4 ms·

While not Paris, there may be a general market factor at play that doesn't make for punchy headlines. Things don't "disappear," they economically polarize to no

While not Paris, there may be a general market factor at play that doesn't make for punchy headlines. Things don't "disappear," they economically polarize to normal and inferior states. These bistros (as culture) are like newspapers and media in general, where a high quality middle ground is no longer viable, so only the very cheap, and the very expensive survive, and the middle is hollowed out. Arguably, a quality middle is the effect of a temporary distortion or disequllibrium, where for whatever reason, quality has not been optimized out of an attractive price point. A good middle quality bistro doesn't compete on marginal price, it seeks to differentiate itself on features. Customers become indifferent to the feature quality, select for price, and good places fail. When you add tourism, you add feature-indifferent customers who select on price - which is why locals hate them, as this indifference upsets the local equilibrium that made a good middle possible, and that hollows out their quality of life. The same quality is available, but it costs more to sustain because it has lost the price selecting customers, and must survive on a smaller population who values them. This was the big "race to the bottom" criticism of globalization in the 90s, where global competition ostensibly ended local ways of life by flooding markets with indifferent consumers of goods optimized for generic global markets. Polarization happens, and it's usually costly regulation that staves it off. France led the way with designation of origin (controlee?) trade rules, and banning the McDonald-ification of their cafes probably has precedent. Rents and real estate prices are the other key factor, where the risk/reward for anything but a proven franchise model is not a viable investment. San Francisco is a great example of that. It's not gentrified, it's globalized.

stcredzero 8y ago
Things don't "disappear," they economically polarize to normal and inferior states. I was just coming here to say this, just in less precise terms. I have a history of frequenting cafes as a regular, only to become disillusioned over time. A cafe has become either something which can be established for very little money and a modicum of knowledge or something which takes a certain level of fit and finish to appeal to a well heeled subgroup. Arguably, a quality middle is the effect of a temporary distortion or disequllibrium, where for whatever reason, quality has not been optimized out of an attractive price point. A good middle quality bistro doesn't compete on marginal price, it seeks to differentiate itself on features. So entrepreneurs should be on the lookout for the "quality middle" as a temporary market opportunity? Maybe this applies to some large fraction of all startups? It could be stated thus, "A shift in technology creates a new market opportunity for a 'quality middle' which hadn't existed before."
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  > So entrepreneurs should be on the lookout for the "quality middle" as a temporary market opportunity? I guess very temporary, because the next step is for a typical entrepreneur to notice that there's a "quality middle" somewhere, which he/she can exploit by cutting some corners, selling for less, and taking over most customers.
- motohagiography 8y ago
  The distortion is often a quirk of geography, or taboo. There was a famous graffiti statement in a condo construction barrier growing up that was, "artists are the stormtroopers of gentrification." To take this further, that quality-middle is risk. It's possible that the sort of sick and uncanny aesthetics of corporate franchises are our reaction to the a disequllibrium of risk. Reacting to something that lacks skin in the game as a trap seems like a reasonable instinct. It's a representation or a simulacrum, something we recognize in nature as bait. The things we romanticize, like old cafes, are expressions of risks taken. Where there is little risk, perhaps on some animal level we expect scavengers and death. Gentrification is de-risking, as is franchising, and imho some portfolio management as well. There is probably an underlying aesthetics of risk theory in there, however, we should leave that one for Nassim Taleb.
VK538FY 8y ago
This thread 'triggered' me and I must say that you have identified what is in my opinion the problem: natural human greed and the increasing cost of rent in touristic cities flooded by low cost travel. I experienced something similar as a (francophone) tourist in Venice recently. Seafood pasta with a total of one chopped prawn and one chopped scallop, really? 'Italian receipe!' cries the Venisian waiter. But mass tourism wants cheap and it wants fast. I'm sure that the locals would have been ashamed. As a further anecdote, I didn't repeat my mistake and the next day went to a restaurant recommended by the Michelin guide (instead of by the colleague of nationality X who recommended the first), paid marginally more for a truly inspired menu and stellar service. And across us sat a table of tourists of nationality Y who frankly would have been better served in the first restaurant.
C7H8N4O2 8y ago
Excellent comment, thank you for phrasing this so clearly.

stcredzero 8y ago

Things don't "disappear," they economically polarize to normal and inferior states. I was just coming here to say this, just in less precise terms. I have a history of frequenting cafes as a regular, only to become disillusioned over time. A cafe has become either something which can be established for very little money and a modicum of knowledge or something which takes a certain level of fit and finish to appeal to a well heeled subgroup. Arguably, a quality middle is the effect of a temporary distortion or disequllibrium, where for whatever reason, quality has not been optimized out of an attractive price point. A good middle quality bistro doesn't compete on marginal price, it seeks to differentiate itself on features. So entrepreneurs should be on the lookout for the "quality middle" as a temporary market opportunity? Maybe this applies to some large fraction of all startups? It could be stated thus, "A shift in technology creates a new market opportunity for a 'quality middle' which hadn't existed before."

TeMPOraL 8y ago
> So entrepreneurs should be on the lookout for the "quality middle" as a temporary market opportunity? I guess very temporary, because the next step is for a typical entrepreneur to notice that there's a "quality middle" somewhere, which he/she can exploit by cutting some corners, selling for less, and taking over most customers.
motohagiography 8y ago
The distortion is often a quirk of geography, or taboo. There was a famous graffiti statement in a condo construction barrier growing up that was, "artists are the stormtroopers of gentrification." To take this further, that quality-middle is risk. It's possible that the sort of sick and uncanny aesthetics of corporate franchises are our reaction to the a disequllibrium of risk. Reacting to something that lacks skin in the game as a trap seems like a reasonable instinct. It's a representation or a simulacrum, something we recognize in nature as bait. The things we romanticize, like old cafes, are expressions of risks taken. Where there is little risk, perhaps on some animal level we expect scavengers and death. Gentrification is de-risking, as is franchising, and imho some portfolio management as well. There is probably an underlying aesthetics of risk theory in there, however, we should leave that one for Nassim Taleb.

VK538FY 8y ago

This thread 'triggered' me and I must say that you have identified what is in my opinion the problem: natural human greed and the increasing cost of rent in touristic cities flooded by low cost travel. I experienced something similar as a (francophone) tourist in Venice recently. Seafood pasta with a total of one chopped prawn and one chopped scallop, really? 'Italian receipe!' cries the Venisian waiter. But mass tourism wants cheap and it wants fast. I'm sure that the locals would have been ashamed. As a further anecdote, I didn't repeat my mistake and the next day went to a restaurant recommended by the Michelin guide (instead of by the colleague of nationality X who recommended the first), paid marginally more for a truly inspired menu and stellar service. And across us sat a table of tourists of nationality Y who frankly would have been better served in the first restaurant.

C7H8N4O2 8y ago

Excellent comment, thank you for phrasing this so clearly.