I had lunch at KFC today, so I decided to try their new Colonel's Fish and Chips. After all the advertisements and hype, you'd be expecting more.
Picture of actual advertisement.: I can't find an actual advertisement online, but this picture comes closest to what is shown in their commercials. Compare this to what I had.
Unfortunately, I have to say the actual dish is a far cry from that they present in the advertisement. The lack of the lemon slice (included in the advert) was disappointing (Edit: Other pictures I've seen on other blogs have lemon wedges. Why didn't I get any lemon?!), but that wasn't the worst - the size of the fish was pitiful - you could get MORE meat from their 2 pc chicken meal, which costs the same price. The crinkle-cut fries as a replacement for the mashed potatoes? Not good enough. There was nothing unique about the chips, unlike the mash, which at the very least features a gravy aligned to the taste of the original recipe chicken in KFC.
This was what I had. The red line approximates what was eaten. I think I ate about a quarter of the fish before I had the presence of mind to take a photo as evidence. And well, yes, the fact that I pushed all the fish and chips to one side does make it look even smaller. But a quarter, mind you! Only a quarter! (And that's being generous; I think the entire fish piece was the size of one of my hands, and I DO NOT have large hands.)
Despite the fact that it's whimsically named "Colonel's Fish and Chips", the proportion of chips to fish makes it seem as if the main dish is the chips, with a side of fish. I'm not sure if the Colonel would have liked having his 'name' associated with first, what is not the "original 11 secret herbs and spices" recipe, and second, a meat that was not the basis of his success.
Nonetheless, the taste of the batter was true to the "spicy and crispy" recipe they use for their chicken and rather palatable (if not a little salty), as I prefer the spicy and crispy recipe to the orignal. However, since the fish was very thin, it felt as if I was eating more batter than actual fish. Other consumers have commented about the texture and quality of the fish (discovered after briefly googling), and I must concur - it tasted more like soft chicken than fish.
And this, dear friends, is how thick the fish is. Note its proportion to my plastic knife and fork. And it's so crispy that you don't cut the fish, you break off pieces of it. (Compliment or criticism? You decide.)
The meal left me disappointed and wishing I had opted for the 2 pc chicken meal instead, the alternative which I had been deliberating when I first stepped into KFC for lunch.
Offering fish is a good idea in view of the bird flu scares around Asia, but KFC should think about making this meal more value-for-money, like their other sets. I, for one, felt underfed as I walked out from the restaurant. However, as a caveat, I would like to say that this is merely the first time I have had the fish, and I cannot say for certain if the standard and size of the fish does not vary from time to time, outlet to outlet.
As an after note, I also have to guiltily admit that I submitted this above article (sans pictures, first paragraph, and some editing) to AsiaOne Wine, Dine and Unwind. I plead "unhappy consumer" and "adult rebel streak". And well, it did say "Your Say" there, so I'm having my say. So there.
Tune in next week, when we make fun of the food at MOS burger. Existentialism @ carpeveritas.blogspot.com - taking the piss out of fast food since just now.
And then, quietly, secretly when we're alone, we weep about it in our sad, dark hearts, wondering "Why, why, why is this all there is to our lives?"
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home