HOME > Chowhound > Food Media & News >


New York Magazine's Cheap Eats

Anybody else find this article a bit out of touch with reality? There were all kinds of great picks, like Frank, Momofuku, DiFara, the RedHook ballfields, etc. But to include Lupa and Casa Mono? Cheap Eats? I mean I know they found ways of justifying all their picks,and I adore these places, but come on. If I sent someone to Inside claiming they have cheap eats, I'd hear about if for a year!

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
  1. Totally agree!

    We laughed about it over breakfast. I don't even think Momofuku should make the cut. We dined there last weekend and it cost us around $80. Neither of us ordered an entree.

    I'm not complaining about the price. Everything we had was great (no ramen) but I wouldn't put it in the same category as Nicky's Vietnamese Sandwiches which cost us around $12 the week before. Now that's a cheap eat. And it was delicious too.

    I still have to look at the list more closely but so far I'm looking at it as just another list of some good dining spots.

    3 Replies
    1. re: CornflakeGirl

      the article emphazized that it was also about restaurants that were good deals. At that particular price point, Lupa is the best deal in Manhattan.

      1. re: josh L

        yes, i definitely understood their justification for those places being considered "good deals," but still, there are so many places in this city that are genuine "cheap eats," i just don't want to read about lupa, inside, and alta in an article called "cheap eats." and again, i LOVE the above mentioned places.

        1. re: billyeats

          tell me about some of these places?

    2. Some not so great too! I glanced through the list the other day and remember seeing a few that we have not cared for in the past.

      1. What don't you understand? New York Magazine and the NY Times are incapable of printing an article about food in NYC without mentioning at least one Batali restaurant.

        1. All in all, I thought it was a good list, although too Manhattan-centric.

          2 Replies
          1. re: Dave Feldman

            I thought it was a good list as well. But did you consider it a "Cheap Eats" list?

            It was all over the map.

            For "Cheap Eats" there shouldn't be such a broad price range.

            1. re: Dave Feldman

              Considering that New York Magazine usually infuriates me with its obsession with all things affluent, its definition of "cheap" didn't surprise me, even if wouldn't be mine.

              But I don't understand the complaint about how the contents were the "same old places." DiFara's *IS* great, and its age doesn't make it less great. If more people discover the place, good for them and good for Dom. I'd much rather focus on places that have produced good food for a while than a flash in the pan that could burn out long before next year's "Cheap Eats" issue.

            2. Lupa, cheap? Sure...if I have a glass of water and an appetizer. Aside from complaints about the list not actually being cheap, the picks just seemed too obvious - it's the same s--t on every list they churn out. DiFara's, yeah. Been there, many times. Momofuku - NY Magazine is still talking about that place?! I read those sorts of lists because I want to learn about new places I wouldn't otherwise find on my own. Tell me something I don't know.

              1. They did rank Tanoreen high. I was living in Bay Ridge two blocks away when it opened in '99. The place is that good, that cheap and that fresh. Best in all of NYC, I don't know. But since I moved to BK Hgts, and now Carroll Gardens for the last 6 years, I still miss having Tanoreen nearby. Zaytoons is excellent, but Tanoreen had a bit more diversity. Cuter interior too.

                1. New York Mag described their criteria - one of which was entrees under $20. If you don't agree with this, fine. But why just the Batali bashing? Una Pizza Neopolitana has $17 single-serving pizzas, Bouchon Bakery has $13 sandwiches, both surely no less expensive than a $12 Lupa pasta. Just as sure as New York Mag will wax poetically about Mario, you can count on some chowhounders to bash him. I, for one, think Lupa is a terrific bargain for the quality of food . . . would I call it "cheap", maybe not - but I'd certainly call it "inexpensive".

                  2 Replies
                  1. re: dcardoni

                    I totally agree with what you've said here.

                    1. re: dcardoni

                      I find it interesting that they stuck Lupa on their Cheap Eats list while listing it as being Moderate ($$) in the mag and on their site. If it's a "Cheap Eat" shouldn't it be listed as Inexpensive ($)?Little bit of a contradiction there.

                      Bogus criteria aside. And I'm not a Batali hater either. But I don't consider Lupa inexpensive and apparently neither does NYM. They just wanted a list that would sell more copies of their rag.

                      Another publication with little respect for their readers. And I say that as a subscriber and someone who works in publishing.

                    2. I'm pretty sure they're not writing that list for us Chowhounders! Just a hunch...

                      Although I did discover a new place right near my office that I'm interested in trying: Oms/B. Anybody been there?

                      1 Reply
                      1. re: zGustibus

                        Do a search. Oms/b has been discussed here many many times. It's a favorite place of mine.

                      2. I personally think that when it comes to "Cheat Eats" issues, Time Out trumps New York magazine by leaps and bounds. They're writing to a demographic that really knows the difference between cheap, inexpensive, and moderate, and they usually find some fun way to put a spin on it. I remember last year's issue had to do with cheap eats from around the world, which of course visited all five boroughs and the various ethnic neighborhoods.

                        1 Reply
                        1. re: lalagirl


                          NYM criteria was a bit ridiculous. And the list was pretty generic. Same old, same old.

                          TONY is much craftier in their list. And they know what a real cheap eat is.

                        2. I think we all deserve a pat on the back, because when it comes to dining recommendations, this site kicks New York magazine's ass! Yeah, they had good and obvious picks there, but I agree that the "cheap" criteria was ludicrous. Al Di La? I like it, but everytime I've been there it's been at least $40 a person. And a cheap eats story on New York City without a single West Indian recommendation? Wake me when it's over.

                          1 Reply
                          1. re: JackS

                            Jack, I can't disagree. Chowhound has always been a reliable source for cheap eats or any other kinds of eats for that matter.

                            The relative nature of "cheap" having been touched upon, I also have to wonder if the NY Magazine staff really combs the city, hits all the high and low ways, looks down all the alleys, nooks and crannies of this vast metropolis. In every respect, I think, Sietsema's annual lists kick butt. I'm much more in line with his sense of what is cheap, his adventurous nature and his overall aesthetic.

                            What we need on Chowhound is our own forum for the "top 100". Maybe it can become an annual event or board. We choose a category, and then everyone's votes ultimately get counted and tallied.

                            Or, we can just skip the tally and argue back and forth, like usual.

                            Who's with me?

                          2. Just putting in the link for anyone wishing to read the article.