Chris Berry has continued his analysis of restaurants with a comparison of the Old Spagetti Factory and the Hothouse and it is a very interesting read, or at least it is if you are into this sort of stuff. What was neat for me was tonight I was out for dinner and I was talking with some friends about what Chris was doing and as an example I used the dessert menu at the restaurant.
What was interesting to us was whether the expensive item, the Big Ben Brownie should be at the top or not. Both Cindy and I noted that the expensive items should be at the bottom, the idea being that by the time you get to the bottom, you’d probably picked an item and that by changing the price, the brownie is differentiated and may help change your mind for the more expensive item.
Hans suggested that while that might sell more brownies, by having it first, and sounding absolutely deciden,t it may encourage people to buy the other “natural” desserts settling instead for the Apple Berry Crisp which is also featured with a picture and highlighted in red.
I was intrigued so I asked how they both would react if the brownie was $10. Both suggested that because the menu has on it “We encourage sharing” the brownie would become a more viable option since the doubling in price would make it seem as though you should get twice as much dessert.
In that case the doubling in price implies a doubling in amount. However if the brownie was $9, it now differentiates itself in price, close to doubling the other desserts, but still becomes the more economical choice if sharing. If it was $12, then it would become super-decadent and should only be chosen when shared.
This wasn’t exactly a scientific study on our part but I think what Chris is getting at is that there are a number of ways to play the menu game, and that what might appear to be little choices in fact can have a significant impact to your bottom line.
Not that it counts for much I choose the Highland Bread Pudding for nostalgic reasons. I guess that would be an unforseen variable.