Why I won't be using Groupon again.. A consumer perspective.  - <AUTHOR> I took a friend out for dinner last Friday and thought it might be a good time to take the plunge and Groupon it. It was an £18 pound deal to get to get £46 pounds of food at a Tapas bar. My thinking went something like this. I like Tapas, the restaurant is a little out of the way but that's ok, the savings mean we can get some nice food, a good bottle of wine and try new place. So I made the booking, slightly curious about how it would all pan out.
When we arrived, the place didn't look too appealing from the outside though it did have that kind of Film Noire dirty back alley appeal which I guess is a charm in itself. But you can't judge a book by it's cover so I made joke about it, took a mental to at least Google Earth the next blind restaurant I book and strode on in.
It was a much more pleasant experience from the inside, a friendly waitress greeted us and asked if we'd like a bottle of wine. We ordered a pretty decent bottle - upper range of their price list and chatted about the menu. When she came back to take the food order, I pointed out that we'd be using a Groupon voucher to cover part of the cost of the meal (not that it should make any difference but just as a politeness thing). I did this in a slightly awkward apologetic way, using a voucher to pay for a meal isn't something I do often and it just makes me slightly uncomfortable.
As soon as this happened though, a dark cloud came over the proceedings. The whole atmosphere of the meal changed. The face and cheery demeanor of the waitress visibly dropped. It was like I'd sucked the fun out of her. She glumly pointed out the bottle of wine we'd ordered wasn't available on Groupon so we'd have to pay for that separately. The wording of the voucher had been 'Authentic tapas for two with bottle of wine at xxx tapas bar and restaurant - value £46.00'. We also had to order the other bottle which was not on the menu but priced around £20 pounds leaving us with 26 to spend on food (when we tried it later, even my limited wine palette could tell that £20 pounds wasn't exactly fair value for it). She did actually say to another waiter passing by "it's another Groupon on table 4" which did more to make us feel cheap and dirty.
Having read about the Groupon experience from a business side, I felt some sympathy. I know that %50 - %100 of the money we paid for the voucher was going to Groupon and that Groupon customers are apparently 'tight and argumentative' - they were probably sick of people like us by now and trying to recoup some costs with the old 'cheap overpriced compulsory wine switch'. Anyway, having £26 pounds left to spend on the food, we went a fair bit over. It was decent, but I'd never go there unless they were offering a massive discount as they were. Our portions were surprisingly small, and in my new found state of Groupon paranoia, I looked around at some of the 'non Groupon' dish sizes for a size comparison.. I hope it was just my imagination.
The meal ended up being £42 pounds + the £18 we'd paid in advance. £60 pounds for an average meal and two bottles of wine isn't great value, but more significantly, I learned the restaurant actually despised 'Grouponers' - clearly they had become jaded with the Groupon experience. Fortunately for us, we could simply scratch it from our list of restaurants to visit and forget the whole experience. As I was walking home, I went past the Tapas bar on my street that is only 3 months old but continually turns people away because they are too full. I had the realisation that good restaurants don't use Groupon because they don't have to - word of mouth is much more effective. Bad restaurants use Groupon because they have to - and any place that can discount so much for their customers makes me question how ridiculous their prices are to start. To any small business thinking about using Groupon:
1) The only reason I went there was for the discount 2) I will never go back there 3) If asked by my friends, I'd say it was overpriced (relative pricing is a powerful thing) <comment><USER4> I think you might be overestimating how much insight the waitress has into the business. It may be the case that this was a close, family-held restaurant and they have a daily pow-wow on cost of goods and marketing strategy, but I wouldn't bet that way. My guess? Groupon customers are poor tippers, either from adverse selection or because they either a) attempt to tip with leftover funny-money or b) tip based on the amount they paid rather than the face value. Thus, mentioning you to other waitstaff: they're complaining about prospective tips. ("Gah, I drew another Groupon while you get a good table.")

Put it this way: if you had put twenty quid in her hand when you sat down she would probably have instantly become the most devoted Groupon fan in the world.

<comment><USER5> Groupon customers are definitely poor tippers. I've known a number of waiters to complain about it.

The problem is they tip on the Groupon price, not the full price, and are thus tipping something like 40% of what they should be.

<comment><USER6> _The problem is they tip on the Groupon price, not the full price, and are thus tipping something like 40% of what they should be._

I am not intimately familiar with the tipping culture (at least in the US), but here are some genuine questions: Is there an inherent reason you tip on the full price? Is it a tax? If tipping is to support staff wages does that mean waiters who serve fancier higher priced food items are entitled to larger wages solely for the fact that their table happened to order a costlier meal?

<comment><USER7> this is something that probably isn't clear to people who don't live in the US -- wait staff in the US make around $2-3/hour. they aren't paid a living wage. they rely on tips as their primary source of income, and tips are usually shared with a bartender/busboy.

if a restaurant runs a groupon and all grouponers tip on the post-coupon rate, the wait staff will be taking a rather large pay cut for the length of time that people are grouponing. i know i'd be grumbling if something my company did resulted in me making 50% less for a month or two.

more expensive restaurants and meals mean more expensive tips because the wait staff is more experienced, better trained, higher quality, and do more work. one person at a higher-end restaurant can give high quality service to fewer people than one person at a low-end place, and meals at a higher-end place usually take much longer. yes, the average tip is larger, but the frequency in which they receive tips is lower. yes, they make more, but not _that_ much more.

<comment><USER8> _wait staff in the US make around $2-3/hour. they aren't paid a living wage._

Not true. That's why we have federal minimum wage laws. If the wait staff are actually employed and not acting as independent contractors, then they are paid the minimum wage for their state. (Although I will grant that this being a living wage is definitely arguable.)

Edit: Correction - although not California (my state), apparently some states _do_ allow minimum wages in the $2-3 range if employees receive tips [1]. For the downvoters, I only count about 5 states that do this, however. The original statement does not accurately reflect the majority of the U.S.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._minimum_wages>

<comment><USER9> Not true. Waiters have a different minimum wage:

<http://www.dol.gov/wb/faq26.htm>

Question: Is it legal for waiters and waitresses to be paid below the minimum wage? Answer: According to the Fair Labor Standards Act, tipped employees are individuals engaged in occupations in which they customarily and regularly receive more than $30 a month in tips. The employer may consider tips as part of wages, but the employer must pay at least $2.13 an hour in direct wages. An employer may credit a portion of a tipped employee's tips against the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour effective July 24, 2009. An employer must pay at least $2.13 per hour. However, if an employee's tips combined with the employer's wage of $2.13 per hour do not equal the hourly minimum wage, the employer is required to make up the difference. The employer who elects to use the tip credit provision must inform the employee in advance and must be able to show that the employee receives at least the applicable minimum wage (see above) when direct wages and the tip credit allowance are combined. If an employee's tips combined with the employer's direct wages of at least $2.13 an hour do not equal the minimum hourly wage, the employer must make up the difference. Also, employees must retain all of their tips, except to the extent that they participate in a valid tip pooling or sharing arrangement.

<comment><USER10> So, although waiting tables is - predictably - not a great job, nearly all waitstaff in the US will be making 7.25/h as you would expect from federal minimum wage? And contrary to what most people attempt to convince me?

Coming from a country with a culture of smaller tips and significantly less social pressure to give them, I usually say that I should not be forced to make up for the employer's false advertising when receiving only mediocre service. This now seems correct - not tipping wi make the employer pay the remainder, not force the waitstaff on to the streets. Right?

<comment><USER11> Nearly all waitstaff in the US will be making more than 7.25/h. If "not tipping" suddenly became endemic, I imagine plenty of waitstaff would be forced "onto the streets".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> My perspective is that there is a systemic disconnect between what serves the restaurant's interests and what serves the staff's interests. A Groupon promotion may help fill empty seats and sell off perishable inventory, but that may not be a benefit for the staff that work for tips.

This is a massive problem for the consumer, because the promotion is for some specific food and drinks, but not for service. If the restaurant is unable to motivate the staff to like the deal, you may have to negotiate separately ("I know these deals can be a PITA, but we intend to tip on the face value of our meal"). This isn't the customer's fault, of course, and I sympathize with the OP for crossing this restaurant off his list: Why return to a restaurant that doesn't work out how to make their staff happy about the promotion?

A bigger question is whether this is an isolated incident or something to expect when dealing with similar deals. From what I know about the way small restaurants are managed, I would expect this to happen on a fairly regular basis.

One possible solution: The fine print of the deal could levy a 15% gratuity on the face value. Customers who want the freedom to tip less should exercise the freedom to pay the face value of the food and beverages. If I was offered a $100 dinner for two for $40 plus $15 mandatory gratuity, I don't think I'd bark about it.

</comment><comment><USER13> I wasn't aware tipping was all that common in the UK but here in Canada I would be wary of using Groupon for that exact reason. Personally I find tipping to be a nearly meaningless exercise (nearly because occasionally great service deserves a bit extra). Because I live in a country where we are expected to tip, restaurant owners do (and are allowed to with lower minimum wages) expect to be able to underpay their staff and let them live off tips.

It is to the point where most chains have a tipping system where wait staff tip out to everyone, chefs, bussers, etc so everyone gets a chip at it. If you undertip the wait staff can actually lose money.

