The Right of Return
r1
food/drink for poor quality. Is it proper to return a dish and ask for a
refund or alternative if you've eaten more than 25% or 50% or 75% or all of
it? What's the consensus here? How about a bottle of wine?
I know of a situation in an upscale restaurant where the customers drank
almost the entire bottle of expensive wine and later claimed it of poor
quality and wanted a credit for the charge. The management obliged.
Ray Savage
>A recent post brought to mind the issue of customer's right to return
>food/drink for poor quality. Is it proper to return a dish and ask for a
>refund or alternative if you've eaten more than 25% or 50% or 75% or all of
>it? What's the consensus here? How about a bottle of wine?
In my previous post I mentioned that we were ACCUSED of eating almost
all of the dish....in fact we each had a bite.....one bite....for a
grand total of two bites of the entree. That having been said, it is
the establishments job to produce a quality product at a fair price.
It is the customers job to make it known in short order if they are
displeased. You certainly can't expect any establishment to make
things right if you don't let them know there is a problem. However,
if you wait until AFTER the meal, you have dropped the ball on your
end of the bargain.
>
>I know of a situation in an upscale restaurant where the customers drank
>almost the entire bottle of expensive wine and later claimed it of poor
>quality and wanted a credit for the charge. The management obliged.
>
We have, over the years, sent back some pretty high-dollar wines that
were just not any good....it just happens. We would, however, NEVER
think of doing it once the waiter has finished letting you taste and
approve. Again, your job is to pay attention and make sure everything
is right. You don't get to finish the meal or wine and then expect
to be compensated. This is just as rude as some of the establishments
are to their customers at times. <grin>
Ray Savage
Encinitas CA
To reply via email, remove the "unspam." in the address shown.
OOR...@usmc.ret
had a bite or two). Unless I'm blocking bad memories, I can't recall even one
case where the restaurant objected.
Restaurants spend a ton to get you in the door, and generally work on 75-90%
gross margin. It's good business - and profitable - to bring you another dish.
And the customer is ALWAYS right.
Ray Savage
>And the customer is ALWAYS right.
At least that is the way it USED to be <sigh>.
Daniel W. Rouse Jr.
news:zk1Ha.2235$Hw.20...@news2.news.adelphia.net...
> A recent post brought to mind the issue of customer's right to return
> food/drink for poor quality. Is it proper to return a dish and ask for a
> refund or alternative if you've eaten more than 25% or 50% or 75% or all
of
> it? What's the consensus here? How about a bottle of wine?
>
and find out its bad, and the second to confirm, yes, it's bad.
Eating like 75% of the meal and then complaining seems to be trying for a
free meal, IMHO.
For a bottle of wine, assuming dinner for two and the glasses have been
poured, I'd say a couple of sips to confirm it's bad.
> I know of a situation in an upscale restaurant where the customers drank
> almost the entire bottle of expensive wine and later claimed it of poor
> quality and wanted a credit for the charge. The management obliged.
>
>
I'm surprised, because if it's that bad, how were they able to drink more
and more of it?
Now, as a followup question, do you dare return to the restaurant if you do
a return? Might the waiter and/or cook "mess with" your food?
The Ranger
> A recent post brought to mind the issue of customer's right
> to return food/drink for poor quality. Is it proper to return
> a dish and ask for a refund or alternative if you've eaten more
> than 25% or 50% or 75% or all of it? What's the consensus
> here? How about a bottle of wine?
Having worked in several restaurants, it's ALWAYS preferrable to have the
customer let the server (or manager, when s/he walks about) know that the
food or beverage is not acceptable. *MOST* customers will not, though,
thinking that 1) they're creating an unnecessary complaint, 2) they will
immediately be tossed or have their meals tampered with, or 3) just hoping
to get by without any confrontation at any level. They'll never come back,
either, but will tell ANYONE that stands still long enough about the rotten
restaurant at XXY Street. I was amazed at the number of customer that would
force themselves to eat something they didn't like or found offensive. A
customer should *NEVER* eat something that isn't to their liking. This
assessment can be done in a couple bites/sips. BTW: You'd be amazed at the
number of people that scarf down a significant portion of their meals down,
and expect the meal to be comped, with the idea of something for nothing.
