Requiring WiFi at restaurants.

I came across this article and thought it might interesting to discuss it here.

http://thenextweb.com/asia/2012/01/02/n ... vide-wi-fi

Generally speaking I am AGAINST government rules on business operations. Obviously some are needed. But mandating service(s) might be a bit over the top. This is not in US and I can't believe it would pass muster here… oh wait.. it might in Louisville if it involved food industry.

Having said that I think it is just bad service for about 99.99% of restaurants to not have FREE WiFi, with password protection, for their patrons. There are a few places where it makes no sense such as 610 Magnolia and dinner at Vincenzo's, Proof, et.al., of that nature. But for the vast majority of restaurants the added expense is minimal. At brunch on the 1st I told our end of the table that Suzi and I were out a few weeks ago and went to Wild Ginger. They have WiFi and I asked if I could use it and the owner said sure if I can put the password in. I turned my iPad around for her. Tweeted all about dinner too for her.

I now travel for my job and because of that I do tend to have lunches out. If I am on the road and pull off for lunch I pick places that have FREE WiFi so I can check up on my e-mail and news. Amazingly, Wendy's now has it, altho not talked about. Subway doesn't, but I sure wish they did. I need to talk to Jarred (sp) about that. Of course Mickey D's does too but I am staying away from that if I can. When I do make my selection in those instances I will lean hard to the providers. I don't do much over night travel but when/if I do, supper places will be based on that as well.

And, on a side note I have seen several tweets recently about people carrying on long loud phone conversations at tables in coffee shops. I do stop in, but if I need use my phone for a business call I will step outside, so as to not bother others and to not talk about my business in front of people. Additionally, several people have tweeted comments about 'businessmen' taking up a four top for themselves in coffee shops with laptop and paperwork spread all over. Thoughts? One thing I have noticed in Starbucks on remodels is that they are putting in a lot of tall tables with stools for two and going away from 2 and 4 person tables. Yes, invariably the person tweeted about is male, I was not generalizing.

Discuss freely. So how do others feel? Diners? Restaurant owners/managers? Service People.

Richard

Too funny we were just discussing that yesterday at my house. I bring my iPad everywhere for my son. (he's 4 and has Autism, so it really helps us get through a meal keeping him entertained). So sometimes not having wifi limits our choices. Panera and McAlisters also have wifi. By no means should restaurants be required to have it, and it certainly doesnt belong in fine dining establishments. But for me, it would spread our dining dollars out to more places. And it would be nice to not have to have just fast food places.

I personally think it's a terrible idea! I'm also quite sure that many restaurant operators would be opposed to something along these lines. I'm sure people who are using WiFi end up staying longer and tying up table space without spending more in most cases. It's fine for Starbucks, Jason's, McCallister's and other restaurants along those lines but in any place nicer they can rapidly become a major distraction. People end up having business meetings while using laptops or other devices on their table which is certainly inappropriate in so many ways! Overall it's just a bad idea!

I agree with the OP. I was working in the Hurstbourne area yesterday and wanted to have lunch and a beer but needed to send off a few emails. I called maybe 6 or 7 places to ask if they had wifi. Negatory. Ended up at Starbucks. Boo.

Free WIFI going on 4+ years, honestly a lot of customers expect it especially during lunch

This should be a business decision made by the owners and how they feel it would affect their business. They might just make the decision on a whim or personal preference. That's OK too, It's their business. We the customer have the right to patronize them or not based on the products and services. I don't believe we need government telling us how to live our lives.

[Robin Garr]

This should be a business decision made by the owners and how they feel it would affect their business. They might just make the decision on a whim or personal preference. That's OK too, It's their business. We the customer have the right to patronize them or not based on the products and services. I don't believe we need government telling us how to live our lives.

Wait, isn't this the same argument we heard about smoking, though? It troubles me mainly because, in another context that some of us are old enough to remember, this exact same argument was used against being "forced" to serve minorities.

Wait, isn't this the same argument we heard about smoking, though? It troubles me mainly because, in another context that some of us are old enough to remember, this exact same argument was used against being "forced" to serve minorities.

Somehow I'm having difficulty equating WiFi with smoking bans(health concerns from 2nd hand smoke) and the immorality of segregation.