I'm tired of being responsible for someone elses paycheck. Most restaurant waitstaff are merely ok, not amazing and not deserving of something extra, nonetheless I feel obligated to pay 15%+ anyways because of the culture.

Worse than this there are many here who despite the tipping culture feel perfectly free to never tip or undertip, leaving the rest of us to make up the difference (how do you think we go from 10% being a normal tip to 15-20%?).

It's for this reason alone and because I know most Groupon users are brutal cheapskates I will probably never take a Groupon for a restaurant. Though one persons advice to tip up front or at least let the waitstaff know you have no intention of only tipping on the remainder is valid and if you are going to get a groupon deal you'd do well to remember that.

What sucks about this whole anecdote is it means owners using Groupon are getting doubly screwed. They are getting one-timer coupon clipper who don't care about the crap service since they are never coming back anyways, and they are getting potential first customers who are not going to come back now because of the bad service. Even worse they will likely get negative word of mouth.

Of course there is a simple solution here, plan ahead and don't mistreat your staff by making them beg for tips. Personally I have zero sympathy for restaurant owners since they themselves are the ones who maintain this bullshit tipping culture.

<comment><USER14> _I'm tired of being responsible for someone elses paycheck._ What's the alternative? Do you think the total cost of the night out would go down if the waitstaff was paid more? You're going to be paying their salary one way or the other, it's better that you get some input on their performance I think.

<comment><USER15> Maybe, but I'm sick of the way the price of everything in America is a lie.

This steak will be thirty dollars! Except it won't be, because you've got to pay tax on top of that, so it's thirty-three dollars! And then you've gotta pay an extra fifteen percent minimum on top of that, only apparently people think you're cheap if you only tip fifteen percent nowadays, and you just _know_ you're going to be too lazy to do the maths properly so you're just gonna wind up rounding it up to forty dollars, aren't you?

On a recent trip back to Australia I did discover everything was very expensive, but at least you pay the price it says and not a penny (errr, cent) more. No mental arithmetic, no stress.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> It's really sad, because it's not only good restaurants that do the Groupon thing. It can be a good way to advertise your business in addition to the standard (boring) ways.

Any restaurant that treats their customers like crap because the customer uses a deal that the restaurant approved is... Well, rude. I don't have much use for rude restaurants. For a lot cheaper, I can cook the food myself, and it's probably as good. Worse, the time spent is about the same, too! And cooking can be fun.

So in the end, what does a restaurant offer me? New dishes, and good service. Most restaurants don't have the former, so that just leaves good service.

The restaurant in this post failed at the only thing they can offer their customers. And all because they made a bad decision. (I'm assuming they think it's bad because of their actions.)

I'm not a Groupon apologist. Some of the tactics I've heard lately are downright dirty, and detrimental to both the restaurant and Groupon both. But it's not inherently a bad thing.

<comment><USER17> There is a distinct possibility that restaurant owners approved the deal with Groupon but staff is left to suffer the consequences, possibly with little warning from management or the owners.

The restaurant business is not exactly raking in the big bucks right now, with the continuing (and deepening) recession, and the owners may have signed on in desperation to claw out whatever money they can.

<comment><USER16> I'm not sure how it matters what part of the company went wrong. As a customer, you only care about the end product. You don't care whether an owner or a waiter failed to do their job. The responsibility for the failure always lies on the business.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I think the biggest problem is that the staff and sometimes the owners don't understand what is the biggest possible gain - to get people in the door and then blow them away with great service and great products. I guess Groupon and the other giants probably don't tell the companies this enough. If I buy a coupon and get great service (pretty much the opposite of the story above) I would come back and recommend it to my friends. What companies end up doing, is paying through their noses to spread bad reputation about themselves.

If the restaurant would have treated the customers like all the other guests and maybe let them order the more expensive bottle of wine while explaining that it's actually not included (with a smile!) those two guys would have walked out happy and would probably have returned.

Groupon and the other coupon sites is a marketing expense, so treat it like one. You don't put up ads in the magazine with a discount and then scare away the customers when they show up! I don't defend the coupon sites, they seem to take a whole lot of the money for a small benefit. However, if you go into the deal, you might as well make the best of it. They will use the groupon no matter if you're nice or not.

</comment><comment><USER19> I see 5 problems:

1\. An offer for "Pay $X for $Y of Z" have at least anecdotally led to people spending $X+(small number) where a lot of those who offer such deals are expecting more (the Gap was a notable example of this). Perhaps a better model is a capped percentage discount on the bill?

2\. Evolving social etiquette of tipping. It may simply be that people are unaware that the right thing to do is probably to tip on the undiscounted price. Or it may simply be that those who are inclined to use Groupons are simply cheap. I expect it's a little of both;

3\. No caps on offers is a big problem. It means businesses can't budget what are basically marketing expenses. For this to work you need to be able to track individual offers (so a person can't use the same offer twice). This has the added advantage of you being able to mine this data as you know who used an offer, when they did, what they spent, what other offers they've taken and so on;

4\. Businesses seem to resent people using these coupons. This I don't get (other than the complaints of wait staff). It's a marketing expense. If a Coolhaus truck can sit a block away from my office in downtown Manhattan giving out free ice cream sandwiches for several days (raising awareness and creating a lot of good will) then you, as a business, owe yourself this: leave the customer happy. If they're unhappy you've just wasted your marketing spend on them; and

5\. Having to ask for the offer upfront is BAD. It's awkward. It leads to at least the suspicion of getting smaller portions or otherwise getting the cheap version. It probably means you'll get worse service. The offer should simply be X% off a bill (max value $Y). Exclude alcohol entirely.

Honestly I expect Groupon to sink into the ocean. Businesses don't seem to like it. Consumers are having mixed experiences. The early investors have been paid off with large F/G rounds. Revenue per customer is decreasing. What Groupon is doing isn't exactly rocket science. I kinda see small investors being left with the bill for all this post-IPO.

It's a shame really because I see such things as a great way to promote a restaurant (which is actually hard).

<comment><AUTHOR> I'll certainly watch the IPO though I won't be participating. My understanding is that they think they have a competitive advantage coming from the Groupon voice [https://docs.google.com/View?id=dmv9rbh_2g92x4scj&pli=1&...](https://docs.google.com/View?id=dmv9rbh_2g92x4scj&pli=1&ndplr=1) \- the way the write their ads.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I don't use groupon for restaurants or services because I'd probably hate it if I were in their shoes. I think business owners get roped in the same way that artists or programmers do free work because "it'll look great on your portfolio/resume".

<comment><AUTHOR> I think you're right that they don't love it - and if I were in there shoes I'd have trouble keeping a pleasant demeanour if I was losing money from people being in my restaurant too!

<comment><USER21> This is opposed to the alternative of traditional advertising, where you're losing money on the people who aren't even in your restaurant.

These deals are reasonable to offer if your overhead is more than your incremental costs, for instance. Or if the look of a full restaurant (and thus the vibe) is more important than making money off of those initial customers.

The joke is groupon taking so much for brokering this. Groupon doesn't do anything to warrant $1 per coupon, let alone 1/4 the face value. If it takes off it'll be on ad-driven sites taking no or very little cut, and/or via the restaurants' websites and facebook pages directly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> A few weeks ago a tapas restaurant in my city ran a Groupon for the second time.

The comments on the deal were nearly universally from people who had purchased the first coupon, and when they tried to redeem them staff at the restaurant treated them like lepers.

I've only bought and used one restaurant Groupon and honestly I didn't really had a problem. Then again I didn't show it until it was time to pay (are you supposed to show it when you order?). It was a $15 coupon and we used it to cover part of a $50 tab for dessert and drinks. I imagine that was probably not the norm, and they likely more often see people who spend only $14 and ask if they can have a dollar in change.

<comment><AUTHOR> I have no idea whether you're supposed to show it up front or not either - <USER2> didn't say on the voucher. I felt as though I should at least tell them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I had a similar terminal groupon experience: I had meal of really, really bad indian food, at a restaurant I would never have tried otherwise and when I mentioned I was going to use a groupon I was told that my bill now included a 15% non-negotiable "service charge". In fact, my bill was taken back and changed so it was clear that the "tip" was compulsory.

<comment><USER24> Is that legal? Can restaurants legally include a serive charge?

<comment><USER25> They can put whatever they want on the bill but the post author was not required to pay it. Of course, he would be in a difficult position since the restaurant would have taken the tip and put it towards the service charge, so the author could not have easily paid for just the meal and the tip.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I've found that it's best to show the Groupon when it's time to pay the bill. I know we're supposed to show it when we sit down, but no restaurant has ever complained.

</comment><comment><USER27> It sounds like a rather depressing experience, and I'm rather sorry to hear that.

That said, would you consider going back after the groupon deal, just on a purely scientific basis, to see what you'd rate it at based off a clean slate? I'm mildly curious about the actual differences when the place actually wants you there, as opposed to "handling" you.

<comment><AUTHOR> I like your commitment to proper scientific process but I'm not sure I could bring myself to go back though - my heart is no longer in it..

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I've just recieved an offer in a Groupon mail listed as:

£69.95 instead of £239.00 - Classic Black Pentax I-10 Digital Camera with Kodak Portable Charger at Teqport

A quick search on Amazon shows it available at £74.98.

