Pleasant Pops pushed out — to be replaced by CVS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why an 8-month-old popville post that literally (and lazily) just copies and pastes someone else's social media post and calls it news is noteworthy now. I mean, if Dan had followed up this post with some actual reporting, that would be one thing. But as usual he didn't so we're just speculating about a closed business 8 months after the fact?

I’m the OP.

It’s relevant now because
- I recently talked to the Pleasant Pops ownership who said they wanted to stay but the landlord wanted them out,
And
- I recently talked to the counterculture people who said they too were leaving.

And I noted Red White and Basil closed. And that Mint is still open.

And someone I know who’s connected in AdMo told me the plan was to lease to a CVS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why an 8-month-old popville post that literally (and lazily) just copies and pastes someone else's social media post and calls it news is noteworthy now. I mean, if Dan had followed up this post with some actual reporting, that would be one thing. But as usual he didn't so we're just speculating about a closed business 8 months after the fact?

I’m the OP.

It’s relevant now because
- I recently talked to the Pleasant Pops ownership who said they wanted to stay but the landlord wanted them out,
And
- I recently talked to the counterculture people who said they too were leaving.

And I noted Red White and Basil closed. And that Mint is still open.

And someone I know who’s connected in AdMo told me the plan was to lease to a CVS.

Ok? Is this a unique situation?

No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why an 8-month-old popville post that literally (and lazily) just copies and pastes someone else's social media post and calls it news is noteworthy now. I mean, if Dan had followed up this post with some actual reporting, that would be one thing. But as usual he didn't so we're just speculating about a closed business 8 months after the fact?

I’m the OP.

It’s relevant now because
- I recently talked to the Pleasant Pops ownership who said they wanted to stay but the landlord wanted them out,
And
- I recently talked to the counterculture people who said they too were leaving.

And I noted Red White and Basil closed. And that Mint is still open.

And someone I know who’s connected in AdMo told me the plan was to lease to a CVS.

Then go buy a building and lease the space to Pleasant Pops. You’ll solve your problem.

[Anonymous]

There was a comparable drugstore a few blocks away at Conn & FL, one at DuPont Circle, one near Columbia & 18th and another around 17th and P. The area is already saturated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There was a comparable drugstore a few blocks away at Conn & FL, one at DuPont Circle, one near Columbia & 18th and another around 17th and P. The area is already saturated.

I work on a block that has a CVS and there's one on the next block too. I think dense areas can sustain a bunch of them and that CVS probably has a better sense of what it needs to be profitable than any of us would.

With that said if someone wants to buy a building and lease to Pleasant Pops there are several available nearby--check out Loopnet.

[Anonymous]

DC has a loophole for these commercial landlords. They find really bland (useful, but as OP mentioned oversaturated) tenants who can pay exorbitant rent or the property sits empty for years and is a write off. The landlords win either way. DC needs to give a few months grace period (not years) for empty retail space and then maybe the landlords will not engage in driving out SO many small business in favor of big box and fast express.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did someone press a red button that activated the AU defense force? Pretty incredible series of defensive posts.

What does AU have to do with this?

They’re the leading destroyer of small independent businesses in upper northwest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did someone press a red button that activated the AU defense force? Pretty incredible series of defensive posts.

What does AU have to do with this?

They’re the leading destroyer of small independent businesses in upper northwest.

Ahold/Bozzuto, the owners of Cathedral Commons, are close behind. They promised that Sullivan’s, Shamali’s and a number of small business tenants that once rented space at the location could come back at discounted rents. Then they reneged on the promise, because they want chain stores and corporate restaurant groups.

The only developer/operator that tries to get independent businesses as tenants is BF Saul, which also designs and builds quality projects. (Compare the quality of Park Van Ness on Connecticut with Cathedral Commons, for example). But Saul is the exception, sadly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did someone press a red button that activated the AU defense force? Pretty incredible series of defensive posts.

What does AU have to do with this?

They’re the leading destroyer of small independent businesses in upper northwest.

Ahold/Bozzuto, the owners of Cathedral Commons, are close behind. They promised that Sullivan’s, Shamali’s and a number of small business tenants that once rented space at the location could come back at discounted rents. Then they reneged on the promise, because they want chain stores and corporate restaurant groups.

