Up for grabs: Reservation for 2 @ Katsu, Fri. Feb. 25, 8 pm

I'm not sure if you can actually give away a reservation, but I thought I'd offer it to LTH before calling to cancel. Due to a babysitter cancellation, we're not going to be able to go to Katsu this Friday. PM me if you're interested in taking the reservation. Thanks.

unbeknowneth wrote:I'm not sure if you can actually give away a reservation, but I thought I'd offer it to LTH before calling to cancel. Due to a babysitter cancellation, we're not going to be able to go to Katsu this Friday. PM me if you're interested in taking the reservation. Thanks.

Reminds me of Rao's, the East Harlem Italian restaurant that founded the idea of condominium dining. One owns a reservation at Rao, and to most who own it, it is a prized possesion. Anyone ever go there--Rao's not Katsu?

Rob

The concept reminds me of Without Reservations.

Back on valentines day they made prime reservations under phony names at LA, san francisco, and new york restaurants weeks or months ahead of time, and then sold them, for $40, to desperate people in the week before the big day.

gleam wrote:The concept reminds me of Without Reservations.

Back on valentines day they made prime reservations under phony names at LA, san francisco, and new york restaurants weeks or months ahead of time, and then sold them, for $40, to desperate people in the week before the big day.

I just thought of an idea for a new business.....actually, didn't the Tribune(or was it Chicago Magazine) do something similar this year? They made reservations at several of the "hard to get into" places for Valentines Day and then published the info a few days before Valentine's Day and more or less said to call up and ask for the reservations that were being held in thei name. First come first served.

Great, soon they'll be checking ID at restaurants. And making you take your shoes off.

Mike G wrote:Great, soon they'll be checking ID at restaurants. And making you take your shoes off.

Well, how does this hurt the restaurant?

People who paid $40 for a reservation are almost certainly more likely to show up for it, and are perhaps likely to order more big ticket items, tip better, buy wine, et cetera..

What I see as being more likely is restaurants starting to charge for reservations on busy days themselves, rather than allowing third party companies to do it.

Don't some baseball teams buy unused tickets from season ticket holders and then resell them, sometimes at a premium?

-ed

Steve,

I've been aware of Phil Vettel of the Tribune doing this for at least the last 2 years on Valentine's Day. He and his staff make reservations all over the city and suburbs, then after they are published the first person to call the restaurant and secure the reservation "wins".

Mike G wrote:Great, soon they'll be checking ID at restaurants. And making you take your shoes off.

gleam wrote:Well, how does this hurt the restaurant?

Ed,

I'm pretty sure Mike was just joking. Anyway, Katsu, unless they changed policy in the last couple of weeks, does not ask for a deposit on reservations.

Much as some of enjoy Katsu, you, me, Mike, Steve, we should really plan an LTHForum dinner there in the next month or two.

Enjoy,
Gary

Katsu Japanese Restaurant
2651 W Peterson Ave
Chicago, IL. 60659
773-784-3383
5pm - 10PM
Closed Tuesday

G Wiv wrote:

Mike G wrote:Great, soon they'll be checking ID at restaurants. And making you take your shoes off.

gleam wrote:Well, how does this hurt the restaurant?

Ed,

I'm pretty sure Mike was just joking. Anyway, Katsu, unless they changed policy in the last couple of weeks, does not ask for a deposit on reservations.

Oh, I assumed he was kidding But it is a valid question - is the idea of a third party selling prime reservations at busy restaurants good or bad for the restaurant, and good or bad for diners?

It's obviously bad for diners unless they're taking advantage of the service -- any reservation made by the company takes away a slot a diner could get for free. But I really think it's neutral or good for restaurants. That being said, if the company is unable to sell all the reservations it may be bad for the restaurants...

And a katsu dinner sounds awesome.

gleam wrote: - is the idea of a third party selling prime reservations at busy restaurants good or bad for the restaurant, and good or bad for diners?

Ed,

Bad, the more people in the middle, the more expensive and the restaurant has less control over it's operation.

Did I miss something? Unbeknowneth simply offered his reservation at Katsu for free, right. No selling stuff on LTHForum, not even AMC Pacers.

Enjoy,
Gary

As much as I enjoy money, the offer of my reservations at Katsu is, indeed, free.
The idea of a group dinner is a great one, especially now that we're missing our maiden voyage to Katsu.

