Restaurant foods that are ripping you off

[Janet Bostwick]

By Nadia Arumugam
Forbes
updated 2 hours 10 minutes ago

If you thought you bagged a bargain by skipping the $29
burgundy-braised short ribs and opting for the $18 baked ziti with
mushrooms, marinara sauce and chicken, you�d be wrong. With food costs
only accounting for about 18 percent of the menu price, the pasta dish
is where the restaurant is making the most profit. Believe it or not,
the beef is actually the better deal, since it costs nearly half the
menu price to source and prepare it.

If price alone isn�t the best indicator of value on a menu, what
criteria should we use to ensure the most bang for our buck? �Choose
labor-intensive, time-consuming, complex dishes, that call for
hard-to-find ingredients,� suggests New York-based restaurant
consultant, Clark Wolf. �If you can whip it up yourself in 20 minutes
with stuff from your kitchen cupboard � do that,� he says.

Wolf has a point. Avoid the ubiquitous, low-cost chicken breast dish.
Dishes comprising of everyday, bulk ingredients like pasta or rice are
cheap to prepare and as simple for the restaurant chef to put together
as it is for the home cook. For this same reason, restaurants love
brunch when they turn out highly-profitable, egg-centric meals, and
bread, flour and dairy-based dishes, such as French toast, waffles
and, pancakes.

Then there�s making the most of specialized equipment � and
relationships � that eateries have. Steakhouses, for example, Clark
adds, not only have dry-aging cabinets to hang meat to develop flavor
and add value, but the best ones have built links with suppliers that
deliver the most prime cuts that aren�t available in retail.

Just as a diner should mull over these factors when selecting a meal,
the restaurateur also considers them, and several others, when pricing
his menu. �Food cost, what nearby restaurants are charging for similar
dishes, and perceived value � what customers are willing to pay for
certain foods, are all taken into account,� says Linda Lipsky who runs
a Pennsylvania-based hospitality operations consulting firm.

While the average raw food cost for fine-dining restaurants is 38
percent � 42 percent of the menu as a whole, there is no standard
mark-up across the board for appetizers, entrees, and desserts. There
is also significant fluctuation within these categories. If $1.50
worth of chicken and $1.50 worth of shrimp features in two distinct
appetizers, the shrimp dish will be more expensive because customers
perceive the crustacean to be of higher value, and so will shell out
more for it. However, with a range of quality available, chefs can use
a cheaper variety of shrimp unbeknownst to the diner who continues to
pay a premium, says Lipsky.

Other than to avoid out low-quality shellfish, there�s another reason
why diners should pay more attention to their appetizer order.
According to Jody Pennette, founder of CB5 Restaurant Group, in the
last 15 years restaurants have raised the price of appetizers
disproportionately to the increase in food costs. �This has gone under
the radar because people form their perceptions of value by looking at
the price of entrees,� Pennette explains. �Restaurants keep mains as
competitive as they can, knowing they have leeway in other parts of
the menu.�

Sides are another area featuring unpalatably high mark-ups, especially
when sold as �family style� servings to be shared by the table.
�Diners have a hard time deciphering value when portion sizes become
more abstract,� says Pennette, something that makes it easier to add
extra dollars to the check. Throw in exotic, luxury or ethnic
ingredients, like caviar, saffron, or fresh lemongrass even in the
tiniest quantities, and again the diner swallows a disproportionate
price hike. �People are thrown off the scent of seeking out value with
foods they are unfamiliar with and don�t know how to cost,� adds
Pennette.

Despite inflated prices in the appetizer sections, there are still
parts of the menu where diners can find good value. Red meat and
seafood dishes will get more bang for your buck � and don�t forget the
dessert list. �Dessert used to be a low-cost, money-maker until the
ambitions of the modern day pastry chef got in the way,� says
Pennette. Nowadays, indulging in elaborate, luxurious desserts is
reason alone to eat out. Go on, order that triple-layered chocolate
torte. You owe it to your wallet.

[ImStillMags]

Being a restaurant owner and understanding food costs.....which this
columnist doesn't...... it's a bit insulting to say that affordable
dishes on menus are "ripping you off". Food costs for most
restaurants is more in the 35% range. And in higher end restaurants
food costs can be more than 50%.

