Quote

There's the common misconception that restaurants make a lot of money. It's not true. If you look at maybe the top chef in the world, or at least monetarily, it's like Wolfgang Puck, but he makes as much money as an average crappy investment banker.

Chefs have only been able to work in restaurants, high-end cuisine. Why? Why haven't they been able to find other scenarios? For those chefs who want to do avant-garde cuisine, should they be finding their income in a restaurant?

Here's the thing, I've been cooking more and more and I'm pretty good; the problem is I can only go out to restaurants that cook better than I do, therefore, it's expensive.

There's a battle between what the cook thinks is high art and what the customer just wants to eat.

I think people are more savvy about cooking, food and dining. I notice they are looking for more value for their money - not in larger portions but more in terms of healthier, fresh, farm-to-table dishes with a nice presentation.

Whenever I'd go to restaurants, the main chef came out and was cooking for me, and he's asking me how the food is. I get, like, VIP service, so it's weird.

The most successful food, I think, is food that both appeals to the super-sophisticated diner or foodie and to the lay diner at the same time.

In a time when it is common for chefs to simply reproduce the innovations of others, the few who speak for themselves through their food become the skilled artists of their time.

People who have come to appreciate well-sourced and well-cooked food refuse to pay too much for food that they wouldn't want to pay anything for.

It is great to add some glamour to the food industry, like television shows have done for the food world and inspiring people to work in the industry. The flip side of that is unfortunately people think that after they get their qualifications, they get their invitation to compete on 'Top Chef.'