OK - there is no cake. I made it all up. This is a post though, so it's not all lies! This also isn't the
post I was expecting to publish this week, but as it is fresh in my
mind I feel like I should probably write about it now.
I also want to throw a curve ball in
and say that a lot of what I write is not entirely my honest opinion
on a variety of topics. In a similar way as I discuss topics in real
life conversation, I like to play devil's advocate in order to
promote stronger opinions than my own, which may be more centrist,
and that's no fun, being the belligerent that I am.
Anyway...
Last week I spent 3 days at Thorpe Park (Where I had a generally fantastic time). The food
establishment was dreadful, but this is not meant as a scathing
review (although I suppose by it's nature it is one). My interest was
the nature of the business itself, and in the fact that it was
enabled to perform so poorly. The price of the food was high and the
quality of the food was as basic as it could have been. The manager
seemed to be disinterested with the atmosphere of total chaos displeasure,
and with reasonable cause.
But I have eaten rubbish food before,
and I have spent large amounts on meals in the past, and in both
situations I have been perfectly content with the meal. What was
particularly frustrating in this situation was the combination of the
two. As a result of the lack of competition, the food provided only
needed to accomplish the goal of feeding a person. Which it did...
It made me appreciate the importance of
value for money within restaurants in a free market. We are
fortunate, at least where I live, to have the opportunity to choose
where we eat, whatever your budget. Supply and demand do the rest,
and in that regard I think it is a very positive thing that the
competition exists. If we experience poor value for money we are able
to eat elsewhere; we can offer negative reviews to friends and
family, and in the age of the internet, to almost everybody that wants to listen; and ultimately, whether this drives up quality, drives down
prices, or forces underachievers to close down, it can only be a good thing for consumers. Right?
Agree? Disagree? Let me know via the
medium of comments in the comments. All opinions welcome, no holds
barred!
New completely random topic next week!
I totally agree with the cost/quality of restaurants at places like Thorpe Park, etc. Including gigs and festivals too. One thing we noticed was that even at large events there is often just one licence holder, so it hardly ever matters which stall you go to, the choice is the same, as is the cost. (and you're usually talking poor and extortionate)
ReplyDeleteThe thing is, you're a captive market, so they can pretty much do as they please. I'd love to know what ballpark figure they're paying for the privilege of being sole suppliers to these things, but I'm guessing it's a massive amount. The sad thing is, that if people voted with their wallets, then choice, cost and competition would benefit greatly. After all, if you pay loads for the licence and then nobody eats your 'dirty burger' then what?
But, at the end of the day, it's about convenience a lot of the time. People are lazy, and they're 'treating themselves' in theory (whereas in reality, it's all expensive rubbish) I've done it myself, and always been saddened by the outcome.
The last air show we attended, we did the 'uncool' thing of taking a packed lunch.. and oh my, was it a bazillion times better than the garbage other people were forced to eat.. and we didn't have to queue for half an hour for a cold undercooked 17% 'meat' burger.. It took more effort, but it was a real eye opener for me.