… with the staff of The Standard Hotel.
Gotta admit— the F&B/Hospitality industries really know how to throw a party like nobody else’s business!
:)
Amizetta Cabernet Sauvignon 1998 – Napa Valley, California
Cost: $22.99/bottle
It’s quite a surprise to find an 11 year-old California cabernet at a wine store these days— but I came across this for just a penny under $23 and thought it certainly worth checking out. My palate tends to prefer older more mature wines for their complexity and intrigue which, personally, I find a most exhilarating experience. This Amizetta exhibited telltale typical mature California fruit. The nose is initially dominated by spearmint, ripe currants and black cherry notes. The wine evolves over time in the glass revealing cola notes while maintaining its mintiness. In the mouth, it remains moderately full bodied with supple tannins, at a virtually low acidity (but with plenty of fruit that wraps the tastebuds). It was quite easy to drink and remains soft on the palate, which one wouldn’t normally expect of an aged wine— but it’s possible this wine may have seen better days early on, and perhaps I caught it on the tail end of its peak drinkability. For $23 a bottle, it’s a decent value, and I may look for more recent vintages of this wine in the future.
Rating: 89
Karl Lawrence – Aldin Red Table Wine 2006 – Napa Valley, California
Cost: $29/bottle
Just released by the Karl Lawrence winery as an adjunct, this is really an experimental blended wine of cabernet sauvignon, merlot and cabernet franc. Notes of cherry, Flintstone’s vitamins, sweet oak and berries are consistent on both the nose and palate. However, I must add that it tasted quite young and in need of rest for a few more months, as it appeared very monotone and unevolved. Still it is medium-bodied, with fair levels of fruit that need to settle for it to bolster the structural integrity of the wine. I opened the wine not 24 hours from taking it out of the box, which was shipped the prior day to my home. Will have to explore this further, perhaps later in the year.
Rating: 87
• Tuesday, December 8, 2009. 8:30PM – Matt Dillon, Andre Balazs, Ric Pipino, Justo Artigas, Mark Baker, Cat Wei, Nur Khan, Roy Liebenthal, Ronnie Madra, Natalie Kates, Sasha Muniak, Nick Rytting, and (of course) Sante D’Orazio at the opening night party for the Barely Private exhibit at Milk Studios.
PX This presents THE F&F REVIEW
Hey, sorry we couldn’t make it to "Friends&Family," we were out of town/ had to work/ not invited. We’re really glad we finally managed to come by, though— it’s so nice to see you!
What’s that? You would still like us to take the time to fill out the F&F survey, because you’d love to take advantage of all our vast experience, knowledge, insight, and expertise as long as we’re already here? Because you invited 75 people to F&F, and afterward all you got was 41 "Congrats[es]!" 22 "Awesome[s]!" 3 "Ciao[s]!" and 9 "Best of lucks[s]!" ?
Of course, we’d be honored. Oh ha, yesss, we’ll be honest— brutally honest even, ha ha! After all, that’s what friends & family are for!
No no please, don’t send anything more, we’re stuffed, we can’t breathe, you’ll have to roll us out of here, ha ha ha… !
What was your first impression?
Hmmm…
Please rate the Bar:
It’s small and rather awkward. By virtue of this, the seats (which are actually quite nice) are cramped on top of each other, and the entire set-up is then piled atop the hostess stand. Now factor in the three ladies manning the tiny podium (which is butted up against the bar) and suddenly you have three loud women socializing with each other, the bartender, their two friends (?) seated at the bar next to the podium— and ultimately it’s very hard to hear anything else.
Plus, the wall behind the bar seats is barely more than an arm’s length away, making the entrance/walkway quite narrow and too close to the bar. Overall, I’d say this is a major design snafu for a space that seems to emulate a serene, polished elegance.
Please rate the drinks/ cocktails/ wine:
The wine list is good and diverse, with several choices at a reasonably decent prices. Check the bottle charge before ordering by the glass— you’ll likely find it’s a much better value. The cocktail list is OK, but for the life of me I can’t understand why anyone would specify Absolut for a recipe.
