3750 is not common to mean 3,750 in a lot of contexts, which is exactly what you proved by your next example. so context matters, basically you proved yourself wrong.
I think it's the other way around. People don't seem to realize how completely retarded it is to pay over 10x the price for something that is MAYBE 2x as better as something you can get at 1/10th the price. Basic financial management.
Then again, this is atot, if a meal does not cost at least 200 bucks then it's considered garbage. The high priced restaurant business must be ludicrous though. It's basically the Monster Cables of food and there are enough people who are actually willing to pay for it.
LOL that is hilarious.
I once drank a $50 bottle of beer, but never could imagine $3000 for a bottle of wine. That is insane!!!
Call the cops
Don't sign the slip and let the cc deal with a fraud case
Small claims court
After that you're probably screwed
Yup, this. And never eating at that restaurant, fuck them. The bad press will put these db's out of business unless they make it right.
no not when entrees are in the 30's and there are plenty of bottles of wine in ahte 30-100 range. No that is not in context.
Your definition of context needs therapy.
This, have amex sort this out. Definite bait and switch on the waitress part.
Or explain to the waitress that you have a visual impairment and ask for her help not expecting her to try to pull a fast one?
This. Of course, I have 20/20 vision. If the guy had a menu in his hand and the price was on it, he has no excuse. If the price isn't listed or he was simply relying on the server to provide the information on the menu, it's on the server for not making it clear.
Dude was f*ing pointed to the bottle and price on the menu, and he confirmed it was what he wanted.
Well, yeah, but that was after the waitress told him it was $37.50, not three thousand, seven hundred and fifty or thirty seven hundred and fifty.
Big difference. Restaurant should eat the cost of it minus the $37.50 they told the guy it was.
So many people here ignore the FACT that someone open the menu up, and pointed to the wine on the menu, and pointed to the price, and he CONFIRMED that was what he wanted.
That doesn't mean jack shit. The waitress was pointing to the bottle that she recommended and said the price was "3750". Of course he didn't look at the price.
THAT ISN'T WHAT HAPPEN. Someone else came out and someone else showed him the menu and price and asked him if the bottle and price was what he wanted. He said yes.
You know for certain the sommelier, came out an said the price? Because, in my experience, this has never been the case. The restaurant is also claiming he didn't ask for a recommendation, but asked "for the best bottle" available. Is that true as well? They could just release the video showing that is what happened, but they won't. I wonder why?
No. She said thirty seven fifty, which is ambiguous. Someone else came out and verified that it was the wine he wanted and the price was acceptable, by pointing to the wine on the menu and price, which was clearly $3,750.
HE SHOULD NOT HAVE CONFIRMED THE WINE AND PRICE WERE ACCEPTABLE AFTER BEING SHOWN IT IN WRITING. AFTER HE DID THIS IT DOESN'T MATER WHAT THE WAITRESS SAID.
ALL THAT MATERS IS HE WAS GIVEN THE PRICE IN WRITING, AND CONFIRMED HE COULD READ THE PRICE, AND CONFIRMED IT WAS THE BOTTLE HE WANTED.
Um no, the price on the menu isn't "$3,750", it's listed as "23073 Screaming Eagle, Oakville 2011 3750". Big difference for an old fogey who has poor vision and the waitress is already pointing to the item. That's called taking advantage of old people:
1) Old man asks waitress for wine recommendation.
2) Waitress recommends one of the most expensive wines on the menu and says it's "only 3750" in a restaurant where most entrees are in the mid $30 range (i.e. it's not an upscale place).
3) In low lighting and with statistically-likely vision impaired old man, waitress points - on a menu multiple numbers and not clearly labeled with dollar signs - to the $3,750 wine she recommends, betting the old man won't read it.
4) Profit $$$$$$$$$
Textbook on how to fuck the elderly over.
It is confirmed that soneone else came out and pointed to the bottle and price on the menu and confirmed that what he wanted, and he told them yes. He even admits to this, he claims now he was only pretending he could read the menu.
Soon, the sommelier -- the wine steward -- presented the corked bottle at the table. Lentini said he was having conversation with his companions and didn't really pay attention, but he approved of the bottle.
A taste of the wine was served for him to sample. He approved, he said, and the bottle was placed on the table.
^^Lol elderly. That dude is what, 52?
KT