There are plenty of great mid-range restaurants in SF. I haven't been overly impressed with AQ, but if you are OK with that type of restaurant, there will probably be other alternatives and threads for "open on a Sunday" that you can search for.

As for Keiko, I wouldn't be able to judge your thoughts about the nature of the French influence. My suggestion would be to check out the online sample menu and form your own opinion.
http://www.keikoanobhill.com/menu/ind...

AQ is not really attempting to be a two-Michelin-star restaurant in the mold of the existing ones. It's way more casual and accessible. (Plus it's in a really crappy location.) If you're OK with that, there would be plenty of other alternatives as well. If not, I would look at the one-star places that are open on a Sunday that might have two-star ambitions. Michael Mina, Keiko, and Ame might be possibilities, but I wouldn't necessarily bet my life's saving on them being equal to or better than the current two-star places.

What's so strange about someone ordering seafood in a steakhouse? A group of people decide to go out for dinner. Most people in the group like a good steak, but one person doesn't eat red meat and would veto any restaurant that only serves meat. In order not to lose the business of a group like that, the steakhouse has a seafood and/or vegetarian dish on the menu and the person you see ordering it is the non-meateater in the group. Most seafood places will have some form of steak on the menu for similar reasons.

The idea behind a mandatory service charge for large parties is that large parties where everyone pitches in to pay the check tend to undertip. Often, a lot of people in a large party underestimate how much they owe and in order to make it all add up, they take it out on the tip thereby stiffing the waitstaff. (And since paying the bill was a collective effort, nobody will feel particularly guilty as long as they were under the illusion that they had paid their fair share.) A mandatory service charge distributed among the waitstaff in lieu of a tip resolves that problem and protects the waitstaff from getting stiffed. In return, the large party probably doesn't feel obligated to leave a real voluntary tip on top of the service charge unless they were really pleased with the service.

There is no such thing as a mandatory gratuity (or "tip"), that would be a contradiction in terms. If it's mandatory, it's a service charge.

He is obviously quite influential, but exactly to what degree is hard to say. If a restaurant really sucks and he gives it a bad review and it fails, did he break it or would it have failed anyway? And there are restaurants that have had great success in spite of lukewarm initial reviews, like Boulevard. One Market supposedly earned the nickname "1 1/2 Market" based on his initial review.
http://www.sfgate.com/restaurants/din...

But here is an anecdote: I used to know a guy who opened a small hole-in-the-wall place in the Marina. It was the kind of place that would probably have flown under Bauer's radar, but the guy kept emailing him urging him to review it. Eventually, he did and gave it two stars, but the tone of the review was very positive as if he felt guilty for not giving it 2.5. The result of the review was that the restaurant's revenue shot up by 30 percent, at least for some period of time. And that was for a two-star review.

Based on the description, it sounds like it could have been the House of Nanking although it's not really that close to the Embarcadero.

At 50 pages, you are probably looking at less than a dollar to reprint the whole list, which you hopefully wouldn't have to do too often. With an iPad, you have a device that will cost the restaurant a couple of hundred bucks and have a life span of maybe a couple of years before getting worn out or stolen. And it will likely alienate some dinosaurs who would be uncomfortable trying to use it. I've never found your typical traditional printed wine list very hard to search even if it's a very large one. Want champagne? Look it up in the index and flip to those pages! It's not rocket science, nothing you need a computer for if the wine list is reasonably organized.

Not sure about the average but 5 or 10 years with some option for renewal is probably not uncommon. If you go through the listings on Steve Zimmerman's web site, you might be able to get a sense for what is typical.
http://www.restaurantrealty.com/allli...

I think it's fairly common for restaurant spaces to be vacant for quite some time. I can see a number of possible reasons, including:

1. The owner may have unrealistic expectations about how much rent can be squeezed out of a particular location. That may have been a factor in why Namu is no longer there.

2. Restaurant leases are usually long-term contracts that neither party would enter willy-nilly. It may make sense for the owner to hold out for a while.