<comment><USER29> A restaurant wouldn't be able to do that because they'd scare off their regular customers. But for anything where they can set a special price for Groupon customers, I'd suspect they were giving a discount on an inflated price.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> No doubt waiters loathe serving Grouponers.

<comment><USER31> I know that waiters in the US rely on tips, but I think it's unprofessional to deliver bad service just because they think that they won't get a good tip.

Which is strange considering that people tip for good/professional service. Maybe there is a self-fulfilling prophecy somewhere in there :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> If an established restaurant sees any sense in offering a 60% discount, it's probably already fucked. You said that the restaurant looked dirty and uninviting from the outside. That would be fine if it was part of a successful restaurant's branding, but clearly they're not successful, otherwise they wouldn't be offering a 60% discount.

Groupon is for the most part the small business equivalent of Pets.com losing a buck on every sale and making it up on volume. Anyone who has been in the business for more than five minutes knows that voucher customers convert very poorly to regulars. Given the size of the discount and Groupon's cut, there's no way that this restaurant could be profitably converting, particularly if they're making no effort at all to do so.

Badly run businesses are badly run; Film at eleven.

</comment><comment><USER33> I'm really curious to see which way Groupon goes in the long term. With things like Yelp reenforcing a feedback cycle which directly effects the eating establishment in the long term, it rarely becomes all that great of a deal for the restararaunt or the consumer.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree, in the internet age I was hoping searching would become more efficient so that 'find good restaurant in xxx' was a sensible thing to type into a search box. Currently there's too much noise so places like yelp are a much better option. Interestingly Yelp hasn't taken off here yet.

<comment><USER34> To me sites like Yelp and Urban Spoon have too much signal to noise ratio as well. I readily admit I am a food snob. And not the tasteless, this place is expensive so I have to be seen here type. I am very critical of food. I have a culinary degree and I have a refined pallet when it comes to food. I eat at hole in the wall joints as well as 5 star restaurants and the only thing I care about and judge a restaurant by is the quality of the food.

I am constantly depressed by the high ratings that establishments receive on sites like Yelp and Urban Spoon only to go in and find that they are average at best. I have been to places with 95% positive ratings on Urban Spoon and walked away very disappointed in the quality of the food. I have seen fast food restaurants like KFC and Taco Bell with 9x% ratings on Urban Spoon. Meanwhile I have went to places with a 60% to 70% rating and the food has been out of this world.

When those sites where small, unknown and mainly frequented by foodies, it seemed like the quality of the ratings where much better, now they are little guarantee of quality. Now days, I really only use them to tell me what is around and to weed out the really bad joints. If a place is below 50% positive review I avoid it above it and it is a crap shoot.

The problem is people go out for dining experiences for a variety of reasons and they rate a restaurant for all those varieties. Being a foodie, I could care less about anything but the taste of the food. If it has the explosion of flavor I am looking for, I don't care if I am eating it on a paper plate in a plastic chair. Ambiance has no value to me where others it does. The demeanor of the wait staff has no value to me (other than the amount they will be tipped) where others it does.

They really need multiple flags on these sites so that people can rate the different aspects accordingly (I have not been on Yelp in a log time, so forgive me if this has been done). For me the only flag that counts is quality of food the rest of the weight being put into the positive and negative rating is just noise for me. While others may value something totally different and want to see the ratings weighted based on that.

These sites are a great start, but they have a long way to go, before that can seat you at the table you want to be at, with any degree of accuracy. The only value I have found is that they prevent you from ending up in a place that is really really bad. Then again Taco Bell has 9x% rating in my town, so even that is not a guarantee.

<comment><USER35> Oddly Tripadvisor is much, much more reliable, at least for me. Where I live (Edinburgh, Scotland) the top 10 or so restaurants listed are indeed, uniformly, excellent quality - and all the Michelin starred places in the city are in the top 20.

True, the Michelin places don't come right at the top, but I'd defend most of the places that do come higher up as offering as good a dining experience considering price and variable taste. Sometimes (often) you're just not in the mood for a £200 tasting menu.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Sorry to hear about your experience, but to be fair, I have to admit that I personally had just one bad experience in about 25+ visits of restaurants in Germany and Austria due to Groupon and Daily Deals offers. That location turned out to be overcrowded and the staff rude.

The other visits were pleasant or at least we had no complaints afterwards. We DID go back to some of the restaurants (even without coupons) and recommended some to friends. Some others aren't really nearby, so we might not visit them again, but I'd recommend them as well.

However, I first google for reviews of the restaurants/companies before buying a deal. I'd not buy a deal for a restaurant with no or only mediocre reviews. And I present my coupon before ordering - that would have saved you from the bad experience with the first bottle of wine.

Of course, it greatly depends on the restaurant. If they don't plan the Groupon project, they may get overrun shortly after the deal. And the tip problem is already mentioned - so staff isn't always glad about "deals customers." I've even heard discussions with "deals customers" on a neighbor table that insisted of getting money back because their bill was lower than the deal.

Worst I experienced was not with a restaurant but a deal for a walking tour. The company was totally overbooked, promised to provide more dates for tours, but never delivered. Even 6 weeks after the deal, customer service turned out to be great and refunded the deal promptly.

A friend of mine bought a deal from a small photo studio (90% discount) - <USER3> yet (about 5 months after the deal) waits for a confirmation for an appointment: "We are fully booked until at least end of next month." Hopefully, the studio will be still in business at the time he gets an appointment (or he gets a full refund).

Its not Groupon or Daily Deal to blame for bad experience, but the business owner. But due to the growing popularity of the deals, places are more likely to get crowded after a deal. And because Groupon and co think that "the more, the better", they approach businesses as well that don't deliver great service all the time or are just unable to handle the amount of deals sold.

</comment><comment><USER37> I think Groupon suits the purpose if you would be visiting a restaurant that has a usually high amount of coupons or vouchers changing hands. Here in the UK if Franky & Bennys offered the coupon I don't think I would think twice. I think also if it was for somewhere I frequented often and I know the standard of food is good then I would do also.

We had a situation earlier this year with a voucher where the terms were not fully explained, we went to Manchester (England) and sat down in a restaurant called Giraffes. The voucher did not explain that it could not be used before 7pm. It was 1 in the afternoon, I sat there regardless and continued to be ripped out (£8.50 for a breakfast, cheapest thing on menu) and in total paid £40 for some dinner.

In terms of tipping, I generally leave a tip if around 10%, more if the person waiting is really good and a good personality, less if I think they are over acting it to get a higher tip. They don't get anything if the food is crap or over priced. I don't think I have been anywhere recently where I have not used a voucher or coupon, it's not because I am tight, it's simply because they are there. I don't consider myself a bad tipper either.

I know what you mean though about feeling bad about using vouchers or coupons, I feel slightly guilty about it. I think the English culture is slightly different though, I think we don't like confrontation and I feel this goes into that realm.

Stick to voucher cloud, check the terms though properly before sitting down!

<comment><AUTHOR> That's very true, though if you only go to places you know and trust then Groupon isn't doing it's job for the restaurant! They're simply giving a discount to loyal customers.

<comment><USER37> Well I generally only deviate from the restaurants I visit when I have done the entire menu. I try to try everything on a menu then I try a different place. I guess the model doesn't really work for me, I wouldn't generally try somewhere different unless I have seen the place and I wanted to try there anyway.

I guess that's me though, everyone is different. I have been stung too many times in the past with bad meals and I am probably the fussiest customer you will find. If I had been going to a place for years and they started serving bad meals, I wouldn't think twice about not going there again. I don't generally complain about a meal, not going there again is good enough for me.

I like the insight into the Groupon experience as a whole though, this is probably what would happen to me so I'm glad I had never taken the plunge.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Restaurants should either not go for Groupon. If they do, they have no business despising Groupon customers. Doing that makes no sense. It is they who decided to go for it in the first place.

<comment><AUTHOR> Absolutely. But I think there is a disconnect raganwald points out between the owners / managers who had the idea of going to groupon and the staff who feel it's effects.

<comment><USER39> Ultimately, Groupon needs to understand this and work this into their sales script/recipe so new restaurants/customers can prepare for the Groupon event.

However, they may be too busy preparing for IPO so the investors "get paid".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I've used Groupon several times, and I've never had an experience like that. I don't get the feeling that I've been treated differently or badly after showing the Groupon.

>Bad restaurants use Groupon because they have to - and any place that can discount so much for their customers makes me question how ridiculous their prices are to start.

In my experience, the restaurants that use Groupon are mediocre to good. Maybe it's a regional thing, but there are so many restaurants here that even many good restaurants aren't very busy.

</comment><comment><USER40> What this restaurant didn't seem to understand is the fact that groupon is like any other promotion. It's a loss leader that brings in new business. Perhaps the groupon customers wouldn't have been so bratty if the deal had been worded better, but who knows. The thing is that places like restaurants rely on repeat business and word of mouth as their primary sources of customers, and that's what groupon is designed to bring. I think the fault here is not in groupon's hands but the restauranteur.

</comment><comment><USER41> that's pretty much the main reason I don't use Groupon etc, if you are so desperate as to use a groupon to promote your business and get raped with all those fees, then chances are the quality of the service will be extremely subpar.

that's why pretty much the only coupon I ever bought was for Amazon.=

<comment><USER42> And the Amazon promotion was from LivingSocial, not Groupon.

