Gordon Ramsay Flees Kitchen as TV Fame Saves Restaurant Empire
Bloomberg, December 2009
By William Green
On a gray morning in October, Gordon Ramsay bursts into the kitchen of his south London house, pop music blaring from the radio. At the heart of the room stands a 67,000-pound ($109,000) French cooking range that weighs 2.5 tons and had to be lowered by crane into the celebrity chef’s home.
Ramsay, who is 6 feet 2 inches (1.88 meters) tall and weighs 215 pounds (98 kilograms), is wearing jeans, a tight black T-shirt that accentuates his muscles and a Bell & Ross watch -- a Swiss brand marketed to soldiers, bomb-disposal experts and other “men facing extreme situations.”
The 43-year-old Scot pours himself a juice, sits at the kitchen table and looks back on his own extreme situation: a year in which his global restaurant empire almost went bankrupt.
In the fall of 2008, his London-based Gordon Ramsay Holdings Ltd. breached the covenants on a 10.5 million-pound loan and overdraft facility from Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc. The bank hired KPMG to perform an independent review of the firm, 69 percent of which is owned by Ramsay and 31 percent by his father-in-law, Chris Hutcheson. In late December, Ramsay says, KPMG recommended that the company declare bankruptcy, fire hundreds of people and close all but its best-performing restaurants.
On the Line
“Everything was on the line,” Ramsay says. “December, January, February and March were the most highly pressurized, s---tiest, most awful four months I’ve ever had in business.” Ramsay was in Hollywood for most of the first 12 weeks of 2009 shooting the U.S. version of Hell’s Kitchen, the reality show he fronts for the Fox network. After a day of filming, he’d often be on the phone for hours at night, talking with Hutcheson about how to save their business.
The stress was so intense, he says, that he’d go for runs in Malibu at 4:30 a.m., wearing a black vest loaded with 20 kilograms of weights. “I just ran and ran and ran,” he says. For Ramsay, bankruptcy was unthinkable even if it made financial sense.
“There was no f---ing way that was ever going to happen,” he says. “That was never even an option.”
Ramsay’s fame would have made it the most public of failures.
“He’s one of the great chefs,” says Jean-Luc Naret, Paris-based director of the Michelin Guide series, which awards the stars that are the Oscars of the food world. Restaurant Gordon Ramsay at Royal Hospital Road is London’s only dining spot with three Michelin stars. In all, Ramsay boasts 12 stars, surpassed only by Frenchmen Joel Robuchon (25) and Alain Ducasse (18).
Television Chef
By 2009, Ramsay had about 20 restaurants as far afield as Dubai, New York, Paris, Prague and Tokyo. He also starred in five TV shows that reinforced his image as a master chef who swears and shouts in pursuit of perfection.
In the U.K., he earns more than 2 million pounds annually from Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares and The F Word, in which his culinary adventures with celebrities have included creating breast-milk cappuccinos. In 2009, Hutcheson says Ramsay’s talent fees from U.S. shows alone hit $9 million.
Ramsay has also published two autobiographies and lent his name to 23 cookbooks. According to Nielsen BookScan, his books, which have been translated into 18 languages, have generated almost 25 million pounds in U.K. sales alone. Ramsay also endorses pots, pans, glasses and china branded as Gordon Ramsay by Royal Doulton, and he’s Diageo Plc’s U.K. pitchman for Gordon’s Gin. Hutcheson says Ramsay makes about 3 million pounds a year from endorsements.
All of this has placed Ramsay at the vanguard of a generation of celebrity chefs with such myriad business interests that they barely cook.
International and Sexy
“Television made our profession really international and sexy,” says Austrian-born chef Wolfgang Puck, who began appearing on U.S. morning television in the 1980s. Today, Puck, 60, has more than 90 restaurants and says he generates $50 million a year in sales of cookware and appliances.
Ramsay, too, has focused on TV in amassing a fortune that London’s Sunday Times estimated in April 2008 at 50 million pounds.
“He’s perhaps the most media-enhanced chef in history,” says Bill Guilfoyle, a restaurant marketing expert at the Culinary Institute of America in Hyde Park, New York.
Ramsay’s empire expanded just as the global recession deepened. He opened eight restaurants in 2008 and was particularly exposed as diners cut their spending. Brand-name chefs like Ducasse and Robuchon seldom own their restaurants outright; instead, they sign consulting deals under which they provide chefs, create a menu and run the operation. Ramsay’s company owned almost all of its restaurants and was on the hook for everything from rent to salaries.
Bitter Irony
“We weren’t unlucky,” says Hutcheson, 61, chief executive officer of Gordon Ramsay Holdings. “We were clumsy. We’d put too many risks in front of us with too much confidence that nothing would fail.”
For Ramsay, this was especially embarrassing because Kitchen Nightmares showcases him as a savior of other people’s restaurants.
“It’s not great if you’re making a show called Kitchen Nightmares and advising people on how to fix their businesses for you to go bankrupt,” says Pat Llewellyn, producer of the program and Ramsay’s partner in a production company called One Potato Two Potato.
