At present, many restaurants pay the bill before eating. What's your opinion?

This sudden major epidemic has had a great impact on all walks of life, especially on the catering industry. Due to objective reasons, it is not feasible to pay the bill first and then eat. Many catering industries are shuffling and re-planning, making great efforts in service mode and quality, expanding service scope, constantly reforming and innovating, and attracting customers and consumers through various channels. This is the best comprehensive purpose of service.

This is a violation of secular customs. Since ancient times, in this world, people have to eat first and then pay the bill. Relevant management units should express their views on this and take action.

This is understandable, because the hotel business is relatively concentrated, so there are so many people in an hour or two. If you don't pay first, you will probably leave without paying for the meal because you don't have time to collect the money, which is beneficial to the loss. I ate in a restaurant in Shanghai, the two of us were together, and the other two went out while eating at a table. When we finished eating and paid, they remembered that there were two others, and we said they had left. At that time, I was very busy, and there were many such situations, so I understood that people should pay before spending. As long as they don't charge much, they should give as much as they should, just a little earlier and a little later.

I agree and support this. Under the impact of the epidemic, many beverage enterprises have closed down, and those that can survive are also operating at a loss and in debt. It would be even worse if they were caught in the process of maintenance. To be on the safe side, it is feasible to pay first and then prepare the bill, which is also the procedure that has been used in the past. That's understandable.

I am engaged in business and marketing. My philosophy is that customers are always God, and to limit customers is to limit myself.

First of all, eating places are different: fast food restaurants and restaurants with rich dishes.

Generally speaking, fast food restaurants, cafeterias and canteens, or food stores that only sell single food, all pay the bill before eating, and the frequency of ordering food in different restaurants is different.

Simple examples, such as mala Tang and hot pot, are not suitable for paying bills before meals. When customers frequently order food, if we pay the bill before the meal, it will cause a waste of manpower and an unpleasant dining experience. Of course, this can be solved by improving brand effect (customers know brand products better) and service level.

Second, the difference in turnover rate.

Pre-meal payment can significantly improve the transaction rate, but it will also slightly reduce the average unit price. If your restaurant has a high turnover, it is almost necessary to pay before meals. This is highly related to the location of the store (such as whether it is facing the street) and the type of customers.

However, if it is a high-consumption restaurant based on the unit price (rather than the turnover rate), you can consider paying the bill after the meal. In fact, breakfast shops pay great attention to the turnover rate, and customers are familiar with the menu, so they will not order again. But why do many breakfast shops pay after meals?

Because many of these breakfast shops are mainly regular customers, in order to maintain the consumer psychology of regular customers, they adopt a more traditional and conservative way of paying the bill after meals (even forgetting to bring money to brush their faces). Similarly, many mid-to high-end hotels also pay the bill after meals, and even sign the bill. It is to maintain the customer's consumption relationship through the customer's consumption psychology.

Third, the market route is different.

The restaurant that eats first and pays later is for another market route. This kind of restaurant is generally a medium-sized or large-sized restaurant, with large investment, rich and comprehensive dishes and relatively expensive dining price, and the settlement is generally calculated at 100 yuan.

Consumers are generally in groups, and will have dinner with family members, relatives and friends, classmates or colleagues, and there are more people eating. When ordering food, it is not a one-time order, but with the passage of dining time, diners will increase the consumption of dishes from time to time. Therefore, the method of eating first and finally settling accounts at one time is adopted.

Fourth, the cost of supervision is different: possible evasion and no need for excessive supervision.

In addition to the above two reasons, these two restaurants with different dining modes also face different regulatory costs. Fast food restaurants will also adopt the mode of eating first and paying later, but it will reduce the operating efficiency and spend a lot of extra time to operate.

Moreover, due to the large flow of people, if you pay the bill after eating first, there may be evasion. Therefore, adopting the mode of paying first and then eating can not only improve efficiency, but also avoid unnecessary economic losses caused by ticket evasion.

In fact, the two modes of paying the bill after eating first and paying the bill first are all related to factors such as ordering frequency, turnover rate, customer's consumption psychology, labor cost, brand scale and so on. Generally speaking, if the main consumption purpose of customers is food, they are more inclined to pay the bill before meals. If customers' main consumption purpose is environment and service, they are more inclined to pay the bill after meals.

What's wrong with that? There are fewer things, and there are fewer troubles. Paying for a meal is nothing.

I think this is a good thing, but on the surface it seems bad. I never go to a restaurant, but at most I go to a food stall to buy a box lunch. Just like a box lunch at a food stall, you don't have to wait until you eat it to know its price. Wouldn't it be even more humiliating if you just didn't have enough money? It's like going to a restaurant, if it's for two people. Just after eating the bill, one slipped away temporarily, and the other thought it was his own bill, so he asked him to pay the bill. Don't you lose face because you don't have enough money? If you pay the bill first, even if it's not enough for yourself, it's better to make up or order less cheap food than to cause embarrassment. So it's good to pay the bill first and then eat.

Fast food and set meal agree to collect money before eating, and order food before settlement. Ordering tableware has various personalized characteristics and can be adjusted at any time. Payment after ordering tableware is conducive to in-depth marketing to respect and facilitate users. Early repayment can save costs and improve efficiency, but it is not conducive to development and consumption.

I don't have any opinions. Pay the bill first before eating, and pay the bill first after eating, which has little influence on diners, and the merchants who pay the bill first are also more worry-free.