Restaurant services

779 views

Published on

Manchester United restaurant vs Firangi Paani.... Sleepy analysis of an Insomniac

1 Comment
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
779
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
21
Comments
1
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Restaurant services

  1. 1. Restaurant Services Manchester United vs. Firangi Paani
  2. 2. M A N C H E S T E R U N I T E D R E S TA U R A N T A N D B A R , KO R A M A N G A L A , BANGALORE  Type : Restaurant and Bar  Food type: American, Continental, Indian  Features: Draught Beer, Large group friendly  Payment methods: Visa, master, cash  Average pint of Beer: Rs.150 + Tax  Average meal for two: Rs.1000  Ambience: celeb frequented, Gaming  Meal type: Lunch, Buffet, Dinner
  3. 3. M A N C H E S T E R U N I T E D R E S TA U R A N T A N D B A R , KO R A M A N G A L A , BANGALORE Other Features: Serves food  Large Screen Kid friendly  Live music Games  Bar Area Va l e t Pa r k i n g  DJ Cigars available  Air Conditioned Serves Alcohol
  4. 4. F I R A N G I PA A N I R E S TA U R A N T A N D B A R , KO R A M A N G A L A , B A N G A L O R E  Type : Restaurant and Bar, English Pub  Food type: American, Continental, Indian  Features: Notable Beer & Wine list, Large group friendly  Payment methods: Visa, Amex, master, cash  Average pint of Beer: Rs. 160  Average meal for two: Rs.1000  Ambience: Bar Scene, bar seating  Meal type: Lunch, Buffet, Dinner
  5. 5. F I R A N G I PA A N I R E S TA U R A N T A N D B A R , KO R A M A N G A L A , B A N G A L O R E Other Features: Serves food Colonial Ambience  Polished wood Big ship crafted in  Retro music middle  Bar Area Good location  Air Conditioned Cigars available Serves Alcohol
  6. 6. HYPOTHESIS OF THE PROJECTHypothesis: Manchester united Restaurant is successful in restaurant business compared to the other restaurants at Koramangala.Alternate Hypothesis: Manchester United lost its competition to Firangi PaaniNotes:1. The evaluation of success is done on the basis of quality of tangibles and services.2. The study is made to identify the entry barriers of Manchester United restaurant, to identify the potential customers for the restaurant and to study the threat of substitute products and services in the same locality.
  7. 7. M A N C H E S T E R U N I T E D Vs . F I R A N G I PA A N I  Scope of the survey  Survey Analysis  Insights  SERVQUAL Model  Results  Strategies
  8. 8. SCOPE OF THE SURVEY No. of surveys used : 3  Manchester United  Firangi Paani  Restaurant Services Means of data collection : Online + Field Total People Met : 172 (Field) Responses gathered:  Manchester United: 61  Firangi Paani: 60  Restaurant Services: 31 The survey was designed in consideration to quality of food, service, ambience and recommendations with evaluation of the same on a likert scale of 1-5. Model Survey : Firangi Paani
  9. 9. Elements recalled– Manchester United• Average age group of the people surveyed: 25 Percentage recalled60% 51%50% 44%40% FC 31% service30% fun ManU20% 18% food 11% 13% Ambience10% 0% FC service fun ManU food Ambience
  10. 10. Elements recalled – Firangi Paani Percentage of recall60% 50%50%40% fun 30% Service30% 23% Drinks 20%20% nothing specific Food10% 7% 7% Ambience0% fun Service Drinks nothing Food Ambience specific
  11. 11. Quality of Service50% 45%45%40%35% 32% 32%30% 29% 26%25% ManU seated promptly Firangi Paani seated promptly20%15% 10% 10%10% 6% 6%5% 3%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  12. 12. Quality of Service60% 55%50%40% 35% 32%30% ManU Ordering time quick 26% Firangi Paani Ordering time quick 19%20% 16% 10%10% 3% 3% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  13. 13. Quality of Service50% 45%45%40%35% 32% 32%30% 26%25% 23% ManU Server-friendly and patient Firangi Paani Server-friendly and patient20%15% 13% 10% 10% 10%10%5% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  14. 14. Quality of Service45%40% 39% 35%35%30% 29%25% 23% ManU Communication 19%20% Firangi Paani Communication 16%15% 13% 13%10% 6%5% 3%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  15. 15. Quality of Service50% 45%45%40% 35%35% 32%30%25% ManU server answer all qns 23% 23% Firangi Paani server answer all qns 19%20%15% 13%10% 6%5% 3% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  16. 