Pleasant Pops pushed out — to be replaced by CVS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.)

That’s the only thing that explains CVS. For years I worked between the cvs at 14th and G and the one at McPherson square on K. They were both awful—not well maintained, zero customer service, automated robot voices that started yelling at you if you stopped in front of an item for more than 2 minutes. And usually almost no one there. I think the homeless people use them to buy cheap food because there are no grocery stores downtown. Otherwise it’s just the “crap I forgot to get my secretary a card” or “desperately need Advil/candy/chapstick/tampons and can’t wait until I go home” crowd. SNL has the dumb old skit “guess which one is a cvs employee” and it’s pretty dead on.

[Anonymous]

This is the beauty of densification. Lots of CVS's and banks to chose from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Or they can pay exorbidant rents? Like robber baron prices?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the beauty of densification. Lots of CVS's and banks to chose from.

Nothing says “vibrant Smart Growth” like more CVS stores and bank branches!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

True. It does mean, however, that big businesses have unfair advantages over small businesses.
For example, big companies pay little in tax because they buy politicians and rewrite tax law in their favor.
Also, big companies benefit because they have lower cost of capital due purely to size.
And they do anti-worker things like scheduling workers to avoid benefits.

This is why Teddy Roosevelt used government to do antitrust — to level the playing field.

[Anonymous]

Here’s the original “closing” post from Pleasant Pops.

They said they got a vacate notice. Ooof.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10158189536763889&id=212835473888

[Anonymous]

Relevant to the crony market-ism that advantages big firms over small local businesses.

Small business can afford less in rent in part because they actually have to pay taxes!! Which go to benefit us all, while companies like CVS freeload.

?

Has anyone seen anything firm about what will go into the space and when?

[Anonymous]

Indeed - looks like it is a CVS going in.





CVS uses its political capture and anti-competitive size to squeeze out one of the best local businesses in the area.
Meanwhile, they funnel more wealth up to CEOs and MBAs who live outside the area, and take money away from locals.

Boo.

[Anonymous]

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.

Thank you so much for giving me a nice chuckle.

It’s funny schadenfruede that the urbanists are anti-change when it comes to the amenities they enjoy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Indeed - looks like it is a CVS going in.





CVS uses its political capture and anti-competitive size to squeeze out one of the best local businesses in the area.
Meanwhile, they funnel more wealth up to CEOs and MBAs who live outside the area, and take money away from locals.

Boo.

Why do you hate capitalism?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s the original “closing” post from Pleasant Pops.

They said they got a vacate notice. Ooof.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10158189536763889&id=212835473888

They should have upheld the the terms of the lease or they wouldn’t have been evicted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

True. It does mean, however, that big businesses have unfair advantages over small businesses.
For example, big companies pay little in tax because they buy politicians and rewrite tax law in their favor.
Also, big companies benefit because they have lower cost of capital due purely to size.
And they do anti-worker things like scheduling workers to avoid benefits.

This is why Teddy Roosevelt used government to do antitrust — to level the playing field.

The “unfair advantage” is that big businesses actually know what they are doing.

[Anonymous]

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.

CVS does not sell at a loss. Everything is way over priced.

[Anonymous]

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.

CVS does not sell at a loss. Everything is way over priced.

CVS creates more jobs with better benefits and generates higher sales tax receipts for the city than a popsicle shop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sad news: Pleasant Pops in Adams Morgan/ Dupont closed a few months ago.

https://www.popville.com/2020/11/pleasant-pops-closing-adams-morgan/

The other businesses on the ground floor of the building are also closing or have closed, including Red White and Basil. But Mint Fitness is still operating on the top floor.

We heard from the Pleasant Pops owners that the owners of the building wanted to terminate the Pleasant Pops lease.

And I recently heard that a CVS is going in there. Makes sense: the owners don’t seem to be tearing down the building, and CVS would use the whole first floor.

Terrible news. There are CVS’s everywhere around DC— one is just five blocks away at 14th and W.
And big national corporations have an unfair advantage over local businesses, not least because of corrupt tax advantages that they gain via lobbying.

Well what did you expect would happen to them? Overpriced popsicles at a price point few people can buy or variety of everyday items at all price points that lots of people can buy

The problem with these smaller, gourmet food and product brands is they that all want to survive on their specialness which in reality is just not that special now a days bc everyone is screaming about their locally sourced this or their commitment to that and so on. They would be better off banding together, renting one store front, and selling like products