Restaurant owners do their best to keep pricing down and keeping
quality up....at least independent restaurant owners do.

If you want the chicken, get the chicken, the price reflects the food
cost of the dish and it's not ripping you off.
Yes chicken costs less, that is why it is a less expensive item on the
menu.

[Janet Bostwick]

I'm glad that you are here to provide perspective. As is so often the
case, the outsider over-simplifies and generalizes. I apologize for
falling into that trap.
Janet US

[George]

That article seems to reflect typical anti business sentiment. And not
that it isn't deserved with bailouts and mega corps behaving badly but
there are lots and lots of honest smaller businesses run by hard working
people who aren't "ripping everyone off".

[Pete C.]

Yep, it certainly isn't a "rip off" that every dish on the menu doesn't
have exactly the same profit margin.

[Nancy Young]

On 10/28/2011 10:41 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
> On Oct 28, 7:25 am, Janet Bostwick<nos...@cableone.net> wrote:
>> By Nadia Arumugam
>> Forbes
>> updated 2 hours 10 minutes ago
>>
>> If you thought you bagged a bargain by skipping the $29
>> burgundy-braised short ribs and opting for the $18 baked ziti with
>> mushrooms, marinara sauce and chicken, you d be wrong. With food costs
>> only accounting for about 18 percent of the menu price, the pasta dish
>> is where the restaurant is making the most profit. Believe it or not,
>> the beef is actually the better deal, since it costs nearly half the
>> menu price to source and prepare it.

> Being a restaurant owner and understanding food costs.....which this
> columnist doesn't...... it's a bit insulting to say that affordable
> dishes on menus are "ripping you off". Food costs for most
> restaurants is more in the 35% range. And in higher end restaurants
> food costs can be more than 50%.
>
> Restaurant owners do their best to keep pricing down and keeping
> quality up....at least independent restaurant owners do.
>
> If you want the chicken, get the chicken, the price reflects the food
> cost of the dish and it's not ripping you off.
> Yes chicken costs less, that is why it is a less expensive item on the
> menu.

When I go out to eat, I order what looks good to me that day, on
that menu. The price is right there, no one is tricking me into
paying too much for something. If I want the chicken/sausage over
pasta dish, I'm not going to order steak because it's somehow a
better buy.

Must be a slow news day for Nadia.

nancy

[Lou Decruss]

Nothing to apologies for. I may not agree with everything but it was
worth reading. Restaurants don't rip people off unless the food is
bad or people go there to begin with. It's hard to get ripped off if
you keep your money in your pocket and cook at home.

I agree with Sitara. Order what you want. IMO if you can't do that
then you should stay home and cook. Paying your part of the overhead
for the place you sit in a restaurant is part of the deal.

Lou

[Kalmia]

On Oct 28, 10:25 am, Janet Bostwick <nos...@cableone.net> wrote:
> By Nadia Arumugam
> Forbes
> updated 2 hours 10 minutes ago
>
> If you thought you bagged a bargain by skipping the $29
> burgundy-braised short ribs and opting for the $18 baked ziti with
> mushrooms, marinara sauce and chicken, you d be wrong. With food costs
> only accounting for about 18 percent of the menu price, the pasta dish
> is where the restaurant is making the most profit.

So what!! Who thinks about profit margin? If my wallet can only
handle the 18 dollar dish, then that's what I'll order. Ridiculous
article. Sheeeee-it. I don't think too many ppl eat out trying to
'bag a bargain.;

[djs...@aol.com]

On Oct 28, 10:25 am, Janet Bostwick <nos...@cableone.net> wrote:

> By Nadia Arumugam
> Forbes
> updated 2 hours 10 minutes ago
>
> If you thought you bagged a bargain by skipping the $29
> burgundy-braised short ribs and opting for the $18 baked ziti with
> mushrooms, marinara sauce and chicken, you d be wrong. With food costs
> only accounting for about 18 percent of the menu price, the pasta dish
> is where the restaurant is making the most profit. Believe it or not,
> the beef is actually the better deal, since it costs nearly half the
> menu price to source and prepare it.

