[bko]

Doesn't it depend on the absolute amount of profit per customer per hour?

For instance, if a person goes out and has 3 beers over two hours at $6 each, say the profit is $5 per beer or $15.

Instead if that person comes in and orders a meal for $30, with a 50% margin, he's made the same amount and likely didn't stay as long. Basically food is more absolute profit per customer per hour. And you get the benefit of not dealing with drunk people. That's why they they often don't let you take a table if you're not ordering food.

[oneoff786]

A 50% margin on a meal is enormous. Expect single digits. Food requires someone to cook it, a lot more storage, a lot more tools and dishes and what not.

[willcipriano]

I've worked in serval bar kitchens where the food was a loss leader and basically only there to allow the business to more easily aquire a liquor license.

[bko]

Fair enough. The customer may order some soft-drinks or alcohol drinks at the bar. Also I hear deserts are high margin. My point is that relative margin is not the thing you would want to optimize on. You'd want to maximize profit per customer per hour.

[safety1st]

His point still stands. Your original estimate of the margin was just not realistic.

This obviously varies depending on many factors, but when you factor in labor, ingredients, equipment etc. 10% is a good margin on food. In your hypothetical example the customer who came in, had a meal and nothing else, and then left earned the pub $3 in profit. Someone who has a few drinks in the same amount of time will usually generate more profit.