You can have very nice restaurant meals anywhere in Europe for 10 to 20 Euros per person--without wine or beer. $300 is no mid-range restaurant. Add a couple of drinks and you're still way way under 50 euros per person. If they ate $50 each at McDs, they must be 500 pound gluttons.

The biggest bill we had on our trip to Germany was 70 euros for the two of us at a very nice restaurant in Bamberg where we pigged out.

Of course, we seek out places away from the tourist areas.

I agree with the others, NYCFoodsnob, about Jean George (which I have eaten at). It is one of the best restaurants in the world, hardly what I would call a "mid-range" eatery.

Every foodie knows that it is your wine selection that usually determines the extent of your restaurant bill. Most restaurants mark up their wine list by 300%. This is where eateries make their money, not on the food. Hence, if you dine at a "mid-range" restaurant your food tab could be $200 for two, but your bottle of wine could have cost $100.

Happy Holidays. John G.

I'm not sure what all the fuss is about but I had no problem understanding NYCFS's point and it was very clear to me she referenced JonJon and others.

CalGirlSusan, are you creating new rules that prohibit someone from referencing someone else's replies? Hundreds of fodorites do it daily and often, way off topic, including yourself. Who died and left you the hypocrite boss?

There's a committed contingent on this board who jump at the chance to belittle NYCFS with personal digs and insults. Very telling, if you ask me. These are the folks whose knowledge and aesthetic I question and who exhibit the most distasteful behavior here. None of you are welcome at my table.

I eat regularly at Jean George and I love this man's genius. I've been to many, many restaurants in Paris, all highly rated by French food critics and with varied price ranges. I've been following the great chefs of France and NYC for many years. Food is my passion and eating well is my hobby. I can't speak for NYCFS but I did not hear her say that Jean George was a mid-range restaurant, unless you compare it to Alain Ducasse, and she's right.

$80 for 3 courses at Jean George is a bargain compared to something equivalent in Paris. I once had an appetizer at Taillevent that carried a surcharge of 60 Euro. And, yes, the truffles were divine! Some people are content with Progresso soup. I am not.

I think it's very difficult to find a great dinner in Paris for under $100 but consider the source of this comment before you attack.

I agree with wesley. With all that's dished out, one wonders why someone like NYCFS would choose to still hang around here. Personally, I think NYCFS and Patrick are two of the few posters here with a range of experiences broad enough to provide valuable advice to just about anyone asking (so, can you two kiss and make up). Appreciate 'em, folks; and learn from 'em.

Egg nog's ready.......I'm outta here.

Just to add to the Christmas spirit, I have to say I really enjoy both NYCFS and Patrick's posts also. Both travel a little out of my price range, but I still get lots of good ideas from both of them. And the theater and art and culture orientation is very helpful to me.

I enjoy Patrick's informative posts, but can't spend the kind of money he does.

I think some of you have a misconception about how much money I spend. I have never spent $300 for a lunch in Paris -- in fact in my week there last year, I'm sure we never spent half of that for even our "splurge" meals. But I do understand people who do spend that kind of money (and before my retirement and trying to stretch my travel dollars for longer trips I sometimes would splurge to that category). I typically try to keep my European hotels under $150 US (getting harder to do all the time) and often around $100. And although I like good food and wine, I'm usually very happy keeping my nice dinners with good wine to well under $ 100 for two, often half of that.

And in the Christmas spirit which I try to keep year round, let me say I have nothing in the world against NYFoodSnob, in fact we are often on the same wave length. I just don't understand why whenever I make a minor comment that takes issue with something she may have said (which I think is much of the point of this forum), she has to accuse me of "histronics" or as in one recent case felt it necessary to start personally insulting me. I try to avoid that kind of behavior!

Patrick,
you said "I typically try to keep my European hotels under $150 US (getting harder to do all the time) and often around $100. And although I like good food and wine, I'm usually very happy keeping my nice dinners with good wine to well under $ 100 for two, often half of that"
...and I am taking it as a guide line for my trip.
Thanks, short and sure ... just waht I needed.

Amusing thread. A couple thoughts:

1. Prices in France include tax and tip. So, if dinner is 80e prix fixe vs. $80 in US, it's actually less in Europe (8% tax, 20% tip), even with the Euro at 1.25. Also, wine is MUCH less (except at three stars, Taillevent being the excepetion). Virtually all good restaurants will have plenty of choices under 40e, and most will have tons of good wine under 25 or even 20e. Remember, this includes tax and tip too.

2. The only way to spend $300 for lunch in Paris is either indulge in Champagne and Caviar somewhere, or go to a high end restaurant. Even three stars have 70e lunches, making $300 for two at the finest restaurants in Paris feasible. I ate, this summer (euro was 1.17), dinners at L'Epi Dupin, Regalade and Astier for under $120 for two and a half (6 year old daughter). These were full three or four course meals with aperitifs, wine and coffee. All are considered among the finest bistros in the city.

3. Jean Georges is mid-range for Bill Gates. For us mere mortals, it is among the highest end joints in the country. And comparing it to Alain Ducasse, arguably the pricest restaurant in the USA (Ginza Sushi-Ko exempted), is like saying a Mercedes S500 is cheap compared to a Bentley. Also, when you leave Paris, the food is much less than the US. I've had extraordinary meals for under $25 pp, and dined at many starred establishments for less than $75 pp.

Coachboy

50 dollars is thirty pounds, ie 15 pounds a head. There are plenty of hamburger joints in Paris (and london and just about everywhere else)that would cost more than that (think Planet Hollywood, Hard Rock Cafe etc). So it is perfectly possible to have a crappy hamburger meal for 50 dollars.

