Here is my latest New York Times column, on the economics of fine dining and The Society for Quantitative Gastronomy. It is fitting that I am now in Lyon. Excerpt:
Receiving a Michelin star increases prices in a Parisian restaurant
by 20 percent, controlling for measures of quality, décor and location.
Michelin-starred restaurants in fancy hotels, or in areas with other
Michelin-starred restaurants, also have higher prices, again adjusting
for quality. Diners are paying more to eat in fine or prestigious
surroundings, whether or not the food is better. One gastronomy expert,
speaking in Le Nouvel Observateur, noted, “Gaining a Michelin star
ensures that your banker will be kind to you.”
For those who hold
the food as their main concern, the researchers offer a way forward.
Dr. Verardi and Dr. Gergaud have built an index for overpriced and
underpriced restaurants, relative to their food. They use the Zagat
Survey to Parisian restaurants – whose popularity rankings are
generated by diners’ reports, not critics – to provide an independent
measure of customer satisfaction, which is then compared with price.
There is also a new Journal of Wine Economics, see the column for more information. Here is Dubner, on the same.
I believe Zagats is a biased method of estimating food quality. In NYC, Zagats is notorious for inflated scores for expensive restaurants. People want to self-validate that their expensive meals were worth the cost. I be inclined to just the opposite of what these Drs did, use Michelin as the true estimate of quality and Zagats as the popularity contest.
OneEyed, that bias doesn’t undermine the results of the study; if anything it means they’re understated. Jonathan is right, though. The writers could easily be reversing the causal direction, and the higher prices are what patrons pay for the informational benefit of the Michelin star (or similarly, they pay more because the expected food quality is higher).
Zagats gives separate rating for food, decor, and service. (Did I miss one?) Before you count a restaurant as overpricing their food based on Zagats, make sure you take the decor and service ratings into account as well.
When I’m looking for a fantastic night out, I want high ratings on all three, not just good food. And I’m willing to pay extra for it. If you are willing to eat great food in a mediocre setting with undifferentiated service, you should be happy to pay less, but if you have guests that may not be what you’re looking for.
In writing that “… American dining has been less subject to rigidly stratified layers of prestige. The Michelin dining guide has come to New York City, but it does not have the same cachet as in France, where it sells 400,000 copies a year” aren’t you ignoring the prestige and authority of the New York Times restaurant review that likely has the Michelin role in NYC, esp. for expensive restaurants.
Also you write “It remains easier to get good cheap food in the United States” but I’ve been quite happy with finding good cheap food in NYC-equivalent cities–Paris, Rome, Madrid, etc. outside of “ethnic” (to their locations) restaurants or the Guy Savoys although I strongly agree with ethnic restaurants as the way to go when eating at home.
Comments on this entry are closed.