Comments about ‘Chuck-A-Rama offers apology’

If there are supposed restrictions on a "buffet-style" menu there should be notice of this before paying. It's unfair for Chuck-0-Rama to assume that customers are aware of this before deciding to eat at their restaurant. The situation could have been better handled if the manager had just given his comment to the couple as a "future reference" instead of publicly humiliating the couple for what the understood to be a their definition of a buffet.

The climate of business in America has changed dramatically over the last several years. The attitude of -the business entity bares all responsibility and liability in a transaction, while the customer bares none- is getting to the point of being out of control. Why should a company have to spell out every little detail of what should be obvious. Why shouldn't the couple in question be held to some level of accountability for abusing basic rules of etiquette and decency. Perhaps the manager could have used the "future reference" tactic and avoided the majority of the problem, but I believe at least as much responsibility, if not more, rested with the couple who brought upon themselves their own "humilitation" by not respecting the fact that they were guests in a private establishment that operates on the business plan of making money by providing their "guests" with a good meal at a reasonable price. Taking advantage of a situation, getting caught at it, and then trying to turn the table to make it look like THEY are the innocent ones and the propriator is a jerk for not letting them break every code of decent conduct, is pathetic.

I agree with Nathan, The couple should take some responsiblity. Everybody is out to get whatever they can for free no matter what they have to do. The price of things now a days, you have to limit things. There are more then them coming in there to eat. I would be mad if I came in there to eat and couldn't have any roast beef b/c on couple ate it all.. know what I mean. And yes, The manager should of used better words but I'm sure he was polite about it til the couple started to make a scene, they only impbarressed themselves.

The police were called in to a buffet when the coulple ate too much. I understand they were on low carb diet and couldn't each the fillers like bread and deserts with sugar so they ate meat which is acceptable. They weren't eating other stuff some it more expensive than a slab of roast beef. Be thankful they weren't there on shrimp night or steak or rib night. Oh boy!

You have witnessed the loss function. Too be in business to need to understand your total cost. This is statistical like gaming.

Your business model is based on a standard distribution of your customers. Price is set based of the mean cost. You know some people will over eat and others won't be hungry. You pricing has taken this in to account.

A casino won't kick you out if you win. They know most loose. They need winners to give losers something to bet on. This is why gaming machines make noise when people win.

What is the cost of angering a customer. It this case it nullified money paid to promote this place. Then, they are going toponey up with free food too.

Silence would have been the best bet for the manager here.

You've got to be kidding. Being escorted from the Chuck-a-Rama because of overeating? That's bizarre. I'll tell you what this really is about. The manager didnt order enough meat, and when the couple was eating all of it, which, by the way, there was no specified serving limit on, his underpants got tied in a knot.

This happened in Boise,ID
We watched the manager harrass two older ladies for suposedly putting food in thier purse. Trouble was, the ladies were taking out a plastic bag of medication, not food.
The manager said he looked at a tape of them eating!
In other words, Chuck-A-Rama has you under surveillance at all times.
When a couple of chicken legs are worth more than repeat business, that's stupid, those little old ladies said they would never come back, and neither will we!

I live in Texarkana, Arkansas and want to send my Brother who lives in Springville a birthday gift. I have eaten in Chuckaramas many times and thought that would be a nice $50.00 gift for him. In searching for a way to obtain a Certificate to include in his birthday card via the Internet I accidently ran across this matter. I have never heard of any Buffet style facility limiting what and how much a customer can consume. Especially when they apparently have no posted indication that such is the case. Consequently, I am going to look for another eating establishment to make my purchase of his gift. Also while visiting my Brother in the future I will not utilize any Chuckarama facilities. Shame Shame

There is obviously a difference between all-you-can-eat and buffet. I see no problem with an eating establishment asking someone to limit their consumption even though there is not clear posting at the front. You pay $8.50 (or whatever) for the meal so common knowlege states there are limits. If everyone ate that much all similar establishments would have to close their doors. Unfortunatly situation like this ruin experience for the majority. Whoe dosn't love a good buffet. Now it seems the jugular vein is now exposed and time will tell depending on how far they take this. Securing an attorney over this is a sad statement for the U.S.

Wow. I certainly won't be eating at Chuck A Rama again. What a bunch of bull. I don't want to worry that a supervisor is watching me and may randomly decide I've eaten too much and humiliate me. Where do we draw the line? How much is "too much"? Why not just stop doing buffets and serve plates so you can control the exact amount of food each person gets?

I was going to take my son and others to Chuck-A-Rama for our semi-annual dinners after the priesthood sessions of GC but find the companies actions objectionable to such an extent that I wish to no longer give them my funds.