People in their 20s and 30s are cutting back on their usual spending on eating out. But they are actually spending more on gourmet consumption connected to famous chefs. The NH Trend+ report published by NH NongHyup Bank introduced this trend. According to the article, the overall size of dining-out payments is showing a downward trend. But spending seen as a special experience, like chef restaurants or chef collaboration menus, stood out instead. The article and the report explain that spending is moving away from everyday eating out and toward one memorable meal. Behind this is the experience-focused spending style of young people. Even if they reduce regular spending, they still want to spend money on one meal that will stay in their memory. The article also explains that this is linked with demand for dupe consumption, where people want to enjoy the taste of famous chefs at relatively reasonable prices through franchise brands.
원문 보기Eating out decreased, so why did gourmet spending grow?
The key point of this news is not that 'young people suddenly started liking luxury.' It is actually closer to the opposite. It means spending is changing into a style where they reduce the eating-out budget they used often, and focus the budget only on one time they really want to keep in memory.
The reason is pretty clear. As dining-out prices went up, the cost of casually buying lunch and dinner became burdensome, so people started cutting back on everyday eating out. But that does not mean interest in food disappeared. For people in their 20s and 30s, food is no longer only about filling the stomach. It can also become content that shows personal taste, can be experienced together, and can be recorded.
If you understand this, you can see why news like 'the overall restaurant industry is slowing, but chef collaborations are a hit' comes out at the same time. It is not that the whole market is growing. Even within the same eating-out budget, money is being rearranged from ordinary meals to special experiences.
What is happening now is closer to spending reallocation than spending expansion.
Even if the number of times eating out decreases, one meal that feels meaningful can still cost more.
Everyday eating out and gourmet experiences are not the same kind of eating out
Both are ways of spending money on food, but if the purpose of spending is different, the way people accept the price also becomes completely different.
| Category | Everyday eating out | |
|---|---|---|
| Main purpose | Solving a meal and convenience | |
Gourmet experience spending Creating memories, personal taste, and things to talk about | ||
| Price sensitivity | Very high | |
| Place selection criteria | Value for money, distance, quick meal | |
| Actions that happen together | Eating alone, repeat visits, routine spending | |
| Consumer mindset | It should be less expensive | |
In numbers, the dining-out market is already splitting
If you line up the main indicators of 2024 in one row, you can see why ordinary dining out gets pressure first.
How did chefs become a consumer brand from a cook
To understand the current chef boom, you need to see when chefs started being used like a brand name, beyond just a job title.
Stage 1: Experts in hotel kitchens
Until the mid-2000s, chefs were mainly professionals working behind hotels or fine dining restaurants. Consumers remembered the food, but they did not think of the cook's face first.
Stage 2: The arrival of cable food programs
Between 2008 and 2012, as cooking shows increased, the chef's face, way of speaking, and character started to be seen by the public. From this time, not only skill but also 'the way they are shown' became important.
Stage 3: The golden age of cooking shows in 2014~2015
Programs like 'Please Take Care of My Refrigerator' and 'Baek Teacher's Home Food' made chefs like entertainment stars. In this period, the word 'cheftainer' spread, and chefs became known as both skilled people and content figures.
Stage 4: Expansion into ads and product packaging
Food and dining companies started putting chef names and faces on the front of products. Here, chefs began to work like a quality guarantee mark beyond being cooking experts.
Stage 5: The OTT and fandom era
In 2024, content like 'Culinary Class Wars' put chefs back at the center of big public attention. Now chefs do not stop inside restaurants. You can see them as platform IP that can expand to reservations, goods, collaboration menus, and HMR.
In each era, the role Korean consumers expected from chefs also changed
Even with the same word, 'chef,' the meaning consumers think of has changed over time.
| Period | Main image | |
|---|---|---|
| Mid-2000s | Hotel-trained expert | |
What consumers expected Skill, career, authenticity | ||
| 2014~2015 | TV star · daily life mentor | |
| 2020s | Platform IP · taste brand | |
If you understand dupe consumption, you can see why chef collaboration products work
These days, dupe consumption (Dupe) is different from fake copies that illegally copy an expensive original. It is closer to legal substitute consumption that lets people enjoy similar functions, image, and symbolism from the original at a lower price and with easier access.
When this idea comes into food, the structure becomes even clearer. To go directly to a famous chef restaurant, there are barriers like booking, distance, waiting, and price. But when burger chains, convenience stores, and meal kits release chef collaboration menus, consumers can lower those barriers a lot and still get the satisfaction of 'experiencing a taste made by a chef.'
So chef collaboration products are not just simple goods. They work more like a translated version of a premium fine dining experience. If you understand this, you can also see why the dupe idea, once used in fashion and beauty, is expanding into food, and why these products become more convincing when prices are high.
It is not copying the original exactly, but a way to buy the satisfaction of the original more easily.
How are fake goods, dupes, and chef collaboration products different?
If you mix these three together, the core of the trend becomes unclear. You need to separate the differences.
| Category | Fake goods | Dupe | Chef collaboration products |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legal nature | High possibility of trademark or design infringement | Legal substitute | Collaboration based on an official contract |
| Purpose of consumption | To look like the original | To get similar satisfaction at a lower price | To try a chef's experience through mass-market channels |
| Relationship with the original | Imitating the original | Referring to the original's function and image | Officially using the chef's IP |
| Satisfaction point | Similar appearance | Good value for money | Trust, buzz, and accessibility |
Chef collaborations do not explode only because of the name. They explode when combined with distribution power.