<comment><USER43> Yep, it's the only Group/LivingSocial deal I've done as well :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> The whole point of a business (especially restaurant) using Groupon is to gain a repeat customer base. To that end, it would make more sense to give better than normal service to the 'cheap' Grouponers.

For a restaurant, what will cause people to come back is quality & service - so if you are outlaying cash (via discounts) to gain customers, you would think you would go out of your way to gain a repeat customer.

Perhaps this is more of an education for the wait staff, and perhaps the restaurant owners should realize the people using a coupon may not tip well, and make up some of the difference for the wait staff - and emphasis the importance of converting them through service & quality to be repeat customers.

Otherwise - why would the owners do the Groupon at all?

</comment><comment><USER45> I had a very similar experience at an Indian restaurant in Salt Lake City. Once the server became aware we had a Groupon we were treated poorly. Since that experience, I have resisted the urge to use Groupons as I would like to avoid being treated as an inferior.

<comment><AUTHOR> Something close to 'Eat like a human' springs to mind.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> Well, 1) I have had both good and bad experiences going to restaurants via Groupon.

And 2) Groupon isn't just for restaurants... If it were then it'd be out of business already. I've gotten Lasik for much cheaper via Groupon and also teeth whitening.

It just so happens that restaurants try Groupons because they're already battling the odds for staying in business.

And seriously, isn't this over 9000 times more effective than burning money on flyers or a commercial? It gets them INTO the restaurant. From there it depends on the restaurant to bring them back in a 2nd time with charm and great food.

So instead of blaming gift cards, coupons or even Groupons, blame management for not using Excel and the staff for not charming potential customers.

</comment><comment><USER47> The best quote I heard was from Jon Beros, who is the general manager of Scoopon (which is the leading Groupon equivalent in Australia): "You need to make sure they're treated like a first class customer, not a second class coupon holder."

A friend of mine who owns a beauty salon says Scoopon worked with her to ensure they have capacity to serve the customers they're predicted to get.

P.S: The reason I don't usually tip (in Australia) > we have a minimum wage for wait staff that, on Sundays and public holidays at least, is often higher than my hourly rate on a professional salary.

</comment><comment><USER48> I have a tipping story about Australia. I was there for two weeks on vacation and took a taxi to the airport to leave the country. The bill came to around $40 Australian and I had 50 Australian dollars. I told the cabbie to keep the change. He almost wrestled me to the ground to give it back. I told him I was leaving Australia and had no reason for 10 Australian dollars and the fees to convert it to US dollars would take 1/2 the money. He finally kept it but I honestly think I hurt his feelings and insulted him by making him take a tip.

</comment><comment><USER49> Same experience for me -- twice in two settings.

1) I used a Groupon at a korean restaurant in Cambridge, MA. When I went with my friend the waitress was delighted, but once I mentioned the Groupon her enthusiasm completely faded and she became much more rude.

2) I used another restaurant Groupon at a pizza place on Newbury St. in Boston, MA. Ordered the pizza but once I pulled out the Groupon she had a sour look.

I don't understand why these friggin' business do Groupon if they are just going to assholes. Argh, just reminiscing and writing about these experiences pisses me off.

</comment><comment><USER50> As long as you tip based on the non-discounted total I don't see the problem. Unfortunately many probably don't do this, which is why the waitress probably was unhappy to see a groupon customer.

</comment><comment><USER51> I feel much more comfortable using a certificate from restaurant.com. They automatically add 18% gratuity to your bill, so that there are no issues with tipping. And they structure deals such that you have to spend a certain amount, e.g. your $25 certificate requires a $35 purchase, ensuring the business makes some money. It's perceived as a gift certificate more than a coupon. Even better, they frequently have sales where $25 certificates are only $2.

</comment><comment><USER52> In the US Groupon guarantees you'll be satisfied with your experience. If you didn't like the restaurant then tell Groupon and get your £18 back. This restaurant sounds like they did a very bad job of designing and executing their Groupon and it hopefully will end up costing them money and reputation.

Unless that policy isn't in place for Groupon in the UK?

<http://www.groupon.com/groupon-promise>

</comment><comment><USER53> I had the same experience with a Sushi joint in Montreal.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good to know it wasn't a one off.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> Well I was all set to sympathize, but I don't think it's necessarily unfair that the coupon couldn't be applied to any bottle of wine on the menu.

I do think that if the point of the coupon is to attract new customers, then it is extremely counterproductive and foolish to hide the conditions of the coupon so that people are disappointed, and to treat customers badly for using it. That's just bad management.

</comment><comment><USER55> While I think groupon can be very useful for some business model, especially ones where you can control bookings and cross/up sell. I think groupon is going to be hurt when the economy becomes bullish because fewer businesses will be desperate for sales. I think livingsocial has a better longterm future because of its better terms for businesses.

</comment><comment><USER56> I had a similar situation with Living Social and a deal booked for English Tea in London. They had tables available right up until the point I said I had a coupon, they then told me they were fully booked, past the date of the voucher. Complained but only ever got 1 out of the 2 vouchers purchased (at £21 each) refunded.

</comment><comment><USER57> This has nothing to do with tipping. Groupon is a flawed business model.

Consumers who are willing to pay $ for something are not going to be repeat customers who will then pay $$$ for the same thing.

It's a modified pyramid scheme, the only people that benefit are consumers and Groupon it self, even though they are losing money out of their asses.

</comment><comment><USER58> A note about other service industry deals on Groupon:

I've read somewhere of people buying discount coupons for services like haircuts or aesthetics, only to find that when they call for an appointment, couponers have longer waits than non-couponers for scheduling. That alone makes me uneasy.

</comment><comment><USER59> Perhaps the owner could price in lower tips for those that wait on groupon tables. Heck, you could even spin it a bit "at the end of today we will draw a groupon voucher and the waiter gets 50 dollars that served them"

</comment><comment><USER60> It's interesting to me how many news articles are out lately taking a negative tone toward Groupon. I'm sure that has a lot to do with the upcoming IPO (and I won't be an investor based on the numbers), but I thought I'd share my experience with Groupon, because I've never had anything close to this sort of problem.

We had a $20 for $40 deal at a restaurant owned by a local restauranteur. There were no restrictions other than that the Groupon couldn't be used for the tip, which, on the Groupon indicated that the tip should be made against the total bill because "groupon customers are good tippers" or something like that, I found that statement kinda silly, and I just thought it was common knowledge in the US that you _always_ tip on the pre-discount price.

The place had piqued my interest because it was nearby and it wasn't a chain nor did it appear to be owned by one of the larger businesses that plant unique, but rather predictable, restaurants. That's unusual around here.

There were little/no reviews of this place on Yelp and I can say with certainty that there is no way I would have tried this place at this time were it not for the Groupon. The restaurant was "new", which usually equates to a long line and an unprepared kitchen staff. I have children, and frankly, when there's an opportunity to take my bride out for a night on the town, I'm going to go someplace that I _know_ will be good. Nothing is worse than setting up a date, a baby-sitter, and then getting crappy food/service and overpaying for it. Because of said baby-sitting fees, I also won't venture to a place that's far away. I'd rather spend the money on the meal, not the college kid who sits on my couch and watches TV while the kids sleep.

This place ended up being fantastic. It was also inexpensive even without the Groupon. So to point #1: The only reason I went was because of the discount, but point #2, we've already been back once and even later purchased a $50 gift card for my dad on Father's day. I think a lot of the issues with point #2 have to do with the small business in question. We didn't have any limited "Groupon" menu (and I wouldn't buy a deal that's structured that way ... there would be too much of a temptation for the owner to cheapen it up if they were having a bad Groupon experience), nor were there any alcohol limits (which is _really_ common).

Groupon worked great, at least for me, in discovering a new local business. We're planning yet another trip back in two weeks. My bride and I _both_ wrote a thorough Yelp review afterward, we liked the place so much. Is it a good value for that business or would that money have been better spent advertising in other ways? I have no idea/that probably depends on the business. If he's got the working capital to run at a loss for 6 months, I'm willing to bet this place sticks around, provided the food quality doesn't change (the price could go up substantially, and I'd still continue to eat there).

<comment><USER61> Thanks for this. Great to get both sides of the debate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> To me, this is kind of like saying "I won't use OkCupid again because the person I met through it was a real jerk."

</comment><comment><USER63> Maybe we need a site ( or a yelp feature ) where Groupon experiences are reviewed

</comment><comment> brown9-2 Next time don't mention your voucher until the end of the meal.

<comment><USER64> But then they wouldn't have gotten the discount because they'd have ordered the 'wrong' wine.

<comment> brown9-2 They also wouldn't have received the poor service and smaller portion size that the poster perceived having received. It's on the customer to read the fine print of the deal and order the "right" wine, anyway.

<comment><AUTHOR> There was no fine print - the deal was as quoted. But you're right if we hadn't mentioned it, the night would have been more pleasant. At least till the end..

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER65> Groupon failures, opportunities:

I see several things...

1\. Businesses are not empowered the IT system of groupon should take the grudge work out of tracking groupon deals, educating those who get a groupon offer for business, etc. 2\. The group IT system should empower the sales staff to be as flexible as possible in groupon deal runs.