16. Quality of Service60% 55%50% 45%40% 32%30% ManU Overall service excellent 26% Firangi Paani Overall service excellent20% 13% 13% 10%10% 3% 3% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  17. 17. Quality of Service60% 55%50% 48%40%30% 29% ManU Dining experience- value Firangi Paani Dining experience- value 23% 23%20% 10% 10%10% 0% 0% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  18. 18. Quality of Service Firangi Paani facts: • 46.5% overall strongly agree that Firangi Paani has a better quality of service • 82% visited the restaurant without reservation • 86% says the waiting time was about what they expected • 77% agree that they will recommend Firangi PaaniManchester United facts:• 26.7% overall strongly agree that ManU rest. Has a better quality of service• 48% visited the restaurant went with reservation• 84% says the waiting time was about what they expected• 94% agree that they will recommend Manchester United
  19. 19. Ambience50% 45% 45%45% 42%40%35%30%25% 23% ManU Lively Firangi paani Lively20% 16%15% 10% 10%10% 6%5% 3% 3%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  20. 20. Ambience70% 65%60%50% 48%40% ManU Interiors30% Firangi paani Interiors 23% 23%20% 16% 13% 10%10% 3% 0% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  21. 21. Ambience70% 61%60%50% 42%40% ManU seating arrangement 29% Firangi paani Seating arrangement30% 26%20% 16% 10%10% 6% 6% 3% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  22. 22. Ambience60% 55%50% 45%40%30% ManU furniture neat 26% Firangi paani furniture neat 23% 23% 19%20%10% 6% 3% 0% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  23. 23. Ambience70%60% 58%50%40% 35% ManU matches upto date30% Firangi paani matches upto date20%10% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  24. 24. Ambience60% 52%50% 48%40%30% 29% ManU Worth a revisit Firangi paani Worth a revisit 19% 19%20% 16%10% 6% 6% 3% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  25. 25. Ambience Firangi Paani Facts• 20.3% overall says they strongly agree the ambience is goodManchester United Facts• 56.7% overall says they strongly agree the ambience is good
  26. 26. Quality of Food60%50% 48% 42% 42%40%30% ManU Hot and fresh 26% Firangi Paani Hot and fresh 19%20% 10%10% 6% 3% 3% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  27. 27. Quality of Food60%50% 48%40% 32% 32%30% ManU menu 26% Firangi Paani menu20% 16% 16% 13% 13%10% 3% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  28. 28. Quality of Food70% 61%60%50%40% 32% ManU quality of food 29% Firangi Paani quality of food30% 23% 19%20% 16% 10%10% 6% 3% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  29. 29. Quality of Food70% 61%60%50%40% ManU taste and flavory 29% Firangi Paani taste and flavory30% 26% 26% 23%20% 13% 10% 10%10% 3% 0%0% Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree
  30. 30. Quality of FoodManchester United Facts• 57% strongly agree that food is betterFirangi paani facts• 26.2% strongly agree that the food is better
  31. 31. General Restaurant services survey• 90% of the respondents know of Manchester United restaurant• 74% of the respondents know of Firangi paani restaurant• 68% of the respondents were Non-vegetarian• 69% of the respondents quoted that they went to restaurant when a friend recommends him• 61% of the respondents says they will go to a restaurant by just seeing on the passway• 81% of the respondents says they look for tasty food at first instinct• 87% of the respondents says they look for ambience in a restaurant• 74% of the respondents says they find ManU and Firangi Paani have more commanalities
  32. 32. Results 80.00% 74.41% 68.60% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% Firangi Paani ManU 30.00% 20.00% 15.20% 16.10% 11.90% 13.47% 10.00% 0.00% Zone of defection zone of indifference zone of affection• Rejecting the null hypothesis.• It is proven that Manchester United lost its competition to Firangi Paani
  33. 33. Research is to see what everybody else has seen, and to think what nobody else thought THANK YOU! Abbas Mithaiwala Abdul Rahim Shah Baleshwar Srivastava Vidhyalakshmi K Vinay Patil

×