The sentiments that Schwa "doesn't care about its customers" or is all about "ego" are pretty hard to wrap my brain around. The folks at Schwa have been nothing but kind and generous to me and everyone I know who has eaten there since the day they opened.

I would have to agree with Dmnkly and eatchicago...it's a small restaurant with a small staff with exceptionally high demand. I don't think it's any harder to deal with then French Laundry or Per Se (call 2 months to the day in advance at exactly 10am). Or what about El Bulli (fax us and you might get in). Or check out Momofuku Ko in NYC (reservations only taken online, slots open up for 1 week out every morning at 10am).

Dmnkly wrote:It's not the "damn, it's impossible to get through to these guys and they really need a better system" comments that I'm challenging. It's the "the difficulty in getting a reservation shows that these guys are all passive aggressive assholes who don't give a damn about their customers" comments that I'm challenging.

We make evaluations of each and every thing in our lives all day long. These evaluations are often based on educated guesses, since we usually don't have all the facts we need. Sometimes these educated guesses (which are based on our past life experiences) involve speculation as to motive. Making evaluations of Schwa's reservations system is no exception.

My own feeling is that, while they may be unaware of the message they're sending, and while the message they're sending may be totally not the one they mean to send, they really ought (for the sake of their long-term business) to be aware of the message their potential customers are getting.

riddlemay wrote:We make evaluations of each and every thing in our lives all day long. These evaluations are often based on educated guesses, since we usually don't have all the facts we need. Sometimes these educated guesses (which are based on our past life experiences) involve speculation as to motive. Making evaluations of Schwa's reservations system is no exception.

Of course. And my responses above were trying to point out that some of the conclusions people are reaching ignore the reality of their situation. They could be right-- I'm not psychic, though the guys were great to me the two times I went -- but it's a snap judgment that ignores much of what we've heard about how buried they are in reservation requests.

riddlemay wrote:My own feeling is that, while they may be unaware of the message they're sending, and while the message they're sending may be totally not the one they mean to send, they really ought (for the sake of their long-term business) to be aware of the message their potential customers are getting.

I agree completely.

I just don't think anyone who has truly read the many, many things that have been written about Schwa and the way it's run and what matters to Michael Carlson could come away thinking he's pulling 'tude and trying to offend people, as opposed to simply not caring about some of the traditional secondary elements of the fine dining experience, and putting all his focus on the things that do matter (deeply and brilliantly) to him.

It's like thinking The Ramones are trying to piss you off by not having six beautiful backup singers like Sammy Davis Jr. does. No, they're The Ramones.

Sensibly, if you're going to go in with a presumption of offense at the idiosyncrasies of the place, please, go somewhere else more to your tastes.

Mike G wrote:I just don't think anyone who has truly read the many, many things that have been written about Schwa and the way it's run and what matters to Michael Carlson could come away thinking he's pulling 'tude and trying to offend people...
Sensibly, if you're going to go in with a presumption of offense at the idiosyncrasies of the place, please, go somewhere else more to your tastes.

Yes, but Mike, what if you're one of those people who really want to appreciate for yourself the wonderful qualities of Schwa (or re-appreciate them on a return visit), and you can't, because their "idiosyncrasies" don't permit you even to find out if a reservation is possible?

I have been to Schwa, and have nothing but good things to say about the experience. Would I go again, reading how difficult it's become to get through to them? Doubtful. More for you, I know, but it's still no way to run a business.

On a 1-10 scale of the hardness of things in life, I refuse to be convinced that making a reservation at Schwa is higher than a 3.

Even John Danza, who has a serious issue that does need to be resolved-- Carlson did call him back, it's not his fault he didn't get him.

riddlemay wrote:Yes, but Mike, what if you're one of those people who really want to appreciate for yourself the wonderful qualities of Schwa (or re-appreciate them on a return visit), and you can't, because their "idiosyncrasies" don't permit you even to find out if a reservation is possible?

I have been to Schwa, and have nothing but good things to say about the experience. Would I go again, reading how difficult it's become to get through to them? Doubtful. More for you, I know, but it's still no way to run a business.

Persistence, patience and flexibility. That's what got me in the door both times, and it was worth it for me both times. For some people it won't be, and I'm not suggesting it should. But when you say it's no way to run a business, I'm reminded of the people who rail against Hot Doug for not being open at night or on Sundays or for not opening other locations. But he could be packed 24 hours a day! But he could be making a mint on multiple locations! The man has no business sense! The fact is, he's doing exactly what he wants with his life -- he works normal hours, he makes a good living doing what he loves, and he has a great establishment. Yeah, it sucks that there's sometimes a 45 minute wait for a sausage, and he could probably alleviate that by extending his hours, but he's just doing his thing, and I don't know anybody who would suggest for a moment that Doug doesn't care about his customers. When a chef's personal lifestyle desires make his restaurant less accessible than an adoring public might like, I find it unfortunate that it's frequently characterized as bad business or a lack of appreciation for his customers. Personally, I find it very refreshing.

