When ingredient costs rise but customers resist higher menu prices, where should a restaurant begin? A 26 September 2026 report by Tiền Phong described purchasing pressure in parts of Ho Chi Minh City and one restaurant operator's reluctance to raise prices again. Large retailers interviewed in the same report said sourcing across growing regions and longer-term purchasing arrangements helped maintain supply. Read the original report.
This is a local operating snapshot. For restaurant owners, the useful question is how a purchasing change moves through a dish's cost, the business's cash position and the customer's experience.
Count usable ingredients, not just delivered kilograms
A supplier's quoted price is easy to compare. The cheapest kilogram does not necessarily produce the cheapest serving. Delivery charges, accepted quality, trimming and cleaning yields, and spoilage during storage all matter. Ingredients that require more preparation or leave less usable food can cost more per dish despite a lower purchase price.
Start with a few ingredients used in the largest quantities. Record the delivered weight, purchase value, transport charges and usable weight for each comparable grade. Divide the batch's total landed cost by its usable weight, then apply the standard quantity used in a dish. That gives a more useful ingredient-cost estimate. Avoid counting the same wastage twice when it has already reduced usable weight.
Keep units, quality grades and supplier names consistent. A change in pack size, or a switch between buying by the case and buying loose, can create an apparent price movement. A kitchen that already weighs and checks deliveries can start this record without a complex software system.
Recalculate each serving's contribution
Menu analysis needs both sales volume and the amount left from each sale. A practical starting point is meal revenue after refunds and restaurant-funded discounts, less ingredients, packaging, and order-linked platform and delivery costs. Do not deduct a fee again if it has already been subtracted from the starting revenue figure. The remainder contributes toward fixed expenses. It still has to cover rent and fixed staffing costs, so it is not net profit.
The same dish can contribute different amounts through dine-in and delivery orders. Who pays for a promotion also changes the outcome. Comparing the menu price only with food cost can therefore lead to the wrong choice of what to promote. For a popular signature dish, even a small cost change can accumulate across many orders.
Review high-volume dishes with weak contributions first. Check preparation waste, batch sizes and meal combinations before deciding whether a price change is necessary. Changes to serving specifications or ingredients should be clear to customers. Quietly reducing a portion can turn a cost problem into a trust problem.
Compare backup suppliers on total cost and reliability
Different purchasing arrangements can provide different degrees of resilience. Yet a small restaurant cannot simply copy a large buyer. Committing to volumes may require minimum purchases, advance payments or different settlement terms. Larger orders also tie up cash and cold-storage space. If demand falls short, spoilage may absorb the apparent saving.
A more practical step for a small operator is to qualify a second source for critical ingredients. Compare landed costs for the same grade alongside minimum orders, payment terms and delivery schedules. Whether a supplier arrives on time, and what happens when an item is unavailable, should be part of the comparison. Short-term savings must not compromise freshness or food safety.
Seasonal substitutions and menu changes also need kitchen trials. Flavour, preparation time and customer expectations must remain workable. A purchasing decision that looks economical on paper may still be difficult to deliver consistently during service.
Let the restaurant's own records guide the next move
Track comparable quotations, quantities received, waste, dish sales and contribution per serving for an initial one or two weeks. This is a practical observation window, not a prediction of when prices will fall. The aim is to distinguish a temporary supply disruption from a sustained increase in the restaurant's own cost base.
If quoted prices decline while cost per serving does not, investigate usable yield, delivery charges and over-ordering. If quotations are stable but contribution falls, examine promotions, order channels and the mix of dishes sold. This helps locate the problem in purchasing, preparation or sales.
WeyJet's view is that cost volatility tests how well a restaurant connects purchasing, its kitchen and its menu. News can indicate what to examine; the restaurant's own records should determine the response. These local interviews cannot establish nationwide food inflation or a profit trend for all restaurants.