04 Aug 2011 at 2:41 pm
heard you on npr today…you mentioned a pizza place near aventura mall for sicilian slice and a place in davie…could you post or tweet the names please?
The places I discussed on NPR today were Esposito’s Pizza in Davie http://www.espositospizzaonline.com for their Detroit Style Crusty Cheese Pizza and Kings County Pizza for their Sicilian. They are on Dixie just south of Miami Gardens
Interesting, if not unexpected result.
A couple of outstanding questions:* Why is a sold restaurant considered equal to a closed restaurant in the graphic? Seems like that could be a good scenario for some of the owners. Then again, maybe not.
* How many of these restaurants would have closed whether or not they’d been on the show? Clearly these were all struggling businesses to begin with.
* What’s the significance of your knife-and-fork icon visualization on the left hand side of each season? It is presented like a percentage, but really it’s raw number. Confusing.
Can you tell us the name of the place in aventura ?
Kings County Pizza for their Sicilian. They are on Dixie just south of Miami Gardens Drive. Little hole in the wall
I didn’t consider it equal, was just pointing out with the limited space that some were sold and some were closed. Some were closing and sold at almost nothing as well, but I couldn’t fit it in.
It is a question I cannot answer, “if they would have closed”. Not sure many would tell the truth anyways.
Sorry if it confuses you
[…] for Restaurants In case you hadn't notices, we love infographics. Here's part of a great one from The Pizza Experts. Ever wonder how all of those restaurants fare after the reality TV stars pack up and leave? […]
25 Aug 2011 at 9:28 pm
A restaurant closing after Gordon’s involvement really shows how bad the owners are. The worst that could happen is that everything remains the same except for a renovated dining room. It’s hard to see how that could leave the restaurant in worse shape.
30 Aug 2011 at 12:48 am
The problem is not the food after the revamp – it’s the inability of the owners to let go of their pride and realize that they were wrong and need to change.
01 Sep 2011 at 6:52 pm
Most of the restaurants are so far already in debt it’s too late for the owners to think they have a chance once Chef Ramsay leaves.
19 Sep 2011 at 2:51 pm
Considering the utter incompetence of the restaurant owners before chef Ramsay arrived the fact that any of them are still open shows how helpful he is (to even get on the show the restaurants had to be on the verge of collapse).
Most if not all were losing money hand over fist before he arrived & several went on to make good money, those that didn’t have only the owners to blame, the same owners who were running the restaurants into the ground long before they begged chef Ramsay for his help & the failures were most likely the result of the owners going back to the bad habits that had them on the verge of ruin in the first place.
27 Sep 2011 at 7:46 pm
Yes, the future successes of each of those ventures depended on a number of elements including their dire financial condition. But there were a number of other elements.
The global economy not only slammed a number of those restaurants, but ramsay’s as well. He defaulted on something like $10mm debt in 2008 (from memory, may not be exact). At some point in recent years he sold his ferarri and put his house on the market. So market forces strangled a number of them, along with the rest of us – an element over which Ramsay was powerless.
Also, most of those owners did not grasp the 3 most important rules of running a successful business: 1. Remember you don’t know what you don’t know – particularly when you are inexperienced; 2. Surround yourself with professionals and enthusiastically avail yourself of their expertise; and 3. Take all ego out of the equation.
These entrepreneurs had possibly the very best industry consultant on the entire planet at their disposal – and they resisted him like adolescents resenting their parents. Many of them simply weren’t in possession of the necessary wisdom or maturity.
Regardless of how much help they willingly availed themselves of (or didn’t), we the audience took notes. If we thought they were aholes, who didn’t convince us that they would lovingly implement ramsay’s ideas, that restaurants was DOA.
How could the show help them if ramsay’s epilogue was, “I don’t think this previously filthy, gross restaurant, run by a dick who couldn’t cook and had no respect for his customers, is likely to change.”
When his final word was enthusiastic, complimentary, and hopeful, the show was a great help – aferall pre-show they were already DOA.
And of course they needed to completely rebrand and market overnight to hopefully, instantly, create a buzz, attract a customer base from scratch and ensure immediate customer loyalty in a sustainable volume that would get them out of the deep, deep financial holes they were in.
