DrunkArse: Dude. Have you been to McCormick and Schmidt's? It's an incredibly good deal for two dollars. They could tell me I had to cook it myself and stand up while eating it, and that would be fine. I'd still come out ahead.

I'm going to be near one this wk...worthy of a walk down the road? Tuesday is mojito night and I love those damned things. Never eaten there though.

castufari: DrunkArse: Dude. Have you been to McCormick and Schmidt's? It's an incredibly good deal for two dollars. They could tell me I had to cook it myself and stand up while eating it, and that would be fine. I'd still come out ahead.

I'm going to be near one this wk...worthy of a walk down the road? Tuesday is mojito night and I love those damned things. Never eaten there though.


It's great. The actual menu is a bit pricey, but worth it. If you're doing the happy hour menu, I'd stick with the burger. From my experience, everything else is about what you'd expect for two bucks.

the bigger problem:

the logic some of you are handing out, and the 'legal rights' of said burger-purchaser that you've explained is exactly the reason this rule needs to be enforced to everyone. ill explain...

as ive stated, I've worked at restaurants. at one job we used to have our shift meeting in the morning before the lunch shift. for years we would bring our breakfast to the table and listen to the shift meeting.
after years of doing this, we hired a new employee that would make everyone wait in the meeting while he went and got his food. he was told to hurry up, but because he was late.. everyone would start being late to the meeting. then he would eat rather loudly and be a distraction for everyone.
after a month of this we had a new policy "no eating during the meeting."
you see, they couldn't say, "Drew cant eat during the meeting." because thats discrimination, and they didnt have enough things to fire 'Drew' for.. so to make everyone happy (or unhappy) we just couldnt eat during the meetings anymore.

now... sure. this couple just had a burger, and the M&S was just going to throw the rest away, and this couple wasnt abusing any privileges, and lets be honest, the server couldnt have just grabbed a box and looked the other way.. but they had a rule. (and im not going to argue the validity of the rule.. you might not understand it, but i swear to you... the rule makes sense.) so if they made an exception for them, then some other jackass now has the right to start in with the legality of the whole thing, and how they made exceptions before, and it's now discrimination, and WHARGGGGBLLLEEEE... and now the restaurant could actually be in some legal trouble.

instead they just pissed off a few babies that can't just enjoy a good deal.

DrunkArse:

It's give them an inch jackasses like you that ruin perfectly good happy hours for everyone else. Read your menu, obey the rules, tip well. Life is better if you aren't trying to fight every little condition and recognize a good thing when it comes your way.

sniff... thats beautiful. i couldn't agree more.

DrunkArse Quote 2010-03-13 12:48:18 PM
upright_apes_r_us:

\Face palm, Horse poop, who is serving who?
Sign,"limit one per person.", how hard is that?
They think it is better to offend people.
Like I said there isn't a valid reason.
Any food service that causes friction with their customers has got their mission wrong. We catered to up to 600 a day and the customer came first. Ours was the US GOVERNMENT and they would not tolerate this for a second.
BTW How does the business lose squat when a happy customer leaves with a half eaten hamburger. Then look at all the ridicules claims claiming it does. Face palm!


Dude. Have you been to McCormick and Schmidt's? It's an incredibly good deal for two dollars. They could tell me I had to cook it myself and stand up while eating it, and that would be fine. I'd still come out ahead.

It's give them an inch jackasses like you that ruin perfectly good happy hours for everyone else. Read your menu, obey the rules, tip well. Life is better if you aren't trying to fight every little condition and recognize a good thing when it comes your way.

