The Palmerston (Lounged)

[FoodStories]

njc97 - the monkfish was overcooked :(

Bob - I couldn't agree more. Nail on head.

[Jeremy]

I've eaten at Arbutus too, I agree it's very good.

I still think that realistically you're going to pay an extra ?15 or so at Arbutus... dishes are maybe ?2 more expensive, house wine is a couple of quid more, service charge is 15% instead of 10%. It all adds up. But yeah, I guess it's in the same ball-park costwise.

[louisiana]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> When we've been to the P'ston the bill was around

> ?80 - ?100 for two.

Same here. That's the price I'd pay at St John Bread and Wine (central), or Franklins (local) or (top end of range) The Hind's Head at Bray (out of town).... In other words, the price for a basic level of quality.

>

> In terms of price, that puts it right up there

> with just about anywhere in London you'd care to

> try out.

Exactly.

And the food (quality, quantity) simply

> didn't justify the price last time I was there, so

> yes, I'm put-off returning. At least for the

> present.

I agree entirely. The food is plain ordinary. Nowhere up to the standard of Franklins, St John Bread and Wine, or The Hind's Head, mentioned above as in the same price bracket.

>

> I'll make a few concessions for it being five

> minutes walk, but not ?100-worth.

No, it's taking the piss frankly.

[louisiana]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think the food is very nice, and not

> particularly expensive. The wine is also good

> value by restaurant standards.

>

> I think last time I went there, we had two courses

> each and a bottle of house wine, bill came to

> something like ?55-?60. Yes it's more expensive

> than the Harvester, but you get what you pay for.

Jeremy, you mention 'the Harvester'. Would that be where you eat normally?

[louisiana]

Asset Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've eaten in the Palmerston several times and

> always been very impressed with the quality of the

> food, the style of cooking and the size of the

> portions. Yes it is pricey but it certainly is

> not the most expensive place I've been - the

> prices are not far off Le Chardon and the quality

> is far better.

It is not pricey, or expensive. There any many, many places far more expensive. It is over-priced: mediocre quality and poor portions. There is a difference.

> I haven't been for a while though.

Perhaps you should return. Things are not as they should be.

[charliecharlie]

I have often been to the Palmerston... the food has always be fantastic. The portions seem fine to me and I like the fact that they combine ingredients creatively and thus the dishes feel like a 'new experience'.

I once had a starter which might not be everyones idea of bliss, as offal is not popular with all... but for me it as one of the most delicious things ever. Roast lambs hearts with beetroot and horseradish puree... there was just something about it that was so tasty - all the flavours were balanced, the heart was pipping hot and crispy on the out side, the beetroot added a lovely earth taste and the horseradish kicked to give bite at the end of the 'flavour line'... brilliant, I also had a very memorable roast pheasant in the winter, the fish dishes are always excellent... I love it there...

The weekday lunch menu is great value... ?11.00 for two courses

[louisiana]

charliecharlie, you're sounding like that member of staff from The Vale...

[Jeremy]

Hey Louisiana, you know what, I've never actually been to the Harvester! I am guessing it is cheap and nasty. Am I wrong?

I'm not arguing about it... if you don't like that Palmerston then that's fine with me. I just thought I'd pipe in to provide some balance to the thread, because I really like their food and think the prices are fair.

[Gerrard]

I agree Jeremy, and in my opinion, it beats Franklins hands down. I have never had a bad meal in the Palmerston, but had two disappointing meals at Franklins, both of which were rather smallish servings.

[louisiana]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hey Louisiana, you know what, I've never actually

> been to the Harvester! I am guessing it is cheap

> and nasty. Am I wrong?

I wouldn't know. You are the person who used it as a comparator.

[louisiana]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 'You could do worse' is not a good enough reason

> to spend a hundred quid on food.

How true, *Bob*, how true.

I could have married a monster from out space. But hey, who wants to do that?

[louisiana]

Gerrard Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I agree Jeremy, and in my opinion, it beats

> Franklins hands down. I have never had a bad meal

> in the Palmerston, but had two disappointing meals

> at Franklins, both of which were rather smallish

> servings.

I've had a not-so-cheap and indifferent meal at the Palmerston in the last couple of months. The ingredients are fine, it's what they do with them that is so unexceptional. The wine list is... indifferent.

[pk]

i like the palmerston and think the food is good and the prices steepish but tolerable

i've said it before on here but i've been let down by the food at the herne more than once and think that that one's overpriced - if it wasn't for the garden i don't think that i ever go

[louisiana]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hey Louisiana, you know what, I've never actually

> been to the Harvester! I am guessing it is cheap

> and nasty. Am I wrong?

>

> I'm not arguing about it... if you don't like that

> Palmerston then that's fine with me.

I didn't say I didn't like it. I said the food was overpriced for what it was. But it doesn't stand up to other restaurants charging the same price (even though it clearly will have lower overheads than some of those restaurants e.g. central London).

On my last visit, the waiting staff didn't even clean the table, which was sticky with remains of spilt drink. Yes, I did have to point out to staff. I don't expect 'pub service' (sticky tables, indifferent wine list) in a place charging 80-100 quid for 2 starters, 2 mains, a shared dessert and a coupe of drinks. For that kind of price I get at other restaurants a clean tablecloth, a wine waiter who really knows about wine, some imagination in the cooking (not horeseradish and beetroot recipes pinched from other establishments)... So where should I spend my money?