I think Ramsay did as much as possible. BTW the show revenue was something just north of $10mm and he was compensated $250k per year. He didn’t do it for the money he did it for the pr.
Rob Gauger wrote:
06 Nov 2011 at 8:33 pm
“this infographic to show just how unhelpful Gordon
Ramsey and his show Kitchen Nightmares is. As you can see, most of the
restaurants close after being helped by him. Not sure why a restaurant
would even want to be on the show after seeing what happens to the
majority of the others.” Sir, your logic makes absolutely no sense. We are talking about restaurants who are on the edge of failure here. Chef Ramsey, a man who needs no introduction as he is an unbelievably successful chef and restauranteur arrives at these struggling restaurants with a plan to turn them around. By changing their menu for the better, putting together a plan for the staff to turn things around and making improvements to the dining room he provides them with a path to follow. Other than his recipes any fool could go into these hell holes and see why they are failing. Usually it is due to one or more of the following. A hideous restaurant, a staff who does not care about the customers, a lazy and/or uninformed owner/manager and a lazy/unskilled head chef. It seems in most cases the individuals he tries to help are helpless and in many cases the owners seem lazy and uninformed as to what is needed to make a business successful. I do not see how anybody, especially somebody as successful as Ramsey could help lead to these restaurants eventual failure. A restaurant being on Gordon Ramsey’s show and that restaurants eventual failure are completely unrelated events. One has no relation to the other and your infographic does not prove otherwise. It simply proves that those restaurants had no hope for success in the first place.Prove me wrong.
Can’t say I can prove you wrong because I wasn’t at each location. I can only state the stats
Sent From iPhone
Can’t say I can prove you wrong because I wasn’t at each location. I can only state the stats
Sent From iPhone
11 Nov 2011 at 8:05 pm
These people are all so in debt and totally disfunctional, how can this be a receipe for success? Most of the restaurants doomed for failure at the onset of his visit.
25 Nov 2011 at 3:11 pm
So many of the owners and chefs from the restaurants on this show went back to their old ways once Gordon left – watch the revisted episodes and you’ll see. They could actually stand a chance if they followed the plans Gordon laid out for them, but many of the restaurants continued with their crappy ways, and that is why some many of them have closed.
April Taylor wrote:
28 Dec 2011 at 12:09 am
All of these restaurants were on the verge of closing before he even came on board to try to help them. You can’t blame Gordon Ramsey for them closing. He was each restaurants last resort. So to actually sit there and say that they closed because of him is ignorant. It’s each owners fault for letting it get that far in the first place.
05 Jan 2012 at 7:58 pm
The way I see it, a restaurant going on Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares is like a person going to get liposuction in order to become thin–it’s a desperate effort for a quick fix. Of course if one takes painstaking care to maintain the changes, then the result can be great. But if one goes right back to sucking down hamburgers and ice cream sundaes, then the results will be hideous.
Michael O. wrote:
22 Jan 2012 at 10:32 pm
It seems most of these comments state what I felt after looking at the infographic. I think it misses the point that 100% most likely would have gone out of business without Ramsey. The show leads us to believe he does all of what we see in a single week; doesn’t seem like enough time to turn anything around in reality.
27 Jan 2012 at 6:28 pm
Ramsey isn’t to blame. He went to these restaurants because the owners were incapable of running them. He’s only there for a week. He leaves and they’re still incapable of running their restaurant. Just look at the statistics. 70% of all restaurants fail after 3 years. What? Is that Ramsey’s fault too. People think the restaurant business is easy and it’s not. That’s were they go wrong. It has nothing to do with Gordon Ramsey.
Steve Watkins wrote:
23 Feb 2012 at 3:03 pm
As someone who has been through it, let me tell you. When my place was where these places are financially, a sell is a huge win. Selling a failing business is nearly impossible, I tried to months to do so before having to close the doors and sell of my equipment. I was left with a huge amount of debt.
After going through the impending doom, most people would take a sell even if they were back on their feet. it’s a terrifying situation to be in, and it really takes it out of you.
So every sell should be in the win column. That fact that someone even bought the place means he turned it around.