Tough Childhood
Ramsay was, at least, no stranger to hardship. The son of a failed musician who worked as a day laborer, he grew up poor in Glasgow, Scotland and Stratford-upon-Avon, England. In his 2006 autobiography, Humble Pie (Harper), he describes his late father, also named Gordon, as a wife-beating alcoholic and thief, whose favorite punishment was to thrash the back of his son’s legs with a belt. Ramsay’s mother, Helen, raised their four children, baking bread when she couldn’t afford to buy it and cooking them dishes such as ham hock soup or sausages and beans. His father’s view, Ramsay writes, was that “only poofs cook.”
A knee injury wrecked Ramsay’s dreams of a soccer career. So he stumbled into a hotel management course before taking a series of junior cooking jobs.
In 1989, his fascination with haute cuisine was awakened at Harvey’s, a London restaurant run by Marco Pierre White, the first British chef with three Michelin stars. Ramsay then moved to London’s top French restaurant, Le Gavroche, as an apprentice chef. Michel Roux Jr., now its head chef, says Ramsay was late for work in his first week after being arrested for jumping over a London underground turnstile to avoid the fare.
Ruthlessly Hardworking
While Roux says Ramsay was unruly, he made up for it in the kitchen. “He was beautiful to watch,” Roux says. “He’s a very naturally gifted chef. He has the taste, the eye of an artist, the efficiency, and he’s ruthlessly hardworking.”
Ramsay spent three years in France, including a stint with Robuchon, where he mastered the essentials of French cuisine. Then, in 1993, he became head chef at Aubergine in London.
“He was an animal, a monster; he was horrible,” says Angela Hartnett, who worked with him there. Hartnett says Ramsay once threw oysters at her after she’d opened them imperfectly. “He’d always say, ‘Why are you diluting my standards?’”
Nonetheless, Hartnett has worked with Ramsay for 16 years and is currently head chef at Murano, one of his London restaurants. One reason she stayed was the quality of his cuisine, which features lighter sauces using less butter and cream.
“He took classic French cooking and modernized it,” Hartnett says.
Pursuit of Perfection
Friends say Ramsay is hard-wired for perfection.
“If he were in a line of washer uppers in a prison, he’d want to do it the best and fastest,” producer Llewellyn says. Aubergine won two stars in 1997, and Ramsay decided he deserved more than the 25 percent stake its owners had given him. Ramsay quit, triggering a lawsuit for breach of contract that the parties settled out of court.
Ramsay had just married a schoolteacher, Tana Hutcheson, with whom he now has three daughters and a son between the ages of 7 and 11. Tana’s father, Chris, who owned a printing company, risked 1 million pounds in cash and loan guarantees to bankroll the Royal Hospital Road restaurant in 1998.
He and Ramsay have been partners ever since, and their bond goes beyond business. “He’s my son-in-law but, actually, he’s my son,” Hutcheson says.
Boiling Point
The Royal Hospital Road restaurant, with signature dishes like lobster ravioli in a lemon grass and chervil sauce, won its third star in 2001. By then, Ramsay was as famous for his temper as his cooking. A British TV documentary called Boiling Point showed him spitting out food and firing a waiter for serving the wrong appetizer. Ramsay even ejected restaurant reviewer A.A. Gill -- along with his guest, actress Joan Collins -- for criticizing him in print.
“I’ve become more mature,” Ramsay says now. “I wouldn’t say mellow. I still get incredibly frustrated.”
Many employees defend him, saying he’s generous and loyal. “He’s definitely not malicious,” says Josh Emett, head chef at Gordon Ramsay at The London in New York. “He’s passionate.”
Ramsay’s breakthrough came in 2001, when private-equity firm Blackstone Group LP asked him to run the restaurant at Claridge’s, one of four landmark hotels it then owned in London. Since the 1850s, Claridge’s had been patronized by famous guests ranging from Queen Victoria to Cary Grant.
“I thought it would be clever to have a bad boy there, and Gordon was the baddest,” says John Ceriale, Blackstone’s senior adviser for the lodging industry.
Dining Sensation
Ramsay’s arrival attracted a thousand calls a day for dining reservations, Ceriale says, and the restaurant has since made Gordon Ramsay Holdings as much as 2 million pounds a year. In 2002, Ceriale also put Ramsay in charge of all food at the Connaught and installed him at the Savoy Grill, a 120-year-old restaurant in the Savoy Hotel once run by French culinary legend Auguste Escoffier. A year later, Ramsay opened two restaurants in the Blackstone-owned Berkeley hotel.
In 2004, Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares debuted in the U.K., making him a household name. Mike Darnell, Fox’s president of alternative entertainment, saw him in a reality series, Hell’s Kitchen, and signed him to make U.S. versions of both shows. According to Hutcheson, Ramsay earns about $250,000 per episode. On Nov. 3, Fox announced that Ramsay will also star in MasterChef, an American version of the British cookery contest.
“He can’t walk the streets of New York without people shouting and screaming,” Darnell says. “He’s like a rock star.”
Critics Complain
The TV work, along with his international restaurant expansion, has triggered accusations that Ramsay is spread too thin. Richard Harden, co-founder of the guidebook Harden’s London Restaurants, says he was the city’s best chef for 10 years.
“Many of his restaurants have lost their way,” Harden says. “If you’ve got so many interests that are so geographically diverse, you can’t give them all proper attention.”