Dmnkly wrote:But when you say it's no way to run a business, I'm reminded of the people who rail against Hot Doug for not being open at night or opening other locations.

Just for the record, although this is what my comment puts you in mind of, I wouldn't put the two situations in the same category at all. I would never feel that way about Hot Doug's, nor would I agree with those who do, and so I don't see the situations as analogous.

A different (and to my mind, more apt) analogy would be if Hot Doug's door were locked, even though he was open for business, and when you showed up to ring the bell, sometimes someone would let you in, and sometimes someone wouldn't.

Patience and flexibility are a must. You can't necessarily have a single day and time in mind when you call.

I don't really understand why the onus should be on the customer. The customer is paying Carlson to cook the food that is terribly important for him. He is not giving it away for free. So why should it be an ordeal then for the customer to get in?

riddlemay wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:But when you say it's no way to run a business, I'm reminded of the people who rail against Hot Doug for not being open at night or opening other locations.

Just for the record, although this is what my comment puts you in mind of, I wouldn't put the two situations in the same category at all. I would never feel that way about Hot Doug's, nor would I agree with those who do, and so I don't see the situations as analogous.

To be clear, I'm not for a moment trying to suggest the situations are analogous... that would be a ridiculous assertion.

I'm trying to point out a common element -- proprietors with wildly popular establishments that are run in a manner that makes them less accessible than people would like. In both cases, I hear so much about what they should be, and I find it unfortunate that many people are unwilling to accept them as they are. I'm not saying you have to like it. But the fact is that both of these guys have all the business they need, and they're balancing their accessibility with their own schedules and lifestyle desires. If they can be successful on their own terms (and by all accounts, both are -- in a huge way), I fail to see why that's a bad thing and they should be sacrificing that out of some sense of responsibility to serve as many people as possible.

fusionfan wrote:So why should it be an ordeal then for the customer to get in?

It shouldn't be, but it is. Small room + a lot of people who want to get it = a pain in the ass to get in no matter how you slice it.

Mike G wrote:On a 1-10 scale of the hardness of things in life, I refuse to be convinced that making a reservation at Schwa is higher than a 3.

I agree. And on a 1 - 10 scale of ridiculous LTH conversations, this ranks about an 8. I'm out.

fusionfan wrote:I don't really understand why the onus should be on the customer. The customer is paying Carlson to cook the food that is terribly important for him. He is not giving it away for free. So why should it be an ordeal then for the customer to get in?

Truffles shouldn't be so expensive or hard to get a hold of either, but they are. High demand, low supply. It's not a conspiracy -- it's the reality of supply and demand.

And just because the customer is paying, that doesn't entitle the customer to whatever the customer wants. It entitles the customer to what the customer is paying for -- in the case of Schwa, the customer is paying for a great upscale meal in a downscale setting and a fight for a reservation. When you go to a hot dog stand, you aren't entitled to tablecloths. When you go to Everest, you aren't entitled to a TV so you can watch the Bears game. This is what Schwa is, and because it isn't what you like doesn't necessarily mean that the customer is somehow being cheated.

My take on all of this is the reason behind the reservation issues at Schwa can simply be chalked up to the "flakey artist" thing. He's clearly an outstanding chef and runs the business his way, but he just can't get it together enough to make his reservation system run as smoothly as the rest of his establishment.

For the record I've been to Scwa twice. The first time, about a month before the closing I called on a lark on a tuesday night to see if they had any cancelations for that evening and low and behold not only did someone answer but someone had just canceled.

The next, just after the reopening I called several times (5 or 6) at various times. I neevr bothered to leave a message or found a full VM. I fianlly got through to a live person and made my reservation with ease.

Dmnkly wrote:This is what Schwa is, and because it isn't what you like doesn't necessarily mean that the customer is somehow being cheated.

I can understand people getting frustrated with this discussion, but I think it raises a fundamental point about "art appreciation." It makes no sense to say that Shakespeare should write more like Ibsen or that Picasso should paint more like Miro. You have to accept the art on its own terms...and, yes, I believe culinary creations are art, though probably more akin to music than literature or painting. Schwa is trying to create an experience -- now, you may not like that experience, it may seem unduly taxing on the patron or simply not worth it, but I think at some point you have to trust the artist...and, yes, I think this artist may be raising some "challenges," which is exactly what Banchet did when he opened Le Francais in what was once far-off Wheeling.