Please rate the Dining Room:
Personally, I find it a bit sterile and uninviting, or to use my guest’s word: "constipated." Some people like that austere, steely, slick vibe, though— I guess.
Please rate the BOH:
The BOH is in the FOH and it’s squeaky clean and spotless. I don’t see George Mendes anywhere, and I do get the distinct impression the BOH is running on auto-pilot without him.
How was the staff?
Fine, but by no means extraordinary.
What did you eat?/ How was the food?
Sea urchin toast: This could have been so incredibly delicious if the sea urchin were just a little more fresh. I would have come back just for this alone.
Pork belly: OK, but for a dish that’s already rich without embellishments, why skimp on creativity? Pretty to look at (presentation-wise) but a little flat on the palate.
Lightly-cured mackerel: Very nice. Light but flavorful. Probably my favorite of all.
Shrimp Alhinho: Uh-oh, overcooked shrimp? That’s a no-no in my book.
Duck confit "Arroz de Pato": The duck is good and tender, but the rice is dry and vapid, especially for a dish that’s so promising in its heartiness. A little disappointing.
(Complimentary) petit fours: Beautiful and exceptional.
What did you like?
The inexpensive $29 Verdejo/Sauvignon Blanc from Rueda opened up quite nicely by the end of the meal.
What did you dislike?
The bar.
What was your last impression?
I wonder if the food would have been better if George Mendes were here.
Would you come back?
Unfortunately, I can think of other places I’d rather go.
Thank you, and hope to see you soon!
Thank you and have a pleasant evening.
Remember Huey Morgan? Sure you do. Well, his band, the Fun Lovin’ Criminals, has a brand spanking new website, as well as a new album and tour date coming this Spring!
We love you, Huey Morgan!
:)
PX This presents THE F&F REVIEW
Hey, sorry we couldn’t make it to "Friends&Family," we were out of town/ had to work/ not invited. We’re really glad we finally managed to come by, though— it’s so nice to see you!
What’s that? You would still like us to take the time to fill out the F&F survey, because you’d love to take advantage of all our vast experience, knowledge, insight, and expertise as long as we’re already here? Because you invited 75 people to F&F, and afterward all you got was 41 "Congrats[es]!" 22 "Awesome[s]!" 3 "Ciao[s]!" and 9 "Best of lucks[s]!" ?
Of course, we’d be honored. Oh ha, yesss, we’ll be honest— brutally honest even, ha ha! After all, that’s what friends & family are for!
No no please, don’t send anything more, we’re stuffed, we can’t breathe, you’ll have to roll us out of here, ha ha ha… !
What was your first impression?
It’s bigger than you’d expect from the outside.
Please rate the Bar:
Nice, considering. The ceiling’s mighty low and the ambience borders on claustrophobic, but it’s a cute, surprising little discovery, if that’s your thing.
Please rate the drinks/ cocktails/ wine:
The wine list is exceptional and diverse, but I suppose that’s to be expected from a former Cru sommelier. The "1/2 bottle" price policy (Bar Henry will open a 750ml bottle and sell just half, if that’s your preference) is unique and original, and reasonably reflective. The cocktail list is thoughtful and adroit. Yup, Bar Henry is a wine/cocktail aficionado’s sweet but mellow little gem.
Please rate the Dining Room:
Rustic but elegant, cozy and welcoming. An astute and cleverly crafted use of the spare square footage.
Please rate the BOH:
On a scale of 1 to 10, maybe a 6. The menu is uncomplicated and a nice fit for both the space and location, but the execution could use a little work. There isn’t much of a truly creative force at work here, made more conspicuous by its incongruity with the beverage program.
How was the staff?
Good. Casual but professional, informal but proficient.
What did you eat?/ How was the food?
Deviled eggs: Eh. Are these pre-filled and cold-stored? Bleh. And did he say truffle? Hmm, I don’t taste any truffle.
Boquerones: Fine. Skewing more toward slimy/mushy than firm/fresh, but adequate.
Serrano ham: Also fine, but I’ve definitely had better quality elsewhere.
Short rib corn tacos: Not bad. Tender, juicy, hearty, but again, unimaginative and essentially average.