SNIP

But what if I don't want the burgundy-braised short ribs and prefer
the baked ziti? It doesn't matter to the patron how much it costs the
restaurant to make something. All that matters is the final cost. So
what if the short ribs are "the better deal." I'm still going to be
out more money versus getting the ziti. You're not shopping for
groceries where you're trying to decide whether it's a better bargain
to buy two half-gallon jugs of milk or one whole-gallon.

[Lou Decruss]

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 10:40:53 -0500, "Pete C." <aux3....@snet.net>
wrote:

>Yep, it certainly isn't a "rip off" that every dish on the menu doesn't
>have exactly the same profit margin.

Exactly. That's why mCshitties supersized drinks. For a penny or two
they could make a quarter. Same goes for the fries. That margin is
far greater than on what they call a hamburger. But we don't see
articles about how much they are ripping people off.

Advertising is amazing.

Lou

[Paul M. Cook]

"Janet Bostwick" <nos...@cableone.net> wrote in message
news:khela7dp20k7tni7a...@4ax.com...

> By Nadia Arumugam
> Forbes
> updated 2 hours 10 minutes ago
>
> If you thought you bagged a bargain by skipping the $29
> burgundy-braised short ribs and opting for the $18 baked ziti with
> mushrooms, marinara sauce and chicken, you'd be wrong. With food costs
> only accounting for about 18 percent of the menu price, the pasta dish
> is where the restaurant is making the most profit. Believe it or not,
> the beef is actually the better deal, since it costs nearly half the
> menu price to source and prepare it.

Dining out is expensive. Running restaurants is expensive. Dishes are
often priced on how popular they are. It's the same for a bar. The cheaper
booze subsidizes the good stuff so the costs are more linear. Their is no
rip-off here unless they are selling you mackerel and calling it blue fin
tuna.

Paul

[Kalmia]

On Oct 28, 1:47 pm, "Paul M. Cook" <pmc...@gte.net> wrote:

.  Their is no
> rip-off here unless they are selling you mackerel and calling it blue fin
> tuna.
>
> Paul

Yeah - big article in Consumer Reports this month on fish
substitutions.

[KevinS]

On Oct 28, 8:35 am, George <geo...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> That article seems to reflect typical anti business sentiment. And not
> that it isn't deserved with bailouts and mega corps behaving badly but
> there are lots and lots of honest smaller businesses run by hard working
> people who aren't "ripping everyone off".

I don't see it as reflecting a "typical anti business sentiment",
and I'd be surprised if such a sentiment was commonplace at
Forbes. Unless I missed it, I don't see the writer saying or
implying that the practices she describes as involving a ripoff.
I do see it as reflecting Ms. Arumugam's tortured and
contrived concept of value. I'm actually surprised that an
editor didn't shitcan the entire article for being absurd.

[A Moose in Love]

On Oct 28, 10:25 am, Janet Bostwick <nos...@cableone.net> wrote:

> By Nadia Arumugam
> Forbes
> updated 2 hours 10 minutes ago
>
> If you thought you bagged a bargain by skipping the $29
> burgundy-braised short ribs

<snip>
Short ribs here are very expensive I think. $4.99 per pound. And you
can only get them in large packs of 3 pounds or more. I'd like to
make short ribs, but the food cost is too high. They have much bone
in them. One of these days, I'll find them on sale. I'd go $2.99 per
pound, although I won't get them at that price. Haven't seen that
price in recent memory. I'll check the farmers market tomorrow,
Saturday. Maybe I'll find a deal.

[Dave Smith]

On 28/10/2011 2:46 PM, A Moose in Love wrote:
>
> Short ribs here are very expensive I think. $4.99 per pound. And you
> can only get them in large packs of 3 pounds or more. I'd like to
> make short ribs, but the food cost is too high. They have much bone
> in them. One of these days, I'll find them on sale. I'd go $2.99 per
> pound, although I won't get them at that price. Haven't seen that
> price in recent memory. I'll check the farmers market tomorrow,
> Saturday. Maybe I'll find a deal.

