The decline of New York's retail diversity?

[antinimby]

I've read many people here complain about how the pharmacies, bank branches, Starbucks and other generic retailers have really displaced many mom and pop businesses.

Well, I thought we should have a thread documenting this on-going phenomenon.

I'll start off with the Second Ave. deli, which according to the photos below is shuttered for a rumored Chase bank branch.


http://eater.curbed.com/archives/2006_01_2ndavedeli3-thumb.jpg
http://www.eater.com/archives/2006/01/second_avenue_k_1.php

http://eater.curbed.com/archives/2006_01_2ndavedeli7-thumb.jpg
http://www.eater.com/archives/2006/01/second_avenue_k_1.php

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/91/275655338_4cf756cddf.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=275655338&size=m

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/161/331298711_b242e7d47c.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=331298711&size=m

[lofter1]

Take a walk up sixth Avenue above 23rd Street -- after a few blocks your eyes will glaze over. Banks, nail salons and drugstores -- with not a thing of interest to see in or around their windows.

[Punzie]

Competition is killing independent U.S. bookstores

By Mark Porter
12/27/06

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Empty shelves line a back wall of Coliseum Books in midtown Manhattan and a few customers flip through the remaining stock for bargains.

Since the early 1990s the number of independent bookstores in the United States has halved to about 2,500, according to a report in The New York Times.

Coliseum owner George Leibson said that while a lot of people were coming into the store to browse, they were not buying. Coliseum has spent the past four years on 42nd Street after moving from its home on 57th Street.
"We searched high and low for a high-traffic area, but it hasn't worked out," he said. "Chain-store sales and the Internet are far more practical. People will go to places closer to them. Places like Barnes & Noble."

Leibson also said that -- like the toy industry -- discounters such as Wal-Mart and Target have taken a big bite out of the bottom line of independent booksellers.

Maryann Wlock, a business manager, was a loyal customer of Coliseum when the store was located at 57th Street.

"I did all my shopping at Coliseum. But I never went to the new one on 42nd Street," she said. "I am loyal to Borders in the Time Life Building -- I get some great coupons and also get a credit based upon the money I spend with them each month."

Kate Bearce is closing her bookstore, Main Street Books, in Pella, Iowa, after 12 years of business.

"We have a Wal-Mart supercenter opening nearby soon. ... The Internet certainly takes a lot of sales" also, she said.

According to the most recent figures from the U.S. Bureau of the Census, retail sales at bookstores -- independent and chain stores -- were below 2005 levels in October for the fourth month in a row. At the end of October retail sales were down 1.8 percent for the year.

Bearce said the U.S. consumer needed to be educated about the importance of small businesses in the local economy. She said the customer will ultimately lose.

"Customer service is not the same. When somebody walks in this store I know them, their kids, their parents, their grandparents. I put books in their hands. That's what my customers really like," she said.

"I have many customers that tell me, 'If I send my kids to you, I know you will provide them with appropriate titles,"' said Bearce, adding that that kind of service cannot be duplicated at the bigger bookstores and discount outlets.

Deb Andolino, who is shutting Aliens & Alibis in Columbia, South Carolina, said lesser-known authors would suffer from the closures.

"If there's no one to recommend them to customers, they may not get their next book. And there's some really, really good mid-list authors out there," he said.

In New York, the closure of Coliseum has upset loyal customers.

"It's sad to see these little bookstores disappearing. I'm sorry to see it go. I used to go when it was on the West Side. ... I'm not happy," said a woman, who declined to give her name, as she searched for a bargain.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061227/us_nm/usa_bookstores_dc_2


This bookstore had a definite character, and I gathered a few online pics to pay tribute:



http://www.kenilworthchessclub.org/images/general/nyc/coliseum.jpg



http://whatisee.org/mt/archives/images/coliseum-1.jpg



http://images.yelp.com/bphoto/RMKGNmlfmIl4iSXgbc26cQ/l


http://www.secretsofmarriedmen.com/images/ColBooks2_450w.jpg
Lecture/Book Signing on January 25, 2006

[ZippyTheChimp]

http://img288.imageshack.us/img288/1267/cookbooks018np.th.jpg (http://img288.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cookbooks018np.jpg)

Greenwich St, north of Canal. Same block as 497, 505 Greenwich; around the corner from the Glass House, Zinc.

Hope they own the building.

[pianoman11686]

National chains transform Manhattan's most trafficked corridors

By Vanessa Weiman

Jason Pennington of Butler Kane sees national retailers changing the makeup of Manhattan thoroughfares like 34th Street. Even entire crowds can go upscale. While Manhattan's most popular shopping streets, like 34th Street and 14th Street, continue to attract throngs, they are also gradually expanding or transforming themselves, while other areas are now beginning to come into their own as shopping districts.

On an informal list of the top 10 most-trafficked retail intersections put together by brokerage Newmark Knight Frank, 34th Street and Seventh Avenue came in first. The Business Improvement District for the area recorded upwards of 9,000 people per hour coming and going at peak times. (By contrast, 42nd and Fifth Avenue, which is ranked eighth on the list, has 6,600 pedestrians per hour at peak hours.)

The criteria used for the Newmark list include Business Improvement District pedestrian counts as well as some counts done by the brokerage firm, the MTA's periodic counts of subway stop usage, and Newmark's tracking of sales per square foot of retailers throughout the city.

"When I think of the most trafficked retail areas of the city, I think of most of the two-way streets. Going downtown to uptown: 14th Street, some of 23rd Street, 34th Street, 86th Street and 125th Street," says Jason Pennington, director of Butler Kane Inc. All of these streets are still major contenders in the retail arena, Pennington says, but the makeup of the streets is changing.

"Eighty-sixth, 34th and 14th streets used to be very similar in a lot of ways, but now with national retailers coming in, things are a little different," he said.

The opening of Trader Joe's on 14th Street near Third Avenue this past year, for example, has changed where people shop in that area. "It brings people farther east than before," Pennington says. Other national chains that have appeared on 14th Street, such as Whole Foods and DSW, have also made 14th Street more of a draw for shoppers. As the street evolves, many of the smaller retailers that have long been part of the street's discount stores -- selling luggage, batteries and sneakers, often all in one space -- may have to leave as their leases come up in the next year or so, leaving landlords to entice higher-paying tenants into the spaces, Pennington says.

Large national chains that have opened on 34th Street, such as H & M and American Eagle Outfitters, have also forced some smaller stores to parts of the block that are less costly. "Some local stores, like T-shirt shops, are slowly being pushed to lower-rent parts of those streets, farther west or farther east," Pennington says.

However, larger stores on main streets also attract the presence of smaller stores that want to pick up their traffic.

"Accessories and clothing stores want to be on 34th, 86th, or 57th if they can afford it," says Pennington. "Both handbag boutiques and costume jewelry people want to be close to big stores; they can't be too far off by themselves."

86-ing weekends

One street that seems to be expanding its retail reach is 86th Street, ranked ninth on Newmark Knight Frank's list.

"We were always aware that 86th between Lexington and Third was a true nucleus of traffic, but at one point it was a five-day-a-week location. Then, about five or six years ago, retailers really started to understand the importance of the corridor and thought, 'We're sitting in the midst of lots of residential property,' so it evolved to a seven-day-a-week location," says Fred Posniak, senior vice president of W & M Properties.

Extell Development Corporation recently cleared a site for an apartment complex with stores on the ground floor on the southeast corner of 86th and Lexington, and the retail space is already spoken for.

"Barnes & Noble and H & M pre-leased space there before they put a shovel to the ground," according to Posniak.

In a transaction reported in last month's issue of The Real Deal, one of W & M's own 86th Street properties has a tenant who is so pleased with the location that they opened a second store across the street from their first.

"We reached out to one of our retailers -- Sprint -- a year in advance of their lease expiration," says Posniak, "and now they have a second location across the street at $400 a square foot," a record rent for East 86th Street, according to brokers.

Breaking down the Wall

One area of the city that is not on Newmark Knight Frank's top 10 list but which is garnering a lot of attention from retail brokerages as the next big shopping area is the Financial District.

"Wall Street gets 16,000 people an hour," says Darrell Rubens, managing director at Winick Realty.

While that kind of traffic would zoom it onto the top 10 list, numbers vary on pedestrian counts for Downtown. The Downtown Alliance offered the count of 120,000 people for the day at the corner of Broad and Wall, with 4,400 people at the peak lunch hour.

While the Financial District is typically perceived as dead on weekends, that is changing.

"I don't think people understand that Wall Street is that busy and it's getting busier every day, and every subway line converges down there," says Rubens.

Until fairly recently, Wall Street was not considered a place to look for a residence, much less to shop, but now luxury retailers such as Tiffany & Co. and Hermès are moving Downtown.

"Retailers who were neighbors on 57th and Fifth are running Downtown. Lots of retailers want to get a good deal and be next to Tiffany's and Hermès," Rubens says.

Retail rents Downtown are also appealing compared to other areas of the city, though prices are starting to go up.

"As a place to do retail, it's even a little late now because the prices are going up, but the prices are still so much more reasonable than other places in the city," says Cheryl Cohen, vice president of Mogull Realty. "I'm currently negotiating a deal there for under $80 a square foot."

Cohen adds that while prices are comparatively low, retail space can be very hard to find in the Wall Street area. "You have to dig for it," she says.

The great retail way

There is one street that brokers agree is always reliable for retailers: Broadway.

It is also the street that lands most often on Newmark's top 10 list: 34th and Broadway finished in second place, 42nd and Broadway in third, Broadway and Canal in fourth, and 14th and Broadway in seventh.

"The best street in my estimation is Broadway, from Washington Heights all the way down to the Battery," says Cohen. "Broadway has everybody."

Manhattan's busiest retail intersections

1. 34th Street at Seventh Avenue

2. 34th Street at Broadway

3. Broadway at 42nd Street

4. Broadway at Canal Street

5. Lexington at 59th Street

6. 57th Street at Fifth Avenue

7. 14th Street at Broadway (Union Square)

8. 42nd Street at Fifth Avenue

9. 86th Street at Lexington Avenue

10. Columbus Circle at 59th Street

Source: Newmark Knight Frank

Copyright © 2003-2005 The Real Deal.

[MikeW]

I think this is pretty much inevitable. For a long time, national retailers were scared of NYC (the high rents, the crime, the logistical difficulties, the high taxes, the regulation, the unions, etc). But a few tried, and made money. Now their all coming.

They have big advantages of scale over the locals. Add to this the fact that landlords love national credit tenants (they make the property more saleable). The final factor is probably the internet. If the nationals moving in didn't ding the locals enough, the internet is just piling on. The woman who sits next to me at work did all her xmas shopping on line, and she's far from unique.

