large booking at restaurant- how to split the bill?

Foxriver8

onlyroz wrote: »

The ones who think it's "mean spirited" not to split the bill are often the ones who start the meal with a fancy cocktail, order three courses, neck back a bottle of wine or two to themselves, and then order a liqueur coffee at the end of the meal. They then get all huffy when the vegetarian designated driver only wants to pay for their mushroom stroganoff and diet coke.

Well, that's not the case with me. If that is the situation you are generally in then in my opinion you have some very questionable friends!

Person_one

Foxriver8 wrote: »

2) People who have a bee in their bonnet about "subsidising others". Whilst technically, yes, OK, why should you, I find it a bit mean spirited and not really in keeping with the whole spirit of the thing.

Is it not more mean spirited to be absolutely fine with letting other people pay more than their fair share because of what you chose to order?

If I was in a 'split the bill evenly' situation I would feel really guilty about ordering more than others, and would probably order cheaper/less just to avoid being subsidised!

onlyroz

missbiggles1 wrote: »

You don't take it off someone else's plate - you offer them a taste on your fork - you must've seen people leaning forward and doing this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Tn0HSVq7E

Foxriver8

pigpen wrote: »

that would mean losing your arm in my family!!! ... disgusting practice.. one does not touch anothers food.. ever!! I wouldn't take my partners food and he knows better.. if someone stole some of my food from my plate I would not eat the rest.. absolutely not a bite.


The only comments made about the food are usually if it is nasty... we have far more interesting things to talk about!

We are all major greedy so have 3 courses.. when my elderly nanna was alive we would split her bill with everyone else.. regardless of what she ate or how much. I'm pretty much the only one that doesn't drink.

We usually round up what each has eaten.. we add up our own.. round up to the nearest £1 as a tip and pay that.. each pays for their own children.. sometimes my mother will chip in a bit for mine but rarely and I would never expect it!

I find this very odd. How does a friend "stealing" something off your plate affect the rest of your food? Is it in case they've touched it? Do you find your friends / family that repulsive? :eek:

You would honestly just sit there and refuse to eat your dinner and when they asked why you'd say "because you stole a chip" ? :rotfl:

pollypenny

Gosh, it seems that no one can win here, folks.

Just do what suits you and your friends.

Foxriver8

Person_one wrote: »

Is it not more mean spirited to be absolutely fine with letting other people pay more than their fair share because of what you chose to order?

If I was in a 'split the bill evenly' situation I would feel really guilty about ordering more than others, and would probably order cheaper/less just to avoid being subsidised!

Why are you assuming I am letting people pay more? I am not much of a drinker and not one to order steak/lobster etc, so my part of the bill is more often than not less but il split evenly. In the event that I do order something more expensive I'l always put in more money.

However, my point is that seems to be a much nicer way than a load of ppl calculating out exactly what they had and what other ppl had and what they owe them. And my friends / colleagues would all do the same.

This whole issue seems to me to be a matter of the people in question and not the method of payment - even if a bill is "being split down the middle" most ppl (in my experience) will put in extra if it's blatantly obvious they had loads more (as in your example). When it's a case of "you had two cokes, I only had one, and your pasta was £1.50 more exensive than mine" - I find THAT incredibly mean spirited and just a bit ridiculous.

onlyroz

Foxriver8 wrote: »

However, my point is that seems to be a much nicer way than a load of ppl calculating out exactly what they had and what other ppl had and what they owe them. And my friends / colleagues would all do the same.

I don't think anybody has suggested calculating what you've eaten to the penny, or having arguments over how many olives you had, or whether you took any garlic bread or not.

I imagine most people would be happy with a rough estimate of what they'd had rounded to (say) the nearest fiver, and then throw in an extra few quid for a tip. That way you can order whatever you want, whether that's a single course or three courses plus wine and coffee, without having to worry about what the bill will come to.

duchy

Well I want to go out to dinner with Georgie

The rest of you are bonkers !!!

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I'll sometimes have two starters rather than a starter and a main -just because it's what I fancy from the menu ........and if the wine list is full of pretentious not very good wine - I'll wash it down with sparkling water....... None of my friends are offended by this whether they drink like fish themselves -as some of them do .....or don't drink at all for health or religious reasons ....as some of them do.

If someone had the nerve to tell me I was spoiling their evening because I had two starters instead of of a starter and a main - they'd be told to jog on by all and sundry - and not invited to join us the next time. It's not about the food it's about the company !

gettingtheresometime

Foxriver8 wrote: »

The two different things I am getting from this thread are

1) people who are on v tight budgets, are happy to go out, order just a main and a water (or whatever) because it's all they can afford. As stated previously, in situations like this I am happy to pay for a friend - over the course of a lifetime things like this even themselves out.
.

Reminds me of when we went out for my sister's hen party.

One of the girls was a student whereas all the rest of us were earning.

She joined in the meal fully but you could she was mentally doing the maths so when the bill came us that were earning chipped in abit extra and told her that she wasn't paying and she could repay the favour once she was in a position to do so.

The few ££s extra that we had to pay to cover her meal was worth it just that she could enjoy the night

coolcait

I choose not to split the bill.

Those of a nervous disposition may wish to look away now.

I am that person who:

- orders exactly what she wants to eat, even when it's the most expensive thing on the menu

- orders as many courses as she is capable of eating (that's a fair capacity)

- has an aperitif, wine with the meal, a digestif and/or a liqueur coffee

- talks about the food while eating it

- invites others to try her meal if it is particularly good

- accepts, with alacrity, invitations to try others' food.

At some point in the evening - which may be when the bill comes, or may be at the start of the evening, or may be when I'm ordering my third course - I'll make it clear that I'll be getting a separate bill for what I've had to eat and drink.

My declarations will be accompanied by a variety of self-deprecating (or honest :rotfl:) statements about my gluttony and tendency to be bibulous.

There are usually a few murmurs of the 'no one minds/we're happy to split the bill' ilk. But there's no real resistance to the idea that I pay my own gluttonous, bibulous way.

Rightly so.

As a result, I tend to see these 'split the bill' discussions as an indictment of those who - like me - have gluttonous and bibulous tendencies, but - unlike me - aren't willing to pay for those tendencies in cold, hard cash.