Here in New York City, many restaurants offer "buffalo burgers" on
their menu (in addition to the usual "beef burgers"). They also cost
about 25% more than regular beef burgers.

What's the big deal about buffalo burgers? Are they supposedly
"better" than beef burgers? Do they supposedly taste better? (I tried
one, and I couldn't tell the difference).

So why would anyone want to spend one and a quarter times more for a
buffalo burger?

wylbur37 wrote:

They also cost
about 25% more than regular beef burgers.

So why would anyone want to spend one and a quarter times more for a
buffalo burger?

BEEP. Math error.

I like bison, but it doesn't pass the cost/benefit test. Give me some
and I'll gladly eat it.

--
Reg email: RegForte (at) (that free MS email service) (dot) com

(wylbur37) wrote in message . com...
Here in New York City, many restaurants offer "buffalo burgers" on
their menu (in addition to the usual "beef burgers"). They also cost
about 25% more than regular beef burgers.

What's the big deal about buffalo burgers? Are they supposedly
"better" than beef burgers? Do they supposedly taste better? (I tried
one, and I couldn't tell the difference).

So why would anyone want to spend one and a quarter times more for a
buffalo burger?

Lower fat.

wylbur37 wrote:

Here in New York City, many restaurants offer "buffalo burgers" on
their menu (in addition to the usual "beef burgers"). They also cost
about 25% more than regular beef burgers.

What's the big deal about buffalo burgers? Are they supposedly
"better" than beef burgers? Do they supposedly taste better? (I tried
one, and I couldn't tell the difference).

So why would anyone want to spend one and a quarter times more for a
buffalo burger?

They are priced at 25 percent more, not 125 percent. However buffalo
meat costs more here too, where it is produced.

In NYC, marketers can make a big deal out of anything relatively
ordinary LOL!

However, so far, the bison raised here in NM are strictly free range and
not dosed with anything that isn't medically necessary (with the meat
being withheld from slaughter as necessary). The herds have never been
fed with animal products, so there is little risk of BSE and related
diseases.

It tastes like meat; nothing special at all.

wylbur37 wrote:

Here in New York City, many restaurants offer "buffalo burgers" on
their menu (in addition to the usual "beef burgers"). They also cost
about 25% more than regular beef burgers.

Smaller price difference than many places.

What's the big deal about buffalo burgers? Are they supposedly
"better" than beef burgers?

Just plain different mostly. More lean so less fat and cholesterol
for folks who count those.

Do they supposedly taste better? (I tried
one, and I couldn't tell the difference).

When I tried one I *could* tell the difference, but the difference
wasn't large enough to make any difference beyond 'ok, so I can
tell'.

I remember good bison chili on Catalina Island near Los Angeles,
but I remember the natural beauty of the island more.

on a side note, bison or buffalo are raised free range, whil most cows are
almost in a factory environment, dont picture your regular cows grazing in a
feild.

cows that are "farmed" this way will have a higher fat content than those
that are free range, much like buffalo
IF buffalo replaced cows as the primary beef source im sure it would be the
opposite


-steve
"Doug Freyburger" wrote in message
om...
wylbur37 wrote:

Here in New York City, many restaurants offer "buffalo burgers" on
their menu (in addition to the usual "beef burgers"). They also cost
about 25% more than regular beef burgers.

Smaller price difference than many places.

What's the big deal about buffalo burgers? Are they supposedly
"better" than beef burgers?

Just plain different mostly. More lean so less fat and cholesterol
for folks who count those.

Do they supposedly taste better? (I tried
one, and I couldn't tell the difference).

When I tried one I *could* tell the difference, but the difference
wasn't large enough to make any difference beyond 'ok, so I can
tell'.

I remember good bison chili on Catalina Island near Los Angeles,
but I remember the natural beauty of the island more.

Also most feed lot carcasses are water expanded by 15% or more, therefor
the price difference for meat content is not so bad.

JJ

S wrote:

on a side note, bison or buffalo are raised free range, whil most cows are
almost in a factory environment, dont picture your regular cows grazing in a
feild.

cows that are "farmed" this way will have a higher fat content than those
that are free range, much like buffalo
IF buffalo replaced cows as the primary beef source im sure it would be the
opposite

-steve
"Doug Freyburger" wrote in message
om...
wylbur37 wrote:

Here in New York City, many restaurants offer "buffalo burgers" on
their menu (in addition to the usual "beef burgers"). They also cost
about 25% more than regular beef burgers.

Smaller price difference than many places.

What's the big deal about buffalo burgers? Are they supposedly
"better" than beef burgers?

Just plain different mostly. More lean so less fat and cholesterol
for folks who count those.

