I’m not implying that the New York Post is a trusty news source, but I did read a story they recently wrote about restaurants that might impact you. The newspaper believes that “restaurants are discriminating against old people.”
Just to clarify, New York Post refers to old people as baby boomers. The story points out that more and more restaurants are eliminating phone reservations. Some restaurants are even eliminating phone numbers for patrons.
The reason why I zeroed in on this story was because I, too, noticed a change in recent months when I call to make dinner reservations. The hours to make a reservation have been shrinking and the hosts leave me on hold way too long.
The New York Post revealed that restaurants need to save money and one way they are doing that is cutting back on employees. This is also a maneuver to discourage older customers from going to certain restaurants that are aimed at younger hipper crowds. Baby boomers are supposedly not comfortable making reservations online.
I’m don’t really think this story has much validity to it, but I do encourage seniors to use OpenTable, the website for online restaurant reservations, as much as possible. Let’s show them that we have what it takes in today’s society. Don’t fret. OpenTable is very user friendly.
Andrea Peyser has been working as a feature columnist for The New York Post for as long as I can remember. She is younger than I am, but I just can’t remember the newspaper without her. Her job is to write human interest stories, mostly about New Yorkers or things that happen in New York. Most of the time her stories have a bizarre twist that no one else thought of before. Day after day, week after week, she writes stories that are wicked, ruthless, and most of all shocking. When Rupert Murdoch hired her he must have said, “Let them have it. And as long as you keep letting them have it, you have a job here.”
Jerry Della Femina
DigiDame first to challenge Jerry Della Femina PR Spin
Click here for the original blog post on Della Femina’s claims.
Remarks From Todd Gerber
“You make a good point about the high overhead probably being the reason for the sale, Lois. I can’t figure out why someone in Mr. Della Femina’s position would feel forced to sell because of the higher taxes in 2013, which would amount to an additional 8.8% (5% higher capital gain +3.8% surtax on income over $250,000 for the Affordable Care Act a.k.a. Obamacare) had he sold in 2013 vs 2012.
“Assuming a $20 million gain on the property held for decades, that would amount to $1.76 million in savings by selling in 2012. With a Manhattan townhouse and Palm Beach properties, plus the value of the Hamptons house, it’s reasonable to assume Mr. Della Femina’s has net worth in excess of $50 million. With that amount of net worth, I can’t understand why a 3.5% reduction in net worth due to the tax implications would make someone feel like they absolutely had to sell NOW. If that was the case, it sounds like borderline irrational behavior to me. Your assumptions about wanting to reduce overhead sound more plausible.
“And, of course, Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post has its own axe to grind trying to make it look like Obama forced Mr. Della Femina’s hand. The Post article implies a 40% rise in taxes in the same sentence it mentions a 5% rise in taxes,and the reality of an 8.8% rise in taxes in the case of Mr. Della Femina. That represents just 1 pretty decent year in overall investment return. Spin, spin, spin.”