24 Feb 2012 at 7:50 pm
Wow, these people don’t show much as far as intelligence. Everyone on of the restaurants were over six figures in debt and one guy in a few days is going to somehow manage to change this downward spiral? You just want to rag on Ramsey. Be honest, no one in their right mind would consider this as a possible task. lol It does however make a good TV show. After seeing some of the idiots who think they know how to run a business respond to someone who does understand restaurants it is no surprise they went out of business. I more amazed that any of them managed to survive after all the years of mismanagement. That is more of a credit to Ramsey than the failures. Is he kind of an asshole, yes, but all in all anyone willing to come over and pay to try to save a business that is failing is OK in my book. No one should have had any misconceptions about how he works because he has never had a good beside manner. lol Most of the people were looking for help and a makeover hoping to buy some more time to save their business and several have said so. So who is using who?
24 Feb 2012 at 8:10 pm
Very nice post. I think all in all the single most important thing that seemed to be over looked by so many of the owners is service. A kind disposition will do more for you than anything. Good food is pretty important too, however if you cannot figure out number one you are on borrowed time anyway. Most of this is covered in a first year business class which most seemed oblivious to considering how so many treated their customers and staff. Ramsey did a lot for these people and failing to use one of the best in the business for advice boggled my mind. Having someone with that kind of knowledge offering to help is something few ever get to use. Well, you pretty much covered everything. Cheers!
Gino Lee wrote:
22 May 2012 at 10:03 am
You can’t blame Gordon Ramsay for the failures. Most of these restaurants are usually on their last legs by the time they call Ramsay. Like someone else said, the failure rate for these restaurants without Ramsay would probably be close to 100%.
28 May 2012 at 2:28 pm
I agree with rob. u cant blame Ramsey. The business is tough as is, then the fact that these places are litterally on the ropes does not mean its Ramsay’s fault. And I am sure many of these places go back to doing things the way they were them before. Bad habits die hard.
Ayame Kagamine wrote:
10 Jun 2012 at 5:55 pm
You can’t blame Gordon Ramsay for the failures of over 50% of the resturants. He did his best to help yet these delusional people don’t realise that with Gordon’s help, they could actually stand a chance in keeping their resturants in business, yet they decide to go back to their old ways and this is what happens. Bankruptcy, homelessness, etc. Stupid fools.
Felicity Kansai wrote:
11 Jun 2012 at 11:18 am
To be honest, you can’t blame Gordon for the failures of these restaurants. The owners could actually stand a chance of keeping their restaurants open if they were willing to let Gordon help them change, but these poor fools went back to their old ways and then they end up down the path of bankruptcy and homelessness. This is what they get for being deluded fools.
11 Jun 2012 at 11:24 am
I agree with Ayame Kagamine, it’s not Ramsay’s fault. If these owners were willing enough to give Ramsay a chance then they wouldn’t be homeless, bankrupt or stupid enough to have a restauranteur commit suicide after Ramsay stepped in. I don’t get how they made all this happen.
25 Jun 2012 at 6:56 pm
that’s bullcrap……ramsey is one of the 5 top chefs in the world………these closed places now were not properly run and served Shit food……he got to most of them when they already ran their resturants into to ground……come on 80% were nasty n didn’t care about their customers….Ramsey is brilliant!!!!!! too bad these owners were morans.
[…] Via Tags: Mad Men, TV show © 2012 Latest Infographics /* */ […]
Rob Chadwick wrote:
02 Jul 2012 at 2:22 am
Agree with all of the commenters here re: misleading conclusion author draws for his facts.
Also, what about all of the restaurants not featured of the show that have benefited?
08 Jul 2012 at 3:19 pm
In fairness, though, most were standing one one leg when they called in help, and a fractured leg at that. One would have to believe that ingrained habits may be shaken free in the frenzy at first, but habits are habits, and poor management is poor management. When left alone after the Ramsay Rampage, they revert. It does seem to be the kiss of death, and precious few do survive after the show. What a waste of good money that could have been spent elsewhere, tsk, tsk, how sad. There are many I was saddened to see have shuttered their doors. But like other, do I want to eat there? Do I trust them?