So grandma and grandpa are jackasses because they can't wolf it down, live on a fixed income and would like to take it home to share it with their cripples old mutt.
Maybe someone's ulcer flared and they can't eat it right then but don't want to be discriminated against.
Maybe the large person waiting in the car is so self consciousness it is too debilitating to come in.
Maybe the diabetics guy doesn't want his service dogs hair to spoil your meal.
Maybe the homeless guy doesn't want to offend you.
Maybe the gal with the flu, or bronchitis, or cold doesn't want to cough on you.
Maybe that schizophrenic person is to paranoid to stay in the store.
Maybe the mother with the crying child doesn't want to bother everyone.
Maybe the individual with the infection doesn't want to spread it.
/ I could go on but I think I made my point. I sorry I up set your ego centric world. I see a law suit just waiting to happen.
The sad fact is the policy doesn't need to be there. It is the product of a misguided belief it will help maximize profits. It however alienates customers.

upright_apes_r_us: So grandma and grandpa are jackasses because they can't wolf it down, live on a fixed income and would like to take it home to share it with their cripples old mutt.
Maybe someone's ulcer flared and they can't eat it right then but don't want to be discriminated against.
Maybe the large person waiting in the car is so self consciousness it is too debilitating to come in.
Maybe the diabetics guy doesn't want his service dogs hair to spoil your meal.
Maybe the homeless guy doesn't want to offend you.
Maybe the gal with the flu, or bronchitis, or cold doesn't want to cough on you.
Maybe that schizophrenic person is to paranoid to stay in the store.
Maybe the mother with the crying child doesn't want to bother everyone.
Maybe the individual with the infection doesn't want to spread it.
/ I could go on but I think I made my point. I sorry I up set your ego centric world. I see a law suit just waiting to happen.
The sad fact is the policy doesn't need to be there. It is the product of a misguided belief it will help maximize profits. It however alienates customers.


Boo farking hoo.

If you want to go to court over two dollars go for it, restaurant tough guy.

It's their business, it's their conditions. Everyone else is fine with it. Walk your ass to McDonald's.

This couple where regular customers, in other words they showed up every Friday for $2 burgers and crab cakes and happy hour beer. Now they and Consumerist regulars and the whiners in this thread are going to boycott McCormick and Schmick's. Good. More room at the bar for decent reasonable people.

upright_apes_r_us: The sad fact is the policy doesn't need to be there. It is the product of a misguided belief it will help maximize profits.

The ban on to-go orders is fine and makes business sense.
Extending that ban to dine-in customers is just a sign of inept or lazy management. I saw the same shiat way too often when I managed. It's a form of conflict avoidance. "We had to ban x because people trying to do y complained, so it was easier to just ban both and not have to explain it anymore."

oops.. didnt mean the crazy link to itself.

ReverendJasen: upright_apes_r_us: The sad fact is the policy doesn't need to be there. It is the product of a misguided belief it will help maximize profits.

The ban on to-go orders is fine and makes business sense.
Extending that ban to dine-in customers is just a sign of inept or lazy management. I saw the same shiat way too often when I managed. It's a form of conflict avoidance. "We had to ban x because people trying to do y complained, so it was easier to just ban both and not have to explain it anymore."


Happy Hour is not some kind of right. It's a special offer. They give the food away at a loss in the hopes that the drinks will make up for it. They can attach any kind of condition they want to that, whether or not it makes sense to you.

Seriously, pay full price if you want all of the options typically available at a restaurant. Otherwise, grow up, order a beer, and eat your two dollar hamburger in one sitting.

DrunkArse: Happy Hour is not some kind of right. It's a special offer. They give the food away at a loss in the hopes that the drinks will make up for it. They can attach any kind of condition they want to that, whether or not it makes sense to you.

"Any" kind of condition is rather arguable.
I can call them lazy and inept for their policy, whether or not that makes sense to you.

DrunkArse Quote 2010-03-13 01:19:27 PM

So your morals can be bought for $2 or less.
I glad you held yourself to such a high standard.

I was at a buffet at a local big city, and while my wife and i were eating, we saw a couple go up to the buffet (after they had eaten two plates of food apiece) load up the plates to the point of the food falling off, and sitting back down. They then asked for "to go boxes". The management told them it wasnt going to happen. Totally with the management on this call. That's pretty cheesy of the people to do. But, for the people in the story, should have just wrapped up his burger and fries in a napkin or two and walked out. They paid for it, it's theirs.

So the cheeseburger and fries cost $1.95, he ate 1/2 the cheeseburger, and very few of the fries. So he lost what, $1.25 worth of food?