I see is a combination of IT improvements and realizing that you are educating 3 or more distinct group s at once and the IT system has empower that approach.

Whoever, does that will at some point reach the efficiencies Groupon needs to reach to reach profitability as being more effective will all 3 groups means less salesperson time per salesperson per group.

</comment><comment><USER66> imagine a restaurant on a good Sunday where the place is crowded and absolutely all the customers are Groupon coupon users,

the main aim of the waitresses and cooks would be to get the Groupon people - meaning - everybody - out of the restaurant as soon as possible - that goes against all principles of running restaurant business ..

</comment><comment><USER67> i think you're missing that the entire point of "tapas" restaurants is to rip you off in the first place.

"how can we get someone to pay for their entire meal as appetizers?"

some MBA student got a good grade for that one

<comment><AUTHOR> I hope we can contribute at least some part of the kudos for inventing tapas restaurants to the Spanish as well as the MBA students.

<comment><USER67> i'm not referring to spain, where delicious tapas are cheap and plentiful, but to the americanized concept where the going rate for 3 bites of food seems to be about $7

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER68> Do you really not understand why the waitress's demeanor changed the moment you mentioned using a coupon? Seriously?

You know wait staff live on tips right? You know that people who use coupons are notoriously bad tippers right? There are very, very few people who feel they got a deal so leave a bigger tip. Most leave a tip based on what they paid, not on what the meal should have cost and people that use coupons tip at the bottom of the scale to begin with.

<comment><USER69> If this is the case, then as far as my reading of the story goes, upon discovering that she was serving people who she believed would be stingy tippers, she behaved in a way that would make even a generous tipper leave nothing.

This seems counterintuitive.

<comment><USER70> _This seems counterintuitive._

Worse, it creates the results expected, reinforcing the bias, leading to more bad service because the worst suspicions have been "confirmed."

Now everyone is screwed.</comment></comment></comment>


Verbal Tics: As bots grow up, like us, their bugs become their features - <AUTHOR> http://reallifemag.com/verbal-tics/ <comment><USER2> I've seen that quote from Levesque before (or heard someone make a similar point) and I really don't think that a machine ducking questions or straight up lying disqualifies it from having passed the test. People do that kind of thing a lot and if the person conducting the test buys it doesn't that mean something?</comment>


Ask HN: Best practice for estimating development tasks? - <AUTHOR> Would like to see a list of resources that would be useful to help improve estimating skills.. books, resources, methodology etc. <comment><USER2> Not a list of resources - but my rules (to myself) for estimating are below. My personal bias is that I really dislike under-estimating, and I typically over estimate how long tasks will take (by design) - but usually it's pretty close (i.e. not an order of magnitude off).

1\. Usually, the smallest unit is a week. When people say something will take a day, it's usually wishful thinking - they forget about meetings, other commitments, etc.

2\. Think about what "done" means for individual tasks when estimating. Often more junior engineers will give estimates where "done" means the code is submitted to source control - but really think about the work that it'll take to get that code into production. Testing, configuration, documentation, monitoring/metrics/alerts, etc. I think a lot of under-estimating comes from this, where the estimates are just for writing the code, and all of the other stuff comes either as a scramble at the end, or a ton of time to actually launch as tons of bugs and missed features are discovered late in the game.

3\. Think in latency and throughput. Estimates typically have both baked in - if something takes a week of "at-keyboard' time, it might take a month to get done because of other commitments. Both estimates are important.

4\. Think in probability distributions rather than absolutes. I usually set my threshold around 90% confidence - i.e. my estimates are based on where I am 90% confident I can have something done. When you think about how long something takes, if the stars align, a 10 day task might take 5 days, but if things go wrong, that 10 day task could take several months or more. Things can only go a little bit better than expected, or a lot worse than expected. But when people make estimates, I think they are often biased toward the "stars align" case, and forget about this fat tail.

5\. With team estimates, add a friction value to longer term estimates to account for vacations, sick days, distractions, etc. Usually around 30% seems to work. So that one month task (20 days) I plan for it taking 20 * 1.3 = 26 days.

6\. Work backwards from the end goal. This forces you to factor in things like testing and productionalization. This also helps with coordination too, as you can figure out when to parallelize tasks to get to the end goal.

7\. Write estimates down, and go back and reflect. When something that you thought would take a week took a month, sit down and really think about why. This will help you recognize and refine your biases.

</comment><comment><USER3> My go-to reference for this is Evidence-Based scheduling. In a nutshell, the methodology is to NOT change how you estimate—why fight the behavior you're so accustomed to—and instead measure how past estimates differed from actual delivery time. Over time, the model you train can become very accurate at estimating and—importantly—does not require you to do anything different than you normally would. Link [0]

Now here's the other important thing! You must realize that there are multiple types of tasks and they require different kinds of estimates. You can use the Cynefin framework[1] to categorize problems into one of a few domains:

For problems in the Simple domain ("known knowns") you can give an exact number on how long it will take, because the solution is known to you and there's absolutely no uncertainty.

Problems in the Complicated domain ("known unknowns") have some up-front questions that can be answered, and you have the capacity to answer in the requisite time—these problems you give an estimate on, because you don't literally know how long it will take but you have an idea.

Problems in the Complex domain ("unknown unknowns") have a high amount of uncertainty. You must at least start work on them in order to fully understand the problem and the realm of possible solutions. Use Agile here and let the client know that there's multiple steps involved and it's very hard to give a good estimate. Give the client the estimate for the first step and let them know you'll be able to get back to them with more information. If they _require_ an overarching estimate, think really big so when those "unknown unknowns" show up they can't bite you in the ass.

0: [https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2007/10/26/evidence-based- sch...](https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2007/10/26/evidence-based-scheduling/)

1: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin_framework](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin_framework)

<comment><USER4> I'm my experience, if the client insists on complete estimates before the project is started, you should find another client.

<comment><USER5> I noticed while I was contracting the more the client pushed for a fixed price the more likely there would be problems with scope creep.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Great topic. Given the fact that we, developers (as humans), are terrible estimating in time tasks with a high degree of uncertainty (most cases in software development), the most effective way I have found after many years in the field is using velocity (based on effort points) as a (project-dependant) predictor, while applying Scrum, as described in the following article in detail:

"Why Asking Developers for Time Estimates in Software Projects Is a Terrible Idea and How to Bypass It With Scrum": [http://www.romenrg.com/blog/2015/09/28/why-asking- developers...](http://www.romenrg.com/blog/2015/09/28/why-asking-developers- for-time-estimates-in-software-projects-is-a-terrible-idea-and-how-to-bypass- it-with-scrum/)

</comment><comment><USER7> Well timed.

I just had my annual performance review, and it was brought up that my time estimates are consistently 'off'. The actual complaint was ridiculous because I typically get my work done faster than my estimate.

So, you order 'food' at a restaurant, and they bring you a nice filet mignon, and you criticize them for not bringing you leftover chicken.

Being forced, in a corporate setting, to come up with a time estimate without any information other than a 100,000 foot view of a project, combined with ongoing commitments, interruptions, meetings, conference calls etc is absolutely ludicrous. So I tend to estimate high. But not overtly high. Some projects still run over (usually owing to not having anywhere near enough info to estimate). These are not mentioned during the review, only those that were delivered significantly under.

Then to be criticized for over delivering during performance reviews at year end... Anybody looking for a programmer with 30+ years of experience?

<comment><USER8> I think it is reasonable to push back and ask for more requirements. If they say that they don't exist yet, estimate it will take 6 months. When they accuse you of being unhelpful, restate that at present you don't have enough information to make any kind of reasonable ballpark estimate let alone something for them to put in their awful gantt chart.

If that path won't work, then I'd tell them that I need two days to break it down into all the tasks that I _think_ I'll need to do and then give them an estimate after you do that investigation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> The problem with estimates is that it's easy to install (and easy to estimate the time involved installing) a new air conditioner (or water heater or other applicance), but it's hard to estimate how long it will take to design/invent a new air conditioner, etc.

In software, the frustration between customers/management and developers comes from this misunderstanding. They think they're asking for a simple install of a thing (which has known risks), but they're often really getting the invention of a brand new thing (with unknown risks).

So my solution is to only give high-confidence estimates for things I've already done once. (e.g. I _know_ it takes me 4 hours to assemble and ship one of my robots. I know because I've done it 100 times. But I have no idea how long it will take to design a new robot using unfamiliar parts from scratch.) But I do try to clearly point out where things are "installations" and where things are "inventions", with the appropriate margin-of-error for each kind of task in the estimate.

</comment><comment><USER10> Breaking things down into smaller parts will help you estimate better.

Also, sadly, just getting more experience will improve your estimating. Don't expect to be very accurate when you start. Most young developers, myself included, think "oh that will be no problem at all" and lowball everything.

There is a good question on StackOverflow to check out [https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/648/...](https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/648/how- to-respond-when-you-are-asked-for-an-estimate)

<comment><USER11> The usual problem with this is that we tend to estimate based on difficulty, not effort.

Building 10 web pages is "easy" because we know how web pages work, no problem. So we allocate half a day per page because it's just HTML, right?

Designing a user interaction path through 10 different application functions isn't hard, but it takes a lot of communication and effort. Half a day per function is a tiny fraction of the effort required.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Take your final estimation (whatever method you use) an multiply it with 2.

