From busboy to beverage director: Meet Jose Luis Betancur
Advertisement
How did you get into this industry?
When I came to the US, I was always attached to restaurants. I was doing valet parking in a French restaurant in the South End, Petit Robert.
My first day as a busser was Mother's Day. I'll always remember it. It was brunch. I was working solo, and I was dropping things because I was so anxious and nervous and busy. I just needed a little break. I went downstairs to rest a little bit.
Advertisement
Jacky told me, 'We don't rest. We need to go back to work.' That told me: It's time to do things. It's time to continue the work. I think that kind of gave me a path toward the structure of our industry, how much we want to take care of guests. We're tired, but we need to take care of them.
I started moving into many other different restaurants in the city, on Newbury Street and the Park Plaza area. I worked at Via Matta; I worked in the North End as a busser at Fiore.
That was a busy place, very Italian-driven, very hard-core. It was an interesting vibe; it was awesome, the fast pace. I was working with a lot of professional servers back in the day, all these Italian servers. It was awesome learning from them, learning how they do service.
How did you get into wine?
I always loved being in this industry. My father was a chef in Chile. I feel like I've always had that type of foodie mentality. I got married in Boston, and then we moved to New York; [my wife] got into school in New York. I said: I need to get a job. I saved one on my browser, I applied, I had a second interview, and I started working for TAO.
I wanted to make a little bit more money as well. Since I was in New York, things were a bit more complicated. I asked my beverage director, 'Can I do something else?'
Advertisement
They said to come early in the morning and organize all the wine, liquor, and beer deliveries. So that's what I did. I started looking at the vintages of the wines, and it was fascinating, I said: 'I want to learn more about wine. Can you teach me?' I was told that the world of wine is very complicated. They said, 'I can teach you, but I highly recommend you take classes.'
I found a program at the Sommelier Society of America in New York. It was a six-month program, and then from there, pretty much, I just took off. I applied to a place in Midtown from the Patina Group.
Since I was a new guy, I was getting the worst section. In order for me to make money every day, I was just talking about wine pairings and making people happy. I was able to develop this and make a daily living. My wine director said, 'I like the way you talk about wine. It's awesome. Continue to do that.'
I became a certified sommelier. My wife and I came back to Boston, and then I started working at Bel Ari, a very small place. I applied to Harvest, but then Joe Bastianich was opening Babbo.
What was Babbo like?
I was the sommelier. I learned everything Italian, rustic, peasant food. We had a lot of natural wine, a lot of small family producers. For me, it was very challenging to recommend to our guests. I was always used to classic French varietals. It was a constant study. My palate was developing more earthy, savory nuances.
Advertisement
What were your first impressions of Boston when you moved here?
This was probably 15 years ago. My first impression was that it was very clean, beautiful. I do remember my first look at the city, walking out of South Station and then going up to Summer Street. Back then, there was Macy's. It had all these beautiful American flags. It was a little bit past December, so there were still holiday decorations out. There were all these beautiful flags, 50 of them, and Filene's was still there.
It was very elegant, the architecture. I took some pictures right away of those buildings. Another thing that grabbed my attention was the newspaper boxes and mail boxes on the street — they were colorful, flashy colors.
Where do you eat when you're not working?
We try to do Mexican food. I live in Manchester, N.H. There's [a restaurant] called
I went to
What's your favorite wine?
Wow, that's a very difficult question: Val delle Corti, Chianti Classico 2010 and 2010 Azienda Agricola Pugnane 'Villero' Barolo.
How do you not get a hangover? Wine gives me a horrible hangover. Maybe I'm just old.
I was always told: It's a glass of wine and two glasses of water.
What do you snack on at home?
That's difficult. I mean, chocolate's always great. Lately, I've been doing a little Hershey's, and Lake Champlain milk and dark chocolate.
Advertisement
Last but not least: What food won't you eat?
Anything that's aggressively spicy. I just want a little touch of spiciness.
Interview was edited for clarity.
