If you mean why it ever became an issue for the restaurant, I have to agree. In the name of customer service, If nothing else, they should have just given it to them for the listed price. This is a couple that was about to drop a few hundred bucks for a meal in a time when that could buy 2 weeks groceries for some families. This whole incident is sickening.

I agree with Joyce W., the restaurant showed serious lack of judgement. When I was a restaurant manager (way, way long ago in the dark ages), comping some food or drink was considered an inexpensive and sensible way of calming an upset customer.

I wonder if they would have acted differently if the knew that the restaurant's name would be splashed all over the paper.

Flemings has the same drink for $27.00 but you have to put up with grown men dining in shorts and wearing baseball caps. If I had been the manager I certainly would have honored the $28.00 price without hesitation.

Very poor judgment exercised by the manager....

We discussed this at dinner last night, and the part I don't get is that the dispute occurred before the bill arrived. Did the customer say "I'll have a glass of this $27 liqueur"?

That struck me too. EL

What was the restaurant manager thinking? Especially in today's tight economic times, when people are eating out less and less, it seems they should really be trying to keep the customers they have happy. I've never eaten at Oregon Grille and now I never will. For me, this level of arrogance is not excused by good food.

Where did Mark Henry (Oregon Grille's former chef) go?

He retired to his farm in Virginia. EL

I'm with Dahlink and EL. There's something fishy here. (See how I'm trying to stay "on topic" by referring to food in a post about commerce?)

I say, "I'll have a glass of cognac." The waitperson leaves, then returns and says, "Oh, by the way, that drink is $35, not $27." If he thought the menus were all correct, why didn't he just bring the booze?

(Can you call something that cost $35 a glass "booze"?)

It doesn't add up to me.

Much to do about...
Agree with Dahlinkand EL also..it wasn't like a bait and switch"Sorry we ran out of that flavor Ripple how about
a nice Petrus?"
and it wasn't like he had already consumed the drink and been billed.
buttttt after dropping 300 Bills the management should read Rule # 1

The part that stands out in the column for me is earlier than the booze imbroglio. It's this: "The waiter forgot some specials, and some items they ordered didn't make it out to the table." Sounds like a problem with the waiter, who is possibly new and inexperienced. Or even just having an off night.

If someone's dropping 3 bills on dinner, management should probably do what they can to keep him sweet. Then again, once a year is hardly a "regular".

Bucky -- Where I come from, a drink that costs $35 is called a lap dance.

I agree that some aspects of the story don't sound right, at least in the absence of further explanations. The story suggests that the complaining couple already had reason to be unhappy about the meal, since "some items they ordered didn't make it out to the table." The owner claims that only the husband received an incorrect menu out of all of the diners that evening. Assuming that the wife also received a menu to order desserts or nightcaps, then the wife's menu had the correct price. Did the couple note the difference between the two menus, prompting the husband (already unhappy with the prior snafus in the meal) to make an issue out of it?

Well, regarding the fishiness, some pretty unexpected stuff can go on behind-the-scenes at any restaurant. I'm willing to bet that it wasn't an intentional bait-and-switch. Probably just a combination of the waiter being new or just bad, and maybe either him or the bartender happening to notice the drink was the wrong price. So sue me, I like to play devil's advocate.

That said, they should've just honored the $28 price...it's not like it was going from $10 to $70, for crying out loud. But I guess this is part of that "why should I care? It's only my job." attitude that a lot of people in service industries seem to be adopting. Anyone else noticed this, or is it just me?

My take here is this is a case of a pushy customer and the manager who decided he wasn't going to give in to pushiness. If I were in that situation as the customer I would just have to decide if I still wanted to order the drink at a higher but 'correct' price or just cancel the order. Obviously, this customer got his way in the end and lived to bitch about it. The fact that he spent more than $300 is irelevant to me. I would prefer that the restaurant treats all customers the same.

Wow. I agree with Joyce W. Unless there is more to this story that we have not been told, I'm never going to Oregon Grille, no matter how good the food may be.

The price could have come up in just casual conversation, "I know $28.00 is alot of money for a drink but we only do it this one time a year." Or something like that. Overall the service received (or reported) certainly does not correspond to a restaurant costing that kind of money.

