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

The economics of all-you-can-eat buffets

thehustle.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 272 posts

Re: The economics of all-you-can-eat buffets

#101

Post by dbmueller »

fortran77 wrote: post #59
wtmt wrote: post #14

According to Drawdown, reducing food waste is the top individual action one can take to reduce one’s impact on climate change. Buffets tend to be quite wasteful and/or encourage serving older food a lot more than a la carte orders. There could be some exceptions, such as buffets in hotels where it’s included in the room rent and is a lot easier to plan for (the quantities) based on the number of guests and the guest…

Obesity has been linked to climate change in many studies. Here's a summary of one typical example: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/another-reason-to-combat-t... People in developed countries eating more food than they need is very wasteful, not just in food production, but the extra fuel needed to transport these people, the extra material needed to clothe these people, etc. Anybody who's overweight or obese can't…

> Anybody who's overweight or obese can't be credible if they act concerned about climate change and won't do something as simple (and without cost) as eating less food.

For one, I don't think it's "as simple", and for two, the pattern "if you don't do X, you're not serious/credible/honest/worthy" is unhelpful.

Re: The economics of all-you-can-eat buffets

#102

Post by isoskeles »

virtuallynathan wrote: post #92
jasoneckert wrote: post #68

I stopped going to all-you-can-eat buffets years ago for the simple reason that you don't stop eating when you're full - you stop eating when you hate yourself. If the number of all-you-can-eat buffets drops, it's likely because society is starting to advocate healthier lifestyles in my opinion.

I’ve started going more, but mostly to Brazilian steakhouses. You will stop eating steak exactly when you are satiated. I actually lose weight if I go a few days in a row.

Do you avoid the cheesy biscuits?

Re: The economics of all-you-can-eat buffets

#103

Post by bluedino »

astura wrote: post #57

>The big buffet chains that once dotted the Midwest have been hit the hardest: Old Country Buffet is down to 17 of its 350 original locations; HomeTown Buffet has closed 217 of its 250 eateries; Ryan’s Buffet has downsized from 400 to 16. I am not surprised. I went to an Old Country Buffet about two decades ago during the time I was working in a hospital kitchen. I recognized a lot of their dishes from work, they wer…

Golden Corral has moved up to the midwest.

Re: The economics of all-you-can-eat buffets

#104

Post by gnicholas »

> Even higher-end buffets, like the $98 brunch at the Hotel del Coronado in San Diego, employ these tactics: “They hide the truffles, the foie gras, and the oysters,” says Britt. “You literally can’t find them.”

I honeymooned are The Del, and they kindly comped our brunch for our entire stay. This was for the downstairs brunch, which doesn’t have as much meat but is still amazing. It’s about $40/person these days, and considering all that it includes (made to order eggs, bacon, waffles, pancakes, pastries, fruit, desserts, and fresh squeezed juice), and the level of service, it’s a pretty good value.

Re: The economics of all-you-can-eat buffets

#105

Post by JMTQp8lwXL »

snovv_crash wrote: post #45
PopeDotNinja wrote: post #33

I sometimes drink a stupid amount of diet soda. I know drinks are usually high margin, but I wouldn't be surprised if some places lose money on me. I went to a Denny's recently and tried to count the number of refills I got, but I lost count. This is the same Denny's I went to in college, where the waitress knew me. She'd drop two pitchers of Diet Coke on the table before she took my order. The epitaph on my tomb sto…

All studies I've seen of artificial sweeteners have only shown that they are measurably worse for you than water. Sugar is worse than non-nutritive sweeteners Similarly with MSG, studies show it is less toxic than salt. It is only 'toxic' in ridiculously large quantities.

There's studies suggesting artificial sweeteners aren't good for your gut microflora. I haven't heard anything beyond that.

Re: The economics of all-you-can-eat buffets

#106

Post by JCharante »

jasoneckert wrote: post #68

I stopped going to all-you-can-eat buffets years ago for the simple reason that you don't stop eating when you're full - you stop eating when you hate yourself. If the number of all-you-can-eat buffets drops, it's likely because society is starting to advocate healthier lifestyles in my opinion.