Jay Rayner, restaurant critic for the Observer newspaper, says Ramsay’s food is “out-of-date” as he doesn’t have time to create new dishes. “It’s no longer top-notch,” Rayner says.
While Ramsay bristles at such criticism, saying consistency is more important to him than being avant-garde, he makes no apology for spending less time at the stove. “You tell me a chef anywhere in the world that’s prepared to turn down quarter of a million dollars for an hour’s work on TV, and they’re the biggest lying bastard that ever put on a chef’s jacket,” he says.
Overseas Expansion
By 2006, Ramsay had nine restaurants in London. Ceriale then asked him to create restaurants in Blackstone’s overseas hotels, too. Ramsay opened in New York that year; Prague and Boca Raton, Florida, in 2007; and Hollywood and Paris in 2008. He rented the properties from Blackstone and used his non- restaurant earnings to equip the kitchens -- a strategy he says made sense because it deployed income that would have been taxed at 40 percent in the U.K.
Every one of these overseas ventures has lost money. In New York, where he opened two restaurants in Blackstone’s London NYC hotel, Ramsay says losses reached $4 million a year, with a unionized staff costing 80 percent of revenue.
Hutcheson says he and Ramsay didn’t think locally. For example, they neglected to take into account how little alcohol New Yorkers would order at lunch. Ramsay’s foray into Prague failed in early 2009. He also tripped up in France where he opened at the Trianon Palace Versailles, on the outskirts of Paris. Hutcheson says they lost as much as 200,000 euros ($295,000) a month there in 2008, with wages consuming 90 percent of revenue.
Emotional Approach
Ramsay’s ambitions in France were fueled by ego, Ceriale says, as he dreamed of winning three stars in the home of haute cuisine.
“I totally agree,” Ramsay says. “The French have been brilliant over the last 20 years at coming over to our country and telling us how crap our food is.”
Hutcheson says this emotional approach became a liability once the credit crisis struck. In late 2008, when RBS wanted to assess whether its loan was at risk, he says his accounts department couldn’t provide the relevant financial data. The company was also 7.2 million pounds in arrears on U.K. taxes. At the time, Ramsay and Hutcheson had 1,250 employees, up from 45 in 1998.
“The company just grew too quickly and no one kept on top of it,” Murano’s Hartnett says.
Crisis Moves
To avert bankruptcy, Ramsay and Hutcheson poured nearly 9 million pounds of their personal savings into Gordon Ramsay Holdings in 2009, 69 percent of it from Ramsay. They worked out an extension of tax payments with the British government and cut the staff at their London headquarters to 58 from 86.
Hutcheson says he told Ceriale the company would go bankrupt unless they could renegotiate their contracts with Blackstone.
“Shuttering the restaurants would not have been the best outcome for us or Gordon,” Ceriale says. “They needed to restructure the business, and we were the key to restructuring it.”
After weeks of negotiation, Blackstone agreed to assume ownership of the restaurants in Hollywood and Versailles, paying Ramsay a consulting fee to run them. The restaurant in Prague was closed in February. In November, Blackstone also took control of Ramsay’s restaurant in Boca Raton and his two restaurants in New York, paying him a percentage of revenues to oversee them as a consultant.
“Financially, we weren’t going to come out with much,” Hutcheson says. “But you just want to stop these apparently endless losses.”
Cutting Costs
In Ramsay’s remaining restaurants, everything is now about cost control. In London, his bistro Foxtrot Oscar has closed on Mondays and Tuesdays. Stuart Gillies, his head chef at Boxwood Cafe in The Berkeley, has saved 1,500 pounds a month by no longer ordering flowers, and he now uses cheaper cuts of meat, such as beef shoulder, that he says require more skill to prepare.
Hutcheson says the worst is over and Gordon Ramsay Holdings should generate 7 million pounds to 8 million pounds in earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization in the fiscal year ending in August. The company is also moving ahead with two new projects in 2010: Petrus, which had two Michelin stars, will relocate in London’s Belgravia neighborhood in January, and the Savoy Grill will reopen after a renovation.
New Life
Still, Ramsay will focus as much as ever on TV. “I want a life out of my kitchen,” he says.
In the future, Hutcheson says restaurants may become even less of a priority for Ramsay.
“I can run the business in Gordon’s name,” he says. “TV is his forte. That’s what he likes doing.”
Ramsay says his restless ambition stems from his childhood. He sometimes forces himself to recall those days as a reminder of how far he wants his life to be from that misery.
“Trust me,” he says. “That’s enough to keep anyone f---ing moving a thousand miles an hour.”
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Pokhara: Construction of Regional International Airport Commences
Construction of new airport commences in Pokhara
Nepalnews, 9-Dec-09
Finally, construction works of a regional international airport in Pokhara, a major tourist hub of the country, have commenced.
The preliminary phase of the construction saw the light of the day after Minister of Tourism and Civil Aviation Sarat Singh Bhandari himself steered dozer and excavator to level the land acquired for the purpose of building international airport.
Government had acquired 3,106 ropanis of land in the Chhinedanda area of Pokhara sub-metropolitan some 34 years back to build a new airport. Due to lack of budget, political instability and other land-related hassles, the plan of constructing new airport had long been confined to shelf.