B O O...H O O

/hotter than Molly Ringwold's lipstick trick

ReverendJasen: DrunkArse: Happy Hour is not some kind of right. It's a special offer. They give the food away at a loss in the hopes that the drinks will make up for it. They can attach any kind of condition they want to that, whether or not it makes sense to you.

"Any" kind of condition is rather arguable.
I can call them lazy and inept for their policy, whether or not that makes sense to you.


If you find it lazy and inept, go elsewhere. You will not be missed.
The concept works perfectly fine for the vast majority of their customers. Like I said, if you don't want to play by the rules, then pay full price.

upright_apes_r_us: DrunkArse Quote 2010-03-13 01:19:27 PM

So your morals can be bought for $2 or less.
I glad you held yourself to such a high standard.


LOL Wut?

Say it with me...Happy Hour.

They aren't turning away any of the cavalcade of misfits you described in your previous post. All of those people are completely within their rights to call in a to-go order and pay full price.

The restaurant doesn't owe anyone the premium pricing they offer for the customers that they are looking to attract. If you aren't willing or able to comply to the incredibly reasonable conditions they set, go elsewhere. The restaurant is not obliged to lose money on you. Quit ruining it for the rest of us.

Bit'O'Gristle [TotalFark] Quote 2010-03-13 01:41:43 PM
I was at a buffet at a local big city, and while my wife and i were eating, we saw a couple go up to the buffet (after they had eaten two plates of food apiece) load up the plates to the point of the food falling off, and sitting back down. They then asked for "to go boxes". The management told them it wasnt going to happen. Totally with the management on this call. That's pretty cheesy of the people to do. But, for the people in the story, should have just wrapped up his burger and fries in a napkin or two and walked out. They paid for it, it's theirs.


Agreed, to both your claims.
I also don't advocate breaching the basic spirit of either offer as you also note above. I disagree when people try to cling word for word to a misguided policy that crosses legal lines.
Somehow that gets lost on this board quickly.

The customer should keep a ziplock baggie in her purse for emergencies. Seriously- that's what I do. I have two teen-aged boys with massive appetites, but I've never been able to eat the standard entree in most restaurants. (The things are always huge.) Some places are nice and will let me order off the kids or seniors menu (even though I'm thirtysomething) but for those that won't, the ziplock is always there. No sense paying for food you won't get to eat.

I wish restaurants would realize that if I get to order what I want, in the size I want, that leaves me more money for other parts of the meal. Like drinks, dessert, and bigger tips.

upright_apes_r_us: a misguided policy that crosses legal lines

Like a first time home owners loan?

Like a need-based scholarship?

Like a buy one get one free offer?

Like a prize when you buy a box of Cracker Jacks?

Offers are allowed to be conditional and incentive based. As long as those conditions are clearly stated and reasonable, there is no legal line.

Twit.

upright_apes_r_us: So grandma and grandpa are jackasses because they can't wolf it down, live on a fixed income and would like to take it home to share it with their cripples old mutt.

If grandma and grandpa are going to happy hour to get a cheap burger, chances are they know they can't wolf it down, and on their fixed income, they'd order one burger and split it.

In reality, they probably wouldn't even go to this bar in the first place.

All this article did was make me want to go to McCormick and Schmick's for a $2.00 burger and a $15.00 martini. Sounds like a good deal overall to me. And I'll finish my burger.

I had no idea there was an M & S in Michigan. I wonder if they'll let me order cheap happy hour food with my water or iced tea. :)

DrunkArse Quote 2010-03-13 01:54:00 PM
upright_apes_r_us: DrunkArse Quote 2010-03-13 01:19:27 PM

So your morals can be bought for $2 or less.
I glad you held yourself to such a high standard.


LOL Wut?

Say it with me...Happy Hour.

They aren't turning away any of the cavalcade of misfits you described in your previous post. All of those people are completely within their rights to call in a to-go order and pay full price.

The restaurant doesn't owe anyone the premium pricing they offer for the customers that they are looking to attract. If you aren't willing or able to comply to the incredibly reasonable conditions they set, go elsewhere. The restaurant is not obliged to lose money on you. Quit ruining it for the rest of us.