Get used to dealing with the chains. There not only here to stay, but will likely keep squeezing out the locals.

[gradvmedusa]

P&G Bar on the UWS is being replaced by a bank.

[Fahzee]

wait - has that been confirmed?

[ryan]

how many bank branches can one city need?

[macreator]

how many bank branches can one city need?

It's cyclical. During the boom of the late 90's I remember banks rushing to shutter their bank branches in order to focus on their lucrative commercial banking customers.

Also, inevitably a lot of the recent banks that have been popping up (Valley Savings, etc.) and some older banks (North Fork) will be bought out or merge and the redundant bank branches will be shuttered. An example will be when most of the Bank of New York branches close by the end of the year now that BONY's retail divison has been bought out by Chase.

[MrSpice]

how many bank branches can one city need?

As many as banks feel it needs. After all, they paying for it in full. We should not forget that those bank branches high-paying jobs as well.

[MidtownGuy]

Bullocks! they SUCK! We don't need anymore!!

[lofter1]

We should not forget that those bank branches high-paying jobs as well.

What's the pay scale for a teller? At my branch they seem to turn over by the quarter.

[ryan]

From Salary.com (http://swz.salary.com/salarywizard/layoutscripts/swzl_localrangebell.asp?jobtitle=Teller+I&metrocode=119&geo=New+York%2C+NY+10022&narrowcode=FA02&zipcode=10022&r=salswz_swzmatbll_psr&yearsofexp=&jobcode=FA06000465&narrowdesc=Banking&wsrcode=SW1&isswzupdateoptin=&isjswupdateoptin=&isnewsoptin=&choosesignup=0)

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/133/351860281_11b4200f53_o.jpg

woo hoo!

To beat a dead horse, publicly-held corporations extract profits from a community and send them to shareholders. Locally-owned businesses spend their profits locally.

[gradvmedusa]

wait - has that been confirmed?

They are currently trying to hold on to their lease...but it's not likely to happen. At least that's what the bar-tenders were saying when I was there. They have Save the P&G Flyers inside. So while not OFFICIAL official...it's pretty much grapevine confirmed.

[Eugenious]

From Salary.com (http://swz.salary.com/salarywizard/layoutscripts/swzl_localrangebell.asp?jobtitle=Teller+I&metrocode=119&geo=New+York%2C+NY+10022&narrowcode=FA02&zipcode=10022&r=salswz_swzmatbll_psr&yearsofexp=&jobcode=FA06000465&narrowdesc=Banking&wsrcode=SW1&isswzupdateoptin=&isjswupdateoptin=&isnewsoptin=&choosesignup=0)


woo hoo!

To beat a dead horse, publicly-held corporations extract profits from a community and send them to shareholders. Locally-owned businesses spend their profits locally.


that's such crap it's not even funny,

most small business extract the same profits which goes straight into the owners pockets without any benefit.

I worked for a small paper distributor a few years ago and the guy basically milked the business for all it's worth. He didn't hire illegals but he paid bare minimum salaries, paid in cash of course which is why he could find workers. He offered no health insurance or any kinds of benefits, the business was worth many millions of dollars a year in profits but it all went into his pocket and his workers got nothing while he built houses in other states. He gave money to charities but only to claim the deductions on his tax returns. The working conditions were horrendous but he got away with it because he was a "small guy" trying to make a living.

My ass. There are more businesses in New York than ever, even though many may be chains or franchises etc. They are better run and more efficient .

I have a friend who works for one of the top restaurants in the city, he works insane hours usually 10-11 hrs a day, he is called when needed has NO benefits, has NO bonus or any other security. He works in a cramp kitchen with illegal mexicans and makes barely enough to survive. And this is a very popular restaurant that makes tons of money for the owner who has a few other restaurants in manhattan. the owner drives a Porsche and lives in a million $ condo while his workers are worked to exhaustion. yes I know Manhattan restaurant market is not easy but this is ridiculous when there's so much money thats just going straight into the owners pocket.

[Ninjahedge]

The very thing that makes a neighborhood attractive eventually brings in what made people run from similar areas.

Some places, like the village, will not suffer as much as midtown, but you still see instances where places (like the Blind Tiger) have problems being moved out by boutiques and then have further problems re-opening because of, in utmost irony, local resident resistance.

Everyone wants a bar on the corner and a retail boutique downstairs, noone wants the bar to be downstairs.

But, people do not want the bars and restaurants to dissapear, and that is what is happening.

Hoboken would be a good example in miniature of what is going to happen to the smaller areas in Manhattan. We have more real estate offices, cell phone stores, and banks than any other store in the town. Hell, I think they even outnumber the bars and restaurants!!! (Or pretty close).

Example:

BoA
Chase
Citibank
North Fork
Commerce Bank
Wachovia
Washington Mutual
PNC Bank
Havens Savings
HSBC
Hudson City Savings
Sovereign Bank
TD Banknorth
The Provident
Valley National


And some have multiple locations!!!

All in a town that measures less than a mile square!

The independent record stores are moving out, we have few places to find bands that play something besides cover music, and the town is trying to find that niche that brings the people out that are willing to spend boku bucks without scaring them into Manhattan proper.

Although much of the taste of Hoboken was sour to begin with, it is turning vanilla in the process.

I see the same for Manhattan, but on a much larger scale. No more rotting food at the bottom, but no more "genuine" italian Pizza either...

[ryan]

Sure it's distasteful to see capitalism on an individual level, but corporations are hardly charitable. All that efficiency just creates liquid profits that go elsewhere. I doubt that more corporations would help improve worker conditions on a city-wide scale.

[lofter1]

And I propose a dip in the dunking chair for the design-idiot who came up with the new CHASE signs that are popping up all over the place (I saw one branch on Park Avenue South near 28th that had about 4 spread across the facade :mad: ) ...

The logo is now a three dimensional plastic blob in a Miami-blue tone -- all soft and oogy looking instead of strong and basic as it was before :confused:

[antinimby]

From curbed.com today:

63rd and Broadway
http://www.curbed.com/2007_01_bucksuws.jpg

Anyone willing to bet the boarded-up space next door won't be a either chain or a bank?

[MidtownGuy]

^^ Of course it will be. Makes me furious and full of despair for the future

[Ninjahedge]

Sure it's distasteful to see capitalism on an individual level, but corporations are hardly charitable. All that efficiency just creates liquid profits that go elsewhere. I doubt that more corporations would help improve worker conditions on a city-wide scale.

Oh, add to it the commercials about Wal-Maaart somehow "saving" the average consumer $2600 a year and STRONGLY implying that thi sis saving the community money.

As well as "providing" jobs for areas w/o jobs and insurance for as little as $1 a day.

I hat those commercials. They do not tell of the low wages, profiteering, and eligability for things like insurance, but they are VERY quick to point out these "good" things with a friendly homey sounding annoucer talking while pictures of smiling kids and happy families play in the background.

Feh.

[lofter1]

Another bank branch takes a prime spot ...

2nd Avenue Deli Update #2:
Hello, Chase Bank

curbed.com (http://www.curbed.com/archives/2007/01/10/2nd_avenue_deli_update_2_hello_chase_bank.php)
January 10, 2007
by Scott

http://www.curbed.com/2007_01_2ndavedeli-thumb.JPG


The 2nd Avenue Deli saga has entered its final stages. After the recent plywooding (http://www.curbed.com/archives/2006/12/26/2nd_avenue_deli_update_plywood_confirmed.php), we knew the new tenant would soon reveal itself. And lo, a tipster emails: Walked by the 2nd Avenue Deli Space this am and it is official: Chase bank is on its way! There are big posters announcing their imminent appearance. Obviously, this branch is for the people too lazy to walk to the Chase at the Gwathmey building on Astor Place or the branch on Broadway and 9th Street. I'm sure the North Fork branch right across the street will be happy to have some competition!

[MrSpice]

I noticed that Chase has been very aggressive in the city lately. I see Chase branches opening everywhere.

[MidtownGuy]

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[antinimby]

Coffee battle brews in city
Dunkin' Donuts aims to tap Starbucks' upscale customers by opening shops near offices


By: Elisabeth Butler
Published: December 31, 2006 (http://www.newyorkbusiness.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061231/SUB/61230011/1009) - 6:59 am

Dunkin' Donuts, a fast-food chain that has long appealed to construction workers and taxi drivers, is trying to put more of its signature pink and white coffee cups into the manicured hands of office workers.

As part of the expansion plan it launched last year, Dunkin' Donuts aims to challenge Starbucks' white-collar popularity by opening more stores in Manhattan's office buildings and near tourist attractions such as Rockefeller Center and Times Square. To help secure some of those coveted sites, Dunkin' Donuts has introduced a more upscale store model, complete with granite countertops and wallpaper sporting its new logo. Starbucks, the city's biggest coffee chain, is brewing its own expansion plan to fight back.

"Our thing is getting into more high-end buildings," says Steve Menexas, one of the city's dozen Dunkin' Donuts franchisees. "We want people to see that we're not just about cheap coffee," he says.

Though Dunkin' Donuts' corporate officers did not return calls for comment, an insider familiar with the company's managerial decisions says that executives don't want to turn the doughnut emporium into Starbucks. Rather, they are trying to freshen up the stores to attract a wider variety of customers without irking their working-class devotees.

However, the company did start offering holiday drinks just like Starbucks'.

Dunkin' Donuts shops began multiplying in New York a couple of years ago, as the company made the city a priority in its growth strategy. Today, Manhattan has 90 stores, up from about 30 four years ago. The company aims to open at least 100 more stores within the next few years.

Franchisees drive growth

Individual franchisees are driving the growth. As one of the largest franchisees, Mr. Menexas and his three partners plan to open six or seven stores annually for the next 10 years. They currently operate 11 stores in their territory on the East Side of Manhattan, between Houston and 57th streets. Their 12th store, slated to open at 243 Third Ave. early this month, will feature the new look.

Mr. Menexas says all of his shops are profitable, but his top performer by far is in the Citigroup Center at 153 E. 53rd St. Despite having three Starbucks stores close by, it gets tons of traffic from office workers and the nearby subway entrance. Franchisees like Mr. Menexas are seeking other promising locations.

But most midtown landlords, like many of the workers in their office towers, prefer Starbuck's tall soy lattes to Dunkin' Donuts' box of joe. The Seattle-based company provides much stronger credit than the individuals who operate Dunkin' Donuts.

"A landlord would choose a Starbucks over a Dunkin' Donuts anytime," says Ariel Schuster, a broker at Robert K. Futterman & Associates, which has made deals for both Dunkin' Donuts and Starbucks. "The landlord can sleep for the next 10 years, knowing that the lease is guaranteed." Banks are another worthy rival in the real estate wars.