I think the price point also matters. There's a vegan buffet 10 minutes from my house that gets a lot of visitors. I'll go there when I want to eat food but I don't necessarily have something specific in mind. I just serve myself a reasonable amount (less than a full plate) and once I'm done eating I'll go. I notice that a lot of other people do the same. They have free tea and water, so it's a quick process. The price point is probably 1.5x what you could get a satisfying lunch for from street vendors, but it's a nice environment and still cheap (about $1.37 usd, located in the capital of Vietnam).

It must be a combination of customs and the price point though. If they had a $5 buffet in the US I bet a lot of people would gorge out there, and I feel like if I went to a $50 buffet I'd also try to maximize the value of the food that I'd intake.

Re: The economics of all-you-can-eat buffets

#107

Post by PopeDotNinja »

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #105
snovv_crash wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All studies I've seen of artificial sweeteners have only shown that they are measurably worse for you than water. Sugar is worse than non-nutritive sweeteners Similarly with MSG, studies show it is less toxic than salt. It is only 'toxic' in ridiculously large quantities.

There's studies suggesting artificial sweeteners aren't good for your gut microflora. I haven't heard anything beyond that.

I was (mostly) kidding about the epitaph. Healthcare Triage did a good video on the subject a few weeks ago.

https://youtu.be/cj6oO-O1QsM

Re: The economics of all-you-can-eat buffets

#108

Post by adrianmonk »

_ph_ wrote: post #10

While very occasionally a buffet can be fun, I usually consider them not so great an experience. Yes, it is nice to be able to decide yourself the relative composition of ingredients, like adding the extra piece of meat or a lot of your favorite vegetable, but too often you end out with a strange mix of stuff on your plate. A plate, which as described in the article, usually is to small of this. So while you might ge…

> strange mix of stuff on your plate

Common problem for beginners, but with experience you can avoid it using more advanced buffet technique and strategy.

One trick is to switch to a two-pass algorithm. Before you grab a plate, walk around the buffet area and look over people's shoulders, survey what's available, and make a mental note of which items you want most, which go together, and which will fit on your plate. Then grab a plate, get in line, and fill your plate without being blind to what's ahead of you.

You may mildly annoy the people whose shoulders you look over and your dining companions who have to wait on your slow process before they can begin eating, but it's a small price to pay for taking a buffet seriously.

Another trick is to look at what's on other people's plates, both people sitting at tables and people exiting the buffet line. You may notice a food on someone's plate that you didn't see on the buffet line. Maybe it wasn't easy to spot or maybe there was some other serving area (a dessert table off in a different corner) that you didn't notice.

Re: The economics of all-you-can-eat buffets

#109

Post by throwaway2048 »

ben509 wrote: post #60
lotsofpulp wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but as a business owner in a different field I'm left wondering why anyone would even bother. Because they don't have a choice.

They have a choice. An economic profit is defined as making enough profit (and intangible benefit) to not want to do something else. For a small business owner it's "am I better off selling it off and getting a regular job?" For a larger chain, it's "is there a more profitable line of business?"

This makes the assumption there is some kind of high margin business they can readily enter, but just don't for some reason.

Re: The economics of all-you-can-eat buffets

#110

Post by richk449 »

chrisseaton wrote: post #28
katzgrau wrote: post #16

The only thing I found more interesting than all-you-can-eat buffets actually turning a profit is that there are business people who are apparently content running a business with such slim margins. This article quotes a 5% margin. I know food industry margins are low in the first place, but as a business owner in a different field I'm left wondering why anyone would even bother. The same business prowess and attenti…

> there are business people who are apparently content running a business with such slim margins ... I'm left wondering why anyone would even bother A percentage margin is expressed relative to the value of the sales. Low margin on high value sales is as good as high margin on low value sales, in terms of how much money you make. Low margin is only a problem in low value sales. Why shouldn’t people running a business…

> You can’t criticise just the margin in isolation like you’ve done.

The article is specifically discussing all you can eat buffets. I don’t think they are selling jumbo jets at Old Country Buffet.

Post reply on HN