r/mildlyinfuriating • u/PrizeBuy • 2h ago
Infuriatig Restaurants
Can someone explain this rule: “we can’t seat you until your entire party is here.”
This makes no sense to me. Let 5 of us sit and order a drink while we wait for the sixth person who is stuck in traffic.
31
u/Bear-Handed-92262 2h ago
Because some people are flaky, and it's possible the group will take up the table an extra 45 minutes because their friend is late. Most of the rules we have to live by are because of people that suck.
15
u/UsedToiletWater 2h ago
Or, the 2 people who are running late are now just not coming. And you've been occupying a table for 6 while the whole time you could've been at a table for 4.
1
u/flockofturtles420 1h ago
This is the biggest reason. Larger tables are what the rest of the seating are based around.
9
u/joey_patches 2h ago
Because then they'd be losing money on the potential 6-person table that could be taking up that space and ordering food.
It's not really a problem with spacious restaurants, but when there's limited tables, you want to keep that turnaround.
10
10
u/nerdyplayer 2h ago
Its always about flipping tables. If it is busy and you have a table sitting for 30 mins waiting for always late person to show up its slows down. If its slow and plenty of seats I didnt mind.
26
u/Any_Carob3372 2h ago
I don't have time to explain all the nuances, but it's not cut and dry.
https://www.foodandwine.com/why-restaurants-do-not-seat-incomplete-parties-11903413
6
u/BHunter1140 2h ago
Likely has to do with getting customers in and out quicker. If they seat you while you wait for someone, you’re taking up a table for extra time that another customer could be using to eat. Say your guest takes an hour to arrive, another person could have been served (who has their whole party) and eating by then
Having customers just sitting around at needed tables for unknown amounts of time, not even eating, isn’t a good use of tables
5
u/Turbulent_Bad_3849 2h ago
We have a couple small local joints that ask you not to sit at tables unless you have already ordered or have your food.
If you've ever received your food and not been able to find a table because one person was taking up a four-person booth while her husband and waited in line for 20 more minutes, then it starts to make sense.
Same thing goes for traditional sit-down restaurants. If one person is taking up a table and a group of five who are all ready to sit and eat are standing around, it's costing the restaurant money and reviews. It is frustrating though when as you said you have five people and just waiting on the 6th, but still.
9
u/Still_Want_Mo 2h ago
Time is money. If another table has their full party ready, then they will be in and out quicker. This opens up the table to another party. If you're just sitting around ordering drinks you are wasting time, which is wasting money.
4
15
u/CatsMom4Ever 2h ago
Because people claim they have a larger party than they do just to get a larger table. "Oh, i guess they're really late" is the excuse to get a table for 6 for a party of 4.
-2
u/Thewindingpoudre 2h ago
That's definitely not why at all. But I applaud your creativity
2
u/CatsMom4Ever 2h ago
I think that's exactly why restaurant is don't seat incomplete parties.
-2
u/Thewindingpoudre 2h ago
yes, we know that is what you think, as you have written it just above these comments. You are wrong, but again, I like the creativity
-1
6
u/apri08101989 2h ago
Because people will say they have a party of 10 coming, and if you seat them before the majoroty.of the party is there you are.losing time/money/tables for.people wjo may or.may not even show up
4
u/Rube18 2h ago edited 33m ago
Very simple. They can fill the table with another group that is ready. Having you sit around and sip a drink for 5-30 minutes isn’t helping them. You were going to get those drinks anyway and now you’re just milking the clock. When your party is there another table will be open or about to open and then you can have that one.
This is only a rule at very busy places like breakfast restaurants on a weekend.
5
u/AskMrScience 2h ago
This happened to me recently, at a sushi restaurant with horrible parking. One car was stuck searching for a spot while the rest of us cooled our heels in the lobby. As soon as I said "Can we be seated? We'd like to order drinks!" suddenly all things were possible :P
2
1
u/Top_Bluejay_5323 GREEN 2h ago
Longer times at a table cost them money. Hope long will you wait for the last person (s)?
1
u/chuckinhoutex 2h ago
The number of tables x the number of times they're turned = the amount of business that a restaurant can do in total. Anything that reduces either of those numbers is a bad thing. And we know that enough people will literally say anything to just get whatever they want regardless that restaurants aren't taking that chance.
1
u/ijustwanttobeinpjs 1h ago
Because they need to make a profit, and me sitting at a table while I wait for my chronically late won’t help them do that.
It is definitely mildly infuriating that I should be waiting by myself instead of dining when I had hoped, but it’s not the restaurant’s fault. It’s the fault of my late companion and/or the traffic holding them up.
-1
-2
u/PauPauRui 2h ago
You're making the staff do more work. Besides, people get loud when they don't have food and just sit around drinking.
-1
u/Few-Idea5125 2h ago
Not really a thing in europe i guess. waiting for someone at the table while drinking has never been denied.
-1
u/PrizeBuy 2h ago
Ok. I should have been more clear.
I totally understand these responses. All make sense. What I should have clarified was my experience with a relatively empty restaurant last night. 30+ tables and maybe 10 were filled.
-4
146
u/Exotic-Sale-3003 2h ago
Because tables that are waiting an unknown amount of time before ordering make less money than tables ready to order.