What matters here is not simply comparing one number. The key point is that success does not come from the chef's name alone, but from that name combining with the distribution power of mass-market channels to create real results.
According to research, hy's H1 meal kit saw sales increase by 30% as premium positioning and collaboration strategy worked together. Also, the Popeyes chicken sandwich case introduced by McKinsey showed that menu innovation can create about 400 thousand dollars in additional sales per store across the whole chain.
But these figures use different standards and units, so putting them side by side on one graph and comparing which is better can cause misunderstanding. So in this news story, it is more accurate to focus on the fact that many channels have already confirmed cases where collaboration effects led to actual sales and buying behavior.
hy case: 30% sales increase
Popeyes case: about 400 thousand dollars in additional sales per store
Because the units are different, it is better to look at the direction of the collaboration effect than to compare the size directly.
Why chef collaborations work especially well in burgers, convenience stores, and meal kits
The shared strength of these channels is the ability to translate the core of fine dining into the language of mass-market channels.
| Channel | Original strength | |
|---|---|---|
| Burger chain | Nationwide stores, fast purchase, familiar menu | |
Effect created when chef collaboration is added Try unfamiliar food ideas with a low risk cost | ||
| Convenience store | Instant access, small payments, habit buying | |
| HMR · meal kit | Can be recreated at home, built for repeat purchases | |
| Delivery platform partnership | Accessibility, easy search, regional expansion | |
In the dining-out market, the real competition is now at the two ends, not the middle
If you only look at people saying the dining-out market is shrinking, it may seem like everything is getting worse together, but in reality, each business type is moving in a completely different way.
| Category | Premium · experience dining | Low-cost · everyday dining | Mid-price dining |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reason for spending | Special experiences and self-expression | Solving a meal and feeling worth the money | A decent simple meal |
| Competitors | Other culture and leisure spending | Convenience stores, lunch boxes, easy-prep meals | Both sides |
| Good strategy | Story, rarity, branding | Low price, quantity, speed, convenience | Hard to win without differentiation |
| Current pressure | High-price fatigue during the economic slowdown | Rising costs and price sensitivity | The most awkward position |
The overall dining-out industry recovered, then slowed down again
If you look at the overall market flow, it becomes clearer why people say 'ordinary dining-out businesses are having a hard time.'
The chef boom is now entering a test of repeat purchases, not just buzz
Trends usually go through the same order. If you see where the chef collaboration market is now, the next news will be easier to understand too.
Stage 1: Buzz ignition
TV, OTT, and SNS turn chefs into stars and gather attention. Here, the name itself is a strong tool for bringing people in.
Stage 2: Expansion into mass channels
Franchises, convenience stores, and meal kits use chef IP and turn it into products on a large scale. This is the stage where interest changes into real purchases.
Stage 3: Flood of similar collaborations
When a success story appears, similar collaborations quickly increase. From this point, consumers start to feel, 'Another chef collaboration again.'
Stage 4: Fatigue and selection
Products that only borrow the name get filtered out right away, and products without convincing taste and price do not create repeat purchases.
Stage 5: Reorganization around repeat purchases
In the end, what lasts a long time is not the chef's fame, but the brand that creates a reason to buy and eat it again and again. Once it enters this stage, it becomes easier to tell whether the trend is a real structural change or not.
When fatigue comes, what makes the brands that survive different?
When you look at related news from now on, it is good to check the items below rather than simply asking, 'Who collaborated?'
| Item | Brands that survive | Brands that get pushed back first |
|---|---|---|
| Core dependency point | Consistent taste and a repeat purchase structure | The chef's name value |
| Brand story | It is possible to explain why they are doing this collaboration | Depends on one-time buzz |
| Distribution fit | They adapt the menu to fit the channel | Forces a copy of the restaurant menu |
| Price acceptability | Even if it is expensive, you can see the reason | Not enough felt quality compared to the name value |
| Long-term results | Repeat purchases and expansion are possible | Rapid cooldown after the first buzz |
So this news should be read not as 'chefs are rising' but as 'consumption is being rearranged'
Now if you look at this news again, the point is not just the popularity of a few famous chefs. The key is where spending goes down in a recession and where it gathers instead, and who turns that movement into products the best.
People in their 20s and 30s have not given up all dining out. They are reducing ordinary dining out and focusing their budget on meaningful experiences. Chef collaboration products go right into that gap. They translate the symbolism and expertise of expensive restaurants into lower prices and easier access.
So when you read similar news next time, you can look at it like this. First, does this product really sell a special experience more easily? Second, besides the chef's name, is there also a reason to buy again? Third, if you want to see whether this is a one-time trend, check whether it keeps selling for a long time in channels outside the restaurant. If you understand this much, news about the 'chef craze' will stop looking like a simple trend story and start looking like a clue to how the Korean consumer market is changing.
The key question is not 'who is famous' but 'what kind of spending is shrinking and what kind of spending survives.'
In the long run, it is not buzz but the repeat purchase structure that decides the winner.
We will tell you how to live in Korea
Please give lots of love to gltr life