[mwexler]

>A lot of low-end websites are still in that quagmire, but the meat of it is that you don't need to visit the website for most of these businesses but for restaurants the web has become critical, so you notice it more.

Ummm... isn't that all the more reason to make sure it's accessible on a mobile, is enticing to the user with relevant content, and assists them in making a sale (reservation) with ease?

[ZoFreX]

Yes, but a business barely ticking over can't afford to drop 10k on a website to draw in what, 10% more people? How long will that take to break-even? (And of course if you're running at a loss instead of a profit, the answer is never)

[mgkimsal]

Personally, I'd be willing to work on a rev share basis with a restaurant on their website if they left control to me, and I had a degree of freedom in promoting it. Build a nice reservation piece, mobile alerts, etc. I'd have incentive to make it work, restaurant doesn't have to pay a lot up front, etc. They do it with opentable, why don't more restaurants work out web deals with web agencies for ongoing revenue share?

[ZoFreX]

Lots of restaurants have cash flow issues or aren't even making a profit even in the best of times. This would be a seriously risky move for a web agency in many cases and I would strongly advise against doing it unless you can afford to not get paid at all.

[mgkimsal]

it would have to be contingent on trusting both sides to be honest and open re: finances. I'm thinking a little bit more of the groupon model - you pay me for every successful booking (or, booking that turned in to a paying customer). Given how many food places seemed to JUMP on groupon, they could take it one step further and say "instead of one time influx of bargain hunters, we'll manage your website - to our definition of good - and you pay us $x/table"