The only developer/operator that tries to get independent businesses as tenants is BF Saul, which also designs and builds quality projects. (Compare the quality of Park Van Ness on Connecticut with Cathedral Commons, for example). But Saul is the exception, sadly.

Interesting. I maintain that the loophole.is a big problem in abetting these other landlords behaviors. Have you noticed how often properties have sat empty after the small business is driven out? The landlord writes off the rent as a loss I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A trade of Pleasant Pops for a CVS is a bad trade for the area. For workers and for consumers.

And CVS also has another unfair advantage over pleasant pops- most of CVS’ profit comes from their prescription drug business, and most of the goods they sell are just loss leaders.

So our messed up insurance system, which funnels profit to big health companies, also advantages CVS unfairly over local businesses.

It cannot possibly be anything other than market urbanism at work.

Smart Growth favors national chains over small independently owned businesses.

Yup, it's definitely not the NIMBYs who oppose housing, which raises rents, and pushes out local biz. For sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A trade of Pleasant Pops for a CVS is a bad trade for the area. For workers and for consumers.

And CVS also has another unfair advantage over pleasant pops- most of CVS’ profit comes from their prescription drug business, and most of the goods they sell are just loss leaders.

So our messed up insurance system, which funnels profit to big health companies, also advantages CVS unfairly over local businesses.

It cannot possibly be anything other than market urbanism at work.

Smart Growth favors national chains over small independently owned businesses.

Yup, it's definitely not the NIMBYs who oppose housing, which raises rents, and pushes out local biz. For sure.

Agreed. It's not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did someone press a red button that activated the AU defense force? Pretty incredible series of defensive posts.

What does AU have to do with this?

They’re the leading destroyer of small independent businesses in upper northwest.

Ahold/Bozzuto, the owners of Cathedral Commons, are close behind. They promised that Sullivan’s, Shamali’s and a number of small business tenants that once rented space at the location could come back at discounted rents. Then they reneged on the promise, because they want chain stores and corporate restaurant groups.

The only developer/operator that tries to get independent businesses as tenants is BF Saul, which also designs and builds quality projects. (Compare the quality of Park Van Ness on Connecticut with Cathedral Commons, for example). But Saul is the exception, sadly.

Interesting. I maintain that the loophole.is a big problem in abetting these other landlords behaviors. Have you noticed how often properties have sat empty after the small business is driven out? The landlord writes off the rent as a loss I guess.

Does anyone know exactly what/where this loophole is? Would love to have a cite to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did someone press a red button that activated the AU defense force? Pretty incredible series of defensive posts.

What does AU have to do with this?

They’re the leading destroyer of small independent businesses in upper northwest.

Ahold/Bozzuto, the owners of Cathedral Commons, are close behind. They promised that Sullivan’s, Shamali’s and a number of small business tenants that once rented space at the location could come back at discounted rents. Then they reneged on the promise, because they want chain stores and corporate restaurant groups.

The only developer/operator that tries to get independent businesses as tenants is BF Saul, which also designs and builds quality projects. (Compare the quality of Park Van Ness on Connecticut with Cathedral Commons, for example). But Saul is the exception, sadly.

Interesting. I maintain that the loophole.is a big problem in abetting these other landlords behaviors. Have you noticed how often properties have sat empty after the small business is driven out? The landlord writes off the rent as a loss I guess.

Does anyone know exactly what/where this loophole is? Would love to have a cite to it.

It sounds like what’s being suggested is that landlords can write off on their taxes rent for empty commercial retail units. Is that it? Law? And just DC taxes?

Also, yes the area is saturated with CVS already. (Also CVS retail is subsidized by their US-healthcare-industry pharmacy business. CVS is just a healthcare business with toilet paper and groceries to get people in the door.)

[Anonymous]

Another chain store in DC? What a shocker!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC has a loophole for these commercial landlords. They find really bland (useful, but as OP mentioned oversaturated) tenants who can pay exorbitant rent or the property sits empty for years and is a write off. The landlords win either way. DC needs to give a few months grace period (not years) for empty retail space and then maybe the landlords will not engage in driving out SO many small business in favor of big box and fast express.

That's the "it's so crowded, nobody goes there anymore" argument for stores.

I may have the opinion that there are too many CVS stores or Starbucks stores or bank branches in a given area, but that doesn't mean the area is oversaturated. CVS, Starbucks, and the banks are unlikely to be operating their businesses at a loss.