> I know of a situation in an upscale restaurant where the
> customers drank almost the entire bottle of expensive
> wine and later claimed it of poor quality and wanted a
> credit for the charge. The management obliged.
It doesn't surprise me that the customer pulled that nonsense nor that the
restaurant credited the customer's card. No matter how the manager handled
that cheap SOB it would have caused the other patrons to think twice about
coming back. It's a no-win scenario for the restaurant. So it's better to
credit the card and bid the jerk goodbye.
The Ranger
The Ranger
> Restaurants spend a ton to get you in the door, and generally work
> on 75-90% gross margin. It's good business - and profitable - to
> bring you another dish.
Uh... Not one of the restaurants I worked for pull those percentages on
gross margin.
> And the customer is ALWAYS right.
As my first manager explained, "You might be as right as if Gahd Himself
were patting you on the shoulder... But you should never tell the customer
they're wrong."
The Ranger
OOR...@usmc.ret
The Ranger wrote:
> OORAH!!@USMC.ret wrote in message news:3EECB1AC...@introtech.com...
> > Restaurants spend a ton to get you in the door, and generally work
> > on 75-90% gross margin. It's good business - and profitable - to
> > bring you another dish.
>
> Uh... Not one of the restaurants I worked for pull those percentages on
> gross margin.
I'm wrong a lot, but:
Gross margin equals selling price minus actual cost of goods (food).
Everything else is fixed - rent, utilities, insurance, labor. The last I
looked at published information, margin was over 75% in sit-down restaurants.
That is, a $20 menu item included food items for which the restaurant paid $5.
Perhaps that's changed?
My point is that a restaurant can afford to prepare/serve the same meal twice
and still make a profit. That's apparently confirmed by the enormous number of
twofers offered in the Reader, Entertainment, etc.
Jim Lane
snip
> Having worked in several restaurants, it's ALWAYS preferrable to have the
> customer let the server (or manager, when s/he walks about) know that the
> food or beverage is not acceptable. *MOST* customers will not, though,
> thinking that 1) they're creating an unnecessary complaint, 2) they will
snip
Having worked in marketing for a hotel chain, I used to have comp meals
in their restaurants. I was eating with the food and beverage manager
once and made a funny face at something I ate. He asked what was wrong
and then suggested sending it back, something I really didn't want to do.
That manager told me that they would rather an employee catch something
wrong and return it than have a bad dish end up going out to the paying
customer. They want customers to tell them when something is off so it
can be fixed rather than not complain and have a similar dish(es) go out
and ruin a bunch of people's meals.
Then there is the complaining that follows about which the restaurant
never hears and costs them business down the line, mentioned above..
jim
The Ranger
news:3EECF19D...@introtech.com...
> > > Restaurants spend a ton to get you in the door, and generally
> > > work on 75-90% gross margin. It's good business - and
> > > profitable - to bring you another dish.
> > >
> > Uh... Not one of the restaurants I worked for pull those percentages on
> > gross margin.
> >
> I'm wrong a lot, but:
I'm guessing we're in similar boats. <G>
> Gross margin equals selling price minus actual cost of goods (food).
> Everything else is fixed - rent, utilities, insurance, labor. The last I
> looked at published information, margin was over 75% in sit-down
> restaurants. That is, a $20 menu item included food items for which
> the restaurant paid $5. Perhaps that's changed?
Those fixed costs aren't the killer. It's [qualified] labor (first) and food
costs (close second) that are the real problems. ROI, from S&P documentation
when I wrote my business plan twelve years ago was an astoundingly low 6-8%.
I could work less hours, maintain my marriage, not become an alcoholic, and
get more money as it sat in a CD or money market. If those type of gross
margin figures were accurate don't you think more restaurants would be
staying in business or more would be opening up daily? No, owners are
playing it so close to the line that if something as simple as staff
turnover occurs, you can see them go under within a month. It's that
cut-throat and harsh.
> My point is that a restaurant can afford to prepare/serve the same
> meal twice and still make a profit. That's apparently confirmed by
> the enormous number of twofers offered in the Reader, Entertainment,
> etc.
Those are advertising/marketing gimmicks, not regular prices. They can
afford to "give" that second meal away for the number of people that use
them. It's marketing good will and potential future business. The same with
the coupons you receive in the mail for all the other restaurants. We're on
a mailing list for restaurants that feature prix fixe menus (I don't even
remember how we got on that one.) A restaurant can't afford to give away too
many meals, and yes, some loss is built into pricing but not regular loss.
