Imagine the scene: you walk into a stylish city restaurant, order a salad with avocado, shrimp, and the chef’s dressing for 750 rubles, and then glance at the menu to find water priced at 800 rubles. It isn’t a dream in Moscow, it’s a real moment that invites a closer look. Why would a dish made with costly ingredients and skilled labor be priced alongside a bottle of water that seems merely abundant? Is the water in a fancy bottle imported from Italy simply because it looks premium, even if its taste isn’t always superior? And why import water from Europe when local options exist?
Let’s explore why some venues offer complimentary water while others charge what appears to be a premium for bottled water.
The first notable fact is that in many European dining standards, top restaurants must feature water from at least three different regions on their menus. It may not be widely known in Russia, yet the concept is echoed by many who travel and observe. What is the purpose behind this?
Many would agree that water simply tastes different. Tap water, natural springs, or filtered sources can taste clean yet distinct. Variations in minerals and salts create subtle flavors that please some guests and not others. Because of this, restaurants commonly present a range of water options. In some Western dining cultures there is even a profession devoted to water selection for the table. The water waiter helps the restaurant curate the best water lineup and guides guests with goals in mind, whether they want to refresh, accompany a meal, or aid digestion.
Some may find this concept odd at first glance, but it’s worth noting that the wine world once faced skepticism too. Over time, practices evolved, and so did appreciation for nuanced pairings.
For example, the AOC restaurant in Copenhagen offers four Scandinavian waters on the menu and even provides a tasting kit with six different flavors. In London, the Claridge’s hotel menu features more than 35 varieties of mineral water. When water is explored through the lens of expertise and flavor, paying for water in a restaurant begins to feel more reasonable to some diners.
Russia has plenty of its own wells, glaciers, and mountain rivers. So why import water from abroad? Some of the motive is about the ambience, the institution’s image, and the expectation some guests have when they dine out. It’s a matter of style and the guest experience, not merely a hydration task.
In many establishments, the expectation is that a menu should reflect the country of origin of its cuisine. Italian restaurants offering Italian beverages, for instance, meet an expectation held by many guests who value authenticity. This is not universal, but it aligns with how some guests judge a place. And for those who distrust filtered water, bottled water remains a preferred choice; shutting down that preference would alienate a portion of patrons.
From a business perspective, bottled water can be cost-effective for a restaurant. It requires no special equipment beyond transportation and storage, and it can help keep meal prices stable. As noted earlier, premium water is common, and 300–500 rubles for a glass of water is not unusual in some venues.
Still, there are arguments against paid water in eateries. Tap water is inexpensive, and a robust filtration system can deliver safe, quality drinking water to guests while reducing waste from bottles. Some modern restaurants adopt a zero-waste approach, investing in high-end filtration systems and phasing out bottled water altogether.
Tap water costs are a factor for any restaurant, but these costs can be incorporated into the overall meal price. Free water can boost guest satisfaction and loyalty. It’s easy to say this when not wearing the restaurant owner’s hat, but many successful venues do offer free water as part of the dining experience. Even a simple gesture like unlimited water with meals can feel worth it to guests who value basic conveniences.
The practical compromise is to offer a choice between free filtered water and paid bottled water. Diners decide what works for them. Some guests will continue to choose premium brands for personal preference, while others will opt for the free option. A middle-ground approach could be a fixed charge, for example 100 rubles, to provide unlimited water with the understanding that guests will still drink responsibly. The key is to ensure water remains a basic utility available to all guests, rather than a barrier to a comfortable dining experience.
In the end, the value lies in utility and accessibility. Water and restroom amenities should be readily available to guests as part of a respectful, hospitable dining environment. The discussion reflects a balance between practicality and status, a tension that many restaurants navigate every day.
Note: this analysis presents a perspective that may differ from editorial positions. It aims to illuminate how water choices intersect with culture, economics, and guest expectations in dining today.