Bar Henry burger: Undercooked; way more rare than medium-rare. Ah well, better underdone than overdone. Too lazy (and generally apathetic) to send it back. I’ll live, but it’s a bit disappointing.
Sauteed brussel sprouts: Are these frozen? I think so. And doesn’t the menu say "sauteed"? These seem more like steamed (or rather, over-steamed) and then grilled. Or rather, salamandered? Too mushy and primarily flavorless.
What did you like?
The wine list. The element of clandestinity.
What did you dislike?
I can’t say I really hated anything, but I also can’t say I liked the food.
What was your last impression?
How do they get away with these low-hanging chandeliers (in the bar area)? I’m not even that tall, but I feel like I just barely missed whacking my noggin on that thing.
Would you come back?
If I wanted to have some nice wine and just a small nibble at the bar, then yes, probably.
Thank you, and hope to see you soon!
Thank you and… possibly!
I’m running out of great films to recommend! What to do, what to do… Oh, I know! I’ll just inquire of other people which films they’d recommend. And to keep it all in the spirit of PX This, I’ll ask some of the aficionados and arbiters in and around the F&B/Nightlife industry! Won’t that be fun? Here we go!
Hey, Serge Becker! How’s about a good Netflix recommendation?
“…Sometimes, the way being in the industry has made me feel lately, I’d say… watch The Lives of Others. Yeah, definitely watch that one.”
Thanks! OK, will do!
Chef Anne Burrell et al Sued for Discrimination…
PX This has recently obtained the official Supreme Court docket (Index No. 108471-2008 Filed: March 23, 2009) for Susan Kendall Bradford, Jennifer Sue Lim, and Sarra Hennigan VS Anne Burrell, Centro Vinoteca, Sasha Muniak, and George Elkins alleging that the plaintiffs were subject to "discrimination" and "retaliation" in violation of the Human Rights Law. Among the plaintiffs complaints are the accusations that (former Centro Vinoteca chef) Anne Burell subjected the plaintiffs to persistent ridicule and disparagement, at times calling the plaintiffs (all formerly employed by Centro Vinoteca) such derogatory terms as "slutty," "saggy," "ho," "whore," and "stupid dumb whore… idiot." The plaintiffs also assert Burell persistently addressed them mockingly, commenting on their "cleavage," and "harassing" them with such offensive remarks as, "have you fucked that [co-worker] yet?" The plaintiffs further allege they were wrongfully terminated in "retaliation" for their "complaints" about Burrell.
The lawsuit charges that Elkins and Muniak were aware of these circumstances but failed to address the situation in a manner consistent with the NY State Human Rights Law.
According to the docket, the defendants Elkins and Muniak sought to dismiss these claims "as asserted by all plaintiffs, and as asserted by Hennigan against Burrell, …the Complaint is devoid of any allegation against either Muniak or Elkins or of any actionable comments made by Burrell."
"Additionally, plaintiffs have failed to adequately allege that they suffered adverse employment actions by Muniak and Elkins. As to the remaining allegations which do not involve Burrell, such allegations do not identify (1) who allegedly told Bradford to dress nicely for New Years’ Eve, (2) the manager who allegedly told Lim and Bradford to work during brunch, (3) who allegedly replaced Lim after she left for a few days when her mother passed away, (4) who fired Bradford and gave Bradford’s shifts to the new bartender, (5) who allegedly fired Lim, told her she was being suspended, or which manager never returned her calls, or (6) who allegedly terminated each of them Bradford or Lim, or constructively terminated Hennigan. And,to the extent my of the above-allegations constitute adverse employment actjons, plaintiffs have failed to allege individual liability against Muniak or Elkins under New York law. Their names a re absent from all such allegations, and plaintiffs do not specifically allege that Muniak or Elkins were personally involved in any of said conduct. In addition, those allegations made ‘collectively’ against defendants are similarly insufficient. Thus, plaintiffs failed to state causes of action against Muniak and Elkins."