Short ribs, oxtails and chicken wings are some of the meats that used to
be really cheap but, for one reason or another, have become outrageously
expensive. In the early 70s my wife and I used to get enough short ribs
for a real feast for 25-30 cents. Now it costs close to $15 to get
enough to make it worth the time and effort to cook them. I understand
that chicken wings have gone up because Buffalo wings became so popular,
but I don't know what happened to make the tails and short rib prices soar.

[sf]

Deal at the farmer's market for meat? HA, good luck!

It has been mentioned here several times in the past that some part of
the chuck is often substituted and are called "boneless short ribs".
The restaurant where we used go for short ribs gave them up (probably
because they couldn't make enough $ to justify the cost) has started
cooking pieces of chuck in the same sauce and calls it "pot roast" on
the menu. I think the sauce is the same one used for coq au vin (or
possibly Boeuf Bourguignon) because I saw pieces of bacon in it and
they say it's made with red wine, with no mention of cognac.

--
All you need is love. But a little chocolate now and then doesn't hurt.

[Sky]

Lots of other cuts have gone up in prices, too, e.g. flank steak. Flank
steak used to be really cheap. Now it's more like $6.99/lb or even
$7.99/lb (OUCH!).

Sky

--

Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice!!

[Rosemary132]

I am thinking of cooking food at home and selling to mobile food trucks,
can anyone in business help me?




--
Rosemary132

[Ranée at Arabian Knits]

In article <khela7dp20k7tni7a...@4ax.com>,

Janet Bostwick <nos...@cableone.net> wrote:

> If you thought you bagged a bargain by skipping the $29
> burgundy-braised short ribs and opting for the $18 baked ziti with
> mushrooms, marinara sauce and chicken, you’d be wrong. With food costs
> only accounting for about 18 percent of the menu price, the pasta dish
> is where the restaurant is making the most profit. Believe it or not,
> the beef is actually the better deal, since it costs nearly half the
> menu price to source and prepare it.

The article presumes that dishes are chosen at restaurants with the
goal of getting the most for one's money. Although, in a general sense,
we do that - we don't go to restaurants where the food is either so
scanty (we don't like giant plates, I mean you leave hungry still) or so
poor quality for the price - we don't scan the menu for the best value,
necessarily. We look for what sounds like it would taste good and be
within our price range.

--
Regards,
Ranee @ Arabian Knits

"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13

http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/

[Ranée at Arabian Knits]

In article <va0ma7l1gcu2o3e17...@4ax.com>,

sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:

> Deal at the farmer's market for meat? HA, good luck!

City famers' markets seem to be more expensive than rural or
semi-rural ones. We get incredibly good deals at ours, usually at or
below the grocery prices, with an opportunity to get lower prices for
buying a lot or buying seconds for pennies (I once came home with dinged
up nectarines - about 15 - 20 pounds of them for $2.00, because he knew
we had a large family and that most folks wouldn't buy fruit that wasn't
pretty and he didn't want to take it home. They also sell fruit like
this for canning at similar prices). We are getting more ripe, often
organic produce for those prices, too.

[Julie Bove]

I order what I want. Since I am not a meat lover, what I order is usually
one of if not the least expensive thing on the menu. I am not going out to
eat for value.

[sf]

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:08:15 -0700, Ranée at Arabian Knits
<arabia...@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <va0ma7l1gcu2o3e17...@4ax.com>,
> sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Deal at the farmer's market for meat? HA, good luck!
>
> City famers' markets seem to be more expensive than rural or
> semi-rural ones. We get incredibly good deals at ours, usually at or
> below the grocery prices, with an opportunity to get lower prices for
> buying a lot or buying seconds for pennies (I once came home with dinged
> up nectarines - about 15 - 20 pounds of them for $2.00, because he knew
> we had a large family and that most folks wouldn't buy fruit that wasn't
> pretty and he didn't want to take it home. They also sell fruit like
> this for canning at similar prices). We are getting more ripe, often
> organic produce for those prices, too.

Do buy meat at the farmer's market?