19 Jul 2012 at 11:51 pm
bunch of fat cat lazy owners
[…] Via e0A This entry was posted in Entertainment and tagged kitchen by Admin. Bookmark the permalink. […]
11 Sep 2012 at 7:09 pm
I have worked in several kitchens over the years . i believe alot of the problems are that the producers pick buisnesses that are too far gone . Many owners are already many thousands sometimes hundreds of thousands in debt. However restraunts holding their own might not be as interesting . We like seeing altercations with employees and customers . We like seeing Gordon throwing products out of the luke warm fridges . However I wouldreally like to see Gordon set up new buisnesses for people not working in tremendous debt. Without horrific practices, and habits to overcome. Then we could appreciate the talents Chef Ramsey delivers to see what the success rate would be then .
17 Sep 2012 at 6:28 pm
This guy said it all. It’s the owners fault, not ramseys. The guy wouldn’t be the most well known chef in the world if he didn’t know what he was talking about, but people like the owners on his show are generally stubborn and always believe themselves to be right even when presented with proof that they aren’t. That’s why their restaurants are failing in the first place, they refuse to learn.
17 Sep 2012 at 7:42 pm
This is just bad statistics, however, and cannot be used to draw any conclusions (as you have)
[…] If you are a restaurant owner and your business is struggling, do not let Gordon Ramsey use you! -_-Source Tweet Related posts:KFC Double Down SandwichAlice In Wonderland MorningThe Perfect Mix ~ […]
Dezeguys Clueless wrote:
24 Sep 2012 at 2:09 pm
After reading this, there is no reason I should trust your judgment on anything else, especially food. Your logic and insinuations are nothing, but idiotic.
[…] Via Tags: kitchen […]
Ditto to Rob
13 Oct 2012 at 8:31 pm
as only 1 in 5 restaurants actually succeed enough to turn a profit, i would say that gordon ramsay actually has a very good success rate when you consider how bad these restaurants were in the first place
14 Oct 2012 at 2:08 am
As I have watched the shows since they started. I myself have gone to three different restaurants(which aren’t on the charts above) in my area, all of them have succeeded. I go to them to support them and see if they are still “winning” the battle. I go every 3 months, and each time I go all three are jam-packed, sometimes with lines out the door. So it proves that it’s not Ramsey’s fault, but the owner’s.
17 Oct 2012 at 4:47 am
This website is ready retarded obviously some of them will fail due to being on the edge of failure literally all of them are on the edge some just have better potential then others and if some closed we don’t know exactly why they closed or why they sold off the show is interesting and i Guarantee the ones that failed were because they didn’t listen to him he sets up a plan and gives it to them and i guarantee it goes more in depth they what they show on the t.v. series the website is a waste of time
01 Nov 2012 at 11:54 pm
Where does it say “Continue Reading”? I must be dim because I can’t find it. Someone please point me in the right direction. I would like to see the infographic.
Also, I have a hard time feeling bad for almost all of the owners who don’t know how to run a restaurant. You can find anything out on the internet. You can learn safe food handling. You can learn how to cost out your food. It’s just stupid on their part to sit there feeling sorry for themselves for years while their business dies when everything you ever wanted to know about anything is online.
Click on the photo of the graphic
Sent From iPhone
This is a pretty ridiculous article. So your claim is that because he only saves 1/3rd of these businesses which were failing so badly that they all would have been dead within months, the show is fraudulent? I think there are just a lot of Ramsay haters out there and this article is fuel for that fire. Confirmation bias to the max.
Johnnie Stewart wrote:
15 Feb 2013 at 5:34 am
What you people don’t understand is that a restaurant with thousands or hundreds of thousands dollars in debt doesn’t matter who comes is still going to fail. It’s not his fault. I think people get restaurants on the show so they can grow a little and then sell it for more than is actually worth.
03 May 2013 at 3:52 pm
This really is a dishonest and juvenile use of “statistics”
It is hard to figure out where to begin.
Prior to Ramsey 100 percent of these places were going to close or be foreclosed.
After Ramsey a third of them become successful and another third manage to sell and recoup some losses meaning a two thirds success rate and you somehow manage to twits that?
I have seen some silly blogging in my time but this stupidity ranks near the top.
Well done genius…..