Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

theelljar t1_ixaz5xu wrote

my favorite local bar doesn't still exist. it was replaced by condos.

57

gh234ip t1_ixazbde wrote

My favorite localbar was replaced by a bodega 10 years ago

28

thisisntmineIfoundit t1_ixb00s1 wrote

These business owners are what’s on my mind when I picture a better city and when I walk into a voting booth. I have yet to encounter a politician who seems intent on helping them.

Note* Helping them is not writing them one time checks with my money. It is permanently getting rid of the red tape & fees involved in starting / running a business, along with legislation against these ridiculous credit card fees and things like that. Real action.

30

pigeonsmasher t1_ixb0517 wrote

So