Starbucks representatives did not return calls for comment, but industry sources say the company is planning to roll out more Manhattan stores in response to Dunkin' Donuts' barrage. It also started offering breakfast sandwiches to compete with Dunkin' Donuts' morning meals. Starbucks opened its first New York City store in 1994 and today operates nearly 200 locations in Manhattan.

True blue to Starbucks

Now that Starbucks is firmly entrenched in New York's daily life, some blue-collar workers have become loyal to the brand. "It's clean, and the service is excellent," says Lou Kaziu, a construction worker who visits Starbucks at least three times a day to get his quadruple-shot espresso fix.

Others are die-hard Dunkin' fans. "If there's a Starbucks and a Dunkin' Donuts right next to each other, I'll go to Dunkin'," says Joe Pollini, who bought coffee for himself and a buddy while working in Brooklyn Heights last week. "It's not quite as expensive, and the coffee is comparable."

As Dunkin' Donuts continues filling the holes between Starbucks locations in Manhattan, the Canton, Mass.-based company is trying to spiff up its image across the country. A new advertising campaign, "America Runs on Dunkin'," and a recent partnership with the cheap and trendy JetBlue have helped raise the company's profile. "They are going for convenience and accessibility," says Clark Wolf, a restaurant industry consultant based in Manhattan.

© 2007 Crain Communications, Inc.

[antinimby]

Commerce vs. Chase vs. Citibank vs. HSBC vs. Bank of America vs. Wachovia vs ...

Starbucks vs. Dunkin Donuts

Duane Reade vs. CVS vs. RiteAid

While the big corporate chains fight it out, we lose our identity and uniqueness. :(

[macreator]

We're caught in the middle of all of these retail wars.

[Ninjahedge]

There are already enough SB's in the city. I do not know how they can get more w/o displacing a lot more. And they risk oversaturation at this point.

As for DD... They stopped beaing "cheap" years ago. Also, over franchising has made it so that you can never tell what you are going to get there anymore. USed to be a 15 minute coffee rule, but now a pot ould be sitting there for an hour...

Also, they are trying to over-expand their offerings. DD should not be serving egg sandwiches and smoothies! Just like ShopRite should not be selling TV's and Videos...

Unfortunately, they will all expand, displace the local buisness, one will win, consolidate their resources and leave a lot of empty shop space.

Not that we need another all-in-one "discount" electronics store, but seeing some of these smaller places go is a shame.

If I wanted a bank, a starbucks, a Gap and a TGI Fridays I would just move to the suburbs.

[lofter1]

Or you could just move to the new stretch of 6th Avenue in Chelsea :p

[MidtownGuy]

I miss the flower shops and flea markets on Sixth. I miss so many things that used to make this city great. I'm contemplating a move, perhaps to Europe. For artists this city is becoming a dead zone. Do I really want to stick around for 100 more Dunkin Donuts and 100 more Starbucks? And the bank branches, well that's just becoming infuriating.
A walk down any street is now a cause for depression, I'm prematurely sounding like a grandfather, always turning to a friend, pointing and saying, "gee, I remember when that was a..."
You know change can be a great thing, but this is the rapid death of a culture, summarily obliterated by the surrounding barbarians. The natives take their last gasp and kiss their world goodbye.

[Eugenious]

I miss the flower shops and flea markets on Sixth. I miss so many things that used to make this city great. I'm contemplating a move, perhaps to Europe. For artists this city is becoming a dead zone. Do I really want to stick around for 100 more Dunkin Donuts and 100 more Starbucks? And the bank branches, well that's just becoming infuriating.
A walk down any street is now a cause for depression, I'm prematurely sounding like a grandfather, always turning to a friend, pointing and saying, "gee, I remember when that was a..."
You know change can be a great thing, but this is the rapid death of a culture, summarily obliterated by the surrounding barbarians. The natives take their last gasp and kiss their world goodbye.


This is such utter bull@#$. First of all go to Brooklyn for all the flower shops and flea markets you can handle. Brooklyn is a boom town right now, you walk through any neighborhood south of Prospect Park or Williamsburg or even Bay Ridge and you will see tons of non-chain shops and stores.

Brooklyn is the new cultural center of NYC that is going to be more diverse and more exciting than Manhattan ever was.

Brooklyn is small business heaven.

[lofter1]

A walk down any street is now a cause for depression, I'm prematurely sounding like a grandfather, always turning to a friend, pointing and saying, "gee, I remember when that was a..."

You and me both (although methinks you're a tad too young to be feeling this way ;) ).

Paul Theroux terms it "fogeydom" ...

America the overfull

New York Times
Paul Theroux
December 31, 2006

OPINION

HALEIWA, Hawaii -- American crowing is harmless enough, but the announcement this year that the U.S. population had reached 300 million, had (to my ear) the unmistakable growl of a boast. It was as though the colossal agglomeration of people amounted to another great score in our love affair with bigness.

The news gave me no pleasure. I just felt sad, while at the same time hating my wistful mood. Fogeydom is the last bastion of the bore and reminiscence is its anthem. As William Burroughs noted, in the 1950s, "What I want for dinner is a bass fished in Lake Huron in 1920."

It is futile to want the old days back, but that doesn't mean one should ignore the lessons of the visitable past -- say, when there were half that number of people in the country. In some important ways life really was better then because of it. The overcrowded, much noisier, more hectic, intensely urbanized and vertical world of the present can seem hostile and hallucinatory to anyone who knew America in a simpler form.

In my lifetime the population has doubled. I'm glad I grew up when the number of Americans was so much smaller. How does one explain to anyone under 50, or to the grateful unfazed immigrant from an overpopulated nation, that this was once a country of enormous silence and ordinariness -- empty spaces not just in the Midwest and the rural South but in the outer suburbs of New England, like the one I grew up in, citified on one margin and thinning to woods on the other. That roomier and simpler America shaped me by giving me and others of my generation a love for space and a taste for solitude.

Talking fondly, and sadly, of the past, it is impossible to avoid the elegiac tone of Edmund Gosse in "Father and Son." In this, one of my favorite books, Gosse recalls the richness and beauty of the English shores of his youth, and the rock pools he had delved into with his father, who was a naturalist (and a crank). Gosse writes of "the soft and radiant forms, sea anemones, seaweeds, shells, fishes, which had inhabited them, undisturbed since the creation of the world," and then speaks of their violation by collectors: "There is nothing, now, where in our days there was so much." Fifty years before, "on the coast of Devonshire and Cornwall, where the limestone at the water's edge is wrought into crevices and hollows, the tide line was, like Keats' Grecian vase, 'a still unravished bride of quietness.'"

Even in its heyday, Medford, Mass., was never compared to a Grecian urn. But it is impossible for me not to feel a sense of grief when I reflect on how my part of Webster Street -- the house footprint, indeed the whole block where I was born -- is now buried under Interstate 93. Before that road was put through and Medford Square was still important, the Mystic River linked us to the world, and High Street rejoiced in the same sinuous contours it had in April 1775, when Paul Revere rode down it at midnight, warning of the British attack.

I grew up in a country of sudden and consoling lulls, which gave life a kind of pattern and punctuation, unknown now. It was typified by the somnolence of Sundays, when no stores were open.

There were empty parts of the day, of the week, of the year; times when there were no people on the sidewalks, no traffic in the streets, no audible human voices, now and then no sound at all. In this hushed world, a bumblebee was a physical presence, the sound of a cicada could dominate an August afternoon.

Nowhere was solitude more available than on a long drive, especially at night; and it seems to me that my generation was defined by the open road, and the accompanying hope that a promise lay at the end of it. The almost trance-like experience of driving down the soft tunnel of a dark highway at night was something I relished. At most, there would be the distant red lights of a car far ahead, and always the murmur of the glowing radio, the hiss of the tires and, at a certain speed on narrower roads, the fizzing past of telephone poles with their rhythmic whiplash.

Late at night, in most places I knew, there was almost no traffic and driving, a meditative activity, could cast a spell.

Behind the wheel, gliding along, I was keenly aware of being an American in America, on a road that was also metaphorical, making my way through life, unhindered, developing ideas, making decisions, liberated by the flight through this darkness and silence. With less light pollution, the night sky was different, too -- starrier, more daunting, more beautiful.

I have not seen roads or night skies like that for many years.

As Gosse said about the ring of living beauty of the English shore, "All this is long over and done with."

A longing for a simpler world, for a glimpse of the past, is one of the motives in travel. But the rest of the world has fared no better in terms of population pressure, and in many places it is much worse, even catastrophic. The population of Malawi 40 years ago was small and sustainable. None of us Peace Corps volunteers there at that time thought in terms of rescuing the country but only of helping to improve it. Now Malawi can't feed itself; it's one of the many countries that people wish to flee, renowned for being hopeless, unjustly publicized as an enormous orphanage of desperate tots, needing to be saved, devoid of pride, lost without us. The notion that a pop singer (back then it would have been Elvis) would breeze through and scoop up a child in a condescending gesture of rescue was unthinkable then.

In India a few months ago, as I was leaving my hotel in Chennai, I noticed a hotel employee shadowing me. He warned me that the sidewalks were so packed with people I would be swallowed up and stifled. He was right. And I was unable to cross the main street in Bangalore, a leafy city of under a million people in 1973 and now a hectically improvised sprawl of seven million. Mumbai's population of nearly 20 million rivals that of Sao Paulo, Brazil, and Lagos, Nigeria -- nightmare cities.

Travel, except in almost inaccessible places, is no longer the answer to finding solitude. And this contraction of space on a shrinking planet suggests a time, not far off, when there will be no remoteness: nowhere to become lost, nothing to be discovered, no escape, no palpable concept of distance, no peculiarity of dress -- frightening thoughts for a traveler.

Yet some of the most populous countries manage to be habitable because they are societies with strict, and civilized, codes of conduct. India, China and Japan are convenient examples, but I would include many African and Middle Eastern countries, too. The vindictive stereotype of the Muslim as a xenophobe does not tally with my experience of wandering in the Muslim world, where I have been treated hospitably, welcomed by strangers as "dayf al Rahman," a guest of the Merciful One.

We are passing through a confused period of aggression and fear, characterized by our confrontational government, the decline of diplomacy, a pugnacious foreign policy and a settled belief that the surest way to get people to tell the truth is to torture them.

(And by the way, "water boarding" was a torture technique at the worst of the Khmer Rouge prisons.) It is no wonder we have begun to squint at strangers. This is a corrosive situation in a country where more and more people, most of them strangers, are a feature of daily life. Americans as a people I believe to be easygoing, compassionate, not looking for a fight. But surely I am not the only one who has noticed that we are ruder, more offhand, readier to take offense, a nation of shouters and blamers.