The Ranger
Jim Lane
> OORAH!!@USMC.ret countered in message
> news:3EECF19D...@introtech.com...
>
>>>>Restaurants spend a ton to get you in the door, and generally
>>>>work on 75-90% gross margin. It's good business - and
>>>>profitable - to bring you another dish.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Uh... Not one of the restaurants I worked for pull those percentages on
>>>gross margin.
snip
>>Gross margin equals selling price minus actual cost of goods (food).
>>Everything else is fixed - rent, utilities, insurance, labor. The last I
>>looked at published information, margin was over 75% in sit-down
>>restaurants. That is, a $20 menu item included food items for which
>>the restaurant paid $5. Perhaps that's changed?
>
>
> Those fixed costs aren't the killer. It's [qualified] labor (first) and food
> costs (close second) that are the real problems. ROI, from S&P documentation
> when I wrote my business plan twelve years ago was an astoundingly low 6-8%.
> I could work less hours, maintain my marriage, not become an alcoholic, and
> get more money as it sat in a CD or money market. If those type of gross
> margin figures were accurate don't you think more restaurants would be
> staying in business or more would be opening up daily? No, owners are
> playing it so close to the line that if something as simple as staff
> turnover occurs, you can see them go under within a month. It's that
> cut-throat and harsh.
The figures I have seen are in the 6-7% range.
>>My point is that a restaurant can afford to prepare/serve the same
>>meal twice and still make a profit. That's apparently confirmed by
>>the enormous number of twofers offered in the Reader, Entertainment,
>>etc.
>
>
> Those are advertising/marketing gimmicks, not regular prices. They can
> afford to "give" that second meal away for the number of people that use
> them. It's marketing good will and potential future business. The same with
> the coupons you receive in the mail for all the other restaurants. We're on
> a mailing list for restaurants that feature prix fixe menus (I don't even
> remember how we got on that one.) A restaurant can't afford to give away too
> many meals, and yes, some loss is built into pricing but not regular loss.
Further, as advertising, at least a part of this is a write off. I guess
OOHRAH!'s numbers are about as current as his review of a closed sausage
joint.
jim
OOR...@usmc.ret
Jim Lane wrote:
>
> Further, as advertising, at least a part of this is a write off. I guess
> OOHRAH!'s numbers are about as current as his review of a closed sausage
> joint.
Jim, you're both obnoxious and ignorant --- yet again.
Perhaps after you finish your remedial reading class you might eventually get to
Accounting for Dummies.
I said GROSS MARGIN and even defined it as I applied the term to restaurants.
There are only two factors involved in calculating that number: cost of food on
the plate, and the price at which it is sold. In a restaurant, cost of good is the
only significant variable - nearly all other expenses are fixed.
I'll stick to my original numbers: 75% or more. That means a restaurant that
serves a twofer makes a profit.
...as for the "closed sausage joint" -- it's the same joint, Jim. Only the name
has been changed.
The Ranger
news:3EED43EF...@introtech.com...
[snip]
> I said GROSS MARGIN and even defined it as I applied the
> term to restaurants. There are only two factors involved in calculating
> that number: cost of food on the plate, and the price at which it is sold.
> In a restaurant, cost of good is the only significant variable - nearly
> all other expenses are fixed.
>
> I'll stick to my original numbers: 75% or more. That means a restaurant
> that serves a twofer makes a profit.
It's been too many years for me to discuss accounting terms with you
accurately but I'm sure I still have those books for running restaurant
numbers somewhere in my house. I'll dig 'em up and argue with you then. <G>
I'm still thinking you're oversimplifying the numbers and specifically that
gross profit per meal.
The Ranger
OOR...@usmc.ret
> I'm still thinking you're oversimplifying the numbers and specifically that
> gross profit per meal.