[Ran�e at Arabian Knits]

In article <g78ma7le0a37ise73...@4ax.com>,
sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:08:15 -0700, Ran�e at Arabian Knits

> <arabia...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <va0ma7l1gcu2o3e17...@4ax.com>,
> > sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Deal at the farmer's market for meat? HA, good luck!
> >
> > City famers' markets seem to be more expensive than rural or
> > semi-rural ones. We get incredibly good deals at ours, usually at or
> > below the grocery prices, with an opportunity to get lower prices for
> > buying a lot or buying seconds for pennies (I once came home with dinged
> > up nectarines - about 15 - 20 pounds of them for $2.00, because he knew
> > we had a large family and that most folks wouldn't buy fruit that wasn't
> > pretty and he didn't want to take it home. They also sell fruit like
> > this for canning at similar prices). We are getting more ripe, often
> > organic produce for those prices, too.
>
> Do buy meat at the farmer's market?

Occasionally. There is a man who sells poultry, a family that sells
pork and another family that sells sausages and jerky. The sausages and
jerky are comparably priced to the grocery store, but better quality
(what we've tried, anyway) and locally made. The pork is higher priced
than organic at the store, it is excellent, but we just can't afford it.
The poultry is priced comparably to organic poultry at the store and is
very good.

[sf]

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 15:08:33 -0700, Ranée at Arabian Knits
<arabia...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Occasionally. There is a man who sells poultry, a family that sells
> pork and another family that sells sausages and jerky. The sausages and
> jerky are comparably priced to the grocery store, but better quality
> (what we've tried, anyway) and locally made. The pork is higher priced
> than organic at the store, it is excellent, but we just can't afford it.
> The poultry is priced comparably to organic poultry at the store and is
> very good.

Independent butchers and grocery stores with their own butcher counter
are making their own sausages these days and that's a good thing
because I love sausage. In this day and age of an ordinary whole
chicken selling at "a good price" of $2 lb, I certainly understand
where you're coming from about the decent organic anything. Organic,
heirloom pork is out of sight. I had a sublime pork chops from an
heirloom breed hog earlier this year and I can only wish I could
afford to eat that way all the time.

[ImStillMags]

On Oct 28, 10:51 am, Rosemary132

LOL! no, you can't do that. Health department rules apply to
mobile food trucks just as to brick and mortar restaurants.
You must have a commercial health department inspected kitchen.

[Bob Terwilliger]

Sitara wrote:

>> If you thought you bagged a bargain by skipping the $29 burgundy-braised
>> short ribs and opting for the $18 baked ziti with mushrooms, marinara
>> sauce and chicken, you d be wrong. With food costs only accounting for
>> about 18 percent of the menu price, the pasta dish is where the
>> restaurant is making the most profit. Believe it or not, the beef is
>> actually the better deal, since it costs nearly half the menu price to
>> source and prepare it.

<snip>

> Being a restaurant owner and understanding food costs.....which this
> columnist doesn't...... it's a bit insulting to say that affordable dishes
> on menus are "ripping you off". Food costs for most restaurants is
> more in the 35% range. And in higher end restaurants food costs can be
> more than 50%.
>
> Restaurant owners do their best to keep pricing down and keeping quality
> up....at least independent restaurant owners do.
>
> If you want the chicken, get the chicken, the price reflects the food cost
> of the dish and it's not ripping you off. Yes chicken costs less, that is
> why it is a less expensive item on the menu.

In the particular example given, the rip-off is that the chicken dish is
probably at least 75% pasta. Pasta is cheap. Also, the fact that the dish is
easy to make means that a cook can whip it out without a great deal of
training or attention. I also think you were over-generalizing when you
wrote that the article made the claim that 'affordable dishes on menus are
"ripping you off."' I interpreted the article as saying that value is based
on ingredients, time, and effort, and a knowledgeable diner should compare
value (a calculated using those parameters) to price (on the menu) in
deciding what to order in a restaurant.

But OF COURSE, as you say, "If you want the chicken, get the chicken". Who
goes to a restaurant with the intention of ferreting out the dish with the
most "bang for the buck"? I certainly don't.