Earlier, efforts to build a new airport in the city under the concept of BOOT (Build-Own-Operate- Transfer) had also faced a debacle.
This time, the plan of construction new airport is being executed with the financial assistance extended by the Chinese government. Processes like preliminary survey and grading are estimated to cost around Rs 1.5 million. According to the minister, out of US $ 200 million extended by China for financing the Upper Trishuli Hydropower, some US $ 88 million will be mobilized for constructing the airport and Lumbini-Pokhara Fact Track.
The government has estimated some Rs 13 billion in order to accomplish the construction of new airport. The full-fledged construction will begin after the preparation of DPR.
The proposition of building a new regional airport in Pokhara was forwarded as an alternative to Tribhuwan International Airport (TIA) based in Kathmandu.
Tourism entrepreneurs of Pokhara are optimistic that the construction of new airport will help to give a whole new boost to the tourism business of the city.
Related News
International Airport Vital for Pokhara (24-Sep-06)
Nepalnews, 9-Dec-09
Finally, construction works of a regional international airport in Pokhara, a major tourist hub of the country, have commenced.
The preliminary phase of the construction saw the light of the day after Minister of Tourism and Civil Aviation Sarat Singh Bhandari himself steered dozer and excavator to level the land acquired for the purpose of building international airport.
Government had acquired 3,106 ropanis of land in the Chhinedanda area of Pokhara sub-metropolitan some 34 years back to build a new airport. Due to lack of budget, political instability and other land-related hassles, the plan of constructing new airport had long been confined to shelf.
Earlier, efforts to build a new airport in the city under the concept of BOOT (Build-Own-Operate- Transfer) had also faced a debacle.
This time, the plan of construction new airport is being executed with the financial assistance extended by the Chinese government. Processes like preliminary survey and grading are estimated to cost around Rs 1.5 million. According to the minister, out of US $ 200 million extended by China for financing the Upper Trishuli Hydropower, some US $ 88 million will be mobilized for constructing the airport and Lumbini-Pokhara Fact Track.
The government has estimated some Rs 13 billion in order to accomplish the construction of new airport. The full-fledged construction will begin after the preparation of DPR.
The proposition of building a new regional airport in Pokhara was forwarded as an alternative to Tribhuwan International Airport (TIA) based in Kathmandu.
Tourism entrepreneurs of Pokhara are optimistic that the construction of new airport will help to give a whole new boost to the tourism business of the city.
Related News
International Airport Vital for Pokhara (24-Sep-06)
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Shake Shack Taking Over the World
The Accidental Empire of Fast Food
NYT, 15-Dec-09
By GLENN COLLINS
CONSIDER, now, the not-so-fast-food rollout. Of the anti-chain chain.
Indeed, to comprehend the prudent and eccentric global-expansion vision of Shake Shack, Danny Meyer’s mini-chain of burger-and-custard stands, it is useful to consider the essence of contemporary American fast food.
“The whole experience is to cram people into a cookie-cutter space, to feed them as many unhealthy calories as possible — then get them to leave,” said Mr. Meyer, the president of the Union Square Hospitality Group and the Yoda of Shake Shack. “That stripping away of human experience? That is where fast food went astray.”
Contrast and compare, then, with the three Shake Shacks in New York City, where patrons are cheerfully welcomed at the counter of a neighborhood-centered, urban-fantasy version of a burger roadhouse. On the menu? Whole-muscle, no-trimmings, fresh-ground, antibiotic-and-hormone-free, source-verified-to-ranch-of-birth, choice-or-higher-grade Black Angus beef.
Furthermore, “people have to wait in line just to place their orders,” Mr. Meyer, 51, said on a recent afternoon. “After that? They have to wait for us to cook their orders. And then? We hope they’ll stay awhile, as they eat. To enhance the communal experience.”
And since Mr. Meyer’s team is on the case, the imminent proliferation of the concept — four Shacks will open in 2010, and a long-range plan calls for even more — will be persistent. Thoughtful. Considered. Crafted. Correct. In short, exactly what might be expected in a venture where the entire burger-management team honed its skills in three-star restaurants.
And it’s all so Danny.
“A hamburger stand is a very democratizing amenity,” he said. “We hope that each new Shake Shack can become both a citizen of, and mirror of, their communities.”
The Shake Shack rollout is precedent-shattering for the Union Square Hospitality Group. “We’ve always resisted expanding anything, ever,” Mr. Meyer said. “We resisted offers in Las Vegas. We resisted reality TV shows. And it took six years with Shake Shack before we decided to go forth and multiply.”
He has put David Swinghamer — his longtime business partner — in charge of the Shacking of America. As Mr. Swinghamer says of the ramp-up: “This is not a formula that anyone else has, or would do.” (Mr. Swinghamer had supervised the Blue Smoke barbecue restaurants, which Mr. Meyer would like to replicate, but others will lead that push.)
If the deliberate pace of expansion hardly seems to suggest a world-domination strategy, nevertheless a global future is in Mr. Meyer’s sights. Next year Shake Shack plans to plant its standard in Kuwait — way beyond its well-worn subway stops.
Mr. Swinghamer said the Shack in Kuwait will be managed by Alshaya, a local company that handles 50 brands in the Middle East, including Starbucks, Dean & DeLuca and Le Pain Quotidien.