The Supreme Court, however, disagreed and found, "the Complaint sufficiently alleges Muniak’s, Elkin’s and Burrell’s alleged managerial roles at Centro, their ability to hire and fire plaintiffs, their failures to sufficiently investigate the complaints made against Burrell, and the ultimate termination of Lim and Bradford, and constructive termination of Hennigan." Furthermore, "…plaintiffs’ complaint sufficiently alleges that defendants terminated or constructively terminated the plaintiffs after defendants received complaints concerning Burrell’s alleged discriminatory conduct."
As it currently stands, "dismissal… is denied." The case is presently ongoing.
***************************************************
For more information on Anne Burrell, read PX Me – The Sequel to PX This.
Dick Johnson: Knock knock.
abbe diaz: just get on with it.
DJ: LOL. Sorry! Just trying to lighten the mood… OK, so you saw the Crain’s article?
ad: yah
DJ: What, no rampage in the Crain’s comments section from "Crazypants"? Your fan club must be so disappointed.
ad: what is there to "rampage" about? did you read the article? i thought it was good. it’s nice to see a bit of true, impartial news for a change. there’s nothing for me to refute.
DJ: Eater dotcom commenters are calling for your rebuttal. Or at least, one comment says it’s "surprised" you haven’t denied it on PX This.
ad: yah, i saw it. whatever. i only deny what ISN’T TRUE, duh.
DJ: So, you’re not going to comment? Enquiring minds want to know…
ad: want to know what? nobody asked me any questions.
DJ: OK, fine. I’m asking you.
ad: and i really appreciate that, thanks. but i still don’t see a question.
DJ: What’s going on with Mangia 57th and Centro Vinoteca’s filing for Chapter 11?
ad: is that what i’m supposed to comment on? i’m not their publicist you know. and i have neither the inclination nor the authority to discuss their business with anyone.
are you asking me my personal opinion? because that’s a different story.
DJ: But, by your own admission, you do consult with them occasionally. Word on the internet is you get "highly paid" to do so, right?
ad: Mangia and Centro, obviously, as a company, have plenty of attorneys and advisors. my advice wasn’t sought on this matter, but if it had been, i would have said i wholeheartedly agree with their latest course of action. hypothetically speaking.
DJ: Yes! Let’s play "Hypothetically Speaking"! This should be fun.
ad: loads.
DJ: Hypothetically Speaking: Restaurant Enterprise-101
ad: probably more like RestaurantEnterprise:410, but whatever.
DJ: Hypothetically speaking, what are your thoughts on a company like Mangia57th filing Chapter 11?
ad: ooh. really? what a nice question! hmm, well let’s see—
first of all, let’s assume it’s a company juuust like Mangia57. well, according to the Crain’s article, it would "[owe] creditors less than $10 million."
okay, well let’s say— if i were simply an objective observer and not just some dumb idiot creepface looking to gleefully tapdance on somebody’s grave, i would say that seems like an awful little amount to file over. under $10M total? (i actually very much like how the Crain’s article almost seems to be scratching its head over this one, as well.)
i mean, i would think this would be relatively easy to confirm, but i would assume a company like Mangia takes in about $1M per WEEK.
also— a debt of $335,000 to the landlord and (a disputable) $260,000 to the state? that’s less than $600,000.
i mean… for example, i know of another company juuust like Mangia, and last year their BANK FEES ALONE were about $600,000.
which! brings me to another point.
hey did you see how some of the banks have been rahrah’ing lately because they’re apparently about to pay back billions of dollars in bailout money collected from unsuspecting taxpayers? isn’t it amazing how they were able to raise all that profit so quickly?
oh wait— maybe not so amazing? cuz peoples all over the country are complaining about how their fees have skyrocketed and how the banks do creepy things like intentionally approve all your debit purchases and withdraw monthly fees at random intervals so that when you happen to spend over your available balance because you had no cash on you but you bought a pack of gum at the deli, now suddenly that gum costs you $35 in overdraft fees?
and dumbass that you are, you also went to Kinko’s for your boss and charged another $3.00 on your debit card for copies (expecting to be reimbursed), but now the transaction for those copies have just cost you ANOTHER $35 overdraft fee? so now you just spent $70 on $3 worth of copies and a pack of gum?
now— if last year those banks made that kind of money off the average broke-assed citizen, what exactly do you think is happening to big companies like Mangia?