Yes, it is just silly and fogeyish to yearn for that simpler and smaller world of the past. But one could ask for the past's better manners, the instinctive decorum that has served to mitigate conflict. One of the lessons of travel is that, though half the world is wearing T-shirts and sneakers, they manage to live in overpopulated cities because they have not abandoned their traditional modes of politeness. These grace notes, which make traveling in crowded countries bearable, are a lesson to us in a mobbed and jostling world.

(C) 2006 New York Times

[MidtownGuy]

Don't tell me what is utter bullshi# Eugenious. What you said was plain stupid. Piss off if that's how you want to carry on a discussion. See what language like that, even when absurdly cloaked in keyboard symbols, gets you. I expressed my genuine feelings, HOW DARE YOU. And we could argue all day, but I WON'T.
Why should I have to go to Queens for flowers? Do you know what the flower district was? It was a unique stretch. Whatever, if you don't understand that you are a pissy waste of carbon and water.

[Kris]

Please calm down and no personal attacks.

[ryan]

For artists this city is becoming a dead zone.

NYC art scene is still expanding as far as I know. Do you have any empirical facts to the contrary? (and yes, you do need to leave manhattan to see the culturally vital parts of the city)

[MikeW]

Want some cheese with that whine?

The reason most of what you long for came to exist, was that NYC collapsed into what it was in the '70's (a postindustrial wasteland), from what is was before (a bustling, overcrowded, vibrant, dirty, dangerous, exploding boomtown). That collapse left fertile ground for some interesting things to develop.

But everthing runs in cycles. We're pretty much back in boomtown mode, and it's a much nicer boomtown now that it was before the collapse. But it also means that some of the things that grew up in the cracks are going to be pave over. You give a great example, the 6th Ave fleamarkets. Why did they happen? Because there were alot of vacant lots left in that neighborhood, and someone came in an used them for something quick, easy and temporary. Now, they've became large apt buildings, with ground floor commercial, providing housing and jobs for thousends of people. That's the way it should be.

If you want to go to Europe, don't let the door hit you in the a$$ on they way out. But it probably suits you better. They like stagnation over there.

I miss the flower shops and flea markets on Sixth. I miss so many things that used to make this city great. I'm contemplating a move, perhaps to Europe. For artists this city is becoming a dead zone. Do I really want to stick around for 100 more Dunkin Donuts and 100 more Starbucks? And the bank branches, well that's just becoming infuriating.
A walk down any street is now a cause for depression, I'm prematurely sounding like a grandfather, always turning to a friend, pointing and saying, "gee, I remember when that was a..."
You know change can be a great thing, but this is the rapid death of a culture, summarily obliterated by the surrounding barbarians. The natives take their last gasp and kiss their world goodbye.

[MidtownGuy]

...They like stagnation over there.

What's happening here is a form of stagnation. Of the soul.
Does boomtown necessarily HAVE to mean chain-store-town?

Now, they've became large apt buildings, with ground floor commercial

Ugly piles of crap, some of the ugliest in town. With repetitious chainstores and banks in the base. Woopee-do, MikeW. Woopee-f%%cking-do. Pardon me if I don't become ecstatic.

[Ninjahedge]

Great way to phrase things Mike.

Try growing up a bit man!

Teh thing that most people object to here is not the cleaning up of NY, but its absolute sterilization.

It is one thnig to reminisce about this shop or that, but I am getting sick of seeing 5 $tarPh*ck$ in my crosstown walk to work. How much overpriced coffee do you need?

Granted, I do not like those cheap flea-market stands, but that does not mean we shoud abandon DIVERSE street level commerce.

Things I liked when I was around were the diversity of shops, bars and restaurants. Want Thai? Got it. Italian? You kidding me? Greek, yep. Delis, grocerys, everything all better than what I had in the Burbs.

But I am seeing more and more chains from Taco Bell to Applebees pop up in the city. These things survive on the people who are not NYers, ones visiting who are afraid to go into O'Connors for a burger. Not that I am saying that tourism is bad, but when the town starts to over-accomodate the visitor, it loses itself. The entire block between 7th and 8th on 42nd (Cold Stone, DB's and Chevys?) is a classic example of this shhhhhtuf.

Artistry leaving? Yes. In the sense that it is too expensive for many to live of market their wares. They have jumped out of a lot of the sub-city areas as well (Hoboken, JC, Brooklyn, Queens) as prices rise in some of them. They are not gone entirely, but still...


The expression of dissapointment is never over improvement of thnigs. I am sure people would love to see more theaters (not musical theaters mind you), galleries, restaurants, foreign shops and the liek come into town to replace the flea-market converted storehouse type affairs, but when you get places like 2nd ave deli and Colluseum bookstoe go to be replaced by XXX bank or YYY Coffee, it gets depressing.

So enough with the "door hitting you" and "utter bull@#$" comments and get back to the meat of the matter.

Please?

[Ninjahedge]

PS, that means you too Midtown... ;)

[ryan]

Artistry leaving? Yes. In the sense that it is too expensive for many to live of market their wares. They have jumped out of a lot of the sub-city areas as well (Hoboken, JC, Brooklyn, Queens) as prices rise in some of them. They are not gone entirely, but still...

Everyone keeps repeating this, but I don't see any support. Aside from the times overhype of a couple artists moving to Beacon (coinciding with the hype over the opening of DIA: Beacon) where are you guys pulling this out of? From the accounts of actual artists I know the art scene in NYC is in the middle of a multiple-decade boom.

[Ninjahedge]

Example would be the warehouses in JC where there was an artists loft setup.

They are being evicted in order to convert the building into "luxury condos".

Sounds a lot like the Lower East side.

You can't say ALL of those buildings were unoccupied ryan, can you?

Asking us to site specific individuals that we did not know in the first place is rather tough, and proving that they were here and now are not is even tougher. We are not cataloging buisnesses here.

But the question can be turned back to you. Why, even if they are still here, are they having less of an impact on the area they are in and why is so much of it becoming vanilla to the people who do not know where they are all hiding now?

[MidtownGuy]

There should be new ordinances considered. They have 'em limiting the number of porn shops within a certain number of square feet. Why not an ordinance that says , for example, only one outlet of any given chainstore per 5 block radius within Manhattan. That's plenty of leeway to allow them to fluorish, just not to establish monopolies. It would allow start-ups a chance to offer their product to a competitive marketplace. A Clash of the Titans style battle between Godzilla and Rodan, with everything underneath trampled, is not my idea of healthy capitalism.

from ryanAside from the times overhype of a couple artists moving to Beacon
This statement betrays a limited view of what the word "artist" means.

[gradvmedusa]

Starbucks is just crazy.... They have one on 66th and B'way and 60th and B'way now they are opening one on 63 and B'Way WHY?! Not to mention one on 58th and 57th and 68th and amsterdamn

[MidtownGuy]

healthy cell growth----good

cancer------------------bad

[ryan]

This statement betrays a limited view of what the word "artist" means.

Do educate me about what the word means. Here I was thinking my friends with MFAs who show with Mary Boone, Deitch, Bellwether were artists.

[MikeW]

What you're seeing is economic darwinism. Why is there a Starbux every three blocks? Because they're all making money. Given the rents they're paying, they have to be. The chain stores are more effective and efficient, and in lots of quanifiable ways, serve their customers better. So the customers vote with their feet and shop there.

And, why are they every three blocks? How far are you willing to walk for a cup of coffee (or to fill a prescription, or to deposit a check, etc.). NYC in general, and Manhattan in particular is a pedestrian town. every 3-6 blocks is a separate market. So the stores figure out what interval they need to be at, and the locate at that interval.

[MrSpice]

What you're seeing is economic darwinism. Why is there a Starbux every three blocks? Because they're all making money. Given the rents they're paying, they have to be. The chain stores are more effective and efficient, and in lots of quanifiable ways, serve their customers better. So the customers vote with their feet and shop there.

And, why are they every three blocks? How far are you willing to walk for a cup of coffee (or to fill a prescription, or to deposit a check, etc.). NYC in general, and Manhattan in particular is a pedestrian town. every 3-6 blocks is a separate market. So the stores figure out what interval they need to be at, and the locate at that interval.

Excellent analysis - totally agree. At the end, companies give people what they want to have. People lament about disappearing coffee houses that are often being displaced by chains like Starbucks. But the right question should be: why is it that people prefer Starbucks to that mom-and-pop coffee shop? After all, Starbcuks is not cheap - they have significant profit margins. Those mom-and-pop shops that are creative and good (like "Lalo" on Upper West Side or Veniero's in East Village) succeed and prosper.

[ablarc]

I hate that Starbucks are everywhere, and I patronize them in spite of myself. What makes them irresistible is what makes them repulsive: they're predictable and uniform. You always know what you'll get. And what you get is good enough so you don't have to take chances.

[MidtownGuy]

Do educate me about what the word means. Here I was thinking my friends with MFAs who show with Mary Boone, Deitch, Bellwether were artists.

See, that's just it. Not all artists work in those mediums, or show at the typical, sanctified galleries. You seem to have a very elitist idea of art, and that confirms it.

[MidtownGuy]

Excellent analysis

Excellent analysis, or over simplistic rubbish? There's more to it.

[lofter1]

... why is it that people prefer Starbucks to that mom-and-pop coffee shop?

Marketing ... + sugar.

And convenience -- people in NYC have convinced themselves that avoiding an extra 5 minute walk makes spending more money in a nearby shop worthwhile.

Why do some people spend $50 on a face cream that has been shown to be no better than what you can buy for $8?

I recently enjoyed a fantastic $9 bottle of Prosecco (won't tell you where I got it because I plan to go back for more ;) ) that all my Italian friends agreed was far smoother and tastier than a better known $19 bottle.

[ryan]

See, that's just it. Not all artists work in those mediums, or show at the typical, sanctified galleries. You seem to have a very elitist idea of art, and that confirms it.

You were the one telling me I didn't know what an artist was. You're not making any sense.

[ablarc]

^ It's someone with an MFA ... right? :p

[pianoman11686]

I find myself agreeing with Mr Spice and MikeW.

MidtownGuy, I think you're being overly dramatic on this.

[ablarc]

^ Actually, they're ALL right.

[antinimby]

If you want to go to Europe, don't let the door hit you in the a$$ on they way out. But it probably suits you better. They like stagnation over there.No, no, no.

MidtownGuy is the creative type we need more of.

Don't listen to him and don't leave MTG.

Just ride it out and do your part to ameliorate the situation.

[pianoman11686]

^ Actually, they're ALL right.