As many of you know, my roommate/business partner and I are still looking at (once the ecomony loosens up a bit) opening an entertainment venue that will also house a bistro/dining side to it, pluse a dance club and several bar areas. Now, I'm not a porponent of use of WiFi/Cellphones while dining, I can see where the benefits of it could outweigh the negitive affects. It's all based on (ok, here is the rub) common sense. We all have been exposed to inconsiderate souls who gab loudly during their meal giving graphic details of their last surgery. OY!

Now, that being said, I still tend to ignore my phone at dinner, and if it's important, I excuse myself and leave the dining floor as to not distrub the others there. WiFi has the potential problem of "noise" where it not wanted, and to that end, I say no to it.

Robin, as the comparison to the Smoking Ban, it's apples and oranges.....health vs. manners. Like I said, this issue all depends on the establishments patronage and price point. Will we have it when we open? The jury is still out. Probably, if we can segrate it to the bar/dance areas, and keep it out of the dining areas....but, like I said, we've not crossed that path yet.

Wait, isn't this the same argument we heard about smoking, though? It troubles me mainly because, in another context that some of us are old enough to remember, this exact same argument was used against being "forced" to serve minorities.

Somehow I'm having difficulty equating WiFi with smoking bans(health concerns from 2nd hand smoke) and the immorality of segregation.

I certainly agree!

[Robin Garr]

Wait, isn't this the same argument we heard about smoking, though? It troubles me mainly because, in another context that some of us are old enough to remember, this exact same argument was used against being "forced" to serve minorities.

Somehow I'm having difficulty equating WiFi with smoking bans(health concerns from 2nd hand smoke) and the immorality of segregation.

Same argument. That's what I said, and it's all I said. "Leave the government out and let the free market decide" is the identical argument in all three cases. It translates as "Don't tell me what to do." Different subject? Obviously. But what part of "This is the same argument" was unclear?

Wait, isn't this the same argument we heard about smoking, though? It troubles me mainly because, in another context that some of us are old enough to remember, this exact same argument was used against being "forced" to serve minorities.

Somehow I'm having difficulty equating WiFi with smoking bans(health concerns from 2nd hand smoke) and the immorality of segregation.

Same argument. That's what I said, and it's all I said. "Leave the government out and let the free market decide" is the identical argument in all three cases. It translates as "Don't tell me what to do." Different subject? Obviously. But what part of "This is the same argument" was unclear?

The same argument/action is not always appropriate nor is it always inappropriate depending upon subject matter and you know it. On some matters it is quite appropriate for government/society to tell the individual what to do and in other cases it is not. You either fail to see the distinction or your post was meaningless...

[Robin Garr]

The same argument/action is not always appropriate nor is it always inappropriate depending upon subject matter and you know it. On some matters it is quite appropriate for government/society to tell the individual what to do and in other cases it is not. You either fail to see the distinction or your post was meaningless...

Let me say it this way: When I see the "leave the free market alone to work its magic" in any argumentation, I make sure my wallet pocket is buttoned.

Actually, if you read the whole story about Kuala Lumpur, it's nuanced, and has to do with a discussion about how most effectively to extend public wifi to the greatest population. That's not a bad goal, and it's one that can't be accomplished without spending. The US is doing a rather crappy job of this very thing ... and guess what ... we've largely left it up to the free market, and we're trailing most of the developed world.

The same argument/action is not always appropriate nor is it always inappropriate depending upon subject matter and you know it. On some matters it is quite appropriate for government/society to tell the individual what to do and in other cases it is not. You either fail to see the distinction or your post was meaningless...

Let me say it this way: When I see the "leave the free market alone to work its magic" in any argumentation, I make sure my wallet pocket is buttoned.

That is your right to feel that the market is always/usually not a proper response to any situation. And, probably a better argument than gratuitously throwing in smoking bans and lunch counter segregation. It is also my right to disagree that the market always fails

Actually, if you read the whole story about Kuala Lumpur, it's nuanced, and has to do with a discussion about how most effectively to extend public wifi to the greatest population. That's not a bad goal, and it's one that can't be accomplished without spending. The US is doing a rather crappy job of this very thing ... and guess what ... we've largely left it up to the free market, and we're trailing most of the developed world.

Really has nothing to do with my OP, but thanks for digesting it for me.

Don't think anyone said that markets always fail, but that the market don't always work. That's a pretty big difference.