Psst... We're working on the next generation of Chowhound! View >
HOME > Chowhound > Food Media & News >
Jul 26, 2006 01:30 AM

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.