Can you elaborate?

[antinimby]

First of all go to Brooklyn for all the flower shops and flea markets you can handle. Brooklyn is a boom town right now, you walk through any neighborhood south of Prospect Park or Williamsburg or even Bay Ridge and you will see tons of non-chain shops and stores.
Brooklyn is the new cultural center of NYC that is going to be more diverse and more exciting than Manhattan ever was.
Brooklyn is small business heaven.Just give it some time.

I have a sneaky suspicion what's happening in Manhattan won't be too far behind in the outer boroughs.

The saving grace is that the outer boroughs are still primarily middle-class as opposed to the more yuppified Manhattan, so it'll take some time but it's still inevitable, I'm afraid.

[ablarc]

^ It's economic Darwinism, and it's a crying shame.

[pianoman11686]

But what's the justification for punishing success, and rewarding failure? Surely it can't just be a "cultural" thing. If you're willing to accept it or not, big business is, and has been for a long time, a BIG part of our identity as a society and as a nation.

[lofter1]

Who said anything about "rewarding failure"?

And judging the success of an artistic work solely by whether or not the creator of that work has a college degree of some sort or the fact that a big name gallery chose to present that work is very limiting -- and really speaks more to the market rather than the art itself, or the artist.

No doubt my argument will appear to some as simplistic -- but the American penchant for judging our selves and our countrymen by monetary success is not that honorable.

[ablarc]

And judging the success of an artistic work solely by whether or not the creator of that work has a college degree of some sort or the fact that a big name gallery chose to present that work is very limiting --
You said it.

Scraps of paper on a wall. Talismans of prestige.

"Limiting"? No, ridiculous.

Where was Picasso's MFA? Or Van Gogh's? And how many paintings did Van Gogh sell?

.

[pianoman11686]

I won't pretend to be an expert in (the merits of) art. I was mainly responding to the topic of the thread, namely, the replacement of individual retailers by nationally-branded chains.

[Ninjahedge]

It is bad when you have 3 coffee shops on one block, but the thing is, if they are all owned by different people (and are their own buisnesses) they will each have some featur or another that makes them desirable over the others.

Want the bast latte? Go here. Best pastry to go with your regular coffee? Go here, etc etc.

When all 3 shops are owned by the same company, they offer the very same thing.

There is little to NO difference between the Starbucks in New Brunswick, NJ as the one(s) on Broadway. And while this is good for some people who do not want to be surprised by anything they were not expecting, it drains the city of one of the things that made it special.

Also, this is not a case of success or failure, but dominance and conquest. Example? Home Depot. On opening, each of their stores has a bunch of great staff, clean aisles, great prices. After they have been there 6 months, or, god forbid, they open up another 2 miles away, the store goes to hell in a hand-basket. Examples? Try Forest Hills in Queens or Secaucus, NJ. Try finding someone in an apron to help you find a particular pipe fitting.


Now did they succeed? Yes, but not because they were necessarily better. They were just better long enough to drive away competition, dominate, then slack off after. What do you think will happen when Nort Fork or Dunkin DOnuts scales back its presence in NY because of the low margin? What will ahppen to the stores? You think that "Joes Deli" will come running back? I don't think so.

It takes a long time do develop character, and a very short time to exploit it or drive it out.

[ryan]

I'm not going to pretend I'm following this thread at all, but to clarify myself, I've only implied that I know what an artist is - not that I know what is not an artist. All the banks and dunkin donuts in the city suck, but they're not driving away any artists I know (though I don't know any who can afford to live in Manhattan, so maybe it feels that way for you all).

To answer Ablarc's question about MFAs and Van Gogh/Picasso (and, I'm guessing, great artists in general)... They didn't have them, but they weren't uneducated. Both had extensive art training. Today that training would have earned them BFAs or MFAs. Good artists need more than talent. (not that this is at all the point of this thread)

[pianoman11686]

Ninja, I think you're trying to step around the issue. It most certainly is a case of success vs. failure. I just don't know how else to explain it: there are winners, and there are losers. And many people, at least on this forum, seem to have a disdain for the winners, precisely because of the fact that they're so successful.

Here's why we shouldn't worry so much about it: tastes change. It's as plain and simple as that. And what's even more encouraging, for people who hate the Starbucks on every corner, is the fact that more and more people are almost violent in their distate for the purveyor of java. There will always be small entrepreneurs waiting in the wings to open up their one-of-a-kind establishment, be it a store or a place to eat. As soon as tastes change, that will take place. Finally, if what you say is generally applicable to the "winners" - the fact that they "slack off" after "victory" - then they too will meet their end eventually. It just takes time. Who would have thought, 30 years ago, that almost half the cars on the road in the US would be foreign-made?

[MrSpice]

There is little to NO difference between the Starbucks in New Brunswick, NJ as the one(s) on Broadway. And while this is good for some people who do not want to be surprised by anything they were not expecting, it drains the city of one of the things that made it special.

Also, this is not a case of success or failure, but dominance and conquest. Example? Home Depot. On opening, each of their stores has a bunch of great staff, clean aisles, great prices. After they have been there 6 months, or, god forbid, they open up another 2 miles away, the store goes to hell in a hand-basket. Examples? Try Forest Hills in Queens or Secaucus, NJ. Try finding someone in an apron to help you find a particular pipe fitting.

It takes a long time do develop character, and a very short time to exploit it or drive it out.

Fair enough. But what can we do to change it? Should we have laws against Starbucks, or dictate to companies like Home Depot and Starbucks how many stores they can open?

The same kind of competition is happening in other industries. You can say that 20 years ago there were many brokerage firms and many small independent banks. In our era of super-mergers, that's changing and some of the large financial firms dominate the market. Maybe it's just one of the negative consequences of free market and capitalist. But I don't think the comparison between Home Depot and Starbucks is a very good one because they succeed for slightly different reasons (although that success has some things in common). Home Depot succeeds to a large degree because they provide huge selection (unlike smaller stores) and low prices that can only be achived with this kind of scale.

Starbucks on the other hand, delivers the number of selections/choices comparable to many independent cafes and their prices are not that low (they are rather high - $4 for latte, 2-5 dollars for any desert/pastry). So they don't drive out other business because of their low prices. It's the brand recognition, service, quality and the fact that you can come in, order $2 cup of coffee, plug in your laptop and work there all day.

[Ninjahedge]

Ninja, I think you're trying to step around the issue. It most certainly is a case of success vs. failure. I just don't know how else to explain it: there are winners, and there are losers. And many people, at least on this forum, seem to have a disdain for the winners, precisely because of the fact that they're so successful.

I know what you are getting at, but when you start going global, you have to see what that companies methods do on a local scale.

You get a chain like Wal Mart coming in. Their practices lead to an aggresive marketing campaign that actually makes them lose money in the first few years. They force their way in, underbid everyone, get solo contracts that eventually turn around and force supply line renegotiation (squeezing) of their now exclusive suppliers, and raising of profit margins at the expense of the community.

This helps in the short run as NYC would see cheaper prices on milk and OJ, but once they dry out the korean convenience stores and Key-Foods chains (not saying Key is great), what then? They become the sole source for these things. Their prices go up and we pay.

Were they successful? Yes. Were we? No. Do we have a choice? Now, yes, later, no.

So, in order to insure that we do not have this kind of thing, we need to distribute our own costs and efforts, as well as to avoid dumping the equivalent of economic crack on the general populace, and keep a balance in the city.

Too much of a good thing ruins balance and makes ity flop over on itself. How can we make it so the "success" of a company does not rob a city of its own character, or end up stripping and burning it in order to drive out any others?

Here's why we shouldn't worry so much about it: tastes change. It's as plain and simple as that. And what's even more encouraging, for people who hate the Starbucks on every corner, is the fact that more and more people are almost violent in their distate for the purveyor of java. There will always be small entrepreneurs waiting in the wings to open up their one-of-a-kind establishment, be it a store or a place to eat. As soon as tastes change, that will take place.

Um, no.

It kind of works like that. But the mere fact that there ARE Dominoes and Pizza Huts in teh city is a clear fact that things like that are never driven out. It also makes it extremely difficult to start your own mom-and-pop shop when all your competition is Mega-Corporation.

Example? MS. Any company that seemed a threat to their development was either sued, underbid, or bought out. Once you reach a certain level of fiscal leverage, the same rules do not apply, and it taks a bajor, universal change to make a difference.

Finally, if what you say is generally applicable to the "winners" - the fact that they "slack off" after "victory" - then they too will meet their end eventually. It just takes time. Who would have thought, 30 years ago, that almost half the cars on the road in the US would be foreign-made?

That is not a fair comparison as it was a government supported development of industry that promoted the development and reverse-engineering of the Japanese auto market.

We are also talking about scale issues here and other external influebces such as gas prices and availability. If we did not have the gas shortage in the 70s, it is unlikely that Japanese automakers would have suceeded so readily.

Also, I really do not want to have to wait 30-50 years to get back the Washington Square/Villages and Tribecca I like. By that time I will be retired or dead.

So how else would a minority of people who genuinely appreciate what is happening and can see it, how else can they prevent the losing of a character which is the primary reason for so much interest in coming to the city in the first place?

[pianoman11686]

Interesting that you brought up Microsoft. I was thinking to mention it in my previous post as well. It's almost the perfect corollary to Starbucks, except in the software industry. There are so many people out there that just hate Windows, the entire company, and for years were stuck with it. Now, people are buying Macs left and right, and Apple has never been doing better. Just goes to prove my point.

And about Wal-Mart: don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of theirs. I know there are a lot of things that they do, as a company, that are seriously wrong and that should be looked after. But what you're saying is that the government should preemptively step in and prevent a company like Wal-Mart from gaining dominance in the first place, whether their business practices are fair or not. That's not fair, no matter how you slice it.

But the mere fact that there ARE Dominoes and Pizza Huts in teh city is a clear fact that things like that are never driven out. It also makes it extremely difficult to start your own mom-and-pop shop when all your competition is Mega-Corporation.

There are many other factors that influence how good of an environment a city is for the small guys to start up a business. And so what if there are a few Domino's or Pizza Huts out there? If they're doing well, it's obviously because there's a demand for them, and they're filling that niche. So, just because those of us who like the "traditional NYC slice", other people should be denied the right to order from a chain pizzeria?

The Japanese analogy stands, I think, not because of what happened in the 70s, but because of what's going on right now. All of a sudden, Americans are buying SUVs and pickup trucks, long the mainstay of Ford & GM, from Honda, Toyota, and Nissan. And I'd say it has very little to do with the oil crisis thirty years ago. It has to do with what people prefer today, and that seems to be increasingly, foreign-made automobiles. And even if you don't like the auto example because of the government-subsidy thing, you can say the same thing about the electronics industry starting in the late 60s and early 70s. Who would've thought, back then, that RCA would be a defunct company before the end of the century, and we'd be getting all our TVs and stereos from the Japanese and South Koreans?

