Dividing a Restaurant Bill Using Mechanism Design
Every Tuesday is a Game Theory article at Mind Your Decisions.
Update: Welcome Lifehacker readers! See my weekly game theory articles and learn more about this website.
A special thanks to Mike M. for suggesting this topic.
“We’re going to split the bill,” said the organizer at my friend’s ninth grade birthday party. I didn’t think much of it until I ended up paying $40 for a $10 entrée. I felt cheated because I didn’t order a drink like most others. I was afraid to ruin the party mood, so I concealed my own anger, and that ended up ruining the night for me.
If you’re like people I know, I’m sure you’ve had similar horror stories. The overall feeling is that everyone seems to pay too much and no one is happy.
Should you just pay up? Do we need to teach better etiquette? Is better technology required?
No, no, and no.
It’s hard to change how people respond to incentives. But the group dining situation is screaming for better outcomes. As I’ve suggested before, if you don’t like the outcomes, don’t hate people, change the game. And the best tool is the aptly named field of mechanism design (brief intro here).
I’ll frame the dining problem by reviewing the three common payment systems—splitting evenly, pay for what you ordered, and separate checks. I’ll then suggest a solution for those seemingly intractable birthday parties.
Splitting Evenly
This is probably the most common solution. But three economics professors have shown that it’s a very inefficient system (pdf).
The system is problematic because it distorts the incentives of diners. At a table of 6, each item you order contributes 1/6 to your cost and 5/6 to everyone else. You have reason to order more, and so does everyone else. The outcome is that everyone wastefully orders and everyone ends up paying too much. It’s a version of the tragedy of the commons. Restaurants are well aware that diners rack up more expenses, so that’s one reason they favor keeping a common tab.
Furthermore, splitting the bill is unfair to people who prefer less expensive items. If you’re a non-drinker, or if you’re a vegetarian, you’re probably going to end up subsidizing the meals of the meat-eating alcoholics. Or, if you are a saver, you’ll end up subsidizing the people who splurge on ridiculous items.
It’s considered impolite to point out large price differences. It makes gluttons feel guilty and ruins the mood. Besides, is there a better solution?
Yes, you might say. Just pay for what you ordered.
Pay for What You Ordered
I always say, when you collect more money than is needed, it’s a sign that you’re in good company.
Hence, pay for what you ordered is the method I use with close friends. We all trust each other to calculate tax and tip, and not screw each other over. Actually, it’s not so much that we trust each other as friends, but that we are made to trust each other in a game theory sense because we can punish cheapskates the next time we go out.
Unfortunately, this system has its flaws too. How do you split a bottle of wine? Do you go as far as calculating the cost of each glass? What about when you share food, or finish off someone’s meal because they are too full? The problem is there’s a small difference between what you order and what you eat. The system favors people who order cheaper items but then try to sample as much as possible of other people’s food.
There’s one more issue. It’s often not possible to say who put in what. There’s an incentive to pay just a little bit less hoping someone else will be generous and cover. If the pot is short, often everyone is asked to put in an extra dollar or two. So the system still favors the cheapskates—especially the people who pay less and then sneak away to the bathroom when everyone is asked to pitch in more.
If you don’t trust your company, why not just separate checks?
Separate Checks
This is the most efficient system, in terms of incentives. People will only order what they really want because they ultimately have to pay for it. Perhaps this is why researchers found that 80% of subjects favored separate checks.
So the economics are pretty favorable, but there are a few practical problems.
First, it takes longer and longer to pay when you have bigger and bigger parties. Wait staff don’t appreciate this.
Second, separate checks are impractical when you’re sharing appetizers or bottles of wine. What if you share an appetizer with one friend but then take a glass of wine that was split with four different people? It’s a hassle to sort it all out.
Third, in parties, people usually treat the guest of honor. Would a restaurant actually split one item across everyone else’s bill? I am not sure, as I’ve ever seen this.
Perhaps the biggest problem is that separate checks are not even allowed at some restaurants—particularly nicer ones. It’s probably because they know people order more on a common bill, and it’s somehow seen as less “classy” to offer separate checks. I don’t totally understand it, but I have been rejected by at least one snobby waiter (Oh, no, no, monsieur, we don’t do that).