i mean, imagine instead of say your monthly $15 checking fee they automatically debited (which you thought you still had in your account and that’s why you bought the pack of gum at the deli and charged the copies at Kinko’s in the first place)— that monthly fee was ohhh like $40,000.00?
do you see how that could occasionally be kinda problematic?
now let’s say you went to the bank and you waited on line and you finally got to sit and talk to one of those peoples in the little desk cubicle thingies—
and you said, "hey banker dude. i’ve been your banking customer for dozens of years now and we’ve never had a problem like this before. why do i owe you $70 for a pack of gum and $3 worth of copies from Kinko’s? if you hadn’t taken out that $15 monthly fee… what’s that? it’s $25 now? that’s outrageous!… well you didn’t tell me the price went up and that it would be withdrawn so randomly… how do you expect me to pay an additional $80 in fees for a pack of gum and Kinko’s copies?"
and the bank dude replied, "yesssss, thank you so much for your patronage over the years. suck it. we have bailout funds to pay back cuz president-obama won’t let us get our multimillion dollar bonuses."
hmm.
i don’t know bout you, but if i had another option (and lots of attorneys and advisors!), i’d be damned if i’m paying that $80. i’m just sayin.
that was fun! next question?
DJ: LOL. I’m glad you asked, because I do have another question. What about Centro Vinoteca filing Chapter 11? Oh sorry, I mean HYPOTHETICALLY, what about a company LIKE Centro Vinoteca filing Chapter 11?
ad: wow. another great question!
well, HYPOTHETICALLY, let me ask you this. how does one prove, exactly, you know something?
DJ: Beg pardon? You’re not making sense.
ad: yah exactly, thank you.
okay
how about— let’s just say… i lost… an umbrella, for example. and then i said to you, "hey dick-johnson. where’s my umbrella?"
and you reply, "i don’t know." and i say, "yes you do." and you say, "no, i don’t." and i rebut, "but i told you where i left it." and you retort, "no you didn’t, are you smoking crack or something?" and i respond, "yes i told you where it was." and you insist, "no, you did not." and i dispute, "yes i did. well, at least, i told willie-wang where i put the umbrella and i’m sure he told you." and you assert, "willie-wang didn’t tell me shit. i don’t know where your stupid umbrella is."
and so i tell you, "well, i’m sure i told willie-wang to tell you where the umbrella is and now i can’t find it, so now you have to buy me a new umbrella."
and you answer, "what? i never knew where your jackassed umbrella was. i never saw it, i never touched it, you never told me where you put it, and willie-wang never said anything to me about it. period end of story."
and i say, "well, i don’t care what you say, you’re still buying me a new umbrella."
so you ask, "i had nothing to do with you losing your umbrella. why should i buy you a new umbrella?"
and i respond: "cuz it was a really really fancy expensive umbrella and YOU are the only one who can afford it."
i wonder— would you buy me a new umbrella or would you tell me to go fuck myself?
DJ: Oh, I would definitely tell you to go fuck yourself.
ad: i thought so. next question?
DJ: So, are you saying Leah Cohen didn’t leave Centro Vinoteca because of cashflow problems?
ad: as far as i know, she’s on her way to southeast asia and she’ll be traveling for nine months. does that sound like somebody who wasn’t making money to you? better yet, why don’t you just ask her.
DJ: Is the Gusto Ristorante townhouse for sale? Can I buy it?
ad: i think the only way to answer that question is to MAKE AN OFFER ALREADY. be sure to bring along a certified check.
DJ: OK, one last question. Can I blog about the you-know-what now? Seeing as the cat’s… kind of out of the bag and all?
ad: frankly my dear i don’t give a shit.
Start packing your bags now. Two must-visit destinations are about to get hotter (and not just due to global warming).
Your beloved chain of snazzy flophouses, by your favorite cute diminutive hotelier, is expanding to include locations in both London and Costa Rica. Plus, you can probably expect to see some familiar faces to welcome you with open arms when the awesome formidable projects are finally (eons from now) consummated.
Ha ha, "consummated." The Standard Hotel. See what we did there?
Don’t forget to breathe in the meantime.
= "personne extraordinaire"