In the United States, however, Shacks will not be franchised. Mr. Swinghamer said that “in five years we could have 20, mostly up and down the East Coast.”
Scheduled to open next year is an outpost on the ground floor of a Miami Beach building on Lincoln Road designed by the Pritzker Prize-winning Swiss architecture firm Herzog & de Meuron. (It designed the bird’s nest stadium at the Beijing Olympics.)
Another new Shack will land at Prince and Mulberry Streets, to be opened this spring.
On the Upper East Side, Mr. Swinghamer has leased a ground-floor space next door to the Barnes & Noble on the southeast side of East 86th Street near Lexington Avenue.
It is to open sometime next year, around the time another Shack will make its debut in the theater district at the southwest corner of 44th Street and Eighth Avenue, Mr. Swinghamer said.
Schnipper’s Quality Kitchen, three blocks south at 41st Street and Eighth Avenue — whose menu includes premium burgers — seems sanguine about the impending Shack.
“We serve a much more varied menu,” said Andrew Schnipper, its chief executive, who is also looking for more locations.
Mr. Swinghamer professes not to see competition with Schnipper’s. “All boats rise with the tide,” he said.
Shake Shack has also been trying to transplant its Noo Yawk sensibility to an octagonal outpost on the Boston Common (in a crumbling former men’s room). So far Bostonians have mostly greeted the prospect with snark. Some said that since hometown milkshakes are called frappes, the interloper might more properly be emblazoned with the words Frappe Shack.
Mr. Swinghamer said Boston Common is still on his radar. After all, Mr. Meyer brought a Chicago-style hot dog — celery salt, sport peppers and all — to condescending Manhattanites.
Mr. Meyer’s accidental empire began with a hot dog cart in 2001, part of an art installation in Madison Square Park. “To our astonishment, every day, a line would form,” Mr. Meyer said. The cart expanded into a burger stand, “and none of us had any idea that that could be a success.”
The Shake Shack prototype cost a bit shy of $1 million, even though the prefabricated building, designed by James Wines, “arrived like the falling house” among the Munchkins, Mr. Meyer said. “One day it wasn’t there? And the next day it was there.”
In future, Mr. Swinghamer said, each new Shack will cost over $1 million and will be in what he called “special places in each community.”
Thus, the popular Shack satellite at Columbus Avenue and 77th Street “is across from a museum and has a distinctive glass ‘sidewalk shed’ that is an indoor cafe,” said Randy Garutti, chief operating officer of Shake Shack.
And at Citi Field in Flushing, Queens, home of the New York Mets, Shake Shack is crowned by the beloved skyline silhouette that once topped the demolished Shea Stadium scoreboard.
Mr. Meyer said that keeping a sense of community was one challenge in expanding the Shacks, along with maintaining the original’s quality, hospitality and “glint in its eye.” He referred to the bad puns that he seems to favor, such as the fall “Shacktoberfest,” and the winter “Have Yourself a Merry Little Custard.”
The Union Square Hospitality Group does not discuss revenues, which have been estimated at $70 million by trade publications.
Shake Shacks “are profitable,” Mr. Meyer said. “They don’t need a robust economy to work. They have a highly focused menu. They are replicable. There is no reservation operation. There is no florist. And it’s a fun thing.”
The premium burger market “is a really hot niche,” said Malcolm M. Knapp, who heads a restaurant consulting firm in Manhattan that bears his name.
He said of Shake Shack: “They can make a lot of money. Burgers are not only American comfort food, but they are also American ethnic food.” This is why “Americans go abroad hankering for a burger,” Mr. Knapp said, and why a global premium-burger strategy could be well received.
The popularity of the Shake Shacks has been wildly beyond expectations, partly due to their humble order average of $13, “perfect for this economy,” Mr. Swinghamer said.
Remarkably, with more than $4 million in yearly sales, each of the Manhattan Shacks outdistances both premium and mass-market burger chains. McDonald’s, for example, has an average of $2.29 million in yearly revenues from each of its 13,958 outlets, according to Technomic, a Chicago-based restaurant consultant. The Shacks also outdo a premium-burger legend, the Virginia-based Five Guys Burgers and Fries; its 535 stores each average $1.03 million in sales.
Some customers think the Shack rollout is long overdue. “The quality is there, so if they don’t screw it up, they’ll be O.K.,” said Sandy Hawkins, a 61-year-old inventor from TriBeCa who was consuming his Shackburger under heat lamps on a recent frigid afternoon in Madison Square Park.
So how fast and how far can the Hospitality Group take this? Five Guys began franchising only in 2003, and has now ballooned to 535 stores. “Our focus is not on how many you do,” Mr. Swinghamer said bluntly. “If we can’t do it right? We won’t do it.”
Mr. Meyer commented that “we will grow as broadly as we can, without losing the quality, the hospitality, the community. And the sense of humor.”
NYT, 15-Dec-09
By GLENN COLLINS
CONSIDER, now, the not-so-fast-food rollout. Of the anti-chain chain.
Indeed, to comprehend the prudent and eccentric global-expansion vision of Shake Shack, Danny Meyer’s mini-chain of burger-and-custard stands, it is useful to consider the essence of contemporary American fast food.