Thinking about an ideal outcome
What’s an ideal outcome? I think it would have three elements: that each person orders properly, each person pays what is owed, and the money is collected quickly.
How do the three methods compare on these criteria?
Splitting the bill–>Over order, over pay, quick collection
Pay what you ordered–>Order well, a few overpay, moderately fast collection
Separate checks–>Inconvenient for sharing, pay correct, slow collection
So each method is the best at exactly one trait. Perhaps that’s why there’s such disagreement over what to do—each method has its unique merit.
Let’s abstract the problem a little more to consider why the dining problem is so complicated. I see six main characteristics that cause trouble:
1. Hidden preferences on food
2. Hidden willingness to pay
3. Selfish desire to pay less
4. Desire to look fair
5. Desire to maintain party atmosphere
6. Hidden payments on a common bill
I’ve mulled over several solutions, and I think I’ve come up with a good start.
I’ll deal with the situation of a birthday party with a large number of people. Other situations can be handled similarly—they might even be easier because you don’t have to cover the guest of honor’s meal.
The Suggested Answer
There has to be an answer! In fact, there has to be an answer where people truthfully reveal their preferences on food and their willingness to pay. (This is a consequence of the revelation principle).
The first problem is that restaurants allow too many combinations of meals. While it’s nice to have choice, it’s worse that everyone ends up with a wildly different amount that’s owed. That confusion helps cheaters lie about what they ordered and contribute less than they should.
The first step is to make everyone happier by limiting options—this is a strategy I’ve written about before. In the extreme, you could tell everyone in advance that there is a fixed menu, and it will cost a certain amount, like at a buffet. If you want a nicer dining experience, select a few comparably priced items in advance.
The second step is to assign one person to be in charge of collecting the money. Preferably this takes place before any one eats food. This guarantees guests have money, and creates an incentive for someone to collect fairly. In large parties, you could even offer to compensate this person like $10 from the group. I am sure everyone would be willing to willing to spend an extra dollar to ensure the party atmosphere is good. If your party does not have an organizer, volunteer! People will be happy.
Here’s how the solution might work in practice.
Let’s say you have 10 guests, plus one birthday boy. You want to go to Gordon Biersch, a brewery restaurant.
They have lots of food on the menu. I count 13 starters, 12 salads, 10+ pizzas, 5 steaks, 6 seafood dishes, 5 specialties, 9 pastas, 14 sandwiches, and 5 deserts.
There is a large difference between a $10 burger and a $27 steak, so you can already see that a free-for-all “split-the-meal” is going to be a disaster. And I didn’t even mention the drink menu.
Here’s one way to proceed.
Step One: Limit the options.
Choose 3 garlic fries starters for everyone to share.
For drinks, allow people to order a soda or beer. Avoid complications like sharing wine.
Limit the menu to pizzas (except do it yourself) and sandwiches. The price range is $9-$12.25.
Choose 5 deserts for the table to share.
Step Two: Estimate Costs and Collect
I will round some costs up to be safe.
3 garlic fries 3 x $6 = $18.00
11 entrees 11 x $12.50 = $137.50
5 deserts 5 x $6.25 = $31.25
2 beers for birthday boy 2 x $5 = $10.00
Total common = $196.75
Tax + Tip (8% +18%) = $247.91
Per 10 people (treat the birthday boy) = $24.79–>round to $25
The only difference in what people pay is the choice of drinks. I think sodas cost $2 and beers $5. I’ll add tax and tip and do some rounding.
Soda: Contribute $28
1 beer: Contribute $31.50
2 beers: Contribute $38
n beers: Contribute $25 + $6.50 n
That’s it! Collect money in advance, and you’ll have every thing covered.
Step Three: Send everyone an email
The dining problem is about expectations and information. Get every one on the same page before the party starts. Here’s an email you could send to all your attendees:
Hi everybody,
We’re going to be celebrating Dan’s birthday party next Friday at Gordon Biersch.
Because we have a large group, I want to coordinate the food and cost in advance so the party runs smoothly.
For the entrée, we request you order a pizza (except “make your own”) or a sandwich.