I think the most telling point in the article is one I've made often in this
forum:

>> If price alone isn t the best indicator of value on a menu, what criteria
>> should we use to ensure the most bang for our buck? Choose
>> labor-intensive, time-consuming, complex dishes, that call for
>> hard-to-find ingredients, suggests New York-based restaurant consultant,
>> Clark Wolf. If you can whip it up yourself in 20 minutes with stuff from
>> your kitchen cupboard do that, he says.

I hardly ever go to a restaurant and order something I'd make at home.
Tamales are a good example: I think they're usually more work than they're
worth, so I'm happy to buy them rather than make them. I *do* make tamales
every once in a while, but whenever I do it's never a run-of-the-mill
tamale; I make offbeat ones that don't ever appear in the market.

The recent thread entitled "Better at home? Better at restaurant?" was
intended to discuss some of the things which a diner would be better-advised
to make at home rather than buy in a restaurant because the QUALITY of the
home-cooked dish is better. The article posted here is more about food value
per dollar -- and I honestly think it's a rather strange approach to dining.

Bob

[Ranée at Arabian Knits]

In article <7vama7p2dvkeu8m8r...@4ax.com>,

The only way we can afford good pork is to buy it by the half or
whole hog. We're almost entirely out of ours from this past year, so
I'm nursing it along until we can buy another one in the spring.

[David Harmon]

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 07:41:00 -0700 (PDT) in rec.food.cooking,
ImStillMags <sitar...@gmail.com> wrote,

> Food costs for most
>restaurants is more in the 35% range. And in higher end restaurants
>food costs can be more than 50%.

I always heard that the rule of thumb, for a typical restaurant, was
1/3 for the food, 1/3 for labor, 1/3 for the building and equipment,
and the rest is all pure profit.

[Brooklyn1]

David Harmon wrote:
>ImStillMags wrote,

>
>>Food costs for most
>>restaurants is more in the 35% range. And in higher end restaurants
>>food costs can be more than 50%.
>
>I always heard that the rule of thumb, for a typical restaurant, was
>1/3 for the food, 1/3 for labor, 1/3 for the building and equipment,
>and the rest is all pure profit.

What rest... 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1

[Nancy Young]

(laugh) And that's if you're pretty lucky.

nancy

[ImStillMags]

Um...that's the point Sheldon. Profit is not easy in the restaurant
business.

[Brooklyn1]

Profit is easy when one knows what they're doing.

[BillyZoom]

And you would know how, cat lady?

[BillyZoom]

God you're a moron.

[Lou Decruss]

Only on the good days.

[Bryan]

Are you suggesting that on other days he is an imbecile?

--Bryan

[Paul M. Cook]

"Dave Smith" <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4iDqq.10964$Oy6....@unlimited.newshosting.com...

Even tripe is expensive now. Same with skirt steak. One time nobody wanted
it. Now it's more expensive than sirloin.

Paul

[jmcquown]

"Kalmia" <tween...@mypacks.net> wrote in message
news:a63a787b-0311-4d6a...@q13g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 28, 1:47 pm, "Paul M. Cook" <pmc...@gte.net> wrote:
>
> . Their is no
>> rip-off here unless they are selling you mackerel and calling it blue fin
>> tuna.
>>
>> Paul
>
> Yeah - big article in Consumer Reports this month on fish
> substitutions.


I seem to recall some years ago restaurants substituting skate and
pretending they were sea scallops.

Jill

[Brooklyn1]

"Kalmia" wrote in message

>
> Yeah - big article in Consumer Reports this month on fish substitutions.

When people order a piece of fillet what do they expect... order a
whole fish or at least a fish steak with the bone and skin intact...
without the bones and skin it's mystery meat, may as well order the
McFish sammy from the clown

[James Silverton]

Still do but it was more common when skate or rays in general were cheap
trash fish, which is no longer the case.

--


James Silverton, Potomac

I'm *not* not.jim....@verizon.net

[Jean B.]

Wow! That would be an extremely dangerous practice. My best
friend has a potentially fatal allergy to fish, but he can eat
seafood.

--
Jean B.