G Wiv wrote:Bad, the more people in the middle, the more expensive and the restaurant has less control over it's operation.

Did I miss something? Unbeknowneth simply offered his reservation at Katsu for free, right. No selling stuff on LTHForum, not even AMC Pacers.

True enough. And yeah, it was free. It just reminded me of that company that sold reservations (linked up above). It's an interesting concept, and my guess is that it'll soon spread to chicago.

All that being said, in my experience one doesn't need reservations at Katsu. They're preferred, certainly, but I've been there at 7pm on a friday to see the place nearly empty. Which was a little worrying.

-ed

The remark about not needing reservations fascinates me, I seem to recall poking my head in one Tuesday last year with three friends and getting the sort of look that one expects when trying to walk into Nobu without a reservation. How strange for Chicago, I thought; this place must be great. Alas, living on the other side of the city makes it hard to pop in for dinner. I was looking forward to this evening, oh well, another time.

gleam wrote:But it is a valid question - is the idea of a third party selling prime reservations at busy restaurants good or bad for the restaurant, and good or bad for diners?
...I really think it's neutral or good for restaurants. That being said, if the company is unable to sell all the reservations it may be bad for the restaurants...

The idea that someone gets rich off of making fake reservations really does bother me. If anyone should get the money for taking last minute reservations, it should be the restaurants themselves. That being said I would hate for restaurants to start charging just for the reservation, but if the scammers get too much into that business, I just think it's inevitable that restaurants would recognize the value of their product and decide they want in on the action.

I have been asked by restaurants in NY for a credit card number to hold the reservation. When I inquired further about what exactly would be charged and under what terms they said they don't really charge anything unless you don't show up. I then gave a fake credit card number, and since I showed up no one knew the difference.

Kwe730 wrote:Steve,

I've been aware of Phil Vettel of the Tribune doing this for at least the last 2 years on Valentine's Day. He and his staff make reservations all over the city and suburbs, then after they are published the first person to call the restaurant and secure the reservation "wins".

Yes. That's where I saw it. Thanks for reminding me.

gleam wrote:

G Wiv wrote:

Mike G wrote:Great, soon they'll be checking ID at restaurants. And making you take your shoes off.

gleam wrote:Well, how does this hurt the restaurant?

Ed,

I'm pretty sure Mike was just joking. Anyway, Katsu, unless they changed policy in the last couple of weeks, does not ask for a deposit on reservations.

Oh, I assumed he was kidding But it is a valid question - is the idea of a third party selling prime reservations at busy restaurants good or bad for the restaurant, and good or bad for diners?

It's obviously bad for diners unless they're taking advantage of the service -- any reservation made by the company takes away a slot a diner could get for free. But I really think it's neutral or good for restaurants. That being said, if the company is unable to sell all the reservations it may be bad for the restaurants...

And a katsu dinner sounds awesome.

I don't know. This system seems to work for sporting events and plays without hurting the original vendors. In a sense, it has been going on for years. Most hotel concierges can call and get a last minute reservation at hard to book restaurants. The diner pays a fee and/or a tip to the concierge for this service (as does the restaurant in many cases). So the system is already in place, more or less.

gleam wrote:All that being said, in my experience one doesn't need reservations at Katsu. They're preferred, certainly, but I've been there at 7pm on a friday to see the place nearly empty. Which was a little worrying.

-ed

Ed,

Katsu can get pretty crowded peak time on Friday or Saturday, though, as you point out, not every Friday/Saturday. I'd agree about Katsu/reservations, preferred, though not absolutely necessary.

Though, rest assured, someone is going to read our statements, go to Katsu on a Friday night without a reservation, and be turned away.

Enjoy,
Gary

Rich4 wrote:

gleam wrote:But it is a valid question - is the idea of a third party selling prime reservations at busy restaurants good or bad for the restaurant, and good or bad for diners?
...I really think it's neutral or good for restaurants. That being said, if the company is unable to sell all the reservations it may be bad for the restaurants...

The idea that someone gets rich off of making fake reservations really does bother me. If anyone should get the money for taking last minute reservations, it should be the restaurants themselves. That being said I would hate for restaurants to start charging just for the reservation, but if the scammers get too much into that business, I just think it's inevitable that restaurants would recognize the value of their product and decide they want in on the action.