For the appetizers and deserts, I will order a few for the whole table to share.
As for paying, we’re going to split the costs (and pay for Dan’s meal). This should be fair because the pizza and sandwich entrees are similarly priced. It’s not perfect, but it will make collection easy.
I’ve estimated the costs and have a very good idea of what you’ll need to pay. The only difference is what you decide to drink. Here are the estimated costs:
No drink: Contribute $25
Soda: Contribute $28
1 Beer: Contribute $31.50
2 Beers: Contribute $38
n Beers: Contribute $25 + $6.50 n
Please pay me in cash before you start eating. In the unlikely event we’re short, I will ask everyone to chip in an extra dollar or two. Please don’t run to the bathroom when it comes time to pay the bill 
Let me know if you have any questions…
Under this solution, people will roughly pay for what they order, it’s easy to collect and enforce payment, and a good time should be had by all. No one will be surprised by the $25 minimum cost. Big spenders can order more beers for themselves.
Some of you might be thinking, “What, no wine? No steak?” I agree the choice is limited. But I think people are willing to give up a little choice in exchange for everyone having a good party. This is because parties are not about getting exactly what you want–you can do that on your own time. It’s about coordinating a large group.
Do you have another solution to the dining problem? Please share in the comments and I’ll post the best ideas.
Great Reader Ideas:
In the comments, there are a bunch of good ideas. Here is a sampling.
Anna suggests a much simpler email with the same message:
Why not just say “we have a prix fixe options arranged with the restaurant including a chicken dish, pizza, and vegetables and one alcholic beer/wine or non for $25 including tip. Family style. Extra drinks are on your own.
Eric Wu finds my email too commanding, and offers a way to allow for wine purchases:
It seems a bit too commanding and even a bit irrational to limit the choices to a select few within a certain price range. To me, the basic problem is the ordering if shared items such as bottles of wine or appetizers, which are the only items that need to be limited. Here is my solution:
1) Pick someone who is honest and very good at math, adding 25% to your items ordered is not difficult. He will divvy up the bill for everyone but himself.
2) Pick another person to collect the cash and divvy up the first person’s bill All excess collected funds go to the server. This is so no one has incentive to over-collect.
3) Limit the choices for appetizers to group/table appetizers and then order wine by the glass.Definitely will not be as quick to collect if the person in charge is not good at math, but it allows everyone to order what they want, and everyone ends up paying the proper amount. Though the appetizers still cause problems because of the incentive to eat a lot of the appetizers and then eat a smaller meal. A solution would be to have the server divide the appetizers evenly.
Nick Eastop discusses a very cool mathematical method that seems to work out quickly:
The “Chris Dicken” method:
Everybody estimates on a scale from 1 to 10 what level of consumption they had. 10 being somebody who ate and drank a lot and had expensive dishes and 1 being somebody who only had a starter and a glass of water. It can be quite amusing discussing the different levels, but surprising in how quickly a consensus can be reached.
All the “level” numbers are added up and the bill is divided by the figure reached. This give a “unit”.
Each person pays the unit multiplied by his “level” plus a small percentage for whatever tip is appropriate.
I travel a lot with an orchestra and frequently eat in restaurants with groups of all different sizes. After trying this method for a while, everybody who tries it agrees that it is easy to use and a lot fairer than simply splitting the bill as we had done for years…..
Links:
In researching this article, I came across a lot of interesting web articles. The first New York Times article is where I got the idea to limit the menu. The rest of the articles share some popular opinions.
New York Times: You Do the Math
If it’s a fancy place, consider limiting the menu choices ahead of time to several reasonably priced alternatives and house wines, perhaps to be printed on a keepsake placard. If you have piles of money, consider paying for everybody. If you don’t, consider disclosing a rough price of entry ahead of time. And if that is exceeded, suck it up, because the alternative is just unpleasant.
The Onion: Caltech Physicists Successfully Split The Bill
“Before the arrival of the check, several early bill-splitting theories were proposed, including a simple process of dividing it into eight identical fragments, the Random Contribution Model, and a theory posited by Newbury himself—who insisted that he was bound to treat everyone—which was widely rejected on the basis that it would undermine the whole objective of the evening.