“The whole experience is to cram people into a cookie-cutter space, to feed them as many unhealthy calories as possible — then get them to leave,” said Mr. Meyer, the president of the Union Square Hospitality Group and the Yoda of Shake Shack. “That stripping away of human experience? That is where fast food went astray.”
Contrast and compare, then, with the three Shake Shacks in New York City, where patrons are cheerfully welcomed at the counter of a neighborhood-centered, urban-fantasy version of a burger roadhouse. On the menu? Whole-muscle, no-trimmings, fresh-ground, antibiotic-and-hormone-free, source-verified-to-ranch-of-birth, choice-or-higher-grade Black Angus beef.
Furthermore, “people have to wait in line just to place their orders,” Mr. Meyer, 51, said on a recent afternoon. “After that? They have to wait for us to cook their orders. And then? We hope they’ll stay awhile, as they eat. To enhance the communal experience.”
And since Mr. Meyer’s team is on the case, the imminent proliferation of the concept — four Shacks will open in 2010, and a long-range plan calls for even more — will be persistent. Thoughtful. Considered. Crafted. Correct. In short, exactly what might be expected in a venture where the entire burger-management team honed its skills in three-star restaurants.
And it’s all so Danny.
“A hamburger stand is a very democratizing amenity,” he said. “We hope that each new Shake Shack can become both a citizen of, and mirror of, their communities.”
The Shake Shack rollout is precedent-shattering for the Union Square Hospitality Group. “We’ve always resisted expanding anything, ever,” Mr. Meyer said. “We resisted offers in Las Vegas. We resisted reality TV shows. And it took six years with Shake Shack before we decided to go forth and multiply.”
He has put David Swinghamer — his longtime business partner — in charge of the Shacking of America. As Mr. Swinghamer says of the ramp-up: “This is not a formula that anyone else has, or would do.” (Mr. Swinghamer had supervised the Blue Smoke barbecue restaurants, which Mr. Meyer would like to replicate, but others will lead that push.)
If the deliberate pace of expansion hardly seems to suggest a world-domination strategy, nevertheless a global future is in Mr. Meyer’s sights. Next year Shake Shack plans to plant its standard in Kuwait — way beyond its well-worn subway stops.
Mr. Swinghamer said the Shack in Kuwait will be managed by Alshaya, a local company that handles 50 brands in the Middle East, including Starbucks, Dean & DeLuca and Le Pain Quotidien.
In the United States, however, Shacks will not be franchised. Mr. Swinghamer said that “in five years we could have 20, mostly up and down the East Coast.”
Scheduled to open next year is an outpost on the ground floor of a Miami Beach building on Lincoln Road designed by the Pritzker Prize-winning Swiss architecture firm Herzog & de Meuron. (It designed the bird’s nest stadium at the Beijing Olympics.)
Another new Shack will land at Prince and Mulberry Streets, to be opened this spring.
On the Upper East Side, Mr. Swinghamer has leased a ground-floor space next door to the Barnes & Noble on the southeast side of East 86th Street near Lexington Avenue.
It is to open sometime next year, around the time another Shack will make its debut in the theater district at the southwest corner of 44th Street and Eighth Avenue, Mr. Swinghamer said.
Schnipper’s Quality Kitchen, three blocks south at 41st Street and Eighth Avenue — whose menu includes premium burgers — seems sanguine about the impending Shack.
“We serve a much more varied menu,” said Andrew Schnipper, its chief executive, who is also looking for more locations.
Mr. Swinghamer professes not to see competition with Schnipper’s. “All boats rise with the tide,” he said.
Shake Shack has also been trying to transplant its Noo Yawk sensibility to an octagonal outpost on the Boston Common (in a crumbling former men’s room). So far Bostonians have mostly greeted the prospect with snark. Some said that since hometown milkshakes are called frappes, the interloper might more properly be emblazoned with the words Frappe Shack.
Mr. Swinghamer said Boston Common is still on his radar. After all, Mr. Meyer brought a Chicago-style hot dog — celery salt, sport peppers and all — to condescending Manhattanites.
Mr. Meyer’s accidental empire began with a hot dog cart in 2001, part of an art installation in Madison Square Park. “To our astonishment, every day, a line would form,” Mr. Meyer said. The cart expanded into a burger stand, “and none of us had any idea that that could be a success.”
The Shake Shack prototype cost a bit shy of $1 million, even though the prefabricated building, designed by James Wines, “arrived like the falling house” among the Munchkins, Mr. Meyer said. “One day it wasn’t there? And the next day it was there.”
In future, Mr. Swinghamer said, each new Shack will cost over $1 million and will be in what he called “special places in each community.”
Thus, the popular Shack satellite at Columbus Avenue and 77th Street “is across from a museum and has a distinctive glass ‘sidewalk shed’ that is an indoor cafe,” said Randy Garutti, chief operating officer of Shake Shack.
And at Citi Field in Flushing, Queens, home of the New York Mets, Shake Shack is crowned by the beloved skyline silhouette that once topped the demolished Shea Stadium scoreboard.
Mr. Meyer said that keeping a sense of community was one challenge in expanding the Shacks, along with maintaining the original’s quality, hospitality and “glint in its eye.” He referred to the bad puns that he seems to favor, such as the fall “Shacktoberfest,” and the winter “Have Yourself a Merry Little Custard.”