<comment><USER13> Multiply by 5.

<comment><USER14> And add 2 weeks. Just to be on a safe side :)

<comment><USER15> And finish the sentence with "...probably"

<comment><USER16> Finishing the sentence with "probably" would be a bad idea, methinks.

<comment><USER17> How about, "if all goes well" instead?

<comment><USER16> Much better :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The classic solution is make a rough estimate, double it, then increment the unit. Eg. rough estimate of 3 hours becomes 6 days.

I try to avoid working with people/teams where I'm forced to make this kind of estimate. It's a great selector.

</comment><comment><USER19> Have been doing this for about 8 years. As others have mentioned here is something you can follow:

1: Break tasks into as small as you can, say a few hours to a day.

2: Add time estimates for writing the main code, writing tests, doing integration test and code reviews separately.

3: Also take into the account the time which might be wasted to unknowns, things which you know needs to be done but do not have much idea on how you would do that. One way to refine this would to be to talk to other developers who might have some experience doing this part of the task.

4: Account for 'unknown unknowns' these are the tasks which will show up but you can't really predict these upfront. Any software developer who has done commercial software can tell you that for every project 10-20% time is used in this which we did not even anticipate. These things always show up.

Now if you break down tasks into these parts, add up the time and then add a 'buffer' say 10-20% on it and give your estimate. I am sure you will face pressure to reduce estimates, but having a break up allows you to provide some support to the numbers you come up with.

Hope this helps.

<comment><USER20> This approach seems very time consuming at first, but the first step itself starts to show you the ROI on the invested time.

When I start breaking down a task into smaller pieces, I often come across things I had not thought of when just thinking about the monolith. "Oh, I'm using X here, but where am I getting X from? That's another task."

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Programming is a creative task, it cannot be strictly estimated. Somebody mentioned Evidence-Based Scheduling, and it's the best way to estimate ("doing X is similar to Y, and it took Z hours, so it will be unspecified amount of time, but probably around Z hours"

<comment><USER22> >but probably around Z hours

But maybe significantly longer. Programming is a little special, because if you done it before, then doing it again takes no time, you just reuse the code from last time. So you're always doing something you never done before, or at least in a different context.

</comment></comment><comment> yjftsjthsd-h A rule, forget the source: take your estimate, double the number, and increase the unit. Think it will take 2 hours? Tell management/customer 4 days.

<comment><USER23> No. Estimates have a very real purpose, even beyond communicating to managers and customers (whom you should be honest with anyway). Our estimates are used as a team to figure out how much work we can commit to in a sprint. They are also used to determine if you are getting better at things. When we start a project, we don't really have a code base, and many tasks are "new". I expect my estimates to be really wrong at first, and then when I'm implementing things that are very similar to what I've done before, I expect those estimates to get better. I can't really measure that if I'm producing bullshit CYA estimates.

<comment><USER24> My interpretation of the advice was not that it's intended to mislead, but that it's expected to be more accurate than your initial guess.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> There's a book Software Estimation Demystified by Steve Mcconnell

<comment><USER26> Seconded, it's a good book. It doesn't only cover how to estimate but also, to some extent, whether to do so. Finally, it allows you to get very far just reading the first few chapters, a must-have for technical books IMO.

My biggest takeaway from reading this book is that making point estimates is hard and often unnecessary. Saying "umm somewhere between 2 days and 2 weeks" is a much better response in many situations as it conveys to the listener that there's a high degree of uncertainty.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Don't overthink it. Do only as much estimation as you need, not more - relative estimation ("project A will take twice as long as project B" ) is often much easier than absolute estimation, and is often all that you need to base decisions on.

</comment><comment><USER28> If you've done the task before, double the estimate. If you've never done it before, 10x the estimate. Break tasks down to granularity of 1-8 hours. No more than that. Estimate time != real time because life, meetings, other projects.

<comment><USER29> >Break tasks down to granularity of 1-8 hours. No more than that.

I do this for sub-tasks that are relevant to myself only (for example, "create function to do X"), but my minimum estimates are 1/2 a day (in extreme cases like a 1-line fix) or 1 day for anything that goes to a manager.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> I think this kind of thing comes only with experience. Large amounts of experience.

There are simply too many factors to consider. The team, the client, the project.

I usually follow this rule: take the worst case scenario estimate and then double it :)

</comment><comment><USER31> E = (a + 4m + b) / 6

where

a = the best-case estimate m = the most likely estimate b = the worst-case estimate

That's my favorite, called Three-point Estimation: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three- point_estimation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-point_estimation)

This is also a great article on the challenges of estimating development tasks, from the Basecamp blog:

[https://m.signalvnoise.com/running-in-circles- aae73d79ce19](https://m.signalvnoise.com/running-in-circles-aae73d79ce19)

</comment><comment><USER32> Stop estimating, and use previous efforts as evidence of capability to perform future work. The basic idea is to use previous projects as a basis for a distribution, use Monte Carlo simulation, then use whatever quantile you're comfortable with to "estimate" the new project. You can even use multiple quantiles to provide a range, if you care to.

[https://www.infoq.com/articles/noestimates-monte- carlo/](https://www.infoq.com/articles/noestimates-monte-carlo/)

</comment><comment><USER33> I have personally had good results with Wideband Delphi, however with a few tweaks.

1\. Instead of iterating until there's complete consensus, take the min and max of each of the subtasks and use them as follows: The sum of all the min's is the absolute best case hours estimate. The sum of all the max's is the absolute worst case hours estimate. 2\. To project a completion date from the raw hours, you need to estimate how many weddings, deaths, vacations, pregnancies etc. your team might have-- this is absolutely a guess. 3\. Assume an engineer works no more than 80% a day-- he will take coffee breaks, answer e-mails, meetings, etc. 4\. Know your engineers and apply individual efficiency metrics to their tasks. Some guys will work slowly but their first version works flawlessly. Some guys will race through things only to have their code not pass validation later. Most people are somewhere in the middle. 5\. Don't forget time to automate test tools, builds, deploys etc. These are huge time savers. 6\. If doing hardware+software projects, integration will take way more time than you possibly think it could. You will hit at least one dastardly bug in your OS, hardware or silicon. 7\. Give estimates as probabilities of completion, not hard dates.

 _NEVER_ give an off the cuff estimate for anything non-trivial. You will be held to any utterance you make. The correct answer to a request for an estimate is, "I don't know."

If your management won't allow you to make detailed estimates, or won't provide detailed enough design documents, specs, they are not serious individuals and don't deserve a serious answer.

</comment><comment><USER34> (shameless plug) I'm the creator of: [http://scrumsaga.com](http://scrumsaga.com)

It takes metadata from your github repo, and provides effort / time estimates from your previous tasks. Actually, it does alot of things, but the general goal is to facilitate quick understanding and communication of complex systems.

Currently, in beta. Let me know your thoughts.

<comment><USER23> First thoughts: don't link to a bunch of lorem ipsum based documentation from your home page.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> This "hiking trip" analogy[1] is about helping explain "why it's hard", rather than providing a best practice, but hopefully still worth sharing.

[1] [https://www.quora.com/Why-are-software-development-task- esti...](https://www.quora.com/Why-are-software-development-task-estimations- regularly-off-by-a-factor-of-2-3)

</comment><comment><USER36> One agile methodology is to use fibonacci numbers, I think its called planning poker out of scrum. Then you assign the numbers to tasks/tickets with the bounds being:

* 1 being easy, doable in a day

* 13 being too many unknowns, have no idea how long

This works for estimating the size/scope of work, but does not really work for estimating time. Estimating time is mostly pointless as there are unknowns that come up, even on small tasks, especially dealing with existing systems.

What this does provide if you use the numbers consistently is a team velocity for planning purposes. After completion of work you (as PM) can go back and look at two or four week averages of point velocity. Then future work point estimates can be grouped and rough completion timeframe estimated based on past velocity.

If you want to get better at estimating your own tasks, like if a PM is asking "pacifika, how long to do $X?" the best way is to just do more development work and you'll be more confident with your estimates. Working at a place that expects unknowns and doesn't berate people for "missing a date" is a good thing.

A way around lots of planning/estimating time is to do Continuous Delivery. Breaking up work into smaller tasks and putting them into production when they are ready. Even if this means temporary work just to put something in production ahead of other parts. Its super simple to delete temporary things later.

Having the confidence to run tests and deploy small changes to production whenever you want to alleviates a lot of waste, from a lean perspective, in the planning cycle. No meetings to coordinate lots of moving parts, no 3 releases per year with a weekend long release that people have a 50/50 confidence factor in. A simple deploy when ready.

</comment><comment><USER37> My boss wrote up our way of communicating those estimates: [http://www.apsis.io/blog/2016/04/18/communicating- estimates](http://www.apsis.io/blog/2016/04/18/communicating-estimates)

As a rule we have a few techniques that have produces our most accurate estimates:

One: since we're a team we get more than one person to estimate independent of each other, then we talk about it. If you're solo, you can still have a trusted friend do the same.

Two, we measure the uncertainty: client says they have a file ready to go once you sign. Client hasn't designed the login page. Client has spec but like most specs it's under specified. Each piece is going to take time to unravel. We try to make sure we look at that uncertainty when estimating.