“When the check came, we all immediately agreed that the total of $284.57 could be defined as an irrational number of dollars for a party of eight to spend at a chain restaurant,” said Dreyfuss.
Money-Grubbing: An interview with Uri Gneezy, UCSD Professor
Also, culture can matter. In Germany, for example, they count down to the last penny. In Israel, if you do this, it’s not a good way to go around. You’ll get a very bad reputation for calculating up to the last cent. The cultural issue is very important.
But I Only Drank Water! Do you have to split the bill?
If everyone pays only for what he or she orders, then when the check comes, guests get tangled in petty calculations. Inevitably, someone miscounts how many beers he had, or doesn’t put in enough for the tip, or forgets to chip in for the host’s share. Worse yet, fussing over the details of the bill makes you look stingy. Dan Rubin, a spin instructor in San Francisco, says: “Why spoil a great dinner quibbling over awkward minutiae like who had three beers and who had one?” Rubin isn’t wealthy, but he finds this so distasteful, he says, “It’s worth me spending the extra $25 or whatever to save my reputation.”
But I Only Got the Soup…
Personally, I am with you. Establish a grand total, including the tip. (You would be surprised how a group is all too happy to have someone be the designated bookkeeper at times like this–might at well be you.) Split the check by the number of people. Couples pay the two-fer rate, singles pay the single rate. Easy. Except when seven credit cards get tossed at the server. “Put $50 on this Amex, $22.50 on the two Visas,” and so on. Such a pain.
New York Times: A Measure of Guidance: Dividing the Bill
If one person or one couple has ordered significantly more expensive food or had much more to drink, it’s ideal if he, she or they bring up the subject of bill division and volunteer to pay a bigger share of it.
And if the discrepancy between that higher share and the lower share really isn’t much, it’s sweet of the lesser spenders to reject the offer, stave off the arithmetic and suggest a straightforward division.
These are social situations, after all. They’re not algebra classes.
37 Responses to “Dividing a Restaurant Bill Using Mechanism Design”
I see you neglected your own Rule of 25. I figured that’s because you weren’t doing the calculations on the spot. Also, are those personal pizzas, as opposed to a big pie?
By Erik on Jan 29, 2008
I would easily pay a couple extra bucks to avoid that effort, but then again that’s pretty divergent to your mantra.
I can’t say this is even an issue for me though. I think for the most part everyone understands the pitfalls of splitting the bill. So it’s avoided unless the individual sums are comparable.
By Joon on Jan 29, 2008
I have forwarded this to a couple friends and, no offense, we feel like this solution, while perhaps the most fair would also please the least number of people.
People relish choice when dining and most people I know expect to pay a disproportionate amount for birthday dinners.
A better solution might be to avoid these events and so something more intimate with the guest of honor at a later date.
By Mike on Jan 29, 2008
@Mike - Well…why not let people pick items beforehand, most places have an online menu, usually with prices included. Also, pre-paying cuts into the “just one more drink” attitude that often leads to bad decisions and can help save you bail money.
By RohoMech on Jan 29, 2008
@Erik: Yes, I used the less common rule of 26 since I had a spreadsheet handy. The pizzas are personal, I think.
@Joon: First, I would gladly take your couple extra bucks and be the party organizer. Second, I’m more worried about the $20 discrepancies these parties cause than the couple bucks. Third, people do understand the problem of splitting the bill–but the research shows people *still* take advantage of the system. It’s like people who know cheating is wrong, but will do it if they think they won’t be caught.
@Mike: So you see the point–the people who don’t show up for a *fair* solution are obviously the ones who want to cheat! But I agree; there are other ways like doing some thing nice with the guest of honor at another time.
@RohoMech: Good point. Each person could pre-order too and just pay what is owed.
By Presh Talwalkar on Jan 29, 2008
I’ve actually seen one restaurant that allows you to split one item across several checks, although the classier ones definitely wouldn’t - Melissa and I were amazed one day to discover that you could split appetizers across bills at Buffalo Wild Wings.
By Christina on Jan 31, 2008
@Christina: That’s good to know. Seems like some restaurants have already come up with solutions!