Do they supposedly taste better? (I tried
one, and I couldn't tell the difference).

When I tried one I *could* tell the difference, but the difference
wasn't large enough to make any difference beyond 'ok, so I can
tell'.

I remember good bison chili on Catalina Island near Los Angeles,
but I remember the natural beauty of the island more.

Sorry to disagree, but any visit to an abattoir yields the injection
room, huge needles inject water into the carcass at about 2,000 lb.
pressure, tenderizing and adding weight.

The chicken available in stores has the normal 8% and now another 15%
"stock"

JJ

"Steve Wertz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 14:26:48 -0500, Jeremy
wrote:

Sorry to disagree, but any visit to an abattoir yields the injection
room, huge needles inject water into the carcass at about 2,000 lb.
pressure, tenderizing and adding weight.

We were talking about beef and buffalo, though, and your usage of
"feed lot" certainly indicates you acknowledged that.

The chicken available in stores has the normal 8% and now another 15%
"stock"

Not all of it, but yes - it is common for poultry but not for raw
beef (yet).

-sw
I get my chickens fresh from a butcher shop. Never frozen...sittin' on ice.
39cents a pound for the last 6 years....last week he went to 69
cents...Durn.

"Jack Sloan" wrote in message
...

"Steve Wertz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 14:26:48 -0500, Jeremy
wrote:

Sorry to disagree, but any visit to an abattoir yields the injection
room, huge needles inject water into the carcass at about 2,000 lb.
pressure, tenderizing and adding weight.

We were talking about beef and buffalo, though, and your usage of
"feed lot" certainly indicates you acknowledged that.

The chicken available in stores has the normal 8% and now another 15%
"stock"

Not all of it, but yes - it is common for poultry but not for raw
beef (yet).

-sw
I get my chickens fresh from a butcher shop. Never frozen...sittin' on
ice.
39cents a pound for the last 6 years....last week he went to 69
cents...Durn.

Drats, sorry for the crosspost...didn't notice until after I hit
"send"....Look what you did Wertz.

"Steve Wertz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 16:19:29 -0500, "Jack Sloan"
wrote:

Drats, sorry for the crosspost...didn't notice until after I hit
"send"....Look what you did Wertz.

If you were using newsproxy that wouldn't have happened.... ;-)



I guess I'm with Nick on this one...I sometimes wanta see what the idiots
are up to.
Jack


I didn't know which group Jeremy was responding to, so I used them
all. Normally such crossposting would have been deleted.

-sw

Steve Wertz wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:00:12 -0500, "Jack Sloan"
wrote:

"Steve Wertz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 16:19:29 -0500, "Jack Sloan"
wrote:

Drats, sorry for the crosspost...didn't notice until after I hit
"send"....Look what you did Wertz.

If you were using newsproxy that wouldn't have happened.... ;-)

I guess I'm with Nick on this one...I sometimes wanta see what the idiots
are up to.

And you also want to let us know what the idiots are up to as well
even though we've chosen to ignore them?

This thread isn't not an example as it was an somewhat honest (not
a troll) post, just ignorantly crossposted.

Just don't respond to the idiots otherwise you're just
perpetuating the problem.

-sw

yabbutt...
your first two responses in the thread were crossposted...

BOB
who does realize that you wanted to disagree with jeremy and didn't know which
group he lives under
'-)

"Steve Wertz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:00:12 -0500, "Jack Sloan"
wrote:

"Steve Wertz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 16:19:29 -0500, "Jack Sloan"
wrote:

Drats, sorry for the crosspost...didn't notice until after I hit
"send"....Look what you did Wertz.

If you were using newsproxy that wouldn't have happened.... ;-)

I guess I'm with Nick on this one...I sometimes wanta see what the idiots
are up to.

And you also want to let us know what the idiots are up to as well
even though we've chosen to ignore them?

Why Steve...are you into mind reading at distance? I've read this over and
can't see anywhere that I mentioned sharing what the idiots are doing.
Jack

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 20:17:14 -0500, "Jack Sloan"
wrote:

Why Steve...are you into mind reading at distance? I've read this over and
can't see anywhere that I mentioned sharing what the idiots are doing.

So I *did* read your mind, then - Cool!

:-)

-sw

Jack Sloan wrote in alt.food.barbecue

Drats, sorry for the crosspost...didn't notice until after I hit
"send"....Look what you did Wertz.


I don't understand all this crap about crossposts.
I use Xnews and have it set to delete anything crossposted
to more than one newsgroup. I never see any of the posts
ya'll talk about.
So there!


--
BigDog
To E-mail me, you know what to do.