Kara Baskin can be reached at
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Business News
2 hours ago
- Time Business News
How Smart Marketers Use the 80/20 Rule to Double Their Success
Marketing can feel overwhelming. You have dozens of strategies, hundreds of customers, and countless ways to spend your budget. But what if I told you there's a simple rule that can help you focus on what really matters? The 80/20 Rule in Marketing has been helping businesses grow for decades. This powerful principle can transform how you think about your customers, campaigns, and results. The 80/20 rule, also called the Pareto Principle, states that 80% of your results come from just 20% of your efforts. An Italian economist named Vilfredo Pareto discovered this pattern in the 1800s when he noticed that 80% of Italy's wealth belonged to 20% of the population. This same pattern shows up everywhere in business and marketing. Most companies find that: 80% of sales come from 20% of customers 80% of complaints come from 20% of clients 80% of revenue comes from 20% of products 80% of website traffic comes from 20% of pages The numbers don't have to be exactly 80/20. Sometimes it's 90/10 or 70/30. The key point is that a small portion of your efforts creates most of your results. Start by looking at your data. Don't worry – you don't need to be a math expert. Here are simple ways to spot your 80/20 patterns: Customer Analysis: List your customers by how much they spend with you each year. You'll probably find that your top 20% of customers generate most of your revenue. These are your VIP customers who deserve special attention. Product Performance: Which products or services make you the most money? Often, a few star products carry the weight while others barely break even. Marketing Channels: Track where your best customers come from. Is it social media, email, referrals, or paid ads? The 80/20 Rule in Marketing often reveals that one or two channels bring in most of your quality leads. Content Success: Look at your blog posts, videos, or social media content. A few pieces probably get shared much more than others and bring in more customers. Amazon discovered that a small number of products generated most of their profits. They focused their marketing budget on promoting these winners instead of trying to push everything equally. Netflix found that 80% of viewer hours came from 20% of their content. They used this insight to invest more in creating hit shows rather than producing lots of mediocre content. A local restaurant owner I know realized that 20% of her menu items brought in 80% of her profits. She simplified her menu, reduced costs, and increased profits by focusing on what customers actually wanted. Once you know your 80/20 patterns, you can make smarter decisions: Budget Allocation: Spend more money on the marketing channels that bring your best customers. If email marketing generates 60% of your sales but only gets 10% of your budget, it's time to rebalance. Customer Focus: Give your top 20% of customers extra attention. Send them special offers, check in personally, and ask for their feedback. Happy VIP customers often become your best source of referrals. Content Strategy: Create more content similar to your top performers. If how-to videos get more engagement than product photos, make more tutorials. Product Development: Instead of launching completely new products, consider improving your best sellers or creating variations that appeal to your top customers. The 80/20 Rule in Marketing isn't about ignoring the other 80% of your efforts. It's about being strategic with your time and money. Don't cut everything that isn't in your top 20%. Sometimes the 'less productive' 80% serves important purposes like attracting new customers or supporting your main offerings. Also, remember that your 80/20 patterns can change over time. Review your data regularly – maybe every six months – to make sure you're still focusing on the right things. Some businesses get so focused on their top customers that they stop trying to find new ones. This can be dangerous if your VIP customers leave or if market conditions change. You don't need fancy software to start using this principle. Begin with simple questions: Which customers spend the most with me? What marketing activities bring the best results? Which products make me the most profit? Start tracking this information if you aren't already. Even basic spreadsheets can help you spot patterns. The 80/20 Rule in Marketing works because it forces you to focus on what really moves the needle in your business. Instead of trying to do everything perfectly, you can invest your limited time and money where they'll have the biggest impact. Remember, marketing success isn't about working harder – it's about working smarter. The 80/20 rule helps you do exactly that by showing you where your efforts will pay off the most. Start small, track your results, and watch as this simple principle transforms your marketing results. TIME BUSINESS NEWS
The Hill
4 hours ago
- The Hill
Britain's net-zero scheme is being derailed by opposition to solar and wind projects
Britain's plans to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 won't be derailed by high costs, even though Brits are now paying some of the world's highest residential electricity prices. Nor will the effort be derailed by lack of support from the Labour Party, which has issued a manifesto claiming that Britain will be a ' clean energy superpower.' Instead, the country's net-zero scheme will fail because of the fierce opposition from rural landowners throughout the British Isles. They are telling the owners of proposed solar and wind projects to take their oceans of photovoltaic panels and forests of giant turbines and put them somewhere the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow. The proof is in the numbers. Since Jan. 1, there have been nearly four dozen rejections of solar or wind projects in England, Ireland, and Scotland. Among the latest was a rejection last month in Kent, where a planning inspector spiked plans for a massive solar project owned by the French company EDF. The 257-acre project was rejected due to what the planning inspector determined would be a ' significant adverse effect on the receiving landscape.' Also in July, a scheme that aimed to cover 114 acres of prime agricultural land in Scotland with solar panels was rejected by local officials. The project near the town of Coupar Angus had received 44 letters of objection and just one letter in support. I have been tracking the rural backlash against alt-energy projects in the U.S. for 15 years. As the