I just

> thought I'd pipe in to provide some balance to the

> thread, because I really like their food and think

> the prices are fair.

You should get out more... from The Palmerston.

[Knomester]

Hello FoodStories and welcome! You've certainly stirred up feeling with your first post...!

I am not a huge fan of The Palmerston either. I have had a couple of decent meals there but also some not so good ones. As Keef mentioned, they don't cater particularly well for non meat eaters. I think on my first visit the only non-meat option was the ubiquitous wild mushroom pasta which at around ?14 left a lot to be desired. I have had a couple of decent dishes there though (since eating fish) - one, incidentally, was crab which was good quality which made up for the 'on the small side' portion. Much better than your crab starter by the sounds of things. My last couple of meals there have been pricey relative to the quality of the dishes (although I have no concerns about the quality of produce which seems to be high).

A couple of people have mentioned The Herne Tavern - sister restaurant to The Palmerston - which is my local and somewhere I have been to drink and eat a lot in the past. It was generally good quality for a fair price (cheaper than The Palmerston) but it also has lost its edge for me. Curdled custard was one example of something that a chef should never send out of the kitchen (I did tell the waiter and send it back for a replacement....).

I'm in no hurry to try them again, although I miss being able to pop into The Herne for a quick bite to eat!

Slightly off topic, but have you tried La Querce in Honor Oak Park? I've only been once, but the food was good, as was the wine. Might be worth a look in sometime, although it may be a bit far depending on where you are in ED.

[Asset]

You know what, it really pisses me off when my posts are broken down and nit-picked. It happens to be my opinion, if you have a different one, state it but don't make out my opinion is wrong.

Thanks.

Personally I prefer Palmerston to Franklins but maybe that's 'cos I'm a non meat-eater. Last year I had a celebratory meal at Franklins and the food was unimpressive and the service pretty ropey. Maybe it was an off day.

[Asset]

I'm gonna chack out the new pizza joint, more my budget anyway.

[Jeremy]

Louisiana - I go to plenty of restaurants, thanks for your concern all the same. If you don't agree with me, that's fine - I'm just putting my point of view across.

My opinion is just as relevant as yours. Just because it is different, does not mean it is wrong. I think you are being a bit more rude than necessary here.

[Knomester]

Asset - check out the pizzas at The Gowlett too (if you haven't already...). Super tasty. There can be a bit of a wait on a busy Friday night though!

[louisiana]

louisiana Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Asset Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I've eaten in the Palmerston several times and

> > always been very impressed with the quality of

> the

> > food, the style of cooking and the size of the

> > portions. Yes it is pricey but it certainly is

> > not the most expensive place I've been - the

> > prices are not far off Le Chardon and the

> quality

> > is far better.

>

> It is not pricey, or expensive. There are many,

> many places far more expensive. It is over-priced:

> mediocre quality and poor portions. There is a

> difference.

>

> > I haven't been for a while though.

>

> Perhaps you should return. Things are not as they

> should be.

Edited to correct spelling.

[louisiana]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> *Bob* Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > When we've been to the P'ston the bill was

> around

> > ?80 - ?100 for two.

> >

> > In terms of price, that puts it right up there

> > with just about anywhere in London you'd care

> to

> > try out. And the food (quality, quantity)

> simply

> > didn't justify the price last time I was there,

> so

> > yes, I'm put-off returning. At least for the

> > present.

> >

> > I'll make a few concessions for it being five

> > minutes walk, but not ?100-worth.

>

> "Around ?80-?100" is a pretty big margin! But I

> can see you mind spend around ?80 if you have

> desserts and coffee. Maybe ?100 if you'd had

> dessert wine, port or whatever.

I seem to recall the bill was north of 80 with only one dessert between two, no coffees (which I never order and my partner doesn't drink), no wine and 3.5 beers etc.

So how long have you been working at The Palmerston, Jeremy?

>

> I also disagree that the price is up there with

> just about "anywhere in London you'd care to try

> out", ?80 is really not expensive for a decent

> meal these days.

Indeed it isn't. when the food is up there too.

I don't mind spending ?150-200, if the food is up to scratch.

[Moos]

louisiana Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So how long have you been working at The

> Palmerston, Jeremy?

Louisiana, play the game. You know perfectly well that Jeremy doesn't work for the Palmerston.

[MsJ]

Why is it no one can have an opinion on this forum without it turning into some kind of cat fight? Whether you like the Palmerston or not is irrelevant really - it's always packed with people who are more than happy to pay the prices they charge. If you don't like it - don't go, they don't need your custom anyway.

[FoodStories]

MsJ - Although I was the one who was attacked at the beginning (thanks for the welcome!), I have to say that a forum is a place for people to have a debate, a discussion about something and air opinions isn't it? If everyone just thought, 'well if you don't like it, don't go' then what is the point of having a forum for intelligent conversation?! And it was actually more than half empty on Sunday lunchtime, so that's not true either.

[Jeremy]

At least you never feel crushed or devalued at the Palmerston.