Don't forget a pint of lager in a restaurant like the above costs about £4.00

150 dollars a head is on the pricey side for anything not in the Michelin guide though - did they cane the wine list?

I think there is a major disagreement or evaluation as to what a "mid-range" restaurant is, and that term is part of the problem. Some other problems with disagreements on this thread are mis-readings of the post. I think I dine in Paris in "mid-range" restaurants and I routinely spend 35-50 euro per person, including wine. That is mid-range to me, which means a cut above very cheap. Others' ideas of "mid-range" is obviously just a step below Michelin-starred restaurants. Even if that is your normal std of mid-range to you because you eat at expensive places, I think it's misleading to call those mid-range Parisian restaurant prices (ie, $300 for two) because that implies that is the most common range you will find, and it's not.

I live in DC and $200 for dinner is not a mid-range DC restaurant by my standards, and I eat out more than many people. I've never once spent that amount nor has anyone I know and I'm a white-collar professional not dining at fast-food or pizza places-- although it is apparently commonly what Dawn spends in DC restaurants so we obviously have different dining out habits. I don't think even the Post restaurant critic would call $100 a head a mid-range DC restaurant, though.

As for the hamburger, yes you can probably spend that much for a hamburger meal for two in a moderate Parisian restaurant. That is NOT McDonald's or any fast-food place in Paris where it would be impossible to spend that much. Also, this $50 was not for two people, I don't know why people keep saying this, Tat said it was PER PERSON. Planet HOllywood and those Am. chain restaurants are not fast-food restaurants: McDonald's, Quick and Burger King are.

Christina, this is obviously a troll post. I'm surprised it's getting this much attention.

We were in Paris last February and the most expensive dinner we had was a 4 course menu with wine on Valentine's Day, and it only cost $100. It was what I would consider a mid to upper-range restaurant. A menu (3 course) lunch with wine at Altitude 95 was only about $65, and he's talking $50 at Mickey-D's

Trolling, trolling, trolling.

Christina, you are helpfull as always.

Budman, it is kind of ridiculous, you telling Christina it is a troll post and responding to it.
I appreciate the responce, though.
I feel bad for people who goes around wasting time on assuming things ...

It is NOT a troll post, let me assure you.

Thanks

Sorry, folks. Shortly after my last post here, I headed to Rome and missed all this drama.

For the record, I think the term "mid-range" is laughable when speaking about price-point to such a diverse audience. Whenever possible, details and specifics should always be offered when comparing any experience with another.

I adore the posts from the user named, "Patrick." I don't know this person so I don't take anything he says, or the words of anybody else here, personally. Frankly, I think nothing should be edited here but this isn't my forum.

I have read numerous apologies from Patrick and all seem to speak of misinterpreted tone. If the "tone" in his writing is intended to be kind and friendly, then why the confusion and all the apologies?

I'm confident Patrick is mature enough to take responsibility for the words he chooses in his writing and I'm sure he'll continue to write with care and compassion. And, I will enjoy the read.

Thank you for your "kind" words NYCFoodSnob. Why all my apologies? Well, because that's the kind of guy I am. When I have made a sincere post that gets misinterpreted (for example pointing out that one of the most expensive restaurants in New York isn't a logical comparison in a post about "mid range" restaurants and I get called for my "histronics&quot I take the high road and apologize for not making myself clear. Or in this case not realizing that your post wasn't meant to have anything to do with the topic being discussed. When someone rants that my mentioning I spend on average $300 a day in Europe is actually bragging -- I apologize or at least explain that I am somehow getting singled out unfairly. As you in particular know -- $ 300 a day is hardly an extravagant daily allowance for two people in Europe! Apologies and explanations are free, so I offer them often, when I feel there might be a reason to.

Surely you are aware of the many attacks people love to make here, maybe out of jealousy, maybe just because they are rude people. You have certainly been the target of many of those attacks. You may choose not to apologize or explain your original posts to these attackers, but I guess I just do.

You're welcome, Patrick.

The word is "histrionic" and it's just a fun way to say "dramatic." You have to admit, dear, you ARE dramatic. (I think it's safe to say we have this gene in common.) I also don't necessarily view histrionics as negative, at least not always. It's one of those fun words that can be subject to interpretation. Most idiots think the word means hysterical and react accordingly.

I think apologies are like the word "love." One shouldn't over-use such tender words to the point of meaninglessness. The Italians rarely use the term "mi dispiace" (I'm sorry) because it implies you did something really bad and deserve forgiveness. Americans think, by saying "I'm sorry" to everything, it forgives all their bad habits, inadequacies, and lack of culture and sophistication. Well...it doesn't.

Regarding attacks and rudeness...I find Fodors is a microcosm of the real world. There are plenty of ugly people out there. Why should it be any different in here? I don't care about popularity contests and I work very hard to formulate a definitive opinion. If someone doesn't agree with me, too bad. That's your prerogative. Don't expect any apologies from me, except for grammar and spelling. If there is one thing I KNOW it's how to travel in style and have loads of fun.

I offer you a big kiss on your left and right cheek, on the face that is. How's that for specific?

Well, I'm certainly glad you clarified the location of those kisses!

What was I ever thinking to imagine that your comment "Your histrionic analysis of the intention of my reply is presumption at best" could have possibly been negative in any way? And although in your newly given spirit I won't apologize for my mistyping "histrionic", yes, I clearly do know what it means.

Iam SO VERY HAPPY
that Internet use don't give users a chance of physical interaction.
I am so sure that otherwise we would have some black-eyed tourists all over the Europe ((