By Presh Talwalkar on Feb 1, 2008
Thank you for a great overview and real strategy ideas for how to split bills. I personally use billmonk www.billmonk.com and which allows for an easy split, or itemization for large items.
By Sean Oliver on Feb 10, 2008
Pal….you are nuts.
By Oldtimer on Feb 10, 2008
The problem with economists is that they can only solve for economic efficiency, and so that’s what they do.
My goal when I go to dinner with my friends is to enjoy myself. Unless extreme, whether I pay more then I receive in food is trivial compared to the enjoyment I get from the gathering.
To “optimize” completely, do you suggest calculating each person’s ability to pay by pro-rating based on discretionary income? Inviting my friends out to dinner in order to audit them sounds like a jolly time, no?
By Richard C Haven on Feb 10, 2008
It seems to me that limiting the options beforehand feels a bit overbearing or maybe even cheap.
Do people really like it when somebody emails them ahead of time saying you can only order X, Y, and Z?
By anon on Feb 10, 2008
Unfortunately, game theory offers an impoverished view of the agent. True incentives are not quantifiable, and are therefore disregarded by numerical approaches to understanding human behavior. For example, when I go out to dinner with friends, we understand it not as three self-interested agents attempting to maximize our individual gain from the experience (or minimize our loss), but as a community event where the participants engage in mutual cooperation from a position of altruism and respect–and to just have good time without cold, rational calculation. The rational choice paradigm is viewed by many ethicists as a somewhat abhorrent ethical model to base our actions upon, and one that is empirically unjustified in attributing to agents.
By Jem on Feb 10, 2008
With groups- my wife and I have tried multiple methods- and inevitably there are some who want to calculate to the penny, some who just want to split amongst all diners, and various other methods.
However, when we dine with close friends, we always split evenly. Sometimes we may order more, sometimes we may order less. And since we dine together fairly regularly- it all evens out enough for us all.
By Mapu on Feb 10, 2008
@Sean Oliver: Thanks for the pointer to Bill Monk.
Per the other comments, I agree with close friends it really doesn’t matter how you do it.
I worry about large groups of people who don’t necessarily care about each other. Like at an office gathering, or a large birthday party. Those are the times that scream for better outcomes. In fact, I mentioned that I use “pay for what you order” with friends and it usually works out.
I only suggested IF you want better outcomes, I offered a proposal. It’s not perfect, but if you have a better idea, please share so we all can benefit.
By Presh Talwalkar on Feb 10, 2008
Know your friends. Pay for what you ordered. If somebody’s got a budget or issue, everyone else can chip in a couple of bucks more.
If this is ALL a problem, you need new friends. No?
By CJ on Feb 11, 2008
ha, interesting. To those poking fun that the author should be enjoying his dinner rather than thinking this, know that many a classic problem or even new problems have been solved this way making large impacts on life. Consider Hamilton known for the famous quaternions to which he discovered whilst walking around with his wife. http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/octonions/node24.html
I eat with Chinese folks quite often. At a Chinese restaurant we eat family style and split the bill based on number of adults in each family. Thus it is bill total/n and your family pays m*n where m0 here.) Children are not counted in each family as long as they are under a certain threshold age, of which I don’t know as of yet as we all have toddlers currently. I call this the ‘mutual fund’ approach to paying the bill,the toddlers I suppose represent fees, hehe. Anyhow, Chinese prefer variety at dinner and this style encourages this further they have had a few years of practise at it and therefore very rarely is any food left and all parties have ate their full. The only disadvantage would be if one member at the table is a very big eater, this person is usually invited only once.
DK
By dk on Feb 11, 2008
I’m a server, so from the backend of experiencing these type of events, big parties can be a pain in the butt.
When theres 15 people and everyone wants separate checks, this can be good and bad. If one guy wants to buy one other person a beer, it has to go on his tab. Also, when 15 people all do separate checks, usually your tip goes down. When the average check is 15 dollars, and people tip 1-4 dollars, you make end up making a lot less than you would if there was one big check for a 100 bucks and getting a 20 dollar tip.
