FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - Comparing inexpensive versus expensive breakfasts....
Old May 22, 2013 | 1:33 pm
  #40  
nkedel
FlyerTalk Evangelist
30 Countries Visited
2M
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: in the vicinity of SFO
Programs: AA 2MM (LT-PLT, PPro for this year)
Posts: 19,784
Originally Posted by WillCAD
I've seen a couple of posts mentioning equivalency between pounds and dollars, but I'm not sure I understand.

At today's exchange rate, 1 pound is equal to $1.51. 20 pounds, then, is $30.18, which is a lot of money for a meal. I've spent that much on meals before, but I still consider it a lot, at least by my standards.
My experience visiting the UK (a frequent visitor 10-12 years ago, and an infrequent one since) is that "assume prices there are the same as in a similar part of the US, if you just substitute GBP for USD" is a safe rule of thumb to avoid either sticker shock or over-paying.

As to "effing" things up, well, if that's the way you feel about world-class chefs, that's your opinion.
It depends very much on the dish; there are things where innovation is welcome, and there are foods I want to be cooked competently to my own specification, and innovation is decidedly not welcome. In many cases, you pay a world-class chef for the innovation, not just the execution.

I have never personally eaten food prepared by one of those guys, but I have eaten at enough cheap places, chain restaurants, and mid-level restaurants to know that there is a difference in the quality of the food as you go from one level to another.
Sure, although it rarely correlates exactly with cost; I'll put a $7 (sans sides) burger at the best of my local places (Jeffrey's in San Mateo -- they have another one in Menlo Park) against any burger at any price anywhere. Just about ANY local burger place will beat the pants off of the $10 burgers at any of the mid-price casual chain places (Outback, TGIF, Chilis.)

Further, for some foods, "better ingredients" isn't always better. I've had a several burgers made with wagyu (including in Japan -- all except the first on someone else's dime)...which I love for things it's appropriate for. It's an AWFUL beef to use for a burger; it's not firm enough, and too fatty -- you lose most of the flavor benefits of the wagyu if you cook it well done (not an option where I had it in Japan, not speaking the language and not wanting to ask my host to translate) and when I didn't (either with the language barrier or because I was told "the reason it was bad last time was you got it well done" here)... you've got an underdone and mushy burger.

I don't doubt for a moment that a burger from one of the better restaurants in New York or even London will beat G&M.
Whenever I've had a burger at a place like that, the burden of having to justify the $15-$20 price for a burger had entailed elaborations that leave the burger ruined, rather than improved. Could be wrong about that being a general trend, but it's been my experience.
nkedel is offline