Darren72 wrote:Patience and flexibility are a must. You can't necessarily have a single day and time in mind when you call.

I had the ultimate flexibility, to no avail. In late February, I called 3 days in a row, finally getting through to the voicemail system on the third day. I said "Hi. This is _____, phone number ________. I would like a reservation for 2 on any day, any time in April or May. Please feel free to book me for the reservation and just call me to tell me when it is. I am completely flexible. Thank you, and I really look forward to dinner!"

Three days later, I got the first call back. It went to voicemail and said "We got your reservation request and have a couple of choices for you. Please call back to tell us what will work best." Ugh! Are you kidding? Well, I called back and, of course, had to leave another voicemail - reminding them that I was open to ANY date and time, and asking them to please book me for whatever and call to let me know when I should come in. For the next few days I kept my phone near me at all times and looked anxiously at the number of each caller, hoping excitedly for the Schwa return call. Finally, 6 days after my second message - I feel the phone vibrating while in a very important client meeting. I sneak a peek and - %X!@ - it's them! I can't answer it, and check the message asap to find another, "please call us back" message. That was the last straw for me.

As plenty of people have said, the easiest thing to do is to just decide that it's not worth it, and give up on going. I have made that decision, but I don't think it's unfair either for me to be pissed off at the way they handle things. Sure, it's their decision - and maybe their motives are benign. The guy who cut me off on Lake Shore Drive this morning because he was smoking a cigarette and talking on his cell phone instead of paying attention to the road probably didn't intend it as a personal affront either. That didn't stop me from hoping his girlfriend dumps him today, and that he totals his car by crashing it into a telephone pole (I do hope he suffers only very minor injuries). Similarly, after the way I've been treated by Schwa, it wouldn't bother me in the slightest if customers stopped going and the restaurant died a slow, expensive death. Of course, that seems highly unlikely.

Why didn't you pick one of the days like they asked you to?

Mike G wrote:Why didn't you pick one of the days like they asked you to?

Because they didn't give me the days!!!!! They just said they had choices for me, and that I should call back!!!!! Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Okay. If there is one criticism I'd buy, it's that they could learn how to use the business of leaving messages without actually talking to the person in person more effectively.

Mike G wrote:Even John Danza, who has a serious issue that does need to be resolved-- Carlson did call him back, it's not his fault he didn't get him.

Hi Mike,

Carlson did call me back at a time I couldn't take a call because I was on a plane. That's not Carlson's fault at all. However, his message to me was that he would call me again the next day. That was 10 days ago, and still no call.

I am going to stop in tomorrow afternoon for the one reason I stated, that I need to know the answer on the allergy issue. I wouldn't think of asking for a reservation that way, because it's not appropriate.

solution for the full mailbox: PAY THE EXTRA $20/month FOR A BIGGER MAILBOX. And then LISTEN TO THE MESSAGES.

The problem is that by not answering / filling reservation requests promptly, it makes it doubly difficult for the customer. If I had to keep trying to call every day for a reservation 2 months out but and then on the day I forget to call the slots for that day fill up completely, I'd be awfully pissed.

Businesspeople that act like this are idiots. Plain and simple. I don't care what your worldview on life is. You're in business BECAUSE THE PUBLIC GIVES YOU THEIR MONEY. And being a PITA to get in contact with will only make sure that vast swathes of the public will go out of their way to avoid you.

Next time the Chef is unemployed, he should remember that.

I am going to stop in tomorrow afternoon for the one reason I stated, that I need to know the answer on the allergy issue. I wouldn't think of asking for a reservation that way, because it's not appropriate.

Why is this not an appropriate way to get a reservation if they can't or won't do it over the phone? I'm not being snide or sarcastic, I was actually thinking of stopping by to try for a reservation in this way, but now maybe I shouldn't...

tem wrote:Businesspeople that act like this are idiots. Plain and simple. I don't care what your worldview on life is. You're in business BECAUSE THE PUBLIC GIVES YOU THEIR MONEY. And being a PITA to get in contact with will only make sure that vast swathes of the public will go out of their way to avoid you.

Next time the Chef is unemployed, he should remember that.

It's far, far harder to get through to the French Laundry or Per Se in my experience, and Thomas Keller seems to be doing just fine.

Not to equate the two, but the point is that if you're speaking strictly from a business standpoint, he's only an idiot if he isn't filling his tables. Which he is. In fact, if you're arguing business and setting aside courtesy and convenience for his customers, he'd be an idiot to upgrade his phone system and bring in somebody to return calls, because then he's spending money to fix a problem he doesn't have. What's the point in investing to attract more business when you can't even handle a fraction of what's coming your way already?