Renewable Rejection Database shows, there have been at least 878 rejections or restrictions of wind and solar projects in the U.S. since 2013, including 82 this year. I am also tracking the international opposition to alt-energy in the Global Renewable Rejection Database. The numbers in the global database show the extent of the local opposition to solar and wind energy in the British Isles. Thus far in 2025, there have been 64 rejections or restrictions of solar or wind projects in countries outside of the U.S. Of that number, 45 have been in England, Ireland, or Scotland. And of that sum, six rejections occurred in July alone. The opposition to these projects is ferocious, and it has been ongoing since at least 2016, when local campaigners defeated a proposal to build a 12-turbine wind project near Scotland's Loch Ness. One of the latest high-profile battles is over the proposed Calderdale Energy project in West Yorkshire. If built, the 300-megawatt plant, promoted by a Saudi outfit called Al Gihaz Holding, would be one of the biggest onshore wind projects in England. The plan calls for 41 massive turbines, standing 200 meters high, to be built amid Walshaw Moor, a region believed to have inspired Emily Brontë's masterpiece, 'Wuthering Heights.' The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds has called the project ' entirely inappropriate.' Opponents have already collected over 15,000 signatures calling for the rejection of the giant bird-chopping project. The surging resistance to solar and wind projects in Britain rhymes with what I have seen all over the world. Although climate NGOs, the pro-solar claque, and pro-wind lobbyists try to dismiss rural residents' objections as NIMBYism ('not in my backyard'), the reality is that everyone, everywhere, cares about what happens in their neighborhoods. Over the last 15 years, I have interviewed dozens of people from numerous countries who have fought solar and wind projects. Their concerns are the same. They are rightly concerned about the deleterious health impacts caused by noise pollution from wind turbines. They are concerned the projects will hurt their property values. Numerous studies have shown that wherever solar and wind projects are built, the value of nearby properties tends to fall. They are concerned about their landscapes and viewsheds. They are also worried about wildlife. And increasingly, objections are being made about the destruction of agricultural land. To cite just one example, last year, the provincial government in Alberta announced an 'agriculture first' policy designed to protect Canadian farmland from solar and wind development. The province also created a 70,000 square kilometer buffer zone around the Rocky Mountains to preserve viewsheds from alt-energy development. Despite the never-ending hype about renewable energy, land-use conflicts are a binding constraint on the expansion of solar and wind energy. That's true in England, Ireland, Scotland, and in rural communities worldwide. After watching these fights for years, it is clear to me that the farmers, ranchers, and residents of rural communities are not just going to roll over and take it. They will continue to fight to protect their communities, and the numbers in the Global Renewable Rejection Database will continue to rise.
Chicago Tribune
6 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Paul Vallas: CPS budget is responsible, but avoids structural fixes
Chicago Public Schools interim CEO Macquline King has presented the most responsible budget possible under current conditions, especially considering the strong influence of the Chicago Teachers Union and a mayor committed to prioritizing union interests over all other considerations. King's plan solidly protects local school funding without worsening the district's immediate financial health. However, it disappointingly avoids structural fixes — guaranteeing Chicago will face a similar budget crisis next year. The plan clearly elevates CTU priorities above student needs. CPS' budget presentation balances the 2026 budget with the following measures: The district will continue to receive 56% of all property revenues paid by city residents and business while the city will provide the district with almost $1.1 billion in additional subsidies. This includes at least $557 million in the dedicated teacher pension city property tax levy, $379 million in TIF property tax windfall and almost $100 million in debt service on school district capital bonds. The district's budget materials understate a significant increase in property tax revenues. While the district claims deficit progress, its own projections show future budget holes growing — even assuming the property levy is raised to its legal cap limit each year. To her credit, the CEO has proposed hundreds of millions of cuts, but the larger question remains: How will CPS resolve future budget shortfalls? The oft-repeated claim — CPS needs $1 billion more in state funding for adequacy — is simply not supported by facts. CPS spends $30,000 per student, more than the state average, but delivers poorer results. Despite cuts, staff levels in the new budget are 16% higher than in 2019, while student enrollment has dropped 8.5%. The proposed staffing ratio is now one position per seven students — a troubling inefficiency. Meanwhile, the district spends $100 million yearly on 20 near empty schools and wants to spend $1 billion on capital improvements. Despite the 20 schools averaging one employee per four students, just one in 10 kids read at grade level, and in several, it's zero. At the same time the campaign to close public charter schools or convert to CTU member district schools will drive up costs of those schools. On the academic side the proposed $10.2 billion budget will further reduce standards and accountability that will deny poor families alternatives. Meanwhile, CPS continues to shift away from student-based budgeting in favor of the CTU-backed 'Sustainable Community School Model,' which prioritizes not enrollment but perceived needs regardless of outcomes. The district is set to increase its current 20 'community schools' to 70 under this model despite the existing such schools lagging the district average by most measures including academic proficiency and attendance. King is doing her best under enormous pressure, but record-sized union contracts and inefficient CTU-driven policies continue to drive up costs and degrade both the quantity and quality of educational choices. The budget sustains CTU priorities at the expense of needed reforms, deeper efficiencies and, ultimately, the interests of Chicago's students.
