Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Some Cuisines Are More Expensive Than Others

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 119 posts

Re: Why Some Cuisines Are More Expensive Than Others

#31

Post by beat »

whack wrote: post #26

I feel like I'm stating the obvious here, but prices are set by a combination of both demand and supply. The article is focusing mostly on the demand side, but the supply factor makes a huge difference as well. There are significant immigrant populations from Mexico/China/India/Thailand, which means that someone opening a restaurant catering to these cuisines, can hire "ethnic chefs" at an affordable price. In contra…

Modern French cuisine was codified by Escoffier. Not only did he nail down what haute cuisine was in terms of technique, he codified a process of restaurant management, based on the military chain of command. Escoffier trained up-and-coming chefs on how to structure large kitchens (up to hundreds of staffers) and how to handle budget and marketing, to get the "right" customers. In other words, he invented the modern large-scale upscale restaurant business.

American and European cooking schools are all modeled on Escoffier's techniques, as passed down through generations of chefs going back to those worked under him directly. It's not just about the cooking. It's the white tablecloths, the wine list, the dress code - it's about a restaurant experience that says as much about who the customer is and what their role in society is as it says about food.

Why require that gentlemen wear a jacket and a tie for dinner? Does it add to the cost of the food? No. It's about standards. If you offer a gentleman a tie so he may eat, you've said something about his station in life. That's why waiters at such fancy places seem like they're insulting you - they're actually insulting you! Because of this, the restaurants are expensive. Of course they're expensive. Not because the food is superior, but because the kind of people who would eat there expect it. At the best, putting prices on the menu is a faux pas. If you have to think about the cost, you don't belong.

Re: Why Some Cuisines Are More Expensive Than Others

#32

Post by samatman »

"And when Latin American and Asian food also become American food, it will be a signal that the country has at last embraced a new generation of Americans."

I found this peculiar, given that the US has no fewer than four distinct regional "Mexican" cuisines, not found in Mexico. These are Tex-Mex, California Mexican food (e.g. the fabulous Mission burrito), New Mexican food, and American Mexican food (think chimichangas).

New Mexican cuisine is older than the US, and middle-white America has been eating tacos (with the crispy shell, itself a US development) for at least two generations. They're about as American as Chef Boyardee at this point.

Re: Why Some Cuisines Are More Expensive Than Others

#33

Post by 2muchcoffeeman »

beat wrote: post #7

There's a formula for restaurant finance - 30% ingredients, 30% labor, 30% rent and other overhead, and (hopefully) 10% profit. This is broadly true across the industry, at all price points. Much of the higher cost of "nice" restaurants is higher quality ingredients (this is especially true of pricey sushi-dominated Japanese, which pays a premium for the best fish). An additional cost is prestigious locations. Becaus…

In Sydney, I've noticed the better places to eat are increasingly becoming the cheaper restaurants.

Re: Why Some Cuisines Are More Expensive Than Others

#34

Post by beat »

showerst wrote: post #6
mtw wrote: post #2

If the theory is right, then German, Swiss or Singaporean restaurants should be at the top of the list

Looks that got wrapped in 'Continental' in the Zagat numbers, which is pretty high. Anecdotally here in DC Germanic restaurants are almost all Biergarten type places that emulate 'street' food, and there isn't any fine dining to bring up the averages. I imagine that's true in most of the US. Fun outliers I can think of are Filipino and Laotian, which are both fairly expensive vs the country prestige, but of course th…

In the Twin Cities, Laotian food is cheap and easy to find - we have a huge southeast Asian community (the largest Vietnamese community outside Vietnam, with many Hmong). Around here, there's nothing particularly "exotic" about Vietnamese or Thai. More specifically Laotian and Cambodian food is also easy enough to find, although they're sometimes hidden in "Vietnamese" restaurants. Larb and sticky rice? Yeah, we got that. :)

Filipino, on the other hand, is almost nonexistent. We just don't have a significant community here to support it.

Re: Why Some Cuisines Are More Expensive Than Others

#35

Post by beat »

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #33
beat wrote: post #7

There's a formula for restaurant finance - 30% ingredients, 30% labor, 30% rent and other overhead, and (hopefully) 10% profit. This is broadly true across the industry, at all price points. Much of the higher cost of "nice" restaurants is higher quality ingredients (this is especially true of pricey sushi-dominated Japanese, which pays a premium for the best fish). An additional cost is prestigious locations. Becaus…

In Sydney, I've noticed the better places to eat are increasingly becoming the cheaper restaurants.

Minneapolis has an amazing food scene, driven by localvore ingredients (we're farm country) and hipster-casual "fine dining". It's a hard town for traditional fine-dining restaurants. The really good eating is split between the hipster places and southeast Asian ethnic restaurants. For $50/person, you can get a shockingly good meal here, and you can wear jeans and a t-shirt eating it.