Three: we always remember that project management takes up tons of time. Even if there is an outside manager you have to manage your workload and communicate to your client. Make sure you factor it in.

</comment><comment><USER38> I hate to say it, but the best way to learn to estimate dev time is to do a ton of dev work and learn by bitter experience.

<comment><USER39> Yes, and developing the courage to say "no" to project managers who prompt for "off-the-cuff" estimates.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Once I had a very difficult customer who insisted on extremely precise timelines when we were doing some unknowable research. I finally got them to agree to "as fast as possible and no sooner".

<comment><USER41> How much of an "Asshole Surcharge" did you add to the project?

<comment><USER40> Not enough.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> I normally look at the task and have a min of 2 hrs -

> 2 hrs - Simple Tasks - text change, update or insert. The estimate includes > any admin on top > 4 hrs - Slightly harder tasks - change method, single new > method - inc unit testing, and admin

Then it gets more complicated - I try to break down into the above problem sizes, and attach a confidence level to the estimate of low, medium, high and attach a contingcy of _1.25(high)-_ 2(low)

I try not to spend too long on the estimates, unless its a later iteration as the initial round often requires redesign

</comment><comment><USER43> .. tools. Tools embed knowledge and frame its usage.

Plan via [1] and consense via [2].

[1] [https://alternativeto.net/software/projectlibre/?license=ope...](https://alternativeto.net/software/projectlibre/?license=opensource)

[2] [https://alternativeto.net/software/firepoker/](https://alternativeto.net/software/firepoker/)

</comment><comment><USER44> It's been a long time since I read it, but this was a good intro for me back in the bad old days...

[https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Software_Estimation....](https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Software_Estimation.html)

EDIT: And don't forget the Atwood estimation method. "It'll take between 6-8 weeks". 60% of the time it works every time.

</comment><comment><USER45> What are we estimating?

Lead times (calendar time until in production) from time asked for estimate?

Lead times from the time the work begins (since sometimes the time the estimate is made and the time when the development starts can have gaps, sometimes small, sometimes large)?

Developer/development effort (in "man hours")?

Each estimate is important and has it's own use(s).

What estimates do people tend to provide here?

</comment><comment><USER46> I have a coworker whose somewhat cheeky method I often cite. Think about the task, guess how long it'll take you, double it, shift units. I usually get a wry look from our project managers when I mention it.

e.g. 1 hr = 2 days, 2 days = 4 weeks, 4 weeks = 8 months, 8 months = 16 years

</comment><comment><USER47> Points are a good way to estimate complexity, but it does not help communicate with the business stakeholders. They don't understand points. There must be a way to convert points into days. Direct estimations in days almost always miss by a lot.

</comment><comment><USER48> [https://www.amazon.com/Software-Estimation-Demystifying- Blac...](https://www.amazon.com/Software-Estimation-Demystifying-Black- Art/dp/8178531038)

</comment><comment><USER49> My methodology for estimating a development project:

1: Ask the team for estimates on each dev task 2: Double the estimated time for each task 3: Add an additional 25% contingency overall

This usually comes more or less on time.

</comment><comment><USER22> As others have suggested: Start by breaking down the task into the smallest part possible.

The absolute best way of estimating development task we've seen was suggested by PHK (of FreeBSD fame), or at least I remember it as one of his suggestions. Basically you take your absolute best guess on a task, multiple that by two, and move up one unit of time.

Example: My guess for task X is 2 hours.

2 hours times 2 is 4 hours

Move up a unit, that's 4 days.

My guess for two hours can realistically be completed in 4 days.

This prevents you from taking on to large tasks, guessing that you could bang out a project in 5 weeks would realistically be a 10 month project. A two year project will be done in 40 years (4 decades).

It not a realistic way of estimating time of cause, but it illustrates the dangers of tackling to large tasks.

<comment><USER50> We work in smaller teams in a scrum like environment. Our tasks are small ranging from 2-7 days mostly. To make it easier for us developers to communicate estimations higher up, we do following :

* Split work as small as possible, and atomic so that aborting/undoing is possible if required. Like all teams we do throw away a lot of stuff. * If a task contains 5 bullets (best case), we would only give an estimate for the bullets that we know for sure can be done without further dependencies and complications. We refrain from providing an overall estimate in such cases. * We often proceed with starting a task, and as the task progresses and more clarity emerges, we revise the estimate. Importantly we are encouraged to raise flags as early as possible. * We have dev servers that we spin out frequently to stage things that are in progress to test. They may break but give us early feedback which is crucial. Sometimes helps to stop a task earlier rather than later.

Still not a perfect system, but works for us without causing too much friction.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> By far the best method is actual information about how long similar tasks have taken you before - even at the project level

We are much better at looking backwards than we are at projecting forwards

</comment><comment><USER52> Personally, I break everything down into 1 day sized chunks. It helps scope out the problem, creates a to-do and check list of what it takes to get the entire task done.

</comment><comment><USER53> Why You want it as a list? You're doing some sort of research or just out of personal interest?

My $0.02 on this is the more You understand the problem You're solving and details, and more are using the tools and technologies You have experience with, the more correct Your estimates will be. No book or methodology will help You with that!

The more unknowns, the more Your estimate will be off eventually.

It's simple really! :D

</comment><comment><USER35> Tangential quote (sorry, no citation handy)

"Plans are worthless -- but planning is invaluable."

</comment><comment><USER54> "Agile Estimating and Planning" by Mike Cohn is pretty good.

</comment><comment><USER55> Take the most pessimistic estimation and multiply it by 2.

<comment><USER56> This guy's estimation is pessimistic.

Multiply it by 2.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> 3.5 days

adjust task size accordingly

<comment><USER48> See around 0:47 in this video

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtj7gVRjdZI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtj7gVRjdZI)

This is a running gag in the series.

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> I've spent the last few weeks condensing years of experience and many successful agile teams process into a concise and holistic guide which can be found here: [https://agileforleads.com/](https://agileforleads.com/)

Here is my verbatim section entitled "8.3 Estimating a Story". Be sure to take take this in the context of the whole process and tooling, which is covered in detail in the ebook [https://agileforleads.com/](https://agileforleads.com/)

>

Remember how I said that if you only take one action from this course to your team it should be the Retro? Well, the second most critical action to your #agileforleads process is the Estimation; specifically consistent and repeatable estimation. Sometimes this is called Backlog Grooming or Backlog Refinement. Those terms don't work for me because they suggest that it's kinda optional, and for us, it isn't. Other teams call it "pointing [a story]" and you'll see why below.

Not every Agile process will be scientific. Many of the common agile patterns don't need to be. Scrum practitioners will generally apply the following but, as usual, I'm going to refine it a little more for you so that it's not only easier to use, but substantially more valuable.

Don't get stressed or hung up on being careful to ensure that you pull off estimation activities "by the book" because I've said it's so important. Just carry these tips with you and try to throw a new one in each time and eventually, over time, you'll find a consistent groove.

Being able to reliably predict future delivery rates based on historic delivery rates requires control. Controlling the inputs ensures more accuracy for the outputs. It's just science.

The rules for our estimation are the following:

* We use "points" instead of hours or person-days. Our points are a Fibonacci sub-set: 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 and "too big".

* We use Planning Poker for "throwing down a number" and we use our hands to do it. Avoid apps and playing cards if possible. Like the Retro voting, we don't reveal votes until everyone has silently selected a number. Everyone reveals together.

* When there is only a single size difference (eg. min is 3 and max is 5) we "go large" (select the 5).

* Use all 10 fingers to indicate "too big" and as early as possible, break these down into 2 or more smaller stories.

* When there is wider deviation, a "low ball" team member gives reasons for their low vote and the "high ball" member explains theirs too. Then discuss.

* Limit discussions (strictly 2 mins if you have a lot of stories to estimate; use a stopwatch) and invite a second vote to zoom in on a number. Two, maybe three, rounds of voting should be enough to get to the same number or a single size difference. If not, split the story or create a Chore to investigate the requirements further.

* Log blocking questions for the PO, update the AC/this is done when as you better understand the story, and add notes/reference links to the description while you're discussing the work.

* Log the agreed estimate/points number at the end and quickly move on to the next story.

Have a look at the following scenario and then after, I'll unpack some of the details.

How-to: Simple Story Estimation using your hands

Team estimation need not be a formal ritual. Two developers at a desk is enough. On other occasions where you want to move quickly through many stories (you've just cut up a large block of work and the PO wants a date), booking a meeting room with a bigger selection of your team gives everyone focus, and increases the accuracy of estimation.

1\. Gather team members together.

2\. Open up Tracker and expand the story detail (so the title, AC and any attachments/images are clearly visible) so everyone can see it.

3\. Invite someone to read aloud the story and it's AC. Show larger views of attachments. Someone could summarise or add a little more detail verbally if that helps.

4\. Ask members whether the story is clear enough on it's own for everyone to "pick a number" (silently). If not, ask and answer questions for a couple of mins and log questions down for the PO that the team can't resolve on their own.

5\. When members "have a number", ask everyone to hold up closed fists and count backwards from 3 to reveal votes simultaneously. "3\. 2. 1. go!" Single finger for 1 , 2 fingers for 2 , etc, 8 fingers for 8 and all fingers for too big .

6\. Jen votes 5, Alex 2, Kate 3 and James 2. Since she's high, the facilitator asks Jen "why the 5?"

