We recently ate at Barney’s in Locust Valley. Overall, the ambiance and food are really good. The one issue that I had that still sticks in my craw, is the split fee they charged us for sharing an appetizer.
For context, Barney’s is a refined New American and French-influenced restaurant with a cozy, old-world interior and seasonal menu. It has been a long time favorite for me for special occasions and romantic dinners. They have a fireplace and intimate tables.
We ordered a Caesar Salad to start, which we shared and then I ordered Barney’s Famous Long Island Duck and my wife ordered the Pan Seared Diver Scallops for our entrees. The Caesar Salad was $16 and both entrees were $46 a piece. When the bill came, there was a line additional charge for splitting the Caesar Salad (and the charge was $8 or 50% of the cost of the salad).
I have seen these split fees on entrees in a few restaurants. The most notable are in diners in Florida where you get a whole bunch of old people who split their meals. As I get older, maybe I now fall into that category. I rarely see these split charges in fine dining establishments.
My reaction was not only one of surprise but annoyance. If they told us about this split charge, I probably would have ordered another appetizer since I was already paying for half of it anyway. Another fact that annoys me is that it is common for people to share appetizers. In fact, my favorite part of the meal is to share a bunch of appetizers at the table. I have ordered a whole pasta for the table to share. I was wondering if this restaurant would charge us a split charge for the pasta. I also learned that their split charge for entrees is $15. Would I be on the hook for this if I shared a pasta for the table?
As I think about it, while split fees should only be a few dollars (and 50% of the cost of an appetizer may not qualify as a few dollars), is the restaurant sending me a message? Anything special or customized, will be monetized and cost me more. I understand when you add something onto a dish like adding chicken to a salad, but charging simply because two people want equal portions of a single dish feels different.
Interesting enough, we did share a dessert (Flourless Chocolate Cake) and there was no charge for this. Based upon their logic, maybe we should have.
I understand why there may be a reason for the split charges. My take is to ensure that the restaurant generates their expect sales amount from each table. By splitting dishes, patrons may generate a lower bill than the restaurant wants or needs. To me this makes sense for a restaurant to install a split fee on sharing entrees. But that same logic does not seem applicable to sharing appetizers. A significant number of people do not order appetizers and will only order an entrée. In that event, should a restaurant institute a minimum charge to cover their costs. How do drinks factor into their minimum cost analysis? If we order two drinks, should that go against our minimum?
The last thing that I want to feel is that I am being nickel and dimed at every point. This approach on split fees leaves a sour taste in my mouth. One option is for the restaurant to be transparent with its patrons about the fee. The best way to do it is for the waitstaff to inform its customers about the restaurant policy. This was not done. In reality though, I would still be annoyed since I do not feel that an appetizer split fee is warranted and I may act accordingly.
My overall conclusion is that Barney’s wants to portray itself as an upscale eatery with a romantic environment but to me, this is not a pleasurable one when you try to nickel and dime me. There are several places here on Long Island that I plan to frequent instead of Barney’s as a sign of protest. Their surprise fees diminish my eating experience.