Vietnam restaurant law: the more delicious, the worse it looks

This is not an exaggeration. It is almost like a law of physics in this country, and it has a very clear economic reason.

Why are good restaurants ugly?

The shop survives thanks to regular customers, and regular customers don't care about the decor. They care about the bowl of noodles. Without paying rent for a fancy storefront, prices are cheaper, so there are more customers, so ingredients turn over faster, so everything is fresher. • If a restaurant has been selling just one dish for twenty years, there's no need for a menu. No menu means no need to print one either. • The restaurant owner is usually the cook. The cook is busy cooking, not busy choosing paint colors.

Why is it that a fancy-looking place isn't always as tasty: it's not because they cook badly, but because a significant portion of your money is going toward air conditioning, decor, staff, and a prime storefront location. With the same 60 thousand, a street-side stall puts 50 thousand into ingredients, while a fancy place might only be able to put in 25 thousand.

The exception is real: a beautiful place that's still delicious is usually one that was already good and only later renovated, or one opened by a chef who truly puts their heart into it. How to tell the difference: check whether the place sells few dishes. A menu with 8 dishes is trustworthy, a menu with 80 dishes is not.

Warning in the opposite direction too: unattractive doesn't automatically mean delicious. Some places are both unattractive and mediocre. The most reliable indicator is still the number of locals sitting down to eat at the actual mealtime — if a place is packed at 11am, it doesn't matter what it looks like.