I simplified because this isn't a course in accounting. Those calculations can
become complex, with transport, storage, spoilage, preparation, etc. etc. But
the issue was the expense to the restaurant of replacing a 'bad' food item, so I
used cost of goods (COGS) as the only variable in the equation - all others
(rent, labor, utilities, insurance) being fixed. I took a minute on yahoo
finance and checked a few restaurant chains. Please note that COST OF SALES is
probably higher than COST OF GOODS SOLD:
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/l/l/ltus.html ==== 23.8%
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/l/b/brai.ob.html ==== 19%
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/l/a/arkr.html ==== 24.4%
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/l/t/tent.html ==== 25.7%
We just have a 'definitions' problem - we'd probably agree if that were fixed.
Meanwhile - send back bad food!
Jim Lane
>
> ...as for the "closed sausage joint" -- it's the same joint, Jim. Only the name
> has been changed.
>
Yep, and the management.
Your data came from four years ago, posted like you had been there
recently. Being ignorant of that closing made the post bogus at best.
And the La Mesa joint didn't do its own sausages, they came from the
same batches from the Washington store.
Got any other accuracies you want to run down the pipe?
jim
OOR...@usmc.ret
>
> Yep, and the management.
>
> Your data came from four years ago, posted like you had been there
> recently. Being ignorant of that closing made the post bogus at best.
I've been eating their food for many years but only rarely
visited. You see, Jim, some of us don't have to live alone - my
wife does the shopping for the family (look it up). The woman
with whom I chatted at the shop - who seemed to be the manager -
said that instead of Sausage King she now buys from Matern and
Continental.
I apologize for the bogus information. I can always count on
you, Jim - who have never been wrong about anything - to
discover my grievous errors and cast the first stone.
Jim, I'm arrogant (with ample justification, of course) but you
make this Marine look humble!
Jim Lane
>
> Jim, I'm arrogant (with ample justification, of course) but you
> make this Marine look humble!
Yep, and I'm arogant too, but in this case, not from a position of
stupidity.
jim
Jim Lane
> Jim Lane <ensen...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:10558254...@news-1.nethere.net:
>
>
>>Yep, and I'm arogant too, but in this case, not from a position of
>>stupidity.
>
>
>
Try eating your own words, OORAH!:
......
Sausage King on University E of 70th (??) is a German meat market,
grocery, and cafe. The sausages are excellent. In particular, they make
a landjaeger (think of a flattened cigar) that to my taste is perfectly
spiced and is the best in the SD area. I particularly like these when
they've dried completely, and are work to chew. This is the sort of
landjaeger that my family sent me during three tours in Vietnam - there
were times I could trade some for a jeep!
snip
Sausage King on the S side of Washington E of Goldfinch is also a
minigrocery+meat market, but their landjaeger is only okay, at best. I
would have expected it to be the same as the University one, but it's
not.
......
It was the same sausage as I have pointed out in both Sausage King
locations. Both made in the Washington Blvd. store. You already have
admitted you had not been to the place in several years qand were not
aware of the ownership change four years ago. There is no dispute wiht
the differences now. There were no differences then.
Now, any more accuracies you wish to address?
jim
Charles Gifford
<OORAH!!@USMC.ret> wrote in message news:3EEE5DB7...@introtech.com...
>
> I've been eating their food for many years but only rarely
> visited. You see, Jim, some of us don't have to live alone - my
> wife does the shopping for the family (look it up). The woman
> with whom I chatted at the shop - who seemed to be the manager -
> said that instead of Sausage King she now buys from Matern and
> Continental.
The Sausage King as we once knew it is just about over unfortunately. There
is, I think, only the one elderly master sausage maker left. He is at the
remaining shop on Washington. He makes very few of the sausages anymore but
what he does make is very good indeed. Most of the sausages come from
Continental and other suppliers. One of these days I assume that he will
retire and we will be left without the services of a German Master Sausage
Maker in San Diego. For me, that will be a sad day.
Charlie
OOR...@usmc.ret
> Now, any more accuracies you wish to address?
Only one.
I called you arrogant, but should have used a much longer list of
pejoratives.
The Ranger
Jim Lane's challenge:
GOAL!
GOOOOOAAAAALLLLLL!
GOOOOOAAAAALLLLLL!
GOOOOOAAAAALLLLLL!
The Ranger
Jim Lane
If you hadn't learned them by rote from your trainers going through the
Corp, you wouldn't know any. Prototypical Marine you are: muscles are
required, intelligence not esential. Oh yes, and a mouth full of
perjoratives.
However, your retort does not take away from your post.
