you-can-eat buffets attract people who can pack away a lot of food, because it's a good deal for those people. (“What did you expect? A lot of skinny people?”)
But on the flip side, a restaurant is in business to make money, and the very customers that are attracted to all-you-can-eat buffets are the least profitable for them. They manage to stay in business by cooking cheaply enough for most dishes, charging a lot for drinks, etc., and not all of the customers eat like champions. Besides not being a profit center, some customers, including apparently the two gentlemen in the linked story, set out to not only eat a lot of food but eat a lot of expensive food to get an insanely good deal for their price of admission. A good enough deal that it might cost the restaurant money each time they come in. As far as I know, it was within the business owner's legal right to deny them service. (“What did you expect? That they'd pay you to eat like kings forever?”)
This isn't the only situation for which you get businesses owners caught up in a tug-of-war with unprofitable, or marginally-profitable, customers:
- Convenience credit-card users. Credit card issuers make their big money off of people who carry balances. (Number one reason why you want to reduce your debt.) They usually make nothing off of customers who pay their balances off in full each month, and they float those customers use of the money for the grace period. Or, on top of that, the customers get cash back or rewards, which eats into the discount charges that the merchants pay. Worse yet for the issuers, financially savvy and detail-oriented people will play interest rate arbitrage, borrowing at the 0% teaser rate for 12 months and invest it at over 4% for those 12 months. These types of customers find the deals getting not so good or with severe penalties for mis-stepping or missing a payment.
- Phone-company switchers. I didn't play this game enough, but for a while in the late 1990s some of my friends were making hundreds of dollars having the phone companies fight for them as customers. Eventually the companies wised up and made the switching bonus a discount on the next six bills. Not nearly as much fun as a $100 check.
- People asking a lot of questions about scratch and dent merchandise. This happened to me. Employees will be happy to help you out — or at least they should be happy to help you out — if you're looking at new merchandise. I had one employee at a home improvement store walk away from me mid-question when I pressed him for what was wrong with a utility sink. And honestly, what did I expect? That he was going to bend over backwards when I was looking at distressed merchandise?
If you cost a business enough money, eventually they'll show you the door or raise the price. It's that simple. And it's not illegal as far as I know. Just like if I went into a grocery store each day and bought only a pack of chewing gum and put it on my credit card. According to the store owner's merchant account agreement, they have to accept that charge, and they cannot charge me a fee. But each 25-cent purchase could cost them 35 cents in fees. Would they eventually tell me to quit it? Sure. In principle this isn't really any different than the guys eating $20 worth of crabs and frog legs for $10.
It's tricky where to draw the line with this type of thing – it doesn't seem like there is an objective standard in deciding when enough is enough. I can't decide who was right in the buffet debacle, since both parties were obviously there to exploit the other.
It also reminds me of this episode of Dilbert:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBIK4tcdNi8
"At the all-you-can-eat buffet, the only obstacle is yourself… Or an obstructed colon."-Dadbert
Well on the flip side, it's like asking the restaurant if you can pay less since you are a skinny girl and don't eat very much and consume much of your buffet fee. The restaurant will recoup their losses through someone else!
-Raymond
This is an awesome post. As I get older I find very few people who understand that there are consequences for taking advantage of a system. There are natural laws of fairness that come into play to even things out over the long term.
And despite all the stories you hear of the "big, evil corporations" taking advantage of the little guy, you could find just as many stories of the average consumer taking advantage of companies.
Of course, I don't believe there's anything wrong with taking advantage of money-losing deals offered by companies but like you say, you have to realise that those deals aren't set in stone and they may expire one day.
If a business is losing money on the deal you are offering, stop offering the deal, or suck it up as a loss leader.
The "big eaters" should never have been promised one price upon entry, and then charged another upon exit. That is dishonest on the part of the business, nothing to do with the customers themselves. And then to insult them??? That's just bad business, nothing more.
Perhaps the restaurant should consider a 2-plate max, or up the price for all. While good deals can and do expire, they should not expire mid-meal!
I agree with Jeff that deals shouldn't expire mid-meal. Maybe they can have a list of "people we don't serve" kind of like casinos.
They make up for it on me, which is why I never go to them. I only really eat one plate. Sometimes I get soup as well.
Hi, is a great post, thanks a lot of the facts,
to your advance success,
Tracy Ho
http://www.wisdomgettingloaded.com/interview.htm
I don't imagine these guys are that much of a loss to the buffet owner, considering how much food gets tossed at the end of the night anyway (one reason why I hate buffets). Not to mention, the "expensive" stuff (unless you're at a casino in Vegas) is still pretty cheap, comparatively speaking. Buffets are pretty money deals for most owners.
And I agree with the above – either limit the number of plates or suck it up when someone comes in and eats a mountain of food. Certainly they make it up with plenty of other customers.
This leads me to indigestion just reading it… I actually like Raymond's idea of skinny people asking for a buffet discount! Shopping around to make sure that companies are giving you the best deal (in phone service, insurance rates, or anything else) is often worth the time. I don't think there is anything wrong with taking advantage of companies' marketing efforts, as long as it is done legally. If they have left themselves open, they will soon close the loophole.
That's a funny article on Yahoo about the two fat guys at the buffet, hey that sounds like the beginning of a joke.
A contract is a contract is a contract. If the exchange is $10 for "all you can eat" then it means exactly that and it should be honored by both parties. Double charging ex post is way beyond unfair, it is equivalent to fraud. The next time the restaurant should tell these guys = in advance = that they are going to pay double. In this case, there is no problem.
This doesnt seem right to me. I have went to a buffet before and wondered why I paid that price to eat so little. But, the thing is, it all evens out in the end! I totally agree with the commment about the throwing away food at the end of the night, if they can afford to do that, they can afford to feed whoever comes in and pays the priice!
Oh…and on the subject of dented/broken items…I hate when customers ask for an aditional discount on clearance items because they find something wrong with it. I always think, "Well, why else do you think it is 60% off?"
I feel bad sometimes because I don't want to spend my time with someone who I knows is just looking for the cheapest stuff. If I go into a store, I know where to go for the clearance, and I don't have to ask someone to stay with me you know?
Just my lil vent on that one!
You can't decide who was right in the restaurant story? Well, it wasn't the restaurant manager!
It's an ALL YOU CAN EAT place — not a "let's discriminate on a big eater" place. If you can't afford somebody eating a lot of it, you should limit the number of trips through the line. If this group of people really had abused the amount of food they were being served, the manager should have simply told them that they couldn't get any more of X-Y-Z food for that time of being there, he shouldn't have double charged them.
Otherwise it just sets the place up for discrimination. There are plenty of skinny people who pig out, you can't assume that every larger person is automatically going to eat substantially more than every skinnier person.
Wouldn't the restaurant manager be stupid if he hadn't calculated a price high enough to subsidize average customers?
I wrote a post on unlimited offers some time back.. http://www.niquille.com/2007/09/12/the-freedom-of…
I used to think the 5 pounds all you can eat pizza at Pizzahut was good value, but then again spending 5 pounds a day on lunch is expensive…
You can’t decide who was right in the restaurant story? Well, it wasn’t the restaurant manager!
It’s an ALL YOU CAN EAT place — not a “let’s discriminate on a big eater†place. If you can’t afford somebody eating a lot of it, you should limit the number of trips through the line. If this group of people really had abused the amount of food they were being served, the manager should have simply told them that they couldn’t get any more of X-Y-Z food for that time of being there, he shouldn’t have double charged them.
Otherwise it just sets the place up for discrimination. There are plenty of skinny people who pig out, you can’t assume that every larger person is automatically going to eat substantially more than every skinnier person.