My client reminded me yesterday that I predicted the closing of Gourmet magazine last winter. 

It was last February when things were downright dire in America.  My client accused me of over-exaggerating to make a point. Now that Gourmet has in fact closed, my downright dire prediction certainly made its impact.

What I had speculated then that maybe we can all start talking about now is that an enterprise like Gourmet depends on people to support them just because they are "good." And Gourmet was good. It was really good. Good writing, good recipes, good photos.

But it didn't matter. Because good doesn't pay salaries and mortgages and it doesn't even pay for dinners out in good restaurants. And that's the reality.

A lot of restaurants base their future financial projections on the belief that they are "good."  The typical conversation goes like this: 

Q. What makes you different than X, who closed?
A. Our food is better.

Q. Why don't you spend any time marketing yourself on Facebook or Twitter? OR Why aren't you responding to media opportunities? 
A. I don't have time, because I am cooking.  It's more important for me to make sure the food is good.

Now, I am not saying that chefs shouldn't do their damndest to make the best food possible. That is their job. What I am postulating though, is that making the best food possible doesn't mean they are going to keep their job. Helping them keep their job is my job.