Another Hooters for Osaka

Strictly on a point of grammar, shouldn't that be:

'More Hooters for Osaka'?

Certainly makes me want to hoot!

Hey thats near my work. goodbye salary!

Third from right, back row.

Yummy.....buffalo wings

Is it just ME that notices only four of them are actually LOOKING at the Camera ?

Is it just ME that notices only four of them are actually LOOKING at the Camera ?

If it's like most publicity deals, there are about five or six photographers all trying to get them to look their way. I'm not surprised it appears they're looking in different directions.

Is it just ME that notices only four of them are actually LOOKING at the Camera ?

I noticed it as well. I just assumed it was a photo op and that there were other photographers taking photos from different spots at the same time.

Just what Osaka needs!

The trainers are the four in the black tank tops, right?

Healthy looking ladies. Bet they don't eat at Hooters.

Are there any Japanese here?

I went to the one in Ginza. The place was just OK for me, but they do seem to get a lot of business.

I dunno, they look kinda... what's a good word?

Anyway, not my cup a exciting.

I'm there at some point. But seriously... the whole 'little' erect-like thing on their money pouch is a bit gratuitous.

If anyone actually reads this far...

Strictly on a point of grammar, shouldn't that be 'More Hooters for Osaka'?

If the meaning is Hooters (a proper noun and the name of the business which is singular) another is correct. If the meaning is hooters (a slang expression, a noun referring to female body parts in the plural as there are usually two per person) then more would be correct. Many points of grammar depend on usage in this way. Therefore; the headline is correct.

Yum yum! I'll have the (chicken) breast and thighs.

Therefore; the headline is correct.....

Ah yes, but we'd rather be incorrect when it comes to Hooters, eh?

I'm there at some point. But seriously... the whole 'little' erect-like thing on their money pouch is a bit gratuitous.

That "erect-like thing" on the pouch to the right is just the pen they use to write down the orders. The one on the left is just the pouch rotated 90 degrees counter-clockwise, so the "erect-like thing" is actually the word "HOOTERS" printed on the pouch.

More devaluation of women. Notice lots of references here in Comments to "girls"...but, have at it, guys. Sad.

Sad.

It is possible to both respect a person and admire their attractiveness. Why should that be a sad thing. If this were a photo of a group of male waiters and people wrote 'boys', which they often do, would you similarly find it sad? Why the unnecessary double standard?

Fadamor: "That "erect-like thing" on the pouch to the right is just the pen they use to write down the orders. The one on the left is just the pouch rotated 90 degrees counter-clockwise, so the "erect-like thing" is actually the word "HOOTERS" printed on the pouch."

Forgive me, and thanks for the explanation. I'm still a Hooter's virgin with thoughts in the gutter.

In this world there are two types of men: those that visited Hooters at least once, and those that did not (yet).