How novel. And useful.

If restaurants really do lower prices, then I would imagine that sales would likely go up. I can’t tell you how many times I’ll roll my eyes at the inflated wine prices when we go out. I understand why they are so high, but that doesn’t mean I like the idea of paying $30 for a bottle or $7 for a glass when I can buy for the same bottle for $12 at the state monopoly store – especially considering we’re both buying from the same source. It makes BYOBs much more appealing.

Of course, the other temptation will be for restaurants to maintain current prices and just pocket the significantly higher profits. They are certainly free to do so, but as the customer, I wouldn’t be as enticed to drink. Which means I won’t have a second or third drink. I’m also less likely to have a dessert. You can see where this is going…

(Link stolen from Liquidity Preference.)

I’m 100% sold on either making my own cookies or buying the knock-offs from Wal-Mart at this point. Aside from the fact that Wal-Mart’s cookies taste as good and, in one case, better than the Girl Scout version, the Scouts simply aren’t reliable.

I’ve posted before about how the local councils post hours for their tables, but then they don’t even show up. Well, I decided against that path this year and thought about them when we were visiting Sam’s Club today. Last year, they were set up outside during the weekends. Normally I won’t hit up a Sam’s Club on a weekend, but today was the exception. They weren’t there.

At this point, I can’t take their word on the schedule they post, and I can’t rely on past performance. In that case, what the hell is the purpose of trying to support Girl Scouts? Add into that the stories of how they punish entrepreneurial girls, and I don’t want to support them with a single penny. It’s over. This former Girl Scout is now going to be an anti-Girl Scout advocate, and I’ll enjoy my cheaper cookies from Wal-Mart. The market won, and the Girl Scouts lost. Maybe they should make a badge for economics education and try their hand at understanding their own irrelevance.

From my cold dead hands.

Okay, so some whackjob doctor in Britain is trying to get in the papers by proposing a ban on butter. His trick worked. Obviously, it’s not going to happen.

I link this story to not only remind you that there are whackjobs out there who want to take everything fun in life away from us “for our safety,” but also to point out a decent bit of reporting on just who this kook is and why he’s getting attention.

Mr Kolvekar’s comments were issued by KTB, a public relations company that works for Unilever, the maker of Flora margarine.

Well isn’t that interesting?

However, a KTB spokesman said there were no financial ties between the consultant and Unilever and he was not receiving any payment. ‘These are his views,’ added the spokesman.

Of course not. Because that’s not how this kind of pitch works. See, Unilever hires a PR firm to meet various goals, one of which is to presumably help sell more product. Selling more product usually involves creating more demand. What is a handy way to create demand? Bring attention to the product and make related competitors (in this case, butter) look bad. It’s what you call “earned media.” Unilever doesn’t have to pay the doctor, nor does the PR firm (usually) have to pay the doctor. The PR shills go out and find the crackpot doctor who will make the claims that will generate the media hits. That’s how the industry works.

Most people probably still wrongly assume that the Mall of America is the largest mall in the world. I know I would have told you that 15 minutes ago. But I stand corrected after watching this video about the new record holder that stands largely empty. Some of the only stores seem be selling food, but from the looks of things, it’s mostly to serve people who come for the amusement park rides.

I wish I could embed it, but you’ll just have to click through the link.

Consumerist claims that a significant number downgrades in brands are now permanent based on a new survey.  From the report:

Of the consumers who switched to cheaper products, 46 percent said they performed better than expected, and the large majority of these consumers said the performance of such products was much better than expected. As a result, 34 percent of the switchers said they no longer preferred higher-priced products, and an additional 41 percent said that while they preferred the premium brand, it “was not worth the money.”

Consumerist (Consumer Union’s blog, the people who are responsible for Consumer Reports) focuses on those last two numbers. But are they really signs that shoppers are settling for good? I don’t think so.

For the 34 percent who legitimately prefer the cheaper brands now, they may well be lost shoppers for premium brands. But the 41 percent who merely say the value of the higher priced brands wasn’t there, I don’t think they are at all lost shoppers for higher priced brands. First of all, they still clearly have a preference. Second, their hesitation in purchasing is based on value for their money. To me, that clearly indicates that as soon as they aren’t as concerned about value, there will be a change in purchasing habits.

Of course, we’re still only talking about less than a fifth of shoppers. Only 18 percent of shoppers in their survey said they made any switches to cheaper brands.

Last night we made our second trip to NaBrasa, a fairly new Brazilian steakhouse in our area.  Between visits, it went from very good to out-of-the-park.  But at the end of the night, I completed their rating card and only gave them a 9 out of 10.  They asked what they could do better or what services they could add, and we had no suggestions at all.  Instead we said we were open to surprise improvements.