[Ninjahedge]

Interesting that you brought up Microsoft. I was thinking to mention it in my previous post as well. It's almost the perfect corollary to Starbucks, except in the software industry. There are so many people out there that just hate Windows, the entire company, and for years were stuck with it. Now, people are buying Macs left and right, and Apple has never been doing better. Just goes to prove my point.

Interesting then that M$ would purchase shares in Apple, eh?

And they are not buying Macs as much as you would think. Corporate interest is still 90% PC, and so is industrial software development, so...

And about Wal-Mart: don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of theirs. I know there are a lot of things that they do, as a company, that are seriously wrong and that should be looked after. But what you're saying is that the government should preemptively step in and prevent a company like Wal-Mart from gaining dominance in the first place, whether their business practices are fair or not. That's not fair, no matter how you slice it.

Not 100% like that. I hav enot been shouting for governmantal restrictions of free enterprise. But unlike things like Black-Lung, mega-corporatization does pose some risk and should be buffered so that radical steps taken by any one powerhouse does not upset a smaller regional economy.

NYC is lucky that it can stand so much competition and the like, but it is not invincible. There is a limit. I would rather not see it reached and confirmed.

So what is teh buffer that government can instill that would not fully restrict this expansion, but would also serve to protect the smaller companies from being squished before they even have a chance to prove themselves?

There are many other factors that influence how good of an environment a city is for the small guys to start up a business. And so what if there are a few Domino's or Pizza Huts out there? If they're doing well, it's obviously because there's a demand for them, and they're filling that niche.

No, you have that one a little wrong.

they are a name that people recognise and also hav ethe added benefit of a national advertising campaign. Most people who order from them are not looking for a niche, but just something that they recognise.

So in a SMALL sense, it IS a niche, but not for them or their services. It is a niche that is there only to serve a lack of information and an unwillingness of peopel, in general, to change.

(To say it quickly, people are not demanding that there be a Dominoes, but when one is opened, people go there. SO it is not a need that has been fulfilled, but more like a leech that lives off of an already fully supplied line of providence.


So, just because those of us who like the "traditional NYC slice", other people should be denied the right to order from a chain pizzeria?

No, read above. The thing is that:

1. Dominoes is not being demanded. It is not filling a need. It is more of a feeder than a provider.
2. You are not forced. This is not a question of freedom of choice here, but more like the stripping down of NYC's character because people will order from something they are familiar with over something unfamiliar.

How do you stop people from outside, who came here because NY was different, from making it just like what they are used to?

An example? Arizona and Colorado. Many MANY people moved ther to escape things like allergies that were bothering them on the coasts. Thing is, they brought with them the plants that they had on those coasts that did not bother them. After a while, there were enough people that were not allergic to grass that the people who were were now suffering again.

So the areas uniqueness that drew them there in the first place was compromised by what the "people" wanted. It lost its original reason for coming.

I do not want to see that happen with NYC.

The Japanese analogy stands, I think, not because of what happened in the 70s, but because of what's going on right now. All of a sudden, Americans are buying SUVs and pickup trucks, long the mainstay of Ford & GM, from Honda, Toyota, and Nissan. And I'd say it has very little to do with the oil crisis thirty years ago.

They recently stopped. I believe that Ford and GM sited a drastic reduction in SUV sales almost in direct conjubction with this summers high gas prices. It is also not fair to do the american/japanese comparison with the SUV line now as both markets have significant crossover.

If you look at the models available in SUV's from the early 90's (Jeep Cheorkee) and follow the progression, the US models (Lincoln, Ford and GM) had more of a Manly "big" feeling to them than the Japanese and European imports.

It is only recently with things like the Nissan Armada and others that you get the huge ones that the US was known for. The market has merged and the true sales numbers are starting to permeate through the availability limitations that constrained sales years ago.

It has to do with what people prefer today, and that seems to be increasingly, foreign-made automobiles. And even if you don't like the auto example because of the government-subsidy thing, you can say the same thing about the electronics industry starting in the late 60s and early 70s. Who would've thought, back then, that RCA would be a defunct company before the end of the century, and we'd be getting all our TVs and stereos from the Japanese and South Koreans?

You are making comparisons that are too broad to be able to associate directly to one cause or another. RCA, electronics industry, slave labor (china), government subsidy, innovation, trade agreements and so many otehr things go into the RCA/Electronics switcheroo that you cannot make a strait line analogy to mega-corp takeover of a pre-existing urbanized area....


I am not 100% disagreeing with what you are saying, but just that there are too many variables to narrow the argument down to something that can be contextually applied and debated...


And I like using big words.. ;)

[pianoman11686]

I don't want this to get too off topic, so I'll keep some of these responses short...

Interesting then that M$ would purchase shares in Apple, eh?

And they are not buying Macs as much as you would think. Corporate interest is still 90% PC, and so is industrial software development, so...

Which of those two facts matter? The answer is neither. We're talking about individual consumer preferences after all, aren't we? That has nothing to do with companies buying stock in each other, or continuing a long-standing arrangement with a particular PC manufacturer. The bottom line is: more and more consumers are flocking to Apple because they now offer a great product that competes with the standard Windows PC.

Not 100% like that. I hav enot been shouting for governmantal restrictions of free enterprise. But unlike things like Black-Lung, mega-corporatization does pose some risk and should be buffered so that radical steps taken by any one powerhouse does not upset a smaller regional economy.

NYC is lucky that it can stand so much competition and the like, but it is not invincible. There is a limit. I would rather not see it reached and confirmed.

So what is teh buffer that government can instill that would not fully restrict this expansion, but would also serve to protect the smaller companies from being squished before they even have a chance to prove themselves?

You keep saying you're not "for this" or "for that," but why then do you leave the question unanswered? Give me some specifics. Surely you must have some kind of tools in mind, if you're arguing for their use.

No, you have that one a little wrong.

they are a name that people recognise and also hav ethe added benefit of a national advertising campaign. Most people who order from them are not looking for a niche, but just something that they recognise.

So in a SMALL sense, it IS a niche, but not for them or their services. It is a niche that is there only to serve a lack of information and an unwillingness of peopel, in general, to change.

(To say it quickly, people are not demanding that there be a Dominoes, but when one is opened, people go there. SO it is not a need that has been fulfilled, but more like a leech that lives off of an already fully supplied line of providence.

You're reading too literally into this. Demand simply means that there are people out there that are willing to patronize the company. You say they have the benefit of national advertising, but local pizzerias have the benefit of being a neighborhood staple for years or decades. Which one would you prefer, as a company?

Here's why I think Domino's and Pizza Hut have customers in the city: they're cheaper, for one, and they deliver longer hours. It's been more than a few times that I've been out late in the city, and have had to order from Domino's because the local pizzeria was already closed. That's what I call filling a niche. (Well, that, and cheesy bread.)

No, read above. The thing is that:

1. Dominoes is not being demanded. It is not filling a need. It is more of a feeder than a provider.
2. You are not forced. This is not a question of freedom of choice here, but more like the stripping down of NYC's character because people will order from something they are familiar with over something unfamiliar.

It's usually not a question of forced, unless you're talking about something like my late-night dilemma (Which I'm sure many other people face).

How do you stop people from outside, who came here because NY was different, from making it just like what they are used to?

A totally unfair question, if you ask me. How else was NY "made", if not by "people from outside"? All the immigrant neighborhoods, hello? This is just another strain. (Oh, and I can GUARANTEE you, that back when all the Italians, Jews, and Eastern Europeans were arriving, the people who were already here were not one bit as excited as you are about what's happening today.)

An example? Arizona and Colorado. Many MANY people moved ther to escape things like allergies that were bothering them on the coasts. Thing is, they brought with them the plants that they had on those coasts that did not bother them. After a while, there were enough people that were not allergic to grass that the people who were were now suffering again.

So the areas uniqueness that drew them there in the first place was compromised by what the "people" wanted. It lost its original reason for coming.

I do not want to see that happen with NYC.

I don't see how that is applicable, at all.

They recently stopped. I believe that Ford and GM sited a drastic reduction in SUV sales almost in direct conjubction with this summers high gas prices. It is also not fair to do the american/japanese comparison with the SUV line now as both markets have significant crossover.

If you look at the models available in SUV's from the early 90's (Jeep Cheorkee) and follow the progression, the US models (Lincoln, Ford and GM) had more of a Manly "big" feeling to them than the Japanese and European imports.

It is only recently with things like the Nissan Armada and others that you get the huge ones that the US was known for. The market has merged and the true sales numbers are starting to permeate through the availability limitations that constrained sales years ago.

And yet you're still proving my point. The "manly big feeling" that you're talking about is exactly what happens to consumer tastes. People started wanting something different. Foreign companies were offering it, and Ford & GM's sales went down the tubes.

You are making comparisons that are too broad to be able to associate directly to one cause or another. RCA, electronics industry, slave labor (china), government subsidy, innovation, trade agreements and so many otehr things go into the RCA/Electronics switcheroo that you cannot make a strait line analogy to mega-corp takeover of a pre-existing urbanized area....


I am not 100% disagreeing with what you are saying, but just that there are too many variables to narrow the argument down to something that can be contextually applied and debated...


And I like using big words.. ;)

If you like, I'll come up with some other comparisons.

[Ninjahedge]

Fine.

Good by NY and hello Greater Manhattan Mall.

3 cheers for success(tm)!


/me leaves.

[pianoman11686]

So much for being a moderate...

[ramvid01]

And apparently it's spreading (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/14/nyregion/14chains.html?_r=1&ex=157680000&en=e5a18c4b20117831&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink&oref=slogin) to the other boroughs. :eek:

[MidtownGuy]

thanks for the ink.

[antinimby]

Better to paste the entire article here because the links to them eventually expire. ;)


Now, Big-Name Retail Chains Will Take the Other Boroughs, Too


http://graphics10.nytimes.com/images/2007/01/14/nyregion/600_chains.jpg
The Victoria’s Secret store on Steinway Street is one of many name-brand stores on a strip in Astoria, and
one of the lingerie chain’s five stores in Brooklyn and Queens.


By PATRICK McGEEHAN
Published: January 14, 2007 (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/14/nyregion/14chains.html)

They have saturated much of Manhattan so completely that their ubiquity has become fodder for jokes on television. Now chain stores are rapidly spreading into parts of New York City that had long been left to local merchants.