About that delusion of yours: What did I ruin I'm on a board?
I can't now or ever ruin anything for them while I'm on a message board, get real.
How does the offer or the intent behind it change if someone just can't eat it all there? It doesn't it the people are leaving with or without the food so they are not going to spend another dime. Making customers mad isn't a proven method to get money to pay bills. It is however a retarded approach.
What right does a restaurant owner or anyone else have to take a persons food they have to pay for? They don't, it is a criminal act. They sold it it belongs to someone else. They need to get over it. The very spirit of their Happy Hour isn't violated. I listed way people can be effected. Your denial to works of humanity is meaningless. Thank you but I am very under whelmed.

DrunkArse Quote 2010-03-13 02:07:24 PM
upright_apes_r_us: a misguided policy that crosses legal lines

Like a first time home owners loan?

Like a need-based scholarship?

Like a buy one get one free offer?

Like a prize when you buy a box of Cracker Jacks?

Offers are allowed to be conditional and incentive based. As long as those conditions are clearly stated and reasonable, there is no legal line.

Twit.

So I can have a policy that mandates I get to strip search people in my store? Dude a policy is not a contract the courts are clear about that. A policy is a condition one desires complied with. It is not a agreement of compliance. Please try to know what you are talking about, it would save a lot of time.

upright_apes_r_us:

So grandma and grandpa are jackasses because they can't wolf it down, live on a fixed income and would like to take it home to share it with their cripples old mutt.
Maybe someone's ulcer flared and they can't eat it right then but don't want to be discriminated against.
Maybe the large person waiting in the car is so self consciousness it is too debilitating to come in.
Maybe the diabetics guy doesn't want his service dogs hair to spoil your meal.
Maybe the homeless guy doesn't want to offend you.
Maybe the gal with the flu, or bronchitis, or cold doesn't want to cough on you.
Maybe that schizophrenic person is to paranoid to stay in the store.
Maybe the mother with the crying child doesn't want to bother everyone.
Maybe the individual with the infection doesn't want to spread it.
/ I could go on but I think I made my point. I sorry I up set your ego centric world. I see a law suit just waiting to happen.
The sad fact is the policy doesn't need to be there. It is the product of a misguided belief it will help maximize profits. It however alienates customers.

maybe a company successful enough to become a nationwide chain and post profits most years (economic downturn excepted), knows more about running a restaurant business than you.

Fano Quote 2010-03-13 02:20:43 PM
upright_apes_r_us: brandnewchair Quote 2010-03-13 11:06:59 AM
...and the lesson learned:

"Dear McCormick and Schmick's:
While we appreciate that you tried to make a tempting happy hour offer, ($1.99 burger and fries. Dine in only. No take home.) there are FAR too many rules for me to abide. (i.e. no take home)

Please discontinue your incredible offer, or we may be forced to sue you.

signed,
ME ME ME ME ME ME ME!"

Dear owner; Your offer does not need to take the property I paid for from me to limit the number of hamburgers per person. If you treated your customers with dignity and respect they might even come back. If you are so worried about a half eaten hamburger you totally missed the boat and deserve a sound reprimand and sued. The customer's satisfaction should be your highest priority, they pay the bills. If you have policies levied against them don't expect them to. I'm not sure how stupid can you be but you have gotten off a great start.

That was before I put on that extra 60lbs.
Try to keep current!

upright_apes_r_us:
About that delusion of yours: What did I ruin I'm on a board?
I can't now or ever ruin anything for them while I'm on a message board, get real.
How does the offer or the intent behind it change if someone just can't eat it all there? It doesn't it the people are leaving with or without the food so they are not going to spend another dime. Making customers mad isn't a proven method to get money to pay bills. It is however a retarded approach.
What right does a restaurant owner or anyone else have to take a persons food they have to pay for? They don't, it is a criminal act. They sold it it belongs to someone else. They need to get over it. The very spirit of their Happy Hour isn't violated. I listed way people can be effected. Your denial to works of humanity is meaningless. Thank you but I am very under whelmed.