Re: Why Some Cuisines Are More Expensive Than Others

#36

Post by jinushaun »

donretag wrote: post #13
mwfunk wrote: post #4

Fascinating article, although I'm a little taken aback when anyone uses the phrase "ethnic food" nowadays. I didn't realize people said it anymore, it sounds like a relic of the '50s. I'm also bitter because I grew up in a household where anything that was even remotely different from the same bland 4-5 dishes we ate every single day was considered strange and exotic by the rest of my family. I would love to hang out…

I dislike the term "ethnic food" and foodie cultural in general when it comes to foreign food. There is a restaurant that I like to get my culture's home cooking. Nothing fancy, just home cooking. You do not even know it is a restaurant since there is no storefront except for a social club awning. I could never remember the exact street it is on, so when looking for the address one day, I came across reviews for the…

I think everyone has been to enough potluck and home cooked dinners to know the difference between good and bad home cooking. That's the problem with "authentic" cuisine. It's no guarantee of quality. Likewise, "home cooking" is also not a free pass for poorly made restaurant meals.

Re: Why Some Cuisines Are More Expensive Than Others

#37

Post by cmdrfred »

beat wrote: post #31
whack wrote: post #26

I feel like I'm stating the obvious here, but prices are set by a combination of both demand and supply. The article is focusing mostly on the demand side, but the supply factor makes a huge difference as well. There are significant immigrant populations from Mexico/China/India/Thailand, which means that someone opening a restaurant catering to these cuisines, can hire "ethnic chefs" at an affordable price. In contra…

Modern French cuisine was codified by Escoffier. Not only did he nail down what haute cuisine was in terms of technique, he codified a process of restaurant management, based on the military chain of command. Escoffier trained up-and-coming chefs on how to structure large kitchens (up to hundreds of staffers) and how to handle budget and marketing, to get the "right" customers. In other words, he invented the modern…

When I was a cook I worked under a french chef and read Escoffier. Le guide culinaire is a fascinating read, meals for kings with pigeon stuffed into hen, stuffed in a goose, stuffed into a pig and cooked in a coal fire oven for 12 hours.

Re: Why Some Cuisines Are More Expensive Than Others

#38

Post by SwellJoe »

This has Indian food near the bottom of the list, but in most of the places I've lived, Indian restaurants have been among the more expensive places I frequent. Of course, I'm not frequenting Zagat rated places, and I have a fondness for cheap Chinese food and taco trucks and taquerias, so I tend to like cheap and non-fancy places. But, I think I've only lived in one city (Houston) that had really good and really cheap Indian food from multiple restaurants, whereas cheap Chinese and Mexican food is available almost everywhere in the US.

Nonetheless, it's an interesting observation. I wonder what will take the place of cheap Chinese, if those prices rise? Most other Asian cuisine is on the higher end and rising.

Re: Why Some Cuisines Are More Expensive Than Others

#39

Post by tcj_phx »

beat wrote: post #11

Something not really touched on here is how poor people's ethnic food can become fashionable and achieve high prices and desirability, often far outside its origins. Consider the recent bone broth craze, for example. Here in Minneapolis, the current trend is Southern food, often made by hipsters who grew up in Minnesota and have no real cultural ties to the South. For me, with my half-southern roots, it's kind of biz…

> Consider the recent bone broth craze, for example.

Broths made with cartilage and bone are much more nutritious than muscle proteins. Humans have traditionally eaten as much of the animal as they could, for efficiency. Incorporating the types of amino acids in the rest of the animal in addition to the meat is more compatible with wellness.

Bone broth is a correction of a mistake, not a "craze".

Re: Why Some Cuisines Are More Expensive Than Others

#40

Post by beat »

tcj_phx wrote: post #39
beat wrote: post #11

Something not really touched on here is how poor people's ethnic food can become fashionable and achieve high prices and desirability, often far outside its origins. Consider the recent bone broth craze, for example. Here in Minneapolis, the current trend is Southern food, often made by hipsters who grew up in Minnesota and have no real cultural ties to the South. For me, with my half-southern roots, it's kind of biz…

> Consider the recent bone broth craze, for example. Broths made with cartilage and bone are much more nutritious than muscle proteins. Humans have traditionally eaten as much of the animal as they could, for efficiency. Incorporating the types of amino acids in the rest of the animal in addition to the meat is more compatible with wellness. Bone broth is a correction of a mistake, not a "craze".

Not knocking bone broth as a food - it's wonderful. But as the latest "magic ingredient", as Michael Pollan would put it? Yeah.

Bone broth is a pain for restaurants to make. Doing it right takes very long cook times. It won't last as a trend, and people sure as heck aren't going to make it themselves, unless they're nerds (my daughter makes fish and duck bone broths at home, but she's a nerd - and half the time she cheats and pads it with hearts and livers to reduce the cooking time).

Post reply on HN