Often times to be fair, splitting the check individually us fair on everyone, with everyone contributing a couple of dollars to cover the birthday guys meal. Or another way people often to do it is that they’ll split up the check into groups of 3 or 4, one person in the group getting the whole check for that group, with the promise of someone else getting it NEXT time. But then if you have a jerk in your group who will conveniently forget that its his turn next time, that can suck. My suggestion would be to weed out the jerks in your group of friends.
By Jen on Feb 11, 2008
No wine as an option up front, where do you come from? Why not just say “we have a prix fixe options arranged with the restaurant including a chicken dish, pizza, and vegetables and one alcholic beer/wine or non for $25 including tip. Family style. Extra drinks are on your own.
Maybe its just the way its worded, but I would not wan to attend something that sounded as complicated as your email did.
We usually state at teh beginning the deal. split , or split plus unless you order more than one alcholic drink or something over $30, then you pay more. or pay for what you order. If someone orders a bottle of wine, they should be the ones to make sure those drinking the wine will go in the bottle before ordering… Sure, its awkward, but who cares. The cheap ones wont touch it. Or just dont invite those cheap friends!
By Anna on Feb 11, 2008
@dk: Fascinating story of Hamilton. My high school calculus teacher vaguely mentioned it, but I never followed up. Thanks for the link! Your method for splitting at Chinese restaurants is interesting, but I’ve already read stories about people complaining about paying for other people’s kids–I guess it comes down to having good friends again.
@Jen: Thanks for sharing a perspective from the server side of the matter. Sounds like separate checks is more work for less tip; quite the raw deal.
@Anna: You’re precisely right; my email was complicated. Your wording is much better–thanks. I’ve added it to the article
By Presh Talwalkar on Feb 11, 2008
It seems a bit too commanding and even a bit irrational to limit the choices to a select few within a certain price range. To me, the basic problem is the ordering if shared items such as bottles of wine or appetizers, which are the only items that need to be limited. Here is my solution:
1) Pick someone who is honest and very good at math, adding 25% to your items ordered is not difficult. He will divvy up the bill for everyone but himself.
2) Pick another person to collect the cash and divvy up the first person’s bill All excess collected funds go to the server. This is so no one has incentive to over-collect.
3) Limit the choices for appetizers to group/table appetizers and then order wine by the glass.
Definitely will not be as quick to collect if the person in charge is not good at math, but it allows everyone to order what they want, and everyone ends up paying the proper amount. Though the appetizers still cause problems because of the incentive to eat a lot of the appetizers and then eat a smaller meal. A solution would be to have the server divide the appetizers evenly.
By Eric Wu on Feb 12, 2008
The “Chris Dicken” method:
Everybody estimates on a scale from 1 to 10 what level of consumption they had. 10 being somebody who ate and drank a lot and had expensive dishes and 1 being somebody who only had a starter and a glass of water. It can be quite amusing discussing the different levels, but surprising in how quickly a consensus can be reached.
All the “level” numbers are added up and the bill is divided by the figure reached. This give a “unit”.
Each person pays the unit multiplied by his “level” plus a small percentage for whatever tip is appropriate.
I travel a lot with an orchestra and frequently eat in restaurants with groups of all different sizes. After trying this method for a while, everybody who tries it agrees that it is easy to use and a lot fairer than simply splitting the bill as we had done for years…..
By Nick Eastop on Feb 12, 2008
as a Food and Beverage Director i am always working with the Banquet Coordinator and the service staff to find better ways of serving people who desire split checks, including buying a very expensive POS that allows us to split bills in any way a guest desires - however it still seems most desirable for all involved to keep the bill together. in most environments the split check will have service staff flag you - they can make more money with less hassle elsewhere. when i served i knew you weren’t going anywhere anyway.
if every group had a leader as thoughtful as you that paradigm might be changed. but i won’t hold my breath.
By nok on Feb 12, 2008
@Eric Wu and Nick Eastop: Interesting ideas. I can see how they would work with close friends, especially Nick’s idea, but I’m worried about birthday parties where you have to cover someone.
But I’m certainly not the final judge: I included your suggestions so we’ll see what people think about them
@nok: I agree that one bill helps everyone in terms of it being a less hassle.