While confined to the internet you are harmless, your litigious claims are exactly the kind of nonsense that would jeopardize offers like this that make sense and offer value, regardless of their validity. Happy Hour is a conditional purchase. One of those conditions is you can't take it with you.

I really don't get how you can wrap your mind around the all-you -can-eat buffet example above, and not get why an establishment might make a similar rule for heavily discounted food.

DrunkArse: I really don't get how you can wrap your mind around the all-you -can-eat buffet example above, and not get why an establishment might make a similar rule for heavily discounted food.

I really don't understand why people would put up a huge fuss over a $2.00 burger. Suing? Really? You'd want to spend thousands on an attorney and many hours/days/weeks dealing with court over a half eaten burger? Hell, handing them a $2 bill should cover it. Posting in this thread is already more effort than the burger is worth.

upright_apes_r_us:

So I can have a policy that mandates I get to strip search people in my store? Dude a policy is not a contract the courts are clear about that. A policy is a condition one desires complied with. It is not a agreement of compliance. Please try to know what you are talking about, it would save a lot of time.


Really? Strip searching? We're talking about an establishment saying A) You have to order a drink B) You can't take it with you. Perfectly reasonable requests given the offer.

In what way is an establishment violating the law by not providing a to-go box? Further, although it would never happen, in what way would they be out of their rights in charging full price to someone taking their food with them in their own bag/box/purse?

altinos:

I really don't understand why people would put up a huge fuss over a $2.00 burger. Suing? Really? You'd want to spend thousands on an attorney and many hours/days/weeks dealing with court over a half eaten burger? Hell, handing them a $2 bill should cover it. Posting in this thread is already more effort than the burger is worth.


I agree. But look what happened to ladies night.

IncubatorJones
maybe a company successful enough to become a nationwide chain and post profits most years (economic downturn excepted), knows more about running a restaurant business than you.

Like Enron? Or like Wal-Mart ravaging towns using government tax breaks the towns provided, yep they know more than everyone.
As to this co they are violating a well known principal of business.
Some greedy people do that.
Is it the greed part that you think makes them so smart?

First, anyone shocked that a person would leave leftovers in their car for a few hours must live in Florida or some other tropical place. For 7 months of the year, my car is colder than my refrigerator. For 3 of those months, my car is colder than my freezer. For that reason, I have no qualms about leaving any perishables in my car for a few hours.

Second, I noticed how sneaky the waitress was at that restaurant... "The hostess initially took our food, but she came back rather quickly, advising us that no happy hour food could be taken to go, with no exceptions." She obviously threw their food away before returning to tell them they couldn't have it to go, so any idea of using Ziploc/tinfoil/SaranWrap was irrelevant at that point.

Lastly, I read a lot of the comments on that website and one really caught my attention that people who have had gastric bypass get little cards to show off at restaurants to get special treatment. Wow, really? What do these cards say? "I had my stomach reduced and therefore your restaurant has to give me special prices on food, making me more important than other customers."?

upright_apes_r_us: Like Enron? Or like Wal-Mart ravaging towns using government tax breaks the towns provided, yep they know more than everyone.
As to this co they are violating a well known principal of business.
Some greedy people do that.
Is it the greed part that you think makes them so smart?


Seriously...Really...Come back to Earth...

Will you not be happy until all happy hours are abolished? Or do you just want restaurants to serve everyone for a loss? How is a two dollar hamburger greedy?

Take a breath. It's okay to admit you are wrong.

MaritimeGirl: First, anyone shocked that a person would leave leftovers in their car for a few hours must live in Florida or some other tropical place. For 7 months of the year, my car is colder than my refrigerator. For 3 of those months, my car is colder than my freezer. For that reason, I have no qualms about leaving any perishables in my car for a few hours.

Second, I noticed how sneaky the waitress was at that restaurant... "The hostess initially took our food, but she came back rather quickly, advising us that no happy hour food could be taken to go, with no exceptions." She obviously threw their food away before returning to tell them they couldn't have it to go, so any idea of using Ziploc/tinfoil/SaranWrap was irrelevant at that point.

