33
Manchester United vs. Firangi Paani Restaurant Services

Restaurant services

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

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

Citation preview

Page 1: Restaurant services

M a n c h e s t e r U n i t e d v s .

F i ra n g i Pa a n i

Restaurant Services

Page 2: Restaurant services

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 , K O R A M A N G A L A ,

B A N G A L O R E

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

Page 3: Restaurant services

O t h e r F e a t u r e s :

S e r v e s f o o d

K i d f r i e n d l y

G a m e s

Va l e t P a r k i n g

C i g a r s a v a i l a b l e

S e r v e s A l c o h o l

L a r g e S c r e e n

L i v e m u s i c

B a r A r e a

D J

A i r C o n d i ti o n e d

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 , K O R A M A N G A L A ,

B A N G A L O R E

Page 4: Restaurant services

F I R A N G I P A A N I R E S TA U R A N T A N D B A R , K O 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

Page 5: Restaurant services

F I R A N G I P A A N I R E S TA U R A N T A N D B A R , K O R A M A N G A L A , B A N G A L O R E

O t h e r F e a t u r e s :

S e r v e s f o o d

C o l o n i a l A m b i e n c e

B i g s h i p c r a ft e d i n

m i d d l e

G o o d l o c a ti o n

C i g a r s a v a i l a b l e

S e r v e s A l c o h o l

P o l i s h e d w o o d

R e t r o m u s i c

B a r A r e a

A i r C o n d i ti o n e d

Page 6: Restaurant services

H Y P O T H E S I S O F T H E P R O J E C T

Hypothesis:

Manchester united Restaurant is successful in restaurant business compared to the

other restaurants at Koramangala.

Alternate Hypothesis:

Manchester United lost its competition to Firangi Paani

Notes:

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.

Page 7: Restaurant services

M A N C H E S T E R U N I T E D V s . F I R A N G I PA A N I

Scope of the survey

Survey Analysis

Insights

SERVQUAL Model

Results

Strategies

Page 8: Restaurant services

S C O P E O F T H E S U R V E Y

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

Page 9: Restaurant services

E l e m e n t s r e c a l l e d – M a n c h e s t e r U n i t e d

• Average age group of the people surveyed: 25

FC service fun ManU food Ambience0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

11% 13%18%

31%

44%

51%

Percentage recalled

Percentage recalled

Page 10: Restaurant services

fun

Servi

ceDrin

ks

nothing s

pecific

Food

Ambience0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

7% 7%

20%23%

30%

50%

Percentage of recall

Percentage of recall

E l e m e n t s r e c a l l e d – F i r a n g i P a a n i

Page 11: Restaurant services

Q u a l i t y o f S e r v i c e

Strongly disagree

Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

6%

3%

26%

32% 32%

10%

6%

10%

29%

45%

ManU seated promptlyFirangi Paani seated promptly

Page 12: Restaurant services

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

3%

19%

26%

35%

16%

10%

3%

0%

55%

32%

ManU Ordering time quickFirangi Paani Ordering time quick

Q u a l i t y o f S e r v i c e

Page 13: Restaurant services

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

10%

26%

10%

32%

23%

13%

0%

10%

45%

32%

ManU Server-friendly and patientFirangi Paani Server-friendly and patient

Q u a l i t y o f S e r v i c e

Page 14: Restaurant services

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

19%

16%

23%

29%

13%13%

3%

6%

39%

35%

ManU CommunicationFirangi Paani Communication

Q u a l i t y o f S e r v i c e

Page 15: Restaurant services

Q u a l i t y o f S e r v i c e

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

0%

35%

23%

19%

23%

13%

3%

6%

45%

32%

ManU server answer all qnsFirangi Paani server answer all qns

Page 16: Restaurant services

Q u a l i t y o f S e r v i c e

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

0%

10%

13%

45%

32%

13%

3% 3%

55%

26%

ManU Overall service excellentFirangi Paani Overall service excellent

Page 17: Restaurant services

Q u a l i t y o f S e r v i c e

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

0% 0%

23%

29%

48%

10%

0%

10%

55%

23%

ManU Dining experience- valueFirangi Paani Dining experience- value

Page 18: Restaurant services

Q u a l i t y o f S e r v i c e

F i r a n g i P a a n i f a c t s :