I'm not saying he shouldn't. I'm just saying that this idea that the guy's an idiot who's ruining his business is ridiculous.

I mean, honestly, what do people expect? John Danza's situation aside, is having somebody answer the phone to tell you, "sorry, we're completely booked for the next six months" any better than not being able to get through? The phenomenon where restaurants are punished for being popular is one I'll never understand.

Dmnkly wrote:It's far, far harder to get through to the French Laundry or Per Se in my experience, and Thomas Keller seems to be doing just fine.

Hmm, I found Per Se to be 100 times more professional that Schwa when it comes to reservations. They have a reservation desk with dedicated hours of 10-5 daily, and there is always someone answering the phone there (though sometimes you do have to wait on hold for a few minutes.). They also take reservations through Open Table. I've never tried at French Laundry.

I mean, honestly, what do people expect? John Danza's situation aside, is having somebody answer the phone to tell you, "sorry, we're completely booked for the next six months" any better than not being able to get through?

Is the answer to this not an obvious yes?

Kennyz wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:It's far, far harder to get through to the French Laundry or Per Se in my experience, and Thomas Keller seems to be doing just fine.

Hmm, I found Per Se to be 100 times more professional that Schwa when it comes to reservations. They have a reservation desk with dedicated hours of 10-5 daily, and there is always someone answering the phone there (though sometimes you do have to wait on hold for a few minutes.). They also take reservations through Open Table. I've never tried at French Laundry.

More professional? Absolutely. And I didn't word that well. What I should have said I found it far, far harder to get a reservation at French Laundry or Per Se. At Per Se and French Laundry, they'll politely tell you that they're completely booked and the only way to get a reservation is to keep hitting redial and hope you get through. But I fail to see how that's more convenient than a full mailbox. Same effect -- one just looks nicer.

Kennyz wrote:

I mean, honestly, what do people expect? John Danza's situation aside, is having somebody answer the phone to tell you, "sorry, we're completely booked for the next six months" any better than not being able to get through?

Is the answer to this not an obvious yes?

No, it isn't. In both situations, I have no reservation because they can't accommodate the demand. The only difference is that with Per Se, I've wasted 30 seconds being told what I already know -- that the only way to get a reservation is to keep calling and hope to get lucky. And personally, I prefer being able to call at any time of day hoping to get lucky rather than having to be available to call during a specified 20 minute window hoping to get lucky. Of course, that's a matter of personal preference.

Dmnkly wrote:I mean, honestly, what do people expect? John Danza's situation aside, is having somebody answer the phone to tell you, "sorry, we're completely booked for the next six months" any better than not being able to get through? The phenomenon where restaurants are punished for being popular is one I'll never understand.

yes. yes I would. At least then you know that you can't get a reservation rather than trying to leave a message every day for weeks and then never getting a call back and being left to wonder. Just because the vmail is full doesn't necessarily tell you that you can't get *anything* in two months. If one were trying to plan the meal around another event, it would make it impossible to consider Schwa.

What I expect is a business to behave professionally, no matter their size. What you're basically saying is that it's the public's fault for making them so popular that he can afford to conduct business like a jackass and piss people off. Perhaps if the Chef were a bit more organized, he wouldn't have to go 'on hiatus' due to 'personal issues'.

geli wrote:

I am going to stop in tomorrow afternoon for the one reason I stated, that I need to know the answer on the allergy issue. I wouldn't think of asking for a reservation that way, because it's not appropriate.

Why is this not an appropriate way to get a reservation if they can't or won't do it over the phone? I'm not being snide or sarcastic, I was actually thinking of stopping by to try for a reservation in this way, but now maybe I shouldn't...

I only made the comment because I don't want to take advantage of the attention I might have with them due to talking to them about a non-reservation issue. You, and anyone else, should do whatever you want to in order to gain a reservation. I already have one.

tem wrote:Perhaps if the Chef were a bit more organized, he wouldn't have to go 'on hiatus' due to 'personal issues'.

I think that's uncalled for (and has also been discussed pretty much to death).

At Per Se and French Laundry, they'll politely tell you that they're completely booked and the only way to get a reservation is to keep hitting redial and hope you get through. But I fail to see how that's more convenient than a full mailbox. Same effect -- one just looks nicer.

I'm not sure what you mean by hitting redial. Per Se has an automated system that places you on hold until a reservationist comes available. There's no need to redial. If you call Per Se between 10 and 5, you will speak to someone after no more than a few minutes on hold.

It seems obvious to me, though I guess not to everyone, that it would be better to have someone tell you right away that there's no availability on the day you want, then to play the tedious call back game with Schwa.