Lastly, I read a lot of the comments on that website and one really caught my attention that people who have had gastric bypass get little cards to show off at restaurants to get special treatment. Wow, really? What do these cards say? "I had my stomach reduced and therefore your restaurant has to give me special prices on food, making me more important than other customers."?

It's possible, but I didn't get the impression the food was tossed accidentally. More likely, she went to box it up so as not to piss off her customers and her manager called her on it. It's strange, but I've worked at places where they get really touchy about to-go boxes. You'd think it would be a next to nothing cost, but managers tend to focus on it.

Never seen a bypass card, I've seen several allergy cards, though. I can't imagine what the bypass card would say - Please reduce my portion to the size of a thimble?

DrunkArse

While confined to the internet you are harmless, your litigious claims are exactly the kind of nonsense that would jeopardize offers like this that make sense and offer value, regardless of their validity. Happy Hour is a conditional purchase. One of those conditions is you can't take it with you.

I really don't get how you can wrap your mind around the all-you -can-eat buffet example above, and not get why an establishment might make a similar rule for heavily discounted food.

Given the chance I would indeed file a lawsuit. It would change their policy not their special. They are far less related than you argue them to be.
Leaving with a ton of food violates the spirit of the deal, leaving with a half eaten hamburger doesn't.
It is really basic straight forward stuff I want them to keep their hands off my food I own it. It is the fantasy added to the claim that makes it seem different. I refuse to buy in to the hyped up parts. The fate of a half eaten Hamburger leaving the place doesn't bring on the doom and gloom nonsense being spewed as if it were a fact. The couple of bottles of brew they are worried about not selling is pennies to what they can gain. Suppose someone claims their policy kept them from leaving and they then got drunk and killed someone.

upright_apes_r_us: Is it the greed part that you think makes them so smart?

Wanting to make a profit means they are greedy? That means that everyone running a business is greedy. Do you by any chance accept a paycheck that exceeds your essential expenses?

I'm guessing that more than one of those who have commented in favor of the people involved here have cried discrimination to their local pizza place offering deals for carryout only.

DrunkArse Quote 2010-03-13 02:37:00 PM
upright_apes_r_us:

So I can have a policy that mandates I get to strip search people in my store? Dude a policy is not a contract the courts are clear about that. A policy is a condition one desires complied with. It is not a agreement of compliance. Please try to know what you are talking about, it would save a lot of time.


Really? Strip searching? We're talking about an establishment saying A) You have to order a drink B) You can't take it with you. Perfectly reasonable requests given the offer.

In what way is an establishment violating the law by not providing a to-go box? Further, although it would never happen, in what way would they be out of their rights in charging full price to someone taking their food with them in their own bag/box/purse?

I have never claimed they had to provide a to go box.
If I simply can't eat it all I violated nothing. I can place in in a napkin and pocket it. I had 7-11 try that price hike game with some coffee, I won. A court should find that their policy violates my right by a unfounded attempt to control food they don't own ergo void. It may even rise to a class action claim.

DrunkArse: It's possible, but I didn't get the impression the food was tossed accidentally. More likely, she went to box it up so as not to piss off her customers and her manager called her on it. It's strange, but I've worked at places where they get really touchy about to-go boxes. You'd think it would be a next to nothing cost, but managers tend to focus on it.

Never seen a bypass card, I've seen several allergy cards, though. I can't imagine what the bypass card would say - Please reduce my portion to the size of a thimble?

Personally, I would have simply said "Okay, I'll pay the extra $1.95 for the full price so please now box it up for me to go." I went to a cafeteria the other day with some coworkers and ordered a hot dog and sausage with fries but had no idea what it cost. It was a cafeteria where I've gotten a seafood platter for $6.50 before so it's not like the items would have cost me anything more than $10. One of my coworkers turned to me and asked how much it cost (he hadn't noticed those menu options and was then envious of my order) and I told him I had no idea. He looked so puzzled, stated he'd never buy something without first knowing how much it cost. I replied that I was already in line and wasn't leaving to go elsewhere, it's what I wanted for lunch, I didn't care how much it cost because I knew it wouldn't be a $20 sausage. In the end, it cost a grand total of $7.70 and I had to throw away half of the fries because it was way too much food.