• 4 6 . 5 % o v e r a l l s t r o n g l y a g r e e t h a t F i r a n g i P a a n i h a s a b e tt e r

q u a l i t y o f s e r v i c e

• 8 2 % v i s i t e d t h e r e s t a u r a n t w i t h o u t r e s e r v a ti o n

• 8 6 % s a y s t h e w a i ti n g ti m e w a s a b o u t w h a t t h e y e x p e c t e d

• 7 7 % a g r e e t h a t t h e y w i l l r e c o m m e n d F i r a n g i P a a n i

M a n c h e s t e r U n i t e d f a c t s :

• 2 6 . 7 % o v e r a l l s t r o n g l y a g r e e t h a t M a n U r e s t . H a s a b e tt e r

q u a l i t y o f s e r v i c e

• 4 8 % v i s i t e d t h e r e s t a u r a n t w e n t w i t h r e s e r v a ti o n

• 8 4 % s a y s t h e w a i ti n g ti m e w a s a b o u t w h a t t h e y e x p e c t e d

• 9 4 % a g r e e t h a t t h e y w i l l r e c o m m e n d M a n c h e s t e r U n i t e d

Page 19: Restaurant services

A m b i e n c e

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

3% 3%

6%

42%

45%

10% 10%

23%

45%

16%

ManU LivelyFirangi paani Lively

Page 20: Restaurant services

A m b i e n c e

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

0% 0%

13%

23%

65%

10%

3%

23%

48%

16%

ManU InteriorsFirangi paani Interiors

Page 21: Restaurant services

A m b i e n c e

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

0%

6% 6%

26%

61%

3%

10%

29%

42%

16%

ManU seating arrangementFirangi paani Seating arrangement

Page 22: Restaurant services

A m b i e n c e

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

0% 0%

19%

26%

55%

3%

6%

23%

45%

23%

ManU furniture neatFirangi paani furniture neat

Page 23: Restaurant services

A m b i e n c e

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

0% 0%

6%

35%

58%

0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

ManU matches upto dateFirangi paani matches upto date

Page 24: Restaurant services

A m b i e n c e

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

0%

3%

16%

29%

52%

6% 6%

19%

48%

19%

ManU Worth a revisitFirangi paani Worth a revisit

Page 25: Restaurant services

A m b i e n c e

F i r a n g i P a a n i F a c t s

• 2 0 . 3 % o v e r a l l s a y s t h e y s t r o n g l y a g r e e t h e a m b i e n c e i s g o o d

M a n c h e s t e r U n i t e d F a c t s

• 5 6 . 7 % o v e r a l l s a y s t h e y s t r o n g l y a g r e e t h e a m b i e n c e i s g o o d

Page 26: Restaurant services

Q u a l i t y o f F o o d

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

3%

0%

6%

42%

48%

10%

3%

19%

42%

26%

ManU Hot and freshFirangi Paani Hot and fresh

Page 27: Restaurant services

Q u a l i t y o f F o o d

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

0%

3%

16%

32%

48%

13%

16%

13%

32%

26%

ManU menuFirangi Paani menu

Page 28: Restaurant services

Q u a l i t y o f F o o d

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

0%

6%

3%

29%

61%

10%

23%

16%

32%

19%

ManU quality of foodFirangi Paani quality of food

Page 29: Restaurant services

Q u a l i t y o f F o o d

Strongly disagree Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

0%3%

10%

26%

61%

23%

13%

26%29%

10%

ManU taste and flavoryFirangi Paani taste and flavory

Page 30: Restaurant services

Q u a l i t y o f F o o d

Manchester United Facts

• 57% strongly agree that food is better

Firangi paani facts

• 26.2% strongly agree that the food is better

Page 31: Restaurant services

G e n e r a l R e s t a u r a n t s e r v i c e s s u r v e y

• 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

Page 32: Restaurant services

R e s u l t s

Zone of defection zone of indifference zone of affection0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

11.90% 13.47%

74.41%

15.20% 16.10%

68.60%

Firangi PaaniManU

• R e j e c ti n g t h e n u l l h y p o t h e s i s .

• I t i s p r o v e n t h a t M a n c h e s t e r U n i t e d l o s t i t s c o m p e ti ti o n t o

F i r a n g i P a a n i

Page 33: Restaurant services

Research is to see what everybody else has seen, and to think what nobody else thought

THANK YOU!

Abbas MithaiwalaAbdul Rahim Shah

Baleshwar SrivastavaVidhyalakshmi K

Vinay Patil