[Pennyaline]

On 10/30/2011 12:20 PM, Jean B. wrote:

> Wow! That would be an extremely dangerous practice. My best friend has a
> potentially fatal allergy to fish, but he can eat seafood.

I would have to hear more of the details on that one before making any
decisions as to its credibility.

[sf]

On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:20:57 -0400, "Jean B." <jb...@rcn.com> wrote:

>
> Wow! That would be an extremely dangerous practice. My best
> friend has a potentially fatal allergy to fish, but he can eat
> seafood.

Seafood covers fish that live in the ocean. People are usually
allergic to shellfish - not fish in general. Maybe he's one of those
who don't like fish, so they claim to be allergic.

[Jean B.]

sf wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:20:57 -0400, "Jean B." <jb...@rcn.com> wrote:
>
>> Wow! That would be an extremely dangerous practice. My best
>> friend has a potentially fatal allergy to fish, but he can eat
>> seafood.
>
> Seafood covers fish that live in the ocean. People are usually
> allergic to shellfish - not fish in general. Maybe he's one of those
> who don't like fish, so they claim to be allergic.
>

Seems to me, in common parlance, seafood does not refer to fish,
although technically, it should.

--
Jean B.

[BillyZoom]

Exactly!!! "I LOVE DOGS, but I'm allergic". Okay, why don't you just
admit they're too much trouble. Everyone these days is a whiny,
pathetic pain in the ass <cough> Julie Bove <cough>. Remember when we
just lived our lives and if something didn't appeal we just didn't eat
it without a GRAND ANNOUNCEMENT. Nobody cares. Hey Bovine, if you
don't like something, feel free to just not post on that topic. Is
that really so complicated? And Stormee - really, the "legally
blind" (ie. NOT blind) thing does not excuse top posting and replying
dozens of times. Knock it off, cunt.

Now, on the original topic - this sounds like the type of people who
want to do "maximum damage" at an all you can eat buffet. Don't eat
salad because it doesn't cost as much. But don't you like salad?
Fucking hill jacks.

[BillyZoom]

And when have you ever heard of someone who was allergic to freshwater
fish but was okay with seafood? I mean someone who is normal <Julie
Bovine just skip this topic>?

[Julie Bove]

"BillyZoom" <meda...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bf6bb743-bb0d-4441...@o14g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...

Oh hey! FOAD!

[Julie Bove]

"BillyZoom" <meda...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:168ef8eb-4a17-4f26...@f36g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...

I'll read whatever the hell I want to!

[BillyZoom]

On Oct 31, 1:38 am, "Julie Bove" <julieb...@frontier.com> wrote:
> "BillyZoom" <medav...@gmail.com> wrote in message

Please read all you want. Just spare us the comments. Not every post
requires your input. Nobody cares what you're allergic to or what you
don't like.

[Julie Bove]

"BillyZoom" <meda...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:72b61aa0-9548-470e...@v5g2000vbh.googlegroups.com...

Actually some people care. Some people have even sent me recipes. You
don't care. And I don't care that you don't care. You feel that you can
comment on anything you want. And yet you think you can tell others where
they can and can not reply. That's wrong!

[Honey Badger]

I seem to recall a lot of urban legends. Skate would cost more than
scallops much like ordering a duck and getting a bald eagle.

-HB

[Janet Bostwick]

I thought it was shark.
Janet US

[Bryan]

On Oct 31, 7:53 pm, Honey Badger <Honeybadger@craazzy!.com> wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>

> > "Kalmia" <tweeny90...@mypacks.net> wrote in message

Eagle meat is supposed to taste nasty. Might as well eat seagulls.
I'd far rather have farm raised, grain fed duck. You are a dumbass.
Skate is far cheaper than real scallops, and I wouldn't eat it unless
I was desperate.
>
> -HB

--Bryan

[James Silverton]

I once went duck hunting and shot one that I later knew had been eating
sea fish. It was quite inedible.

[sf]

On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 08:20:29 -0400, James Silverton
<not.jim....@verizon.net> wrote:

> I once went duck hunting and shot one that I later knew had been eating
> sea fish. It was quite inedible.
>

Wild duck tastes awful, period.