Talk:Pret a Manger
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The name of the company was created as a play on the existing phrase "pret a porter", that is, "ready to wear". This seems unlikely to me. The French phrase "prêt-à-manger" already existed in the sense of "ready-to-eat" or "fast food" (it's a separate question whether the French phrase was modelled, in the French language, on an earlier "prêt-à-porter" -- that does seem likely). Can someone can cite something showing that the company itself was consciously named as a play on the second phrase? -- I deleted the assertion for now. --Kiscica 06:45, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
- "We borrowed the Pret A Manger name from a boarded up shop in Hampstead and bought the title from the liquidators for £160," Sinclair confesses. from [1] here. orudge 14:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
To me, this article reads like straightforward marketing for Pret. I came to Wikipedia to read something objective and even-handed. There have been criticisms of Pret food - high levels of salt for example - nowhere to be seen here. Pret is expanding rapidly on the McDonalds model; in some areas of central London there are multiple outlets within hundreds of yards of each other; which leads me to wish to find out more about its business practises. Eg its sources and suppliers- any information on these? Does Pret make any fair trade overtures; does it fly ingredients from thousands of miles away, contributing to climate change? What's the real story behind the soft jazz conviviality of the stores' environments? The ambience of the stores seems to me to imply, even if it's never asserted, that Pret has enlightened, responsible policies re the environment and trading practises; is this the case? In an ideal world, I'd like to see some examination of this on Wikipedia. Maybe if I go away and do some research I'll be able to provide it myself.
- I think you answered your own question. Be bold, if you think there is something missing, add it. Edward 2005-07-06 17:35:02 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] OpenGuide exlink
I really don't think the Open Guide to London exlink is suitable. It's largely free of information, and instead is mostly an unsourced rant. I appreciate that it's a good idea for articles about commercial entities to have some negative comment links, so as to avoid looking like adverts, but I don't think the Open Guide page really does that properly. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 15:18, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] London v New York
Being a native of central London, I am extremely familiar with Pret a Manger, since there is one (or two or three) on virtually every street in an area with offices, often in view of each other. Despite this somewhat insidious invasion of the London high street, I have been reasonably satisfied with the food and service. Several points at the bottom of this article are rather too subjective for wikipedia I think, but sadly I must agree with the points raised. Now living in New York, I agree that the service at Prets here is appalling, in contrast to that of the London branches. The sandwiches are also of a lower quality, with far less choice, and standard items offered in the UK stores such as Pret crisps (potato chips) are not sold (These are a major attraction of Pret in London for many of my American friends). It's also expensive compared to other lunch places in the city. If these practices are continued and this is how Pret plans to operate in the US, I don't think it will do well at all, and only serves to re-enforce the stereotype of bad, overpriced British food to Americans.
[edit] Removed criticism
"In January 2001 McDonald's bought a 33% stake in Pret a Manger. McDonald's is often criticised for its high-fat fast food, exploitation of workers and for causing ecological damage."
McDonald's purchase is already mentioned in the article. The criticism corresponds to McDonalds, not Pret A Manger. F15x28 19:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Personal preference, not criticism
The sandwiches are made early in the morning and stored in a refrigerator. Some consumers prefer the type of made-to-order sandwiches available from shops like Subway, and from many independent retailers.
Is this really a "criticism"? It's just personal preference. You might as well add "some consumers prefer to eat hamburgers, some like fish and chips, and others prefer to make their own sandwiches at home".
Personally I like the idea of just grabbing a sandwich and running with it, rather than fussing over 1023 different types of bread and fillings. Having said that, I always buy from Greggs rather than the far-too-expensive Pret a Manger. 217.34.39.123 12:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Non-word "well-abled"
What does "well-abled" mean in "The staff in the recruitment centre are well-abled people and include lawyers"? I can find no such word. Was "capable" or perhaps "well-off" intended? — Paul G 14:50, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've often seen the word used in contrast to "disabled", but it certainly has no place in that sentence - unless it's supposed to be a criticism that Pret doesn't employ disabled people, but I doubt it. - IanYates 13:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Question on trans-fat allegations
After doing a Google search for references, I removed an unsourced assertion that Pret a Manger use trans fats in some of their products. This has been in the article before though, so is there a source? or is it just an urban legend? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petecarney (talk • contribs) 19:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