The Union Square Hospitality Group does not discuss revenues, which have been estimated at $70 million by trade publications.
Shake Shacks “are profitable,” Mr. Meyer said. “They don’t need a robust economy to work. They have a highly focused menu. They are replicable. There is no reservation operation. There is no florist. And it’s a fun thing.”
The premium burger market “is a really hot niche,” said Malcolm M. Knapp, who heads a restaurant consulting firm in Manhattan that bears his name.
He said of Shake Shack: “They can make a lot of money. Burgers are not only American comfort food, but they are also American ethnic food.” This is why “Americans go abroad hankering for a burger,” Mr. Knapp said, and why a global premium-burger strategy could be well received.
The popularity of the Shake Shacks has been wildly beyond expectations, partly due to their humble order average of $13, “perfect for this economy,” Mr. Swinghamer said.
Remarkably, with more than $4 million in yearly sales, each of the Manhattan Shacks outdistances both premium and mass-market burger chains. McDonald’s, for example, has an average of $2.29 million in yearly revenues from each of its 13,958 outlets, according to Technomic, a Chicago-based restaurant consultant. The Shacks also outdo a premium-burger legend, the Virginia-based Five Guys Burgers and Fries; its 535 stores each average $1.03 million in sales.
Some customers think the Shack rollout is long overdue. “The quality is there, so if they don’t screw it up, they’ll be O.K.,” said Sandy Hawkins, a 61-year-old inventor from TriBeCa who was consuming his Shackburger under heat lamps on a recent frigid afternoon in Madison Square Park.
So how fast and how far can the Hospitality Group take this? Five Guys began franchising only in 2003, and has now ballooned to 535 stores. “Our focus is not on how many you do,” Mr. Swinghamer said bluntly. “If we can’t do it right? We won’t do it.”
Mr. Meyer commented that “we will grow as broadly as we can, without losing the quality, the hospitality, the community. And the sense of humor.”
Obituary: Dr Saubhagya Shah
Professor Shah no more
Nepalnews, 16-Dec-09
Renowned anthropologist Prof. Dr Saubhagya Shah passed away after a heart attack on Wednesday. He was 45.
Shah was admitted at Alka Hospital in Lalitpur when he complained of a heart attack Tuesday evening.
Shah, who did his Ph.D in Anthropology from Harvard University, was a professor at the TU's sociology department. He was also the programme coordinator of the Conflict, Peace and Development Studies of TU.
Nepalnews, 16-Dec-09
Renowned anthropologist Prof. Dr Saubhagya Shah passed away after a heart attack on Wednesday. He was 45.
Shah was admitted at Alka Hospital in Lalitpur when he complained of a heart attack Tuesday evening.
Shah, who did his Ph.D in Anthropology from Harvard University, was a professor at the TU's sociology department. He was also the programme coordinator of the Conflict, Peace and Development Studies of TU.
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
Slumping NYC Real Estate
The Non-Hot Hot Spots
NY Magazine, 22-Nov-09
By S.Jhoanna Robledo
Where are sellers hungriest to make a deal?
When the proprietors of the real-estate auction service Bid on the City wanted to find out where their services would come in handy, they turned to Matthew Haines for data. The founder of PropertyShark.com, Haines and his team dug into third-quarter numbers to help pinpoint the five areas of prime Manhattan that have been toughest on sellers, based on three major criteria: how long it takes a typical seller to find a buyer there (Manhattan average: 150 days), median-price drops over the past two years (Manhattan overall: 10 percent), and the number of closed sales relative to the total number of properties on the market (the average is 23 percent, and higher is better). Bid on the City’s Albert Feinstein says he’d expected unglamorous areas like Murray Hill to top the list, but the results were very different. (It may be that dullness equals stability.) As for where the market may be headed based on these numbers? “If I knew [that], I would be so busy acting on that information that I wouldn’t have time to speak to you,” says Haines with a chuckle. Still, it’s fair to say that where there’s a weak market, there’s space for negotiation.
1. Chelsea/Flatiron/ Union Square/ Hudson Yards
Average days on market: 162
Sales-price change from 2007: –36 percent
Closed sales versus inventory: 21 percent
The explanation: Feinstein says he was surprised to find Chelsea and the Flatiron atop the list. But the whole area’s not uniformly problematic. The main trouble’s in “Chelsea Heights,” the area more or less centered on 23rd Street west of Eighth Avenue. According to appraiser Jonathan Miller, in 2008 this area had “one of the highest concentrations of new-development activity. That’s what this is about: the skew in the far west where there’s a lot of projects to be absorbed.” High Line fans, consider making an offer in 2010.
2. Midtown/Midtown South
Average days on market: 149
Sales-price change from 2007: –27 percent
Closed sales versus inventory: 19 percent
The explanation: Many apartments here are pieds-à-terre, and that’s a weak market segment at a time when getting approved to buy a first home is tough enough. On top of that, a lot of new condos in the area were built specifically for that market, compounding the problem. That said, if you have the cash to buy with a minimal loan, opportunities abound.
