Shanghaiist: Is the new Arch a knockoff?

halfpatrant

Wed, 08 Nov 2006 10:25:32 +0800

Funny.. I guess being a silent partner isn't such a bad thing. After all, it looks like Frank doesn't have a legal leg to stand on when it comes to the ownership of the Arch brand. guess customer service isn't the only thing he should have paid more attention to

hdp

Tue, 07 Nov 2006 10:17:39 +0800

IMHO Arch has not evolved since its heyday in '04 so I can't say I have any great allegiance to it. I will check out the new location to see if the other manager is capable of doing something interesting with it on her own.

andy

Tue, 07 Nov 2006 08:44:27 +0800

"Syzygy". Might as well just name the place "Pretentious".

hungerpangs

Mon, 06 Nov 2006 17:49:50 +0800

It's too bad that the new "Arch" that's opening 5 mins from home is not authentic. I'll reserve my verdict too until I taste their salmon pasta. Apparently knock-off restaurants and silent partners grabbing all and running away with the whole business IS very common. Apparently that's what happenned to the guys who started Marrakech. Ousted by the local partner/gilrfriend (presumably an ex by now).. shame!

flex

Mon, 06 Nov 2006 17:07:15 +0800

I'll reserve my verdict until I have eaten at the new Arch. Great location!

sammy

Mon, 06 Nov 2006 15:04:34 +0800

Arch has the worst excuse for coffee I've ever had, even in China. I bewilders me how they can get away with it, considering their savvy clientele. At least we can say it's a match for their sucky desserts.