large booking at restaurant- how to split the bill?

missbiggles1

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

I don't think anyone's actually said that they'll go out to a restaurant and not have anything to eat and drink?

My point (I don't know about anyone else's) is that you should be able to have what you want without being judged by your dining companions.

Surely this whole thread is about people "judging" their dining companions, whichever side of the argument you take?

Georgiegirl256

missbiggles1 wrote: »

Surely this whole thread is about people "judging" their dining companions, whichever side of the argument you take?

How so? I thought it was about how to split the bill fairly?

I personally try not to judge people and take them as they come and enjoy their company. I don't analyse what they do and don't eat. As has already been mentioned, any feelings of awkwardness because you (general you) are eating and they aren't having that particular course or wine is down to the individuals own insecurities and is their problem.

If I go out with my husband and MIL for example, then I am the only one to have a starter. It doesn't bother me that I'm eating and they're not.

Foxriver8

Personally I hate paying over the odds for an expensive restaurant where you are constantly checking the prices of everything on the menu and even having to make your choice based on the price......if I was in a group situation somewhere like this, I can see how the bill and how to split it might be a problem.

For this reason, we tend to go to nice, reasonably priced restaurants where we can relax and get a starter,main,pudding and drinks and know that it's not going to bankrupt us.

Eating out is to be enjoyed and I feel stressing over the prices takes the enjoyment out of it. Ditto haggling over "who had what" etc when it comes to splitting the bill. When the bill comes, whatever group I am with, I would generally suggest splitting it,being very aware if I had more than somebody or if somebody there had very little. Everybody would chip in and I would generally just give a few £ back to somebody if they didn't have much. If it was me that didn't have much though, I would not take anything back unless somebody suggested I did.

I am by no means loaded, but in a reasonably priced restaurant (ie £4/5 a starter, £8-£10 for a main) I can afford to get what I want without worrying. If I was with somebody who couldn't easily afford it, I would probably pay for them.

I feel that over my lifetime of eating out with friends,family and colleagues it'll even itself out. If there's a whole table of people anxious to split the bill exactly I would personally think that would suck the enjoyment out of it a bit.

silvercar

Foxriver8 wrote: »

Personally I hate paying over the odds for an expensive restaurant where you are constantly checking the prices of everything on the menu and even having to make your choice based on the price......if I was in a group situation somewhere like this, I can see how the bill and how to split it might be a problem.

For this reason, we tend to go to nice, reasonably priced restaurants where we can relax and get a starter,main,pudding and drinks and know that it's not going to bankrupt us.

Eating out is to be enjoyed and I feel stressing over the prices takes the enjoyment out of it. Ditto haggling over "who had what" etc when it comes to splitting the bill. When the bill comes, whatever group I am with, I would generally suggest splitting it,being very aware if I had more than somebody or if somebody there had very little. Everybody would chip in and I would generally just give a few £ back to somebody if they didn't have much. If it was me that didn't have much though, I would not take anything back unless somebody suggested I did.

I am by no means loaded, but in a reasonably priced restaurant (ie £4/5 a starter, £8-£10 for a main) I can afford to get what I want without worrying. If I was with somebody who couldn't easily afford it, I would probably pay for them.

I feel that over my lifetime of eating out with friends,family and colleagues it'll even itself out. If there's a whole table of people anxious to split the bill exactly I would personally think that would suck the enjoyment out of it a bit.

Good post. Totally agree with you.

The fact that there would be some people watching what everyone eats as well as scrutinising the bill would dampen the evening for me..

In the same way that going to the cinema involves a discussion beforehand on what everyone wants to see and then everyone goes, everyone pays the same amount and everyone is happy. the same should happen with a restaurant, everyone agrees where to go and then everyone pays the same amount. Nobody watches the costs of what they eat and what everyone else orders, everyone enjoys the evening out and everyone pays the same. So the pre-discussion means everyone is happy to pay for that restaurant.

burnoutbabe

agreed, my friends would generally say what restaurant they want to go to and we'd all check we could afford to eat there (and assume some mains and starters, probably not pudding as well). If someone said they could not afford, we'd go elsewhere, not the rest of us eat what they wanted in front of them and they have 1 salad and water.

group meals with say work colleagues, then choose a set menu as much much easier to then split and no one feels stiffed on the food part.