3. The fact that the previous tenant is no longer there may give prospective tenants second thoughts about the location. You don't want to open a restaurant in a space that is "cursed." Speaking of which, here is a thread:
http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/439578

I looked up the Lighthouse menu and the Danish twist seems pretty minimal -- a "Danish style snitzel" (did they mean "schnitzel"?) squeezed in with Thai chicken wok and New England clam chowder.

Other than Plaj, the scene for Scandinavian food in the Bay Area is pretty bleak. The other Scandinavian chefs that I know in SF are either doing private dining events or concepts that are not particularly Scandinavian (like Staffan at Perbacco or Ola at Oola).

The food at Plaj rocks, though, and is probably at least as worthy of inclusion as 50 of the other picks.

The wikipedia article on chinook salmon (the largest Pacific species) claims that they average 10 to 50 pounds but may reach 130. So 80 lb probably wouldn't be the norm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinook_...

Been there, but only once. Had a wide variety of items. Overall, had a very good experience and looking to go back there.

Do you really think it's unreasonable to expect that a journalist who covers a specific topic should have some fundamental insights into it? Like a journalist writing about health department citations having some knowledge about the rules involved? I think that would be a very reasonable expectation. And in my opinion, anyone who uncritically parrots the message from a grandstanding politician isn't much of a journalist.

I wouldn't agree that Perbacco is that much pricier than Cotogna. Looking at their online menus today, both have pork chop dishes priced at $25. Both have quail dishes at $26 and $27, Both have agnolotti dal plin at $17 and $18. So it seems like the price point at Perbacco might be like $1 higher, which is not a whole lot compared to places like Farina. Of course, you have to take the size of the servings into account as well, but I think Perbacco is relatively reasonably priced for a fine dining restaurant in the Financial District given the quality of the food.

If Amber India was guilty of any significant crime and got away with a $10K settlement, it means that the City Attorney is either an incompetent wimp or didn't have a strong case. Take your pick.

Have you seen anyone on this thread defending actual consumer fraud (as opposed to City Attorney grand standing)? Or, for that matter, anyone completely ruling out that consumer fraud may have possibly occurred. I think most of the debate has been about how the City Attorney and the Chronicle "journalists" have been presenting this case to the public.

Completely disagree. In a civil case, there is every reason to settle rather than spending megabucks on lawyers with no certainty as to the outcome of the case. I know a guy who spent $380K in legal costs for his divorce where the outcome of the litigation was pretty close to the settlement he had offered his ex-wife from the beginning, but that she had refused to accept.

Should be pretty easy for the City Attorney to shake down any restaurant for 5-digit amounts.

Yes, I believe that there is no requirement in California that any money of the service charge whatsoever goes to the employees. The restaurant could conceivably keep it all. That, I believe, is consistent with standard labor law practices. (On the other hand, a restaurant that keeps the service charge could have a serious problem with employee retention unless it gives out very generous base salaries.) The famous New York case is, from my understanding, based on consumer fraud law, not labor law. Would consumers be led to believe that the "service charge" would go to the servers?

http://www.foxrothschild.com/newspubs/newspubsArticle.aspx?id=6436
http://waiterpay.com/legislation-prop...

But going back to the original issue, if the manager told the truth about all of the service charge going to the servers on top of their regular base salary (and California doesn't have a tip credit), any additional gratuity would essentially be an additional tip for a job well done.

Are you aware of the standard distinction between a service charge and a gratuity? In most states, a restaurant can do anything it wants with a service charge that is displayed on a catering contract or a menu (New York may be an exception), including distributing it to the employees as a bonus. And if it's a mandatory charge, the state will likely insist that sales tax will be collected on top of it. That still doesn't exempt a restaurant from paying its employees the legal minimum wage (state or federal, whichever is higher). If the restaurant did indeed pass on the service charge to the wait staff, it could very well be considered the equivalent of a normal tip and at 21 percent, not terrible.

A gratuity, on the other hand, is widely regarded as a gift from the patron to the servers, not subject to sales tax, and the restaurant has no right to interfere other than stipulating how it should be divided among the wait staff.