The stretch of Broadway in Astoria, Queens, where Mike Belvedere opened his second Cold Stone Creamery ice cream franchise is a prime example. Amid a jumble of Greek bakeries, halal butcher shops and Indian doctors’ offices, national retailers and big banks are moving in and remaking the streetscape in Manhattan’s image.

At a glance, the junction of Broadway and Steinway Street could be mistaken for any intersection in Midtown. There are bank branches — Commerce, Chase and Bank of America — on three of the corners, and the fourth is home to a Rite Aid drugstore. Nearby are stores usually found in suburban shopping malls. A few blocks from where Mr. Belvedere is selling waffle cones for as much as $5 each are a Children’s Place clothing store, a Bath & Body Works and a Victoria’s Secret lingerie shop.


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/01/14/nyregion/0114-met-CHAINS.gif
A 'Mall' on Steinway.


“The area’s flourishing, and it’s continuing to change,” said Mr. Belvedere, who added that friends had said that not being of Greek descent would be a handicap in a section of the city that historically has been a Greek enclave.

But Mr. Belvedere said that he had encountered no resistance since he leased the space for his shop about 18 months ago. Rather, he said, he detected among the young professionals who have flocked to the area a hunger for more brand-name merchants.

The rapid gentrification of certain neighborhoods outside Manhattan has accelerated the spread of the chain stores and renewed fears that the pockets of flavor that define the city will dry up, said Jeanne Giordano, an urban planner who oversaw redevelopment of the commercial space in Grand Central Terminal. “The tipping point is that it’s happening beyond the obvious places,” Ms. Giordano said. “The boroughs are all going down like bowling pins.”

Some New Yorkers are worried, she said, that “it’s getting boring around here.”

There are now 220 Duane Reade stores in the city, and 205 Starbucks cafes, and there will soon be 217 Rite Aid stores if a proposed merger with Eckerd Pharmacy goes through.

In San Francisco, such trends drove the passage in November of a proposition to require review by a planning commission of any proposal to open a new chain store outlet or restaurant within city limits. But in New York neighborhoods like Astoria and the area around the Metrotech center in Brooklyn, sentiments among shoppers and business leaders are different.

Those areas are on the opposite end of the commercial growth curve from Manhattan, said Robin Abrams, chairwoman of the retail committee of the Real Estate Board of New York.

They are being discovered by national retailers that previously had balked at paying urban rents that are generally higher than in suburban shopping malls, she said.

“As most of the nationals have saturated Manhattan or been priced out of Manhattan, they fully understand that they can do business in the boroughs,” said Ms. Abrams, who is an executive vice president of the Lansco Corporation. “You see more and more tenants looking at these areas.”

Chains that sell clothing at relatively low prices, like Children’s Place and Payless Shoe Source, led an invasion that others are now following, Ms. Abrams said. Children’s Place, which has 31 stores in New York City, plans to add six this year, all of them outside of Manhattan, according to a spokeswoman. Payless has more than 60 stores in Brooklyn and Queens; Limited Brands has five Victoria’s Secrets, six Bath & Body Works and four Express clothing stores in Brooklyn and Queens.

The chain proliferation and the sameness they have brought to so many blocks has become a pet peeve for many New Yorkers, and the butt of jokes for others. On a recent episode of the NBC comedy “30 Rock,” a character sent to pick up a prescription was stymied by the presence of “Rite Drugs” outlets on all four corners of an intersection.

To some members of the Municipal Art Society of New York, the advance of the chain stores is no laughing matter. The society, whose stated mission is to make the city more livable, said that it was monitoring what Vanessa Gruen, its director of special projects, calls “chain store creep” and looking for ways to protect local merchants.


http://graphics10.nytimes.com/images/2007/01/14/nyregion/650_chains_2.jpg
Luis C. Bolivar, the owner of Dali Shoes. Across from his shop on Steinway Street in Astoria are a Chase bank and
a new Commerce Bank branch.


Ms. Gruen said the effort was spurred by fears that the proposed Atlantic Yards project would bring more “huge chain stores” to Brooklyn and that independent merchants would not be able to afford to stay in the area. Their potential disappearance is a threat to the unique character of the city’s neighborhoods, Ms. Gruen said.

Ms. Giordano, who moderated a panel discussion on the topic for the art society last fall, said there was “a lot of buzz about this, and it’s not just sort of idle chatter.” Even so, there’s no push yet for the sort of broad policy change that was contemplated in the mid-1980s.

Back then, Mayor Edward I. Koch appointed a commission to study the pros and cons of commercial rent control as a response to fears that chain stores and the high rents they were willing to pay would drive laundries and shoe-repair shops out of business.

The commission surveyed residents of several neighborhoods and found that consumer satisfaction was highest where rents were rising the fastest and lowest where commercial rents were most stable, said Alan A. Altshuler, dean of the Graduate School of Design at Harvard University, who led the commission.

“One of the reasons that people were happier where rents were rising most rapidly was that these shops were not going out of business; they were moving,” he recalled. “Shops that didn’t have high revenues were finding ways to survive.”

Mr. Altshuler said he had heard little talk lately of restricting the proliferation of chain outlets, except against very large stores like Wal-Mart. Those companies have met resistance in many communities that feared one giant big-box store might wipe out several specialty stores. Other than those battles, he said, “Clearly the passion to restrict these things is much less intense.”

San Francisco may be the only big city in the United States where an antichain sentiment burns strong, urban planners said. Last fall, the ballot proposition to require planning review of proposed chain stores or restaurant outlets received about 60 percent of the votes, said Gerardo Sandoval, the city supervisor who sponsored the proposition.

“Our position is: ‘We’re San Francisco; you can do what you want in other cities, but here we are going to protect local neighborhood character,’ ” Mr. Sandoval said.

The restrictions on chains, known as “formula retail” in San Francisco, apply to everything from Starbucks to individual outlets of Hawaiian barbecue restaurants, said Lawrence B. Badiner, assistant director of that city’s planning commission.

Mr. Badiner said that a few proposed Starbucks cafes had been rejected by the commission. “The predominant view in most parts of the city is, ‘We’ve got enough; if we want to go to Starbucks we know where to find one,’ ” he said.

That sentiment may exist in some affluent areas of New York, but many other areas are still eagerly awaiting the arrival of their first chain stores, said Ms. Giordano, who has advised some of the city’s business improvement districts on development plans. These community planners “would consider it a success if some of these stores would come there,” she said.

In part, that is because landlords see established retailers as less risky than independent merchants and start-ups, and in part because successful chain stores usually attract shoppers and more chain stores. Local officials in other parts of Queens see “that stretch of Steinway Street in Astoria” as a model of what they would like, Ms. Giordano said.

“I would say a good healthy street is a combination of both,” she said. “If it’s just the chains, then it’s boring. But certain chains have good basics. And it’s always nice to have the small, unique shops. The question is how long that mix holds until it goes and trips over to the other side.”

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

[antinimby]

That sentiment may exist in some affluent areas of New York, but many other areas are still eagerly awaiting the arrival of their first chain stores, said Ms. Giordano, who has advised some of the city’s business improvement districts on development plans. These community planners “would consider it a success if some of these stores would come there,” she said.Fools.

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.

[antinimby]

Rather, he said, he detected among the young professionals who have flocked to the area a hunger for more brand-name merchants.

Was I right or was I right? ;)

The saving grace is that the outer boroughs are still primarily middle-class as opposed to the more yuppified Manhattan, so it'll take some time but it's still inevitable, I'm afraid.

[Ninjahedge]

/me comes in and looks around...


Yep.


/me runs away.

[Eugenious]

Fools.

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.

It's easy to say when you don't live in the ghetto.

[Ninjahedge]

/me runs in...


[Cartman voice] In the ghetto... In the ghettoooooo[/Cartman voice]

/me runs away.

[antinimby]

Stop running Ninja and stay here. :D

Eugenious, this has nothing to do with living in a ghetto or not.

Even in a poor area, businesses run by private owners can provide the goods and services just as well as that of the chains.

I'm not saying to not allow one single chain store.

I'm saying that one extreme (no chains allowed) or the other (nothing but chains) is not healthy.

What is healthy is somewhere in the middle.

Of course that is easier said than done because how does one go about making sure that right balance doesn't get tip over one way or the other?

Legislation? Or let the free market decide? And if legislation, what sort of legislation and how far must it go?

That's the problem we must deal with.

[lofter1]

But once one chain sees the viability of a location then the others jump in -- and it mushrooms from there.

[antinimby]

That's exactly what I was talking about with the greener grass comment.

The people that's welcoming chains into their neighborhoods don't know what they're in for until they experience for themselves and find out the chains are not all roses.

They're like vermin and will multiply rapidly.

[MikeW]

I'll let you in on a little secret. A lot of the time the chains provide better prices, better service, and better facilities than the locals. Sometimes they don't, but it's been my experience that on a nuts and bolts level, the chains do a better job.

I think what this is about is the shoppers in the boroughs not wanting to be held hostage by the local businesses.

Fools.

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.

[MidtownGuy]

I think what this is about is the shoppers in the boroughs not wanting to be held hostage by the local businesses.

Well I think that's just rubbish. Nobody is saying ban the chains completely, just regulate their cancerous tendencies.
I think it's more useful here to speak specifically than in generalities. Then perhaps you can conceive that the veracity of this statement:

"A lot of the time the chains provide better prices, better service, and better facilities than the locals. Sometimes they don't, but it's been my experience that on a nuts and bolts level, the chains do a better job."

is questionable and overly confident in it's assertion. For example, I prefer to have my hair cut in an independent barber shop. I prefer the service there. I also usually prefer to take my meals in independent eateries where the menu is both affordable and personal. I think they cook a better meal than the typical chain. I also prefer buying my bread at a neighborhood bakery where I know it is fresh and delicious each day. Another case where
for me there is no comparison. For hardware items, I have the option of Home Depot now in Manhattan, and that's not a bad thing, but for some items I still prefer the hardware store I've frequented for years. Instead of buying lighting at Home Depot, over the years I've mostly gone to the lighting district downtown where the small independent stores have selections the chains couldn't dream of stocking. The other day, for a design project, I needed 100 peacock feathers in prime condition, and fast. i found them that same afternoon at a small store that sells feathers from around the world. I could go on and on and on. I like the choices, see. They re choices my mother, living in the suburbs, is envious of when she visits. There are so many instances where the chains certainly do NOT come out ahead in my view, so I just couldn't disagree more with your statements. To me your "little secret" is an oft-repeated canard.

[Ninjahedge]

I'll let you in on a little secret. A lot of the time the chains provide better prices, better service, and better facilities than the locals. Sometimes they don't, but it's been my experience that on a nuts and bolts level, the chains do a better job.