I have been asked by restaurants in NY for a credit card number to hold the reservation. When I inquired further about what exactly would be charged and under what terms they said they don't really charge anything unless you don't show up. I then gave a fake credit card number, and since I showed up no one knew the difference.

I agree - its akin to scumbag scalpers who create false markets by buying up tickets before fans/patrons can get a hold of them. It's called racketeering, and it'll never be just to my sensibilities.

I agree - its akin to scumbag scalpers who create false markets by buying up tickets before fans/patrons can get a hold of them. It's called racketeering, and it'll never be just to my sensibilities.

I do not get it - what makes them scumbags? Because you wanted tickets and they got there first? How is it a false market? There must be demand that exceeds supply in order for them to profit, and they do not really create or create an ilusion of that demand. They do perform a service of a sort, linking up sellers and buyers of tickets, and there are times when that is a useful service. I have both sold them tickets, and bought tickets from them. Anyway, I have no idea how it is racketeering, You buy something, hold it for a while, and then resell it at a profit if it all works out okay. That seems the basis of almost every business I can think of.

There is, however, a fundamental difference between restaurant reservations and scalping tickets to events. For events there is a risk for the middle man, who buys the tickets. Now, the difference to the venue is not as large, in that a major portion of the event revenue comes from concessions and parking, which are just as lost if no one buys the ticket as the restaurant revenue is lost if no one shows up to dine.

If this catches on, I would expect it to accelerate the trend of restaurants requiring credit card guarantees for very busy times, thereby guaranteeing a minimum amount of revenue, and motivating the "scalper" to be sure someone uses the reservation.

The loser, if there is one, would seem to be the diner such as ab who discovers that all reservations at prime times in a hot restaurant are always gone way ahead of time, and the only way to get one is to pay a middle man. Everyone else is okay, and those prepared to pay extra for that reservation are actually better served, with more options.

And, as Steve wrote, this is not really a new system. One could always "buy" reservations to certain hot spots at prime times by working with, and tipping, either a hotel concierge, or a host/hostess at the restaurant. Do they deserve the markup more than an enterprising third party? I think it is hard to make a case for that.

Lastly, I agree that a "high roller" who is prepared to pay extra for the reservation is probably a better customer, or at least one who is likely to spend more. But I also understand the populist view against the domination of corporate/rich customers with their skyboxes at sporting events, which by extension seems to be applied here. It shuts out the real people and real fans, letting "fat cats" who really do not care about the team dominate. That is absolutely true as far as it goes, but also ignores the overall nature of the system - one cannot replace high-paying customers with lower-paying ones without there being major ramifications for the entire system. Whether those would be good or bad is open to debate, and in general I do not think they would be bad for sports, but almost everything would be changed.

Interesting discussion. The ingenuity and creativity of American capitalism is amazing to behold.

I am interested in a Katsu LTH dinner.

dicksond wrote:
I do not get it - what makes them scumbags? Because you wanted tickets and they got there first? How is it a false market? There must be demand that exceeds supply in order for them to profit, and they do not really create or create an ilusion of that demand. They do perform a service of a sort, linking up sellers and buyers of tickets, and there are times when that is a useful service. I have both sold them tickets, and bought tickets from them. Anyway, I have no idea how it is racketeering, You buy something, hold it for a while, and then resell it at a profit if it all works out okay. That seems the basis of almost every business I can think of.

Really? Scalpers who buy up thousands of tickets in limited venues do not create an illusionary market? These tickets would have otherwise ended up in the fan/patrons hands without having to go through the grubby hands of scumbag scalpers who bought them for no other reason than to make a dime. Tickets are limited in number and there are already services that distribute tickets. The scalpers swoop in, buy the tickets away from the end user and resell them at higher rates than the theater/venue already has deemed fair. That is a racket.
The scalpers are not usefull to anyone but themselves, as tickets are not some unattainable good or service, they already have middlemen (ticketmaster, venues themselves)... BTW, isn't most scalping illegal in Illinois anyway? Except of course, the scalping being done by the Tribune company themselves (real classy move on their part) and "registered" scalpers that pay some taxes so Uncle Same doesn't get completely cut out of the equation.