3. Soho/Tribeca/Little Italy
Average days on market: 184
Sales-price change from 2007: –15 percent
Closed sales versus inventory: 11 percent
The explanation: Lots of low-hanging fruit here, so pluck away. The particular problem, Miller points out, is that much of the housing stock, both new and old, is made up of larger apartments, requiring bigger loans and more cash up front and therefore “very susceptible to the credit contraction.” For buyers who’ll have no trouble obtaining a mortgage, now may be prime time for loft-hunting.
4. Upper East Side/Carnegie Hill
Average days on market: 162
Sales-price change from 2007: –8 percent
Closed sales versus inventory: 18 percent
The explanation: Feinstein hadn’t expected this moneyed area, but the stats speak for themselves. The occasional buzz-heavy megasale seems to be obscuring the fact that the luxury market has been suffering. “There certainly are sales, but the activity has thinned quite a bit,” reports Miller. “Even though the decline in employment [in the city] wasn’t as high as expected, high-wage-earners were really hit.” Watch this space closely during bonus season.
5. Battery Park City/Financial District/South Street Seaport
Average days on market: 162
Sales-price change from 2007: –7 percent
Closed sales versus inventory: 9 percent
The explanation: Haines says he was struck by the low number of closings, especially in Battery Park City, where prices haven’t dropped much and “nothing’s moving. There seems to be a lot of unrealistic sellers.” Within this area, says Miller, the financial district is particularly bad off, because despite all the new building, the neighborhood, even after a decade, has never quite jelled. Given all the chatter about the neighborhood’s vulnerability, Bid On the City’s Raymond Villani says he’d actually expected the financial district to be higher on the list.
NY Magazine, 22-Nov-09
By S.Jhoanna Robledo
Where are sellers hungriest to make a deal?
When the proprietors of the real-estate auction service Bid on the City wanted to find out where their services would come in handy, they turned to Matthew Haines for data. The founder of PropertyShark.com, Haines and his team dug into third-quarter numbers to help pinpoint the five areas of prime Manhattan that have been toughest on sellers, based on three major criteria: how long it takes a typical seller to find a buyer there (Manhattan average: 150 days), median-price drops over the past two years (Manhattan overall: 10 percent), and the number of closed sales relative to the total number of properties on the market (the average is 23 percent, and higher is better). Bid on the City’s Albert Feinstein says he’d expected unglamorous areas like Murray Hill to top the list, but the results were very different. (It may be that dullness equals stability.) As for where the market may be headed based on these numbers? “If I knew [that], I would be so busy acting on that information that I wouldn’t have time to speak to you,” says Haines with a chuckle. Still, it’s fair to say that where there’s a weak market, there’s space for negotiation.
1. Chelsea/Flatiron/ Union Square/ Hudson Yards
Average days on market: 162
Sales-price change from 2007: –36 percent
Closed sales versus inventory: 21 percent
The explanation: Feinstein says he was surprised to find Chelsea and the Flatiron atop the list. But the whole area’s not uniformly problematic. The main trouble’s in “Chelsea Heights,” the area more or less centered on 23rd Street west of Eighth Avenue. According to appraiser Jonathan Miller, in 2008 this area had “one of the highest concentrations of new-development activity. That’s what this is about: the skew in the far west where there’s a lot of projects to be absorbed.” High Line fans, consider making an offer in 2010.
2. Midtown/Midtown South
Average days on market: 149
Sales-price change from 2007: –27 percent
Closed sales versus inventory: 19 percent
The explanation: Many apartments here are pieds-à-terre, and that’s a weak market segment at a time when getting approved to buy a first home is tough enough. On top of that, a lot of new condos in the area were built specifically for that market, compounding the problem. That said, if you have the cash to buy with a minimal loan, opportunities abound.
3. Soho/Tribeca/Little Italy
Average days on market: 184
Sales-price change from 2007: –15 percent
Closed sales versus inventory: 11 percent
The explanation: Lots of low-hanging fruit here, so pluck away. The particular problem, Miller points out, is that much of the housing stock, both new and old, is made up of larger apartments, requiring bigger loans and more cash up front and therefore “very susceptible to the credit contraction.” For buyers who’ll have no trouble obtaining a mortgage, now may be prime time for loft-hunting.
4. Upper East Side/Carnegie Hill
Average days on market: 162
Sales-price change from 2007: –8 percent
Closed sales versus inventory: 18 percent
The explanation: Feinstein hadn’t expected this moneyed area, but the stats speak for themselves. The occasional buzz-heavy megasale seems to be obscuring the fact that the luxury market has been suffering. “There certainly are sales, but the activity has thinned quite a bit,” reports Miller. “Even though the decline in employment [in the city] wasn’t as high as expected, high-wage-earners were really hit.” Watch this space closely during bonus season.
5. Battery Park City/Financial District/South Street Seaport
Average days on market: 162
Sales-price change from 2007: –7 percent
Closed sales versus inventory: 9 percent
The explanation: Haines says he was struck by the low number of closings, especially in Battery Park City, where prices haven’t dropped much and “nothing’s moving. There seems to be a lot of unrealistic sellers.” Within this area, says Miller, the financial district is particularly bad off, because despite all the new building, the neighborhood, even after a decade, has never quite jelled. Given all the chatter about the neighborhood’s vulnerability, Bid On the City’s Raymond Villani says he’d actually expected the financial district to be higher on the list.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)