I think what this is about is the shoppers in the boroughs not wanting to be held hostage by the local businesses.

Absolute refutals:

Home Depot
ANY restaurant (TGIF, Applebees, Chilis, Chevys, Tuesdays, Uno, etc etc etc).
Wal-Mart (I have found better AND cheaper consistantly at Shop Rite, but they do not compete in te same markets. Go fig.)

Chains do do better so long as they watch themselves, but they also rob every area of its individuality. I am sure that Long John Silvers is probably the best place to get seafood in Iowa, but I would not go to it in coastal Maine. The example holds true for many chain food stores and also for things such as furnature or anything that could have its own special "flavor".

Not saying that Ethan Allen does not have its advantages, but still.....

I would rather have a specialty shop than a Pier 1. I don't think I ever found what I was looking for in a Pier 1 Crate and Barrel or other mass produced accessory store......

[Punzie]

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/01/bbby.gif

"Where you can get any color towel,
as long as it's pink."

[Punzie]

... and is at my expense!

A large Bed, Bath & Beyond (BBBY) opened very near me a few years ago. Not to be outdone, a Linens'n Things opened nearby, too. Together they put the independently owned bed/bath/household stores out of business, except for one, which is I suspect is about to go under.

The independent places offered extensive custom/er service, and each place's buyers had a distinct style. They were the kind of stores that everyone, including interior decorators for Great Neck estates, could depend on to get unique looks. And the prices were about the same as those at the two chain stores!

What did my neighborhood get? Piles and piles of the same products, the same brands, the same few colors. Expensive stuff that does not hold up particularly well.

It's no wonder that BBBY has had lackluster stock performance lately:
http://bbby.bloggingstocks.com/

Then I got to thinking that this could be a blessing in disguise. If pink bedware and bathware are "in" again, I could finally take out and use everything my grandma left me.

[antinimby]

For the most part, I don't see the large chains as so much as pushing out the small private businesses based on them being somehow better but more because they have deep pockets and their goals wherever they set up is to stifle the competition and with the devious intention of driving them (and each other) out of business.

For example, after getting rid of the small coffee shops, Starbucks will now turn on Dunkin Donuts and vice versa.

Meanwhile small private mom and pops don't have that kind of evil intention, they just want to make a living.

[lofter1]

You can't get a Turkey BLT Club Deluxe Platter at either Starbucks or DuDos like you can at a good old NYC Coffee Shop (if you can find one).

[Ninjahedge]

DD's used to be different. It was the "everyman's" shop. A chain coffeehouse in the tradition of the roadside perk-palace.

All they had was baked goods and coffee. No smoothies, no bagels, no omlette sandwiches. But that does not expand on a market, so now they have stretched out and, unfortunately, diluted themselves.

As for BB+B and L+T, I have gone to those stores so many times it is sickening. It is the same stuff, ALWAYS overpriced, and it never stocks the things that you might really need. How do you think they are able to send everone on their mailing list those 20% off coupons EVERY MONTH?

I am not saying that small shops are necessarily the best in all situations, but there has to be some tweaking of the balance mechanism or we will lose all of out small guys to the bigguns.

Will they come back? Maybe. Sometimes the big guys try to do too much and a specialty store will open up covering one particular product line and outsell them.

But with this national market, it is getting harder and harder to survive long enough to do that, and it is not as if these stores will just LET someone take their buisness, you know?

So enough of all this complaining. Does anyone know what would work to encourage a true balance in a place like NYC?

[bigkdc]

Not sure if it has been mentioned here but one thing that is driving the desire for neighborhoods to want a target or home depot in their neighborhood is that they produce jobs. I know in East Harlem they are really excited about what that new retail development will do in terms of local job creation.

In addition, they will produce more retail traffic which will help other businesses in the area.

Obviously if you run the local hardware store and a home depot opens down the block, its not a good thing but I think the positives of having the home depot in the neighborhood outweigh the negatives.

The only kind of legislation you can do is some sort of small business subsidy so they can compete but are you willing to pay the extra tax to support that?

[MidtownGuy]

Wait a minute, correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we have policies to help out the big guys all the time? Tax subsidies, special breaks, etc? But to help little guys is difficult, expensive, and wrong somehow? Amazing how we always have money to help out the big guys, to woo them to a place, or to keep them there, but the same thing for small businesses is immediately questioned by references to our tax dollars.

[bigkdc]

^^^^

that is because helping out big guys provides jobs...the city will give tax breaks to a home depot (although not so much recently...it happens more with companies looking to keep their corporate HQ in NYC) because their presence creates lots of jobs and can revitalize a neighborhood.

[lofter1]

Howard Schultz (http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/profile/howard_schultz.shtml), Chairman of Starbucks, was on Charlie Rose (http://www.charlierose.com/) last night.

He's one smart guy ...

[MidtownGuy]

^^^^The cumulative sum of all the jobs created by small businesses is nothing to sneeze at, and the contributions to the local economy by small businesses is also no trifle.

[MidtownGuy]

In fact, bigdck, SMALL businesses are creating the majority of new jobs in New York and nationwide.

[Ninjahedge]

And they are less likely to use foreign sources, or resource refuges.

Some of these large companies are not "USA". I am not saying that that is a bad thing in and of itself, but calling out that they somehow help the community, especially one that is not really suffering, you also have to acknowledge their foreign investment.

[MikeW]

Haven't checked this in a little while, but to your points.

You're absolutely wrong about Home Depot. My father had a store that sold hardware (among other things). After he sold that I worked at a home center on LI for several years. I can definitively say that in pretty much every category, except possibly location convenience for non-drivers, HD destroyes any local hardware store in selection and, usually, price. HD made available stuff that DIYers never saw before. This is how they put out of business all the other home center chains that were around when they first opened (remember Rickles, Pergament?). And their help usually has a pretty good idea what they're talking about (they try to hire ex-builder types who decided they wanted steady work and benefits).

The restaurants I tend to agree with you on. There's enough creativity in food prep that it doesnt' can so well, except maybe at a very low level.

I don't like Wal-Mart either. But they operate in the bottom feeder market that I don't feel the need to shop in. I do like Target and Kohls, so this isn't an anti-chain thing, I just don't play in Wal-Mart's sandbox. But if you want to compare Wal-Mart to the local competition IN THE SAME MARKET SEGMENT (let's call it bottom of tbe barrel grocery-general merchandise), they'll blow away anything you'll find in the lower income areas of NYC.

Oh, and let me mention one category you didn't, and it's one that is a big source of irritation to the local uber alles crowd - drug stores. I've lived in the same neighborhood since 1989. I moved in before the rise of chain drug stores in Manhattan. It was bad. If I wanted to get a prescription filled, I had to be home by 6PM. That's when all the pharmacies closed. And I had problems finding someplace that took my insurance. Then the chains moved in, and I could get prescriptions filled up till 9:00, and the insurance was no problem. For a while I had a 24 pharmacy two blocks away (unfortunately their building came down). So sorry, but no one is selling me on the superiority of local drug stores. This is a clear case of the chains offering superior convenience and service.


Absolute refutals:

Home Depot
ANY restaurant (TGIF, Applebees, Chilis, Chevys, Tuesdays, Uno, etc etc etc).
Wal-Mart (I have found better AND cheaper consistantly at Shop Rite, but they do not compete in te same markets. Go fig.)

Chains do do better so long as they watch themselves, but they also rob every area of its individuality. I am sure that Long John Silvers is probably the best place to get seafood in Iowa, but I would not go to it in coastal Maine. The example holds true for many chain food stores and also for things such as furnature or anything that could have its own special "flavor".

Not saying that Ethan Allen does not have its advantages, but still.....

I would rather have a specialty shop than a Pier 1. I don't think I ever found what I was looking for in a Pier 1 Crate and Barrel or other mass produced accessory store......

[MikeW]

Yeah, but they tend to be pretty crappy jobs. Low wages, no benefits, and no security. Would you rather work at Bob's Hardware or Home Depot?

In fact, bigdck, SMALL businesses are creating the majority of new jobs in New York and nationwide.

[MidtownGuy]

After he sold that I worked at a home center on LI for several years.......

That goes straight to the point. We're talkiing about New York City, not Long Island. Here in the CITY, I can find the types of things they sell at Home Depot in other specialized places that simply do not exist in Long Island or any other suburb for that matter. That is why this discussion must be limited to New York City, which is the title of this thread. I have no doubt there is a dearth of variety in the hinterlands. Let them have all the chains they need, I couldn't possibly care less. The structure of suburbs and the shopping possibilities to be found there are fundamentally different from New York City.
On pharmacies I see your point. 24 hour pharmacies are clearly desireable. But for the product categories other than prescriptions, I still find better deals and broader variety on goods such as personal care products and various dry goods in other non-chain stores. In New York City we have awesome little discount stores such as Ray's Beauty supply on Eighth Avenue (among countless others all over the place) which are clearly better.
The big chain stores offer to suburbanites the orgasmic one-stop-shopping they crave. Hop out of the car, hop in, pull out. It's different here. We have always had specialty stores and restaurants that outperform any chain on variety and price, all lined up along that incredible urban feature called the streetscape.

[antinimby]

Interesting some of you have brought up the subject of jobs and that the national chains provide better jobs with health insurance and so forth.

That may or may not necessarily be true, but you guys forget one important thing.

All those small businesses are run and owned by regular New Yorkers that often times, live in the very neighborhood their store is in.

They belong to the very important middle class in this city.

Are you going to ask all these people to trade in their businesses that support their families for a $7.50 job as a check out clerk at Target or Home Depot?

Yeah, that's a real smart trade-off. :rolleyes:

[MikeW]

On the hardware side, the same holds for the city. I've lived in the city since '89, and bought and renovated and apt, so i know the city market also. HD has a much greater selection (caveat: Unless you're talking REALLY high end stuff - but I doubt that's what you're talking about), and better prices than the local general HW stores. There are some specialty stores that have stuff you won't find in HD (someone mentioned lighting, and I agree with that), but that tends not to be neighborhood either (unless you live on the Bowery).

That goes straight to the point. We're talkiing about New York City, not Long Island. Here in the CITY, I can find the types of things they sell at Home Depot in other specialized places that simply do not exist in Long Island or any other suburb for that matter. That is why this discussion must be limited to New York City, which is the title of this thread. I have no doubt there is a dearth of variety in the hinterlands. Let them have all the chains they need, I couldn't possibly care less. The structure of suburbs and the shopping possibilities to be found there are fundamentally different from New York City.


It's more than just 24 hours. The chain pharmacies have become more local than the locals. Their closer, more convenient, have better hours, and tend to have better selection than your average local. I'm not comparing you're