By Presh Talwalkar on Feb 12, 2008
I have really enjoyed reading through all of these posts. My husband and I go out often and sometimes to meet people we have never met before so impressions are sometime awkward when it comes time to pay the check. While we would like to treat or be the really generous one it is not cost efficient.
I have found it is cheaper to stop the server for a second and tell him/her that we will need separate checks early on while giving them a little extra tip with the request. This lets them know to ask which check shared items go on and prevents the flagging that the table is more trouble than it is worth.
It has worked in the past and my server brother loves the idea.
Just my 2 cents… September
By September on Feb 16, 2008
There’s a very simple way if you have a crew of people you regularly go out with. Rotate who picks up the entire bill each time. Everyone gets what they want, and you only have to pay once every few times, depending on how large your crew is.
By Tyler on Feb 17, 2008
@September: Thanks for sharing your tip. I like how your answer displays good etiquette and I’ll keep it in mind when I meet people in small groups. I only wish it were more scalable to larger parties.
By Presh Talwalkar on Feb 17, 2008
@Tyler: It’s definitely a method that works for reasonable people, but I’ve had friends who tried this but I’ve noticed someone usually ends up complaining about always paying at the more expensive places. I have heard it works well for people in serious relationships where both parties want to split things equally (though I don’t think splitting equally is a common arrangement for most couples).
By Presh Talwalkar on Feb 17, 2008
I am looking for personal opinions on this situation, so please email me. THanks.
9 women have lunch at an upscale restaurant. They want the waitress to supply 9 separate checks. The waitress is put out but still polite. The group leaders ask the waitress to send over the owner and the owner sits down and goes through the whole bill, asking each one what did they eat and drink and adding in their tax too. Each paid either cash or asked the owner to have the waitress take credit cards for their individual amounts.
The group leaders told the waitress that they will never come back because the waitress told them normally everybody squares up as a group and figures it out. The group leaders insist that it was the waitresses job and that the restaurant is not doing their job. I say everybody should have brought small cash and kept track of their own. It was such a silly scene and I think it was rude to give the restaurant a hard time.
What do you think?
By faith on May 12, 2008
Faith: It appears the story was about miscommunication that unfortunately escalated.
Here is how it could be made better:
–The waiter could have listened and split the bill. If customers ask for something the restaurant offers, it’s not a waiter’s job to make the judgment call.
–The owner could make a policy of not splitting checks. I’ve been to places like this, and it’s understood, so customers come prepared.
–The customers could have been sensitive. I recently was in a group of 9 where we considered paying cash and credit. But we realized it was going to be a big hassle and we didn’t want to impose on a busy restaurant. So we split the group into three credit cards. Those people were paid back in cash by other group members.
Ultimately, dining is about having a good time, so I think it’s best to pay quickly, however that can be achieved.
By Presh Talwalkar on May 13, 2008
Nine separate checks? Are they serious? Who cares if they are put out: give them one check and hope never to see them again.
An on-line/mobile application like scred.com can make it easy for people who share bills to keep track of each member’s balance.
By Richard C Haven on May 13, 2008
Richard C Haven: Thanks for the suggestion; scred looks promising.
It actually makes me think about biometric systems: eventually, bills could just be paid by your fingerprint, which would activate an electronic transfer from your bank account. In restaurants, tables could essentially be given a mini-computer and divide the bill however they want so long as the whole balance gets paid.
Biometric payment was tested in Illinois grocer stores (pay by touch), but it probably failed since not enough adopted.
By Presh Talwalkar on May 13, 2008
I frequently run into an issue where no one at the table has cash or small bills to appropriately split the bill to their individual share. Someone ends up having to find a pen and we all write our credit card share on the back of the bill. While waiters don’t like taking multiple cards, these days it’s pretty quick to do, so they will go ahead and do it. My idea was to have a small white space on the credit card where you could write down a number using a dry-erase marker so you can write your total on your card. I’m sure restaurants that run into the credit card split often can provide dry-erase markers and it becomes easier for the server to match cards to numbers.
By Anand L. on Jun 4, 2008
Anand L.: This is an excellent suggestion. A similar idea is to have a wireless swipe at the table. I think something like this is available in Europe…
By Presh Talwalkar on Jun 4, 2008