UPDATED: Solomonov and Cook Out At Citron & Rose?


Yes, they are. And they’re taking their chef, Yehuda Sichel, with them.

Official word has just come down from the Cook/Solo camp, saying that they “have concluded [their] consulting arrangement with Citron and Rose,” and that Sichel–who has been chef de cuisine since before the place even opened to the public–will be headed back to Zahav (where he came from) “temporarily.”

So what does all this mean? We’re not sure yet. We know that Citron & Rose is staying open (despite losing its exec chef, chef de cuisine and partners), and that owner David Magerman is still in control. But really, that’s pretty much ALL we know at the moment. You can read the statement from Cook and Solomonov yourself after the jump.

“As of this past Monday, we have concluded our consulting arrangement with Citron and Rose.  Chef de Cuisine Yehuda Sichel will return temporarily to Zahav as we work on our next restaurant project.  Mike and I are extremely proud of what our amazing staff accomplished at Citron and Rose in such a short period of time.  It was gratifying to see a full restaurant every night that served kosher cuisine to a diverse clientele.  We are grateful to David Magerman for allowing us to put kosher dining in the spotlight.  We would also like to thank our Mashgiach Rob Kandler as well as Community Kashrus of Philadelphia for their wisdom, guidance and patience throughout our involvement.  We wish Citron and Rose continued success.”

Steve Cook and Michael Solomonov

UPDATE: Hot on the heels of the Cook/Solo statement comes another from Dave Magerman and the restaurant itself. It reads:

“Citron and Rose, and owner David Magerman, thank Michael Solomonov and Steven Cook for their tremendous help and culinary guidance though our opening. Their vision and expertise have fostered a successful beginning for the restaurant. Now it is time for Citron and Rose to continue expanding and building off of the solid brand they have helped us cultivate. Citron and Rose will continue to fulfill the mission of providing unique kosher cuisine and explore innovative avenues to reach more people across the Philadelphia region.”

Is it just me, or shouldn’t it have been a sign of potential trouble down the road when the chefs and “consultants” had one PR firm representing them (Profile PR), and the ownership had another (Cashman and Associates)?

UPDATE 2: Liz Spikol over at Property has more to add from David Magerman.

Citron & Rose [Official]

Around The Web

Be respectful of our online community and contribute to an engaging conversation. We reserve the right to ban impersonators and remove comments that contain personal attacks, threats, or profanity, or are flat-out offensive. By posting here, you are permitting Philadelphia magazine and Metro Corp. to edit and republish your comment in all media.

  • Lies

    That’s a good pr spin

  • JA

    Jason, this is one of Victor’s interviews with Michael S.:

    “You mentioned that you’re not technically owners. How does that work, and who owns the liquor license?

    We’re paid as consultants. We can’t own the restaurant because
    we own other non-kosher restaurant. And the owner [David Magerman] holds the liquor license”

    So perhaps, just perhaps that was the scenario the whole time.

    I’ll ask Mr. Magerman to consult with you in advance…that way you’re always in the know…or at least think you are!

    • barrygster

      The arrangement the whole time was to leave the restaurant suddenly and without notice, and pull the chef? Sure thing.

  • Tomaaas

    Basically reading between the lines:

    1.Cook-Solo awesome guys. Never at ANY point in the history of this place did they say they were “consultants” but now the “consulting” agreement is expired.

    2.Assuming that was even plausible consultants depart with their chef prior to a replacement being found. (BS)

    3. Magerman represented by Nicole Cashman. Cook-Solo represented by Clare Pelino. No love lost between those PR Firms.

    4.Overcompensatory remarks from both camps about the divorce clearly written by said publicists.
    If both camps actually felt that way about each other they would be working together still.

    One can only conclude:
    Irreconcilable differences in the direction of the restaurant and or business agreement leading to a forced separation with everyone trying to put a good spin on it.

    Philly restaurant drama is so comically handled.

    Look on the bright side it is not as bad as the Abrahms = Le Bec Divorce proceedings.