This coworker is exactly the type that would put up a huge fight, make a scene in a restaurant over such a To Go policy but, on the other hand, he seems to have a bottomless stomach so he'd probably be able to order two specials and eat everything at the table, not needing anything to go.

upright_apes_r_us: Given the chance I would indeed file a lawsuit. It would change their policy not their special. They are far less related than you argue them to be.
Leaving with a ton of food violates the spirit of the deal, leaving with a half eaten hamburger doesn't.
It is really basic straight forward stuff I want them to keep their hands off my food I own it. It is the fantasy added to the claim that makes it seem different. I refuse to buy in to the hyped up parts. The fate of a half eaten Hamburger leaving the place doesn't bring on the doom and gloom nonsense being spewed as if it were a fact. The couple of bottles of brew they are worried about not selling is pennies to what they can gain. Suppose someone claims their policy kept them from leaving and they then got drunk and killed someone.



Leaving with a ton of food violates the spirit of the deal, leaving with a half eaten hamburger doesn't.

No, the "deal" was you wouldn't leave with it. That's the spirit and the letter of happy hour. It's perfectly reasonable, and unprejudiced. If you want to take your "property" with you, pay full price.

Given the chance I would indeed file a lawsuit.

Wow. Just wow.

Suppose someone claims their policy kept them from leaving and they then got drunk and killed someone.

I'm speechless.

Please do everyone a favor and never dine out. It's obviously too much for you to handle.

DrunkArse Quote 2010-03-13 02:51:39 PM
upright_apes_r_us: Like Enron? Or like Wal-Mart ravaging towns using government tax breaks the towns provided, yep they know more than everyone.
As to this co they are violating a well known principal of business.
Some greedy people do that.
Is it the greed part that you think makes them so smart?


Seriously...Really...Come back to Earth...

Will you not be happy until all happy hours are abolished? Or do you just want restaurants to serve everyone for a loss? How is a two dollar hamburger greedy?

Take a breath. It's okay to admit you are wrong.

What are you smoking while you are trolling.

upright_apes_r_us: I had 7-11 try that price hike game with some coffee, I won. A court should find that their policy violates my right by a unfounded attempt to control food they don't own ergo void. It may even rise to a class action claim.


Oh, this is getting rich.

Do tell the circumstances around your 7-11 coffee. I was unaware there was a discount for loitering.

I'm sorry, since we don't charge a lot for this particular dish, you cannot take your leftovers home with you. Sincerely, the management

...and that's when I called the cops.

Dan128 Quote 2010-03-13 03:02:44 PM
upright_apes_r_us: Is it the greed part that you think makes them so smart?

Wanting to make a profit means they are greedy? That means that everyone running a business is greedy. Do you by any chance accept a paycheck that exceeds your essential expenses?

I'm guessing that more than one of those who have commented in favor of the people involved here have cried discrimination to their local pizza place offering deals for carryout only.

When they try to control the property owned by another to detain that person so they can try to sell a few more drinks, I have go with greedy and most likely criminal.

upright_apes_r_us: When they try to control the property owned by another to detain that person so they can try to sell a few more drinks, I have go with greedy and most likely criminal.

who was being detained? the restaurant did not require anyone to stick around to finish the food, they only said the food couldn't leave. had they paid yet? if not, it wasn't owned by them.

upright_apes_r_us: I'm guessing that more than one of those who have commented in favor of the people involved here have cried discrimination to their local pizza place offering deals for carryout only.

When they try to control the property owned by another to detain that person so they can try to sell a few more drinks, I have go with greedy and most likely criminal.


You just keep getting better.

I'd offer you a discount for pick-up too. It must take a lot of gas to get out to your compound.

You are honestly assuming that someone other than you has cried foul on a pizza carry out deal...good job, Matlock. Apparently, we have much to learn from you.