On Skimpy Pours

Sometimes the best part of reading blogs is the comments. The best blogs out there tend to have two things going for them - sharp, entertaining writers, and sharp, entertaining readers who chime in on the boards. I stumbled across a very informative and interesting comment on one of the posts of a SF Gate wine blog.

The blogger was relaying a question they'd receieved from a reader about skimpy wine pours. With the struggling times, they thought there was a notable trend of smaller pours in restaurants . . . without a dip in price. The author didn't do much in the way of answering (other than to say she might investigate), but a helpful reader who works in restaurants gave a great rundown of how single pours have always, and will always work.

From the post:

"Frankly, there's no rule about what the proper pour is, and it's up to any restaurant to determine that for itself based on its concept and cost structure. True, the bartender has leeway, but the price:portion size discussion permeates all areas of the restaurant business - small plates vs entrees, ala carte vs tasting menus, old fashioned martini glasses vs jumbos, etc. etc. The concerned citizen writing to you is clearly more concerned with quantity than quality (everyone knows the wine by the glass is always the cheapest stuff in the house, outside the cooking wine). It would be an analagous missive to complain that the steak or fish serving has shrunk over time, which it has, without also mentioning the price. Many restaurants market themselves very effectively with lower prices than their competition but also offer smaller servings. Any price rating system for restaurants should note that, as should the conspiracy theorist. Also, for what it's worth, the reidel pictured can hold half a bottle of wine, but that's not why it's big: it's big and the pour relatively small so as to aerate the wine and allow the customer to smell it better."