I have to say that I was shocked to read that story in the paper yesterday. What this person claims happened to them (and the OG doesn't exactly deny it) doesn't jibe AT ALL with all of the terrific dining experiences I've had there.

I think hmpstd is on to something...perhaps they had the dessert menus and they noticed that the wife's menu had a different price than the husband's?

By the way, this was about 8 years ago. I had that same drink at Shula's Steakhouse and it was $35 then.

I get this drink frequently and have never paid more than $27.00. The 150 version might be a little more.

I have to say that we are regular customers of the Oregon Grill if you consider going once a year "regular." My sister from California likes to celebrate her birthday (which is the day after Christmas) there most years, so we like to book the "golf room," which is quieter than the rest of the place and can seat up to 8 people. It's a big extravagance, but we generally split the food and the spirit bills in order to treat my foodie sister. And we have never had bad service there.

An elderly woman I overheard at the blood lab this morning "those people spent over $300 in that place and they fought with them over a few bucks. that's that place where (???Name's) daughter worked, remember? She hated it because everyone there was so mean!" If I were these restaurant owners, I'd be trying to do some real quick damage control about now. This story is flying about town everywhere!

Skin...I laughed right out loud. Thanks.

There are 2 ways to look at this: (1) the customer spent $300 for a meal so why would the manager quibble about $7 less? and (2) the customer spent $300 for a meal so why would he quibble about paying $7 more?

Some of you will be hatin' on me, but I would be embarassed if my dining companion raised such a fuss about a $7 discrepancy in this situation. If I happened to love my dining companion, I'd have laid my hand gently on his arm and said "I'll buy the drink for you, dear. If you're still this upset tomorrow, you should write a letter to the owner".

If I was on a first date with this dining companion, there would not have been a 2nd date.

Oregon Grille is one of my favorites. Never really had any issues there. But would like to encourage all those that keep saying they will never go there to keep their promise. I for one will enjoy the possibility of having an easier time getting a reservation during my preferred dining hour. I would also like to offer up a list of other establishments where I have observed management laughing at customers: Petit Louis, Sushi Sono, Salt, Cinghiale, and Samo’s. Please, please, please boycott these places also. Dare you doubt that I actually saw this happen? I said it, so it happened!! Or maybe we should have our new resident expert on restaurant service, Dan Thanh, investigate.

Dan Thahn Dang has more comments on this incident from readers on her blog. This story just continues to grow. I think Oregon Grille has a big PR problem on its hands.

I was a little puzzled about some of the details of the story but it didn't make sense to me that the OG just didn't apologize and offer it to him at the menu price, especially since it was their error. It's just good customer service. I have eaten at the OG dozens of times and have had excellent service and not so excellent service and a rude waiter which in my opinion is unacceptable when I'm paying at least 200 bucks for a meal. Fortunately the good has outweighed the bad which is why I have gone back.

I would have just reduced the tip by $7

I always give something new to me two tries. I've been to OG twice and haven't been impressed with either the food or the service either time. Also, seeing the waitstaff smoking out back as drive by gives a bad impression to me. Stories like this confirm why I will not return.

I love this kind of discussion. So much emotion, not enough facts. I would never be critical of a Sun reporter's lack of factiness, but maybe I can add some nuggets of McData for your mastication.

The article stated that Grand Marnier Centenaire "retails for $145 to $200 a bottle."

A quick check of Well's Liquors web siteshows it retailing for $128.99. Restaurants, of course don't pay retail, but I don't have a Beverage Journal in front of me so maybe someone else could look that up for factitudey fun.

A 25% increase in price seems extreme, given that the Euro/Dollar exchange rate has been stable for the past four months. I have no idea what the actual price trends of GM are though.

Assuming that da OG pays street price on their GM, a two ounce pour of Centenaire costs the restaurant about $10.

Opinion free and loving it.

"The waiter forgot some specials, and some items they ordered didn't make it out to the table. But despite those little stumbles" ... I don't have an opinion, but aren't those huge errors for very fine dining? I don't know. That implies that two or more items that were ordered were not received.

OooooooooooooMmmmmmmmmmm

A lot of wasted ink and typing. The mistake was corrected before the drink was purchased. Big woop. This isn't worthy of an article in the Sun. Maybe if it was ordered and then showed up on the bill as $35 and they wouldn't change it. Otherwise, Snoozeville.