Yes Madhu you have written your share and very sensible it was, too. I
wish I could go to more restaurants where I would have people like
you, willing to do some complicated calculations to make the divvying
fair!

I often face this situation when a group of friends get together...and
the bitchers have often brought me to the conclusion that it is better
to foot the whole bill than to listen to them! I feel that if you are
going out with a group, just accept whatever you are told is your
share of the bill (unless of course it is VERY unreasonable)....and
put it down as part of the evening's entertainment.

But I disagree with you that one can "maximize one's gain" if one
knows that the bill is going to be split evenly. If you are a
teetotaller and a vegetarian, AND a small eater, and your friends are
meat-eaters and drinkers...be prepared to subsidize them a little, or
a lot...!

Deepa.

On 5/18/07, Madhu Menon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Udhay Shankar N wrote:
> It's sometimes awkward when the bill arrives at a large gathering of
> people at a restaurant - figuring out who pays what, &c. Here's an
> interesting study of precisely this problem. I'd be fascinated to hear
> comments from Madhu (and others!) on this.

As someone who is still owed money after being tasked with the
unfortunate job of splitting bills for people at restaurants on more
than once occasion, I know this situation all too well. :)

I didn't read all 26 pages of the report (why can't they write this
stuff in plain English?) but I'm not surprised at the conclusion. It's
rarely a fair distribution when a group of friends go out to restaurants
and some drink and eat more than others, yet the bill is split equally.
If one of the group is a teetotaler (like, say, Biju at silk meets) and
drinks only Diet Coke while the others have a couple of drinks each,
then that person is unfairly lumped with having to pay not only for his
food, but also for the alcohol others are drinking. So while that person
may have consumed, say, Rs. 500 worth of food, he gets asked to pay,
say, Rs. 800 as his share.

I am a big believer in fairness, and I hate situations like this. So
usually what I do in a group is to simply keep an eye on what people are
drinking, who the non-drinkers are, and who the vegetarians are. When
the bill arrives, I offer to help split it properly. I split the food
cost 60-40, with the 60% being divided evenly among the non-vegetarians,
and the 40% being divided among the vegetarians. I then just add
individual alcohol consumption totals to the respective shares of
people. Being in the restaurant business, it's easier (though not always
with 100% accuracy) to track drinks, unless I myself am a little tipsy,
of course. I remember menu prices pretty well (need to stay abreast of
what other restaurants charge), so that comes in handy too. This method
is more fair than equal splits, though even this way there might be a
variance of about 10-20% on what a person actually owes. (Once in a
while, you will find a person bitching about his or her share and how
instead of, say, Rs. 500, he or she had to pay Rs. 575 instead. Those
people drive me up the wall.)

But on other occasions, where I know somebody else will probably get
their hands on the bill first and I won't have the chance to do all my
fancy arithmetic, my behaviour is consistent with what classic economic
theory predicts. Why stick with one drink and the cheaper dishes on the
menu when the bill will be split equally? So I tend to order a bit more
and maximise my gain. ;)

Lastly, fairness and family-style dining don't go well together. It's
easy to calculate a person's share of the bill at an Italian restaurant
where individual plates are ordered. It's not as easy at an Indian
restaurant where dishes are shared. Then there might be cases where a
person is non-vegetarian but doesn't eat seafood/pork/beef. So many
complications...

Alright Udhay, I've written my share. :)


--
<<<   *   >>>
Madhu Menon
Shiok Far-eastern Cuisine
Indiranagar, Bangalore
Visit us @ http://www.shiokfood.com
Phone: (080) 4116 1800



Reply via email to