But now I wonder, does that actually help?  That was hardly constructive criticism, and we didn’t offer any useful solutions to reach a 10.  And yet, we both felt that with the improvement we saw between visits, there was a distinct possibility that they could find something to improve to really make it a jaw-dropping value for quality of service, food, and atmosphere.  Maybe turn down the music a little, I’m not sure.

What improved between visits were little things that I never would have imagined before.  For example, if a Brazilian steakhouse want to maximize their profits, the cheapest meats make the rounds more frequently and the higher quality meats would be harder to flag down.  Well, I love their leg of lamb and lamb chops.  The server who had the leg of lamb took note, gave me extra slices, and he stopped back by our table when he came out again even though we didn’t have our little card flipped up just because he knew I might want another slice while he was out on the floor.  Yes, we noticed when it came time to tip.

Our main waiter for the evening tried a little too hard at first, and that was a little awkward, but he relaxed as the evening wore on, and he did a pretty good job of keeping the wine and water glasses filled.  And, though he was a little excited when telling us, he does get credit for knowing that the first wine we ordered was out of stock, but going to check with the bar anyway while giving us a chance to find another bottle.

I guess I feel a little bad for not being able to make specific suggestions for real improvement to hit that 10.  They shouldn’t feel bad that I didn’t give them a 10.  We will definitely make trips to NaBrasa again.  They even have the added benefit of being connected to a bar with a decent selection of beer so Sebastian can grab a drink and we can relax after having just stuffed ourself on incredible meats.

If you’re anywhere in the Philly area, you should absolutely try NaBrasa.  At $34.95/person (only $29.95/person on weekdays), it’s a great deal for Brazilian steakhouses, especially for the level of service and quality meats.  Just don’t fill up at the salad bar.  (I only go to the salad bar to get things that will go well with the meats – a few cheeses, one bread slice, some mushrooms, etc.)  In fact, the best solution is to not eat all day, or just have enough in the morning or afternoon to keep your stomach from growling.  Leave lots of room for the good stuff.

In the meantime, I’ll try to figure out what they can do to make me rate them a 10.

I don’t follow stocks for food-related companies. To be honest, I just don’t care that much. But this story about Williams-Sonoma’s unexpected profits and their cost cutting made me cringe.

But the peddler of high-end home goods is struggling with the recession as people put off purchases. It has slashed prices to hang on to some customers, but as Reuters notes, that could hurt its image over the longer term.

And while the company forecasted improved earnings, it also forecasted that sales would remain essentially stagnant. It is cutting so widely and so deeply with an eye on short-term margins that it could spell big trouble for the future. …

Ray also writes: “At 9.4 percent unemployment and rising, the salad days—or salad bowl days, in Williams-Sonoma’s case—when shoppers looked for the highest price tag on a corkscrew, are not likely to return anytime soon.”

Maybe not “anytime soon,” but they will return, and since high price tags are basically William-Sonoma’s business, it might be better for the company to take the long view and make sure to cut fat, not bone.

Ouch.

Here’s my take as a consumer with a household income that’s still pretty decent: I am willing to pay their higher prices for their unique selection and quality items. But once the “unique” factor wears off and the quality is no longer an issue (usually because it can be matched somewhere else, not because I’m trading down), then W-S has nothing to offer.

As the market was tanking, I decided that we just had to have a potato ricer. I have not only never used one, I have never even known a cook who felt the need to own one. But I was more than happy to spend the $32 kitchen gadget. Sure, Sebastian’s company was just about to lay off 1/3 of the staff, but I wanted that damn ricer. (Be still my heart, those were the smoothest potatoes I’ve ever made. Totally worth it.) It was something that was unique to W-S, and I wanted a quality one since it would be my secret tool for all the potatoes of Thanksgiving.

But now that things are, as the Obama Administration wants us to believe, somewhat stabilizing, I found myself in need of a kitchen scale and coffee grinder. The first place I looked was W-S. But then I checked out Bed, Bath & Beyond. I could buy both from BB&B for the cost of one at W-S. But the best part is that I wouldn’t have to compromise on quality. I could get brand names that I knew would do the job for less money. Suddenly, W-S was not unique, nor did they offer better quality for the tools and uses. So, as Daily Bread points out, all they have left is high prices. And nowadays, there’s just no excuse for that.

Now, it is a fair assessment that W-S trades on that elite high-priced status. However, if the recession really does do another dip or employment does take years to rebound, keeping that focus won’t exactly help. In my completely amateur opinion, if they could re-emphasize that you can find things there that you’ll never find at B,B&B, and you’ll get a better quality product that is valued at a higher price, then they may be able to keep their prices higher in tight times. While people might put off purchases, they might still be willing to make them during the recession if there is a perceived value.