[joeysteele]

No, I do think it's a fairly good idea if things were safer.
I don't feel it is really safe so although I love eating out.
I haven't since February and can't see me taking even the slightest risk at this time.
Likely not this year now for certain.
Again too, I'd rarely eat out in the earlier days of the week anyway.

Preferring Friday or Weekends myself.

How do I know for instance all is really that safe in the kitchens too.
So no.

For those who have however, I'm pleased you have had some chance to, just please keep safe.

[Liam-]

The name of the scheme will never not be stupid, it’s ****ing ridiculous

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Liam-

The name of the scheme will never not be stupid, it’s ****ing ridiculous

oh you smutty, never associated it with smut until now

[Vanessa]

I'm definitely going tomorrow. Taking advantage now, the offer is only for this month.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Liam-

The name of the scheme will never not be stupid, it’s ****ing ridiculous

Cardi B suggested it?

[MTVN]

^ That's a shame but it must be a very tiny minority that have those problems, in general there seems to have been so much positivity about the scheme.

I went for lunch yesterday and would normally never even have thought to book on a Tuesday but I phoned up three places in advance and they were fully booked and eventually got in the forth place. I also went for a big breakfast today and the place had reservations on most the tables through the whole morning, was lucky to get in without booking

[Cherie]

Yes I think that’s an odd case..went for costa coffee and cake today..it was lovely, socially distanced ....and everyone was acting normally

[Kizzy]

I can't understand why it's not drive through too, surely then you're isolating and supporting the economy?..

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I can't understand why it's not drive through too, surely then you're isolating and supporting the economy?..

They don't want people isolating anymore, it's about encouraging people to dine out and reassure them that it's safe

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by MTVN

They don't want people isolating anymore, it's about encouraging people to dine out and reassure them that it's safe

Well not isolating but you have the option to eat in or out then if it's busy.
It's not actually 'safe' is it? They didn't have to introduce the half price thing imo as in a socially distanced place they would've got the capacity at full price. This as said encourages risks like queues and places ignoring social distancing guidelines.

It could be seen as a herd immunity tactic, in an enclosed space maskless, touching chairs and things. otherwise what is the point?

[user104658]

Having worked a kitchen, I can see why it would be a problem. People probably aren't actually paying less when they're getting half price... they'll pay the same and order double. Kitchens only have so much capacity and it can "tip over the line" very easily in unusual circumstances and as soon as you get a backlog, meals start taking ages to get out to tables, things start going cold, and you have the knock-on of reduced table availability because it's taking so long to feed the people who are already there. I was a pub-chef while I was at Uni and one year the bar manager managed to forget that it was St Patricks day... in a Uni town... with a high Irish student population... and staffed for a normal Thursday... on one of the busiest nights of the year. It was horrendous. I still have flashbacks .

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I can't understand why it's not drive through too, surely then you're isolating and supporting the economy?..

I think the issue is that it was designed to support businesses that haven't been doing OK, i.e. those without delivery/drive-thru capabilities. Fast food places - based on the queues - have been doing fine since they were allowed to reopen and would be doing fine even without the dine-in option.

To be honest I think if the govt. had had the option, fast food franchises wouldn't have been included in the scheme at all, but I imagine they couldn't legally exclude them because they are technically still "eat-in dining" if you go in. But yeah, the scheme really wasn't designed to help out McDonalds and KFC, who don't need it.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Having worked a kitchen, I can see why it would be a problem. People probably aren't actually paying less when they're getting half price... they'll pay the same and order double. Kitchens only have so much capacity and it can "tip over the line" very easily in unusual circumstances and as soon as you get a backlog, meals start taking ages to get out to tables, things start going cold, and you have the knock-on of reduced table availability because it's taking so long to feed the people who are already there. I was a pub-chef while I was at Uni and one year the bar manager managed to forget that it was St Patricks day... in a Uni town... with a high Irish student population... and staffed for a normal Thursday... on one of the busiest nights of the year. It was horrendous. I still have flashbacks .



I think the issue is that it was designed to support businesses that haven't been doing OK, i.e. those without delivery/drive-thru capabilities. Fast food places - based on the queues - have been doing fine since they were allowed to reopen and would be doing fine even without the dine-in option.

To be honest I think if the govt. had had the option, fast food franchises wouldn't have been included in the scheme at all, but I imagine they couldn't legally exclude them because they are technically still "eat-in dining" if you go in. But yeah, the scheme really wasn't designed to help out McDonalds and KFC, who don't need it.

Yep some forethought on the subsidy would have been good and gear it towards those only without the option of drive through or take away. Or have 50% for those without and 25% for those with.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Having worked a kitchen, I can see why it would be a problem. People probably aren't actually paying less when they're getting half price... they'll pay the same and order double. Kitchens only have so much capacity and it can "tip over the line" very easily in unusual circumstances and as soon as you get a backlog, meals start taking ages to get out to tables, things start going cold, and you have the knock-on of reduced table availability because it's taking so long to feed the people who are already there. I was a pub-chef while I was at Uni and one year the bar manager managed to forget that it was St Patricks day... in a Uni town... with a high Irish student population... and staffed for a normal Thursday... on one of the busiest nights of the year. It was horrendous. I still have flashbacks .



I think the issue is that it was designed to support businesses that haven't been doing OK, i.e. those without delivery/drive-thru capabilities. Fast food places - based on the queues - have been doing fine since they were allowed to reopen and would be doing fine even without the dine-in option.

To be honest I think if the govt. had had the option, fast food franchises wouldn't have been included in the scheme at all, but I imagine they couldn't legally exclude them because they are technically still "eat-in dining" if you go in. But yeah, the scheme really wasn't designed to help out McDonalds and KFC, who don't need it.

No one I know that availed of it ordered double, they were happy to get the a meal at 50% off the scheme seems to have worked well from what I can gather

[MTVN]

Yeah I mean surely not that many people are so gluttonous that they'll massively overeat by ordering themselves two meals just because they can.

The only way I'd think people are ordering more is they might now have a starter or desert as well as they're main

[caprimint]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Yeah I mean surely not that many people are so gluttonous that they'll massively overeat by ordering themselves two meals just because they can.

The only way I'd think people are ordering more is they might now have a starter or desert as well as they're main

*their

You've had one too many Matthew

[Dogeatdog]

Only over the last couple days because when this scheme first started the queues for places was absolutely ridiculous it just wasn’t worth the wait.

[Crimson Dynamo]

did maccies at weekend and sat in. was fine

[bots]

restaurants that were already busy shouldn't have signed up for the scheme, they were being greedy

[caprimint]

[Ammi]

...there is always so much conflicting contrast in media articles as well...another media source was reporting a similar article, which I read yesterday or the day before, I can’t recall which

‘Overworked and abused': Some hospitality staff can't wait for Eat Out to Help Out to end...


https://uk.yahoo.com/news/eat-out-he...075209676.html

...but I’ve also read an article in the last few days...(...apologies I don’t have a link for that one...)...which was calls from restaurants for the scheme to be given another month in September because it’s helping so much...

[Ammi]

...in before their conflicting stories are deleted with their thread...