Anyway, I fail to see how paying homeless folks to lineup outside of venues and rigging ticketmaster online sales by using hundreds of computer programs to snap up all the tickets in seconds is legit capitalism.

I'd like to think things like music and fine dining could avoid being reduced to such capitalistic/ levels just to GET IN, but like you said "American capitalism is amazing to behold."

The sports/music/theater world would be a better place if scalpers ceased to exist tomorrow.

ab: this is my last note on it, as I do not really want to have an argument.

I understand your outrage that some professional organization puts resources to work to assure that they get there first and buy as many tickets as they can. It is unfair, as their resources give them an advantage over you. And their purpose is solely to drive the price up, and proft from that.

And I can see how you perceive them as solely being in the business of cornering the market on a scarce resource, just to drive the price up. In fact, I agree with you that this is their goal in such cases, and most probably do that whenever they can. If they could get every ticket for an Eminem concert and then price them at $10,000 per, they would, and even if they only sold half of them, they would be pretty happy (though, they would eventually dump the rest of the tickets some way or another).

Where we do disagree, and in the end it may be semantics - you tell me - is on this issue of "creating an illusionary market," and all being scumbags. The market, or demand, for the tickets must be there first. If demand does not exceed supply, there really is no business opportunity. Scalpers are probably not doing much, if any, business in UIC Hockey tickets, for instance. No demand, no market. And brokers, who operate in many areas of the economy, are in the business of buying low and selling high. It is what they do.

They want to corner the market on the most scarce and valuable tickets, that is all.

As to their positive purpose, let me give you two examples. The opening day of the World Cup, in Chicago in 1994, was beautiful. As it happened, work allowed me to take the day off, so I decided I would love to see the ceremony and the game (Bolivia vs. Germany, if I remember properly). Because of the way the World Cup allocated tickets, there were none available through normal channels (they sort of laughed at me when I asked the day before). But I found a broker who sold me mid field, 10th row, seats at face value at 10am for the 1230 game. I was very happy and enjoyed the game about 8 rows away from then President Clinton, and whoever the German chancellor and Bolivian President were - for about $50 a seat. Did the broker pay face value for the tickets? Probably not. But it was a great deal for me, and they made some money.

I have Bear season tickets that have been in my family for about 70 years. 4 seats, and while I sometime wonder why, I cannot bring myself to give them up - memories of my granddad and all that. I use some, and give some away, but they represent a significant expense, and I am not prepared to eat all of that. So, I sell some to and through friends. But I usually find myself with some left, and I really do not have the time or desire to go out and try to find someone to buy them. So I head down to my local ticket broker, and most often they buy them from me at more than face value.

Both of the above are legal, licensed, ticket brokers, as are the ones who try to corner the market on tickets. Though I have also bought and sold tickets with guys/girls, homeless or otherwise, on street corners.

So sometime I am a buyer, and sometime a seller. I do not view ticket brokers as really adding much value to the world, but they can be a real convenience and help at times; other times, they engage in behavior that is iffy at best, and downright scummy at worst. But I do not think that makes all brokers scumbags.

ab, you may have the last word. I have said my piece.

ab wrote:Tickets are limited in number and there are already services that distribute tickets. The scalpers swoop in, buy the tickets away from the end user and resell them at higher rates than the theater/venue already has deemed fair.

Personally, I don't mind paying extra for the convenience of not having to stand in line and the guarantee of a good seat. My time is too valuable for waiting in line and the thrill of "camping out" waiting for the tickets to go on sale only to end up with seats in the balcony is long gone for me.

dicksond wrote:Scalpers are probably not doing much, if any, business in UIC Hockey tickets, for instance. No demand, no market.

No team!

dicksond wrote:
Where we do disagree, and in the end it may be semantics - you tell me - is on this issue of "creating an illusionary market," and all being scumbags. The market, or demand, for the tickets must be there first. If demand does not exceed supply, there really is no business opportunity. Scalpers are probably not doing much, if any, business in UIC Hockey tickets, for instance. No demand, no market. And brokers, who operate in many areas of the economy, are in the business of buying low and selling high. It is what they do.

They want to corner the market on the most scarce and valuable tickets, that is all.


Both of the above are legal, licensed, ticket brokers, as are the ones who try to corner the market on tickets. Though I have also bought and sold tickets with guys/girls, homeless or otherwise, on street corners.
.

As far as Supply/Demand, I'll let the New York State Attorney General speak for me:

The process by which tickets wend their way from the original issuer to the ultimate consumer is complex and often illegal. In the general case, the consumer walks up to the box office or telephones a ticket agent such as Telecharge or Ticketmaster (or uses one of their outlets), pays the price on the face of the ticket (with perhaps a small additional service charge) and obtains the ticket that he or she wants. Too often, however, the consumer finds that the desired ticket (e.g., to "The Lion King" or the Yankee playoffs or the Spice Girls) is unavailable within minutes after it goes on sale, and if there are any tickets left, they are at the rear of the house, the highest tier of the stadium or, in the case of a hit show, the wait can be for over a year. However, while a "sold-out" sign confronts the consumer at the box office, the newspapers nonetheless are filled with advertisements for the most sought after seats -- at prices, depending on the popularity of the event, ranging into the thousands of dollars. The Attorney General's investigation demonstrates that ticket distribution practices are seriously skewed away from ordinary fans and towards wealthy businesses and consumers.

This problem is not simply the result of the law of supply and demand. Rather, the availability of tickets and the outrageously high -- and illegal -- prices that brokers charge, to a large extent, can be laid at the door of illicit practices in the ticket industry and other practices that, although possibly not unlawful, are deceptive, unfair to the ticket buying public and supportive of the corrupt ticket distribution system.

and...

The price that tickets to popular events command in the marketplace belongs to the performers, producers and investors who create the events, not the speculators who through illegality and deception take advantage of the excess demand in the system. Ticket scalping is sometimes referred to as a "victimless" crime. To the contrary, the victims of the current ticket distribution system are the fans, the producers and investors who create the events and the State of New York, which loses both tax revenues and credibility as the entertainment center of the world.

more...

Ticket brokers strive to monopolize the supply of tickets by paying illegal and substantial bribes (premiums over the face price of the ticket) to various persons who have control over tickets at the original point of sale. These persons with control over tickets include box office employees or their supervisors, managers of venues, ticketing agents (such as employees of Ticketmaster or Telecharge), concert promoters, security personnel, or a variety of house seat holders. The pay-offs made to a venue operator, agent or employee, (e.g., a box office employee), is historically known as "ice".

This whole report is worth a read and pretty illuminating on the problems with scalping services:

http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/report ... _text.html


-----

I think there is a huge fundemental problem with scalping. Selling your season tix on a day you can't go for a small profit is one thing, rigging the systems so that it screws the consumer is another one all together. That is a huge problem with ticket sales today (large enough for many states to visit the arguments legally). Many ticket sales are no longer fair (of course, only the hot tickets, not UIC Ice Hockey) - it's a matter of simple consumer rights.

Not to go all Ralph Nader, but the entire scalping industry is filthy and generates a significant cash flow at the expense of the consumer. I really don't see how any of this falls in the realm of true capitalism. It's more akin to kickbacks and payoffs for city towing deals than the mom and pop corner store...

But, have fun next time you want to go to a small-venue event and tickets are going for 3 to 4x the face value.

ab wrote:
But, have fun next time you want to go to a small-venue event and tickets are going for 3 to 4x the face value.

And you have fun next time you camp out overnight in the rain for your 2nd balcony seats.

stevez wrote:

ab wrote:
But, have fun next time you want to go to a small-venue event and tickets are going for 3 to 4x the face value.

And you have fun next time you camp out overnight in the rain for your 2nd balcony seats.

You know, the only time I've seen people waiting overnight for tickets are from Star Wars news reels from the 70's. Lottery systems, phone sales, Internet sales and scalpers buying bulk rendered that useless 10-15 years ago. But yeah...

For those interested in the regulation of scalping:

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/lis/ticketscalplaws.htm

and with particular interest to IL:

http://www.illinoislawhelp.org/index.cf ... entID=2348

What is missing from the debate is the fact that scalpers also have, in some cases illegal deals, or pre-arrangements with venues to have access to the best tickets even before sale to the general public.

That is a false market and is not truly a fair market economy. If you are going to applaud capitalism, applaud legal and fair capitalism, not cronyism, as AB points out.

While I generally abhor ticketmaster, I do applaud their efforts to make it harder to buy bulk tickets by enforcing sales limits and installing systems that discourage bots and electronic means of procurement.