Why not give us a critical review on what you posted. Ala one of your
food reviews. A crow dish comes to mind. Then add in dashes of bald
faced lies, a pinch of creating your own "data" that you have sprinkled
in this forum and that bears no resemblence to anything in the real
world and see what you come up with.
jim
Jim Lane
>
> The Sausage King as we once knew it is just about over unfortunately. There
> is, I think, only the one elderly master sausage maker left. He is at the
> remaining shop on Washington. He makes very few of the sausages anymore but
> what he does make is very good indeed. Most of the sausages come from
> Continental and other suppliers. One of these days I assume that he will
> retire and we will be left without the services of a German Master Sausage
> Maker in San Diego. For me, that will be a sad day.
>
> Charlie
>
>
I couldn't agree with you more. With an ownership change, the place
would have to be brought up to code compliance and that would be dearly
expensive for the location. It will, indeed, be a sad day for sausage
lovers.
Ray Savage
>Why not give us a critical review on what you posted. Ala one of your
>food reviews. A crow dish comes to mind.
Blah, blah, blah. I have a better idea. You guys have been at each
other for months. Why don't you just add each other to your kill
files and save yourselves the aggravation of having to read what the
other has to say.
This is a food group. Granted, in recent years it has become pretty
sleepy, but it was NEVER designed to be an arena dedicated to pissing
contests.
We are all adults here.....can we just either agree to disagree, or
take the conflict to a more appropriate forum?
I am FAR from being a pacifist, but , even though it may be great in
the morning, I hate the smell of napalm when I'm dining.
Soooo......does anyone actually have any food chat?
OOR...@usmc.ret
> Soooo......does anyone actually have any food chat?
Sure.
Where can I get good landjaeger?
Jim Lane
>
>
>>Try eating your own words, OORAH!:
>
>
>
Sorry, mea culpa.
jim
Charles Gifford
<OORAH!!@USMC.ret> wrote in message news:3EEFCC70...@introtech.com...
I get mine at The Sausage King on Washington. It is still as good as it was
many years ago.
Charlie
Brian Saunders
> We are all adults here.....can we just either agree to disagree, or
> take the conflict to a more appropriate forum?
Maybe somebody needs to do a create group on sdnet.eats.flame.
--
Brian Saunders saun...@sdsc.edu
Jim Lane
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Ray Savage wrote:
>
>
>>We are all adults here.....can we just either agree to disagree, or
>>take the conflict to a more appropriate forum?
>
>
> Maybe somebody needs to do a create group on sdnet.eats.flame.
>
It is not about flamming anyone particular person, Brian.
Look at the threads where the swords have really come out.
In most of them, OORAH! has lied, deliberately tried to mislead us or
posted bogus reviews.
Did that little fact go thundering past you without notice?
That you don't see a problem with such behavior is indicative of the
lowness of your moral/ethical position, not mine. Any Marine worth his
title would have a problem with that behavior, especially when that
behavior is directly tied to a Marine identification. When OORAH! posts
like that, he denigrates the Corp.
On the other hand, were I to make such posts, I would expect to be taken
to task equally, except from you, of course, who standards such behavior
evidently are so low that it doesn't count.
jim
Brian Saunders
> It is not about flamming anyone particular person, Brian.
> Look at the threads where the swords have really come out.
> In most of them, OORAH! has lied, deliberately tried to mislead us or
> posted bogus reviews.
> Did that little fact go thundering past you without notice?
No; I just didn't interpret it as such. What I saw was somebody posting
very outdated information in response to a thread (rather than it being a
thread-starting review). I interpret that as somebody who is trying to
impress, not to mislead or lie. That doesn't excuse it, of course.
> That you don't see a problem with such behavior is indicative of the
> lowness of your moral/ethical position, not mine. Any Marine worth his
> title would have a problem with that behavior, especially when that
> behavior is directly tied to a Marine identification. When OORAH! posts
> like that, he denigrates the Corp.
> On the other hand, were I to make such posts, I would expect to be taken
> to task equally, except from you, of course, who standards such behavior
> evidently are so low that it doesn't count.
Given that you get so lathered up that you cannot even recognize who puts
out particular posts (e.g. confusing Sven for OORAH!), and given that you
seem to be the nexus for all the threads in sdnet.eats that go from being
disagreements to personal attacks, I am not going to lose sleep over your
assessment of me. But to be honest, I actually did have a problem with
him posted sadly outdated information. Since you had already pointed that
out, I saw no need to say anything. In what part of my post did you read
that I didn't think you should have called him out?