7\. Jen, who got caught up seeing the css and js note explained a concern which the other team members quickly identified as confusion. Once the issue was clarified Jen exclaims "Oh! Sorry, I'm a 2 then as well".

8\. Another member asks "So go large then?"

9\. And the rest of the team agree. The facilitator logs 3 as the estimate and open up the next story.

I know this example doesn't cover all the scenarios and variables but I'll try to cover many questions I hear frequently and some of the more common variations.

* Let's start with story points. Developers are notorious at estimating very inaccurately when it comes to hours and days. Just ask any project manager. It's also a recipe for bias too - I want to show my team and myself that I have a handle on something and I can do it (quickly), so I'm mentally incentivised to offer a smaller than reasonable number. Most developers often estimate by a factor of 0.5 or smaller when using linear time. Points push all that to one side and free a technical team member to think more clearly. We usually say that points are in terms of "relative complexity or effort". Complexity works for some personality types. Effort for others. The other thing to note is that a 2 is not necessarily twice as much as a 1. Think of 1, 2, 3, 5 and 8 simply as containers. 5 is the "middle of the road" container and 1 is the smallest thing the team will ever do. In that "1 container" might go a one line change that takes 10 mins or a re-styling effort of 3 hours. But it's the smallest so the smallest items of relatively the same size get a 1. 8 on the other hand is absolutely the biggest thing any member of the team wants to commit to in an iteration. If your iterations are 1 week and Bob thinks the story can be done in a week but Sarah thinks longer, then it's more than an 8, and should be broken down.

* Less tools is more. Avoid the Planning Poker cards and apps and just stick to your hands. This also influenced the selection of Fibonacci numbers. We don't use the size 0 because it's somewhat confusing and dangerous (like a Chore - more later). We don't use more numbers because you get diminishing returns by increasing the resolution of estimates too much further. Tracker also offers "t shirt sizes" S, M and L which I've found helpful for planning heaps of work up front very quickly but not particularly practical for day to day work or new teams to this process.

* At all times, remember: we're just estimating. I'm preaching to myself here. I often have to remind myself that these are all just estimates. It helps you relax a little and not apply as much pressure to yourself (and your team mates) and sometimes get to a number quicker.

* Use the Done column to reset your base of reference. I didn't include this in the narrative above because if you're estimating regularly (every 2-3 days), each team member subconsciously knows the relative scale of each point container. But on more occasions than not, it's helpful to pull up the Done column in Tracker and refresh the team on what each size means, using recently completed work: Scroll to the bottom of the Done column (most recent completed iteration) and work back until you find 1 or two of the various sizes that the team is debating match the container for the current story being estimated. This is another mechanism to ensure consistency over time for the estimation inputs. You're essentially reminding each team member "what a 3 looks like" or "what a 5 looks like" prior to each silently forming their estimate. This historic reference is vital in ensuring that work of the same relative size receives the same estimate over and over again.

* PO does not vote. After a story is defined, the developers usually estimate it. Sometimes other members of the build team can help but this activity must absolutely exclude the PO. The PO has a conflict of interest when it comes to estimating how big a story is, so they need to stay out. If your PO can sit in on the discussion to answer questions and further clarify, then that can be helpful but I've found they often influence the estimate, sometimes simply by being present. If you can find a way to meet with the PO and clarify the AC separately and estimate without the PO, I think you will have more success. Discuss in your Retro if you have issues.

This, like many practices, simply gets better over time. It's ok for it to be little slow at first. Like commits, stories, iterations and release phases, the smaller you can batch things, the faster you'll cycle and quicker you and your team will learn.</comment>


Ask HN: Best monitor for text (Programming, terminal work) - <AUTHOR> Hi fellow HNers!
I'm looking to build a desktop for myself, and having a trouble finding the best monitors for text display and sharpness. I just burnt two hours scouring the internet, but could not land on a solid recommendation. Anybody here went through my search and found something?
Size: Around 24 inches (22 to 25)
Resolution : Has to do better than 1080p. My eyes are used to MacBook Retina display. So I'm looking for comparable level of sharpness
Color accuracy: I hate the poppy saturated colors. I'd like colors to be naturally reproduced. Monitor should ideally just display whatever image the PC sends it. Nothing fancy is expected.
Input lag: Very important. The lowest input lag the best.
Gaming: None. As I said, the goal is sharper text, and no gaming needs. Dont care for FreeSync or Gsync or other GPU related techs, as this display will be driven only by integrated GPUs from either intel or AMD.
Budget: < USD 500
Multi-monitor: I'm probably the odd one that hates multi-monitor setup. I like my focus area to be a single surface, and one with the best quality.
Anyone have any recommendations? <comment><USER2> I've been using a 25" Dell U2515H[0] 2560x1440 monitor for over a year now and it's the best monitor I've used in the last 20 years.

1\. At 2560x1440 and 1:1 scaling, text is razor sharp and easy to read

2\. It has an IPS panel (excellent color accuracy and viewing angles)

3\. The input lag is very low and down scales to 1080p well enough for gaming

4\. It was $330 a year ago.

You may also want to read an article I wrote on picking a monitor for software developers at: [https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/how-to-pick-a-good-monitor- fo...](https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/how-to-pick-a-good-monitor-for-software- development)

[0]: [http://amzn.to/2jF3WHp](http://amzn.to/2jF3WHp) (yes it's an affiliate link, but I also wrote a 4,000 word article on it)

</comment><comment><USER3> eizo flexscan ev2455</comment>


The Coming Brick Wall in Venture Capital & Why This is Good for US Innovation - <AUTHOR> http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2011/06/30/the-coming-brick-wall-in-venture-capital-why-this-is-good-for-us-innovation/ <comment><USER2> To me, what the post sounds like is "act now before it's all gone!". And he's the guy selling the product.

I think the VCs realise that an end is coming. And they are trying to get their %s into as many of the important founders companies as possible, so they can continue to harvest even when their industry is no longer relevant.

Think about it: The VC industry itself is going to be a casualty of the internet. These few guys controlling huge funds to decide at their discretion which companies to invest in is the exact kind of industry that is ripe for disruption by more direct investment methods...that would be offered by the internet.

Additionally, as more and more people get rich on the internet, it will be increasingly easy for new companies to raise money from individuals and then relying on profits to grow instead of venture capital.

The post here, intentional or not, sounds like these guys realise that their age of power is coming to an end, and they want to do one final milking.

<comment><USER3> It does seem analogous to the record industry 20-40 years ago. You needed capital to record/produce/distribute. A record company had the capital, and the connections to market you to people who would buy the product, and had the marketing channels (radio, tv, print) in line to promote the product.

VC has the capital you need, access to a network of investors, and media connections to help promote.

This does seem like a model which will morph/fade, and possibly more quickly than we saw the record industry take its lumps. YC/Techstars/incubators and such seem to be proactively trying to change the rules of the traditional VC/investment game, but still keeping some of the better aspects.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It wasn't long ago when everyone was saying that the age of the tech IPO was dead and that would kill VCs. Well here it is and much to my amazement tech companies are going public again -- to me that means there's life in being a VC yet...</comment>


6 Great Articles Every Hiring Managers Ought To Read - <AUTHOR> http://blog.matchfwd.com/2012/02/5-great-articles-hiring-managers-read/

<comment><AUTHOR> My best bookmarks. Always good to re-read before interviews and when reviewing applications.</comment>


Show HN: Twitter directory, search by country, gender, category and more - <AUTHOR> http://new.beevolve.com/twitter/bio-results/?bsearch=&opt_country=us&opt_city_state=&opt_gender=all&opt_category=&options_type=advanced

<comment><USER2> In terms of category, there needs to be a "None of the above"/"general non- celebrity"

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes , that could be added , though there are non celebrities on most of the twitter categories too , results are sorted by number of followers so celebrities happen to be on first page</comment></comment>


Show HN: Revealer – seed phrase visual encryption backup tool - <AUTHOR> https://revealer.cc <comment><USER2> Amazing. Is it 100% secure?

I mean, is it proven to have no way of reconstruction the content from just one of the two parts?

edit: seems to be [https://revealer.cc/how-it-works/](https://revealer.cc/how- it-works/) (one 100% noise, the other some xor on the noise)

</comment><comment><USER3> that's a neat trick!</comment>


The Maasai warriors' guide to England - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/02/nmasai102.xml <comment><USER2> Just in case you were wondering of relevance to Hacker News before reading the article:

"Even though some may look like they have a frown on their face, they are very friendly people - many of them just work in offices, jobs they don't enjoy, and so they do not smile as much as they should."

</comment><comment><USER3> Looks similar to a show called "Meet The Natives" which broadcast last year. A group of tribesmen were brought to the UK to meet the three tribes of the UK - Working class, middle class and upper class.

It's pretty interesting viewing, if a bit gimmickey.

My favourite insights were (1) why spend much time on house cleaning if it's boring and (2) Why do Londoners always seem in a rush if they look so unhappy about where they're going.

<comment><USER4> Back in the 90s there was a reality show where an urban Japanese family traded places with a family of some primitive African tribe. The bits of it I saw were fairly hilarious. There was a lot of mirror image confusion about things like preparing food, how to use a bathroom, etc.</comment></comment>