FBaby

Everybody would chip in and I would generally just give a few £ back to somebody if they didn't have much. If it was me that didn't have much though, I would not take anything back unless somebody suggested I did.

That's fine when it is a one-off or you only meet with the people once a year or so. OH and I took this attitude for a couple of years, meeting every 3 to 6 months, but after it happened 6 or so time, each time paying about £40ish more between the two of us, it started to get annoying and we realised that if we didn't say something at this stage, it could go on for many more years.

Person_one

silvercar wrote: »

Good post. Totally agree with you.

The fact that there would be some people watching what everyone eats as well as scrutinising the bill would dampen the evening for me..

In the same way that going to the cinema involves a discussion beforehand on what everyone wants to see and then everyone goes, everyone pays the same amount and everyone is happy. the same should happen with a restaurant, everyone agrees where to go and then everyone pays the same amount. Nobody watches the costs of what they eat and what everyone else orders, everyone enjoys the evening out and everyone pays the same. So the pre-discussion means everyone is happy to pay for that restaurant.

The cinema analogy makes absolutely no sense. It costs what it costs, unless you're a child/pensioner/student etc. There aren't lots of different options to vary the cinema experience or choose your own budget!

I think a lot of people who just want to 'enjoy the experience' and 'not stress about money' are underestimating the stress their attitudes can cause to their fellow diners. Sometimes, for some people, a few pounds really does make a big difference. Let people spend their own money according to their budget, please don't try to spend it for them!

burnoutbabe

PasturesNew wrote: »

So how would that work for me then? You ask me to join you all and I say "Yes" - and I stick a £10 note in my pocket to cover my meal... and a £10 note in the other pocket in case I'm tempted by something extra and/or I have an emergency to deal with ... so, I'm out the front door "loaded". £20 in my pocket, I expect to come home with £10.

Then I get there .... and I can afford what I planned to eat, I've got the money for it ..... but then somebody decides that after I've had my £8.95 veggie burger/chips ..... and they've had the king prawn starter, bottle of wine, huge rump steak with all the trimmings, fresh dessert of the day, coffee and a brandy ..... that we'll split the bill.

And we've all had the same evening? Should pay the same?

I'd be right embarrassed when Mr King Prawns/Steak guzzler held out his hand for my £50 contribution towards the bill and I didn't have it.



I'm sure Mr King Prawn & Steak's conversation wasn't THAT titillating!

Why embarrass ME when he can't afford what he's ordered?

I think, if you always just came out with £10 and did not eat much, you would generally not be invited to an expensive night out much, people would tend to ask you to cheaper places where it is less awkward. Or just meet for lunch/drinks/a cafe/harvester.

onlyroz

missbiggles1 wrote: »

If you go out for dinner then that's what you're doing for the evening - unless you're just meeting for a curry on your way to the cinema etc, you don't normally go out for dinner and then do something else as well - that would run up expensive!

All through this thread you've made huge assumptions about how people choose to dine out - but your way is not the only way. Sure, for you dining out is an all-consuming experience that involves spending several hours in a restaurant eating three or more courses and drink in several drinks, where everybody is just as happy to tuck in as you are, and can afford to pay an equal share of the bill regardless of whether they had lobster and champagne or the mushroom risotto and lemonade.

If people want to do things differently then how does it affect you? If I want to have a 90 minute one course meal followed by a trip to the theatre then why do you care? If I can only manage a starter and main when you're having three courses plus wine and cheese then how does it affect your own enjoyment?

And why should I pay £50 if I've only consumed £20 worth of food? What makes you think it is reasonable for me to subsidise your meal and pay your tip, with a smile on my face as you finish your liqueur coffee that I passed on because I have to drive home?

Kim_kim

burnoutbabe wrote: »

I think, if you always just came out with £10 and did not eat much, you would generally not be invited to an expensive night out much, people would tend to ask you to cheaper places where it is less awkward. Or just meet for lunch/drinks/a cafe/harvester.

I don't understand this.
If they fund themselves & pay their way why is it an issue?
I'm in the pay seperatly camp too. I'm happy to pay my way, but I'm not subbing others - not do I want to feel I can't order the fillet steak because other people will be paying towards it.
Why on earth is it an issue with people paying for their food & drink only.