All I was saying is that when things go from being a simple disagreement
to a bunch of personal attacks (many of which were in response to you, not
by you), it is an appropriate time for a "flame" group to kick in. It
was meant more as a joke than anything. But to be honest, I don't give a
flying f&ck if OORAH! is a Marine or is a prisoner -- it is irrelevant to
this issue, and this newsgroup. It is almost as irrelevant as the fact
that you have some serious social interaction issues.
--
Brian Saunders saun...@sdsc.edu
OOR...@usmc.ret
of 70th...
My wife, whose first language is German, shops there and I have
regularly eaten food from that source for many years. She never
noticed - or didn't mention - that ownership and name had been
changed. I gave my impresion of the landjaeger, and upon
learning here that things had changed, I drove down to determine
the actual source (Mattern and Continental). I did not lie or
attempt to deceive --- what purpose would that have served?
I apologize to other readers for having stimulated such an
incredibly irrational diatribe from Lane, who evidently believes
that I work for the Landjaeger/JFK Conspiracy.
Jim Lane
You're not that good. The jury is still out on them. You, we have a
clear picture of.
jim
Jim Lane
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Jim Lane wrote:
>
>
>>It is not about flamming anyone particular person, Brian.
>
>
>>Look at the threads where the swords have really come out.
>
>
>>In most of them, OORAH! has lied, deliberately tried to mislead us or
>>posted bogus reviews.
>
>
>>Did that little fact go thundering past you without notice?
>
>
> No; I just didn't interpret it as such. What I saw was somebody posting
> very outdated information in response to a thread (rather than it being a
> thread-starting review). I interpret that as somebody who is trying to
> impress, not to mislead or lie. That doesn't excuse it, of course.
Note, Brian, t h r e a d S. Got the plural?
He lied outright about WAP in his diatribe about them when he said they
had done absolutlely nothing after he sent his letter, finally admitting
several weeks later that he had received a response from them.
That is both a lie and a misleading statement, or does that fly under
your moral radar?
He created facts, that the vast majority of WAP patrons were from out of
town and then stated that they cared absolutley nothing about locals.
Was it you that then posted that the vast majority of their business is
local beofre I dide so? Anyway, someone did.
Does that creation of bogus facts to support his vendetta against the
WAP also fly under your moral radar?
Did his pastrami extravanganza not strike you as ironic when he was
solicitng us for the Big P event and then in a subsequent discourse on
the Big P versus the little p indicate that it would be impossible to
replicate the Big P here in San diego where the pastrami would be heated
under less than desirable conditions, cut up by methods unknown, and
served on two-day old bread, all of which he used to categorize little p?
Hmmm? what part(s) of all that escape you?
Need a referesher, go back and review the messages. Those incidents are
where I tee'd off on OORAH! the hardest. But, hey, if its below your
moral radar, then you can count yourself as a contributor to the
downward spiral to moral mediocrity of the US. And all of this while he
boasts of nbeing USMC retired. I wonder what training program in the
Corp taught him those values.
jim
OOR...@usmc.ret
changed hands, and rub my hands together knowing that when they
get there the new name will confuse them. WOW!
Lane:
When you momentarily shifted from your customary pathological
diatribes, and referred readers to T&H Meats (a good spot!), I
began thinking your pills were working. Recent behavior
indicates, however, that you've been breaking them in half.
Though your posts sometimes contain interesting information,
that's just not worth the venom. You're now officially plonked.
Curiously, my newsreader responded "Do I have to read his crap
before deleting it?"
Jim Lane
Typical, hit and run, OORAH!: I'm gonna deliver my shot and then bury my
head in the sand, great tactics you learned during your tenure in the Corp.
There is a disturbing pattern to your lies, misleading posts and
obfuscations.
You brag on being a Marine with your signature, someone we trust to have
the highest standards, morals and ethics. You have failed on all three.
Your moral radar is non-operational.
You cannot argue with the facts as I presented them. So, while burying
your head in the sand, make sure you stick your thumbs in your ears,
waggle your fingers and say, "nanoo, nanoo, nanoo. . ."
jim