MenuWright · Completed example · Illustrative
Restaurant: Harbor & Hearthfictional sample
Date: example only
Every restaurant name, sales figure, layout observation, and expected outcome on this page is illustrative. The eight item rows mirror the calculator's sample inputs so the formulas can be checked. A real teardown needs a dated POS export and the actual menu artifact before an owner changes price, placement, portion, or assortment.
Contribution margin = price − ingredient cost. Menu mix = units sold ÷ total units. This sample has 720 total units, a 9.00% popularity threshold after the engine's rounding, and a $10.22 weighted-average margin threshold.
| Item | Price | Food cost | Units | Mix | Margin | Quadrant | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Margherita Pizza | $16.00 | $4.20 | 140 | 19.44% | $11.80 | Starsengine: Star | Protect quality and visibility. |
| Caesar Salad | $12.00 | $2.80 | 95 | 13.19% | $9.20 | Crowd Pleasersengine: Plowhorse | Review price or portion cost. |
| Ribeye Steak | $34.00 | $11.50 | 42 | 5.83% | $22.50 | Hidden Gemsengine: Puzzle | Test a relevant visibility cue. |
| Fish & Chips | $18.00 | $5.10 | 88 | 12.22% | $12.90 | Starsengine: Star | Protect the guest experience. |
| Mushroom Risotto | $19.00 | $3.40 | 30 | 4.17% | $15.60 | Hidden Gemsengine: Puzzle | Clarify description and placement. |
| Garlic Bread | $7.00 | $1.10 | 120 | 16.67% | $5.90 | Crowd Pleasersengine: Plowhorse | Check portion and attachment economics. |
| Tiramisu | $9.00 | $2.20 | 55 | 7.64% | $6.80 | Leftoversengine: Dog | Decide whether to improve or retire. |
| House Red Wine | $11.00 | $3.00 | 150 | 20.83% | $8.00 | Crowd Pleasersengine: Plowhorse | Test price and pour-cost control. |
Alias note: Stars = classic Stars, Crowd Pleasers = Plowhorses, Hidden Gems = Puzzles, and Leftovers = Dogs. The engine labels are singular: Star, Plowhorse, Puzzle, and Dog.
0.70 × (1 ÷ 8) = 8.75%. The browser engine rounds the fraction to two decimals before comparing, so this sample uses 9.00%; items at or above it are high-popularity.
$7,356.20 ÷ 720 = $10.22. This weighted average contribution margin is the illustrative profitability line; items at or above it are high-profit in the sample.
A completed teardown records what is known, what is unverified, and what to inspect next. Status color supports the written status; it is not the only signal.
No live menu image is included in this illustrative dataset. Confirm that the first scan reaches a Star before a low-margin Crowd Pleaser.
There is no supplied photo to assess. Do not treat the absence of an image here as evidence for or against a photography investment.
Ribeye and Mushroom Risotto clear the illustrative margin line but sit below the popularity line; check their section position and description.
The sample uses a consistent dollar format. Confirm the live menu follows the same convention across printed, web, and ordering surfaces.
The item data does not show scan time or choice friction. Observe a service and record where guests pause or ask for help.
Action: Give Mushroom Risotto a clear, accurate description and a visible position within its section. Add a relevant FOH cue rather than a blanket push.
Measure: Baseline its 30 monthly units and 4.17% mix, then compare mix, contribution dollars, and guest fit in a defined review window.
Expected impact: Illustrative only: the browser engine models a Puzzle with a 10% volume lift, not a guaranteed result.
Action: Review House Red Wine's pour cost and test a modest price move only after confirming guest value and competitive context.
Measure: Record the baseline $8.00 contribution margin and 150 units, then watch units, contribution dollars, and complaints after the test.
Expected impact: Illustrative only: the browser engine models a Plowhorse with a 5% price move; demand response is not modeled.
Action: Check Tiramisu's prep, waste, description, and placement. Choose one change to test, or retire it when its menu role no longer earns its space.
Measure: Use its 55 units, $6.80 margin, and 7.64% mix as the baseline; document the decision date and the reason for keeping or removing it.
Expected impact: No dollar promise: the right outcome is a documented decision supported by item economics and service evidence.
Illustrative score: 9 / 10
Use this working rubric to make a teardown repeatable. It is an internal decision aid, not a validated industry benchmark. Score the evidence you actually have; do not award points for an unverified layout or sales claim.
| Dimension | 0 points | 1 point | 2 points | Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Economics inputs | No price, cost, or volume | Some inputs, no consistent period | Price, ingredient cost, and units are complete | 2 / 2 |
| Threshold and matrix read | No comparison lines | Quadrant names only | Popularity and margin math support each label | 2 / 2 |
| Layout and photography evidence | No review | Observation without supplied evidence | Evidence tied to a prioritized change | 1 / 2 |
| FOH handoff | No service prompt | Generic suggestion | Item, cue, timing, and guest-fit check | 2 / 2 |
| Measurement loop | No follow-up measure | One metric, no comparison window | Baseline, window, metric, and decision rule | 2 / 2 |
| Total illustrative score | 9 / 10 | |||