So if you pay a 21 percent service charge that all goes to the wait staff on top of their regular pay, any additional gratuity is essentially additional gravy for the wait staff (which may well be well deserved).

During peak hours, there is likely to be a wait for counter seating as well. Best way to avoid the wait is to go there during non-peak hours. I usually go around 8:30 or later when the worst part of the dinner rush seems to be over. Going there in the middle of the afternoon should work, too.

I doubt that the food at HOPR has changed a lot since 2007 -- you don't tinker with a successful formula. Service could always be a variable given the turnover in the industry. The 2007 review reads like yet another example where he wasn't seated right away and was offended. Goes to show the perils of subjecting a restaurant critic to the same experience that normal restaurant goers have.

Another overlooked place with a Michelin star is Keiko, even though Bauer gave it a three-star review. The House of Prime Rib made the list, though, to the tune of two Chronicle stars.

I have had dinner at Cotogna maybe half a dozen times always hoping to capture the magic that makes so many people rave about the place, but I've never succeeded in that. I've never had a bad meal there, but I've always left a little disappointed feeling it didn't quite live up to the hype. I mean, when you have a pizza there and the next night you find yourself at Americano, which is part hotel restaurant, part pick-up bar, and have a better pizza, you start to wonder whether Cotogna isn't possibly overrated.

As for Perbacco, I've had dinner there hundreds of times. It's competently done food with rare lapses in consistency. I would agree with Robert that if you've been to Cotogna twice but never to Perbacco, maybe you should try it out.

One more issue is the small, cramped, and loud space at Cotogna. Getting a seat there will likely be a bigger challenge than dining at Perbacco.

The crowd that looks for food at 3-4am may often have had a drink or two too much and many of the places that cater to their cravings may not necessarily be considered "yummy" by any stretch of the imagination. However, there are plenty of threads about late-night dining options in general that you should be able to search for.

Which brings up the "stated purpose" issue. The restaurant I went to today used the wording "SF mandates" on the receipt to describe the surcharge. That seems vague enough to cover anything from healthcare to minimum wage to local garbage collection ordinances.

Is it possible that some restaurants in the past might have used misleading language or actually have misappropriated funds rightly belonging to their employees? Sure. But we have yet to see evidence that has even happened at all, much less on a scale suggested by the Chronicle headlines.

So calumin, were crimes committed or not? If there were crimes, what explains the lack of criminal prosecution? If there were no crimes, how can you defend a headline like "The City cracks down on restaurant surcharge fraud..." which I'm sure to most readers would imply that restaurants have been criminally defrauding their customers?

Most people I know who would spend Saison kind of money on a dinner would expect there to be valet parking in front of the restaurant and not having to figure out that there is a parking garage half a block away. And they would hardly blink at spending money on valet parking for a dinner that costs hundreds of dollars per person. Moreover, that parking garage may not have availability on nights when the Giants have home games and even if it does, it will cost you an arm and a leg to park there or anywhere else near AT&T park.

The lack of valet parking wouldn't bother me personally since I would take Uber anyway, but I think it's a legitimate issue.

In so far fraud occurs, why not go after it? Like in this article.
http://www.sfgate.com/restaurants/art...

To quote:
"In rare cases, menu fraud is outright deliberate. Last year, the chef at San Jose's Bella Mia was caught substituting pork tenderloin for veal in Italian dishes like veal parmigiana. The practice had been going on for five or six years, much to the chagrin of some Jewish and Muslim customers whose religions prohibit eating pork.

The restaurant agreed to pay $60,000 in fines and restitution after Santa Clara County officials filed a civil action. The chef quit and pleaded guilty to two criminal misdemeanor charges."

Are you talking about immigration laws? I believe they should be enforced and immigration reform should be enacted so that businesses can operate with a sufficient labor force without any legal detriment to either the business or the employees.

Laws that are ignored by much of society just make the society a lawless one. Not a very desirably outcome.