Bubba Gumps

[Gn2Dlnd]

Oh, so THAT'S whats been going on.

In every other thread on the board.

Or is there more?

[lashbear]

Originally Posted by Gn2Dlnd

Oh, so THAT'S whats been going on.

In every other thread on the board.

Or is there more?

There's always room for More Pancakes....

[NirvanaMan]

Damn. Anyway, back to the originally scheduled thread:

Bubba Gump sucks a big one. Even worse than your average crappy chain. The old man dragged me to the one on Fisherman's Wharf (was there not anything more appealing) and the food was horrendous. Deep fried everything (and not in a good County Fair sorta way). Yuk.

What's this about Kevy's porn site? If it's pictures of him in Playboy bunny outfits, I'm opting out.

[MouseWife]

I am just wondering why and who determines that eating at a chain restaurant is a bad thing?

Wouldn't the fact that I allow other people to determine that where I eat is retarded make me, in fact, retarded?

Just wondering.


Baaaah.



{NM~I bet your dad felt it was the safest place to eat, some people don't want their food to look like it was very recently alive....and, fried foods, while they will kill you, mmmm, that fried factor really hits the spot sometimes...}

Hmm. That actually might be a gross thread, but, food that you eat that looks like the animal it came from sort of thing...like, pigs feet. Oh, well, maybe too juvenile....

[NirvanaMan]

Huh?

Maybe I drank too much egg nog tonight.

[MouseWife]

Huh? My question wasn't directed at you, just at the comments about chain restaurants and that going to Bubba Gumps wasn't a brilliant choice. I just wonder why does someone get to make that choice for me and then consider that choice a poor one. If I liked it, that is enough for me. Perhaps I won't like it the next time I go but that is again, up to me.

NM, I was answering to your post about going with your dad.

[€uroMeinke]

Chain Restaurants have their niche, they tend to serve a certain quality of food and experience and deliver it consistently in any market. My beef with them is than they are becoming ubiquitous, so that the great hole-in-the-wall mom and pops are harder and harder to come by.

The chains tend to play it safe, they want to attract the largest possible audience, so the cuisine tends to not be that adventurous - their predicatability being one of their key selling factors. Granted there are more "upscale" chains now of higher quality, but they still lack the authenticity (and flavor) of the places they pretend to emulate.

While I've enjoyed meals at McCormick & Schmicks, Wolfgang Pucks, or P.F. Changs - when I travel to other cities, I'd never stop at one - since they are so alike. And so when going to Fisherman's wharf, you might get a good meal at Bubba Gumps, but you could have the same meal in Chicago. Visiting some of the other one-of-a-kind seafood restaurants allows you to experience something that truly belongs to the city (which might include risking food poisoning if you've nothing to guide you).

[Alex]

If its good for you then that's fine. For your decision making, whether I think it is a smart choice is irrelevant.

But just because you ate there doesn't mean I personally find eating there any less retarded (at places where there are easily available equal or superior alternatives; if you want seafood in Cameron, Missouri, a Bubba Gump's or Red Lobster is probably the best you're going to get and the decision is no longer so retarded). Otherwise intelligent people do individual things I think stupid all of the time.

[Alex]

Oh, and there are reasons that make what would otherwise be a stupid decision into a good one for that moment in time.

I just don't think that these would account for the big crowds waiting for a seat at Monterey's Bubba Gumps. Or waiting 3 hours for a table at the Union Square Cheesecake Factory in San Francisco. But I'm sure it accounts for some of them; the rest are engaging what I see as poor decision making.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

I remember that, back when I lived in a small town, we really enjoyed the food at the Cheesecake Factory, and did wait in line in Chicago to eat there, because there were no others in our vicinity.

I don't think it's a stupid idea to eat somewhere you trust - but I do think that when you eat at a chain restaurant while you're traveling, it speaks to your sense of culinary adventure. Me? I wouldn't choose to eat at a restaurant I could access at home if it meant I was missing out on a new culinary experience. This is probably due to many factors, including:

1) I like to try new foods, new ethnic genres, new flavors, and new takes on dishes I enjoy.

2) I looooove researching restaurants, through Yelp.com or travel books. I can almost always pick something that we'll enjoy, so it reduces the potential for adventure-turned-food-poisoning. It also increases the chances of finding the true hole-in-the-wall that would be otherwise hidden.

3) I don't have any picky eaters or picky children in my party. (Vegan, yes, but we can do plenty of exploring despite that.)

If any of that weren't so - if I (like MouseWife) weren't fond of tentacles, or had people in my party who preferred a consistent (mid-) level of quality as opposed to a possible adventure (with possible bad meal, or possible terrific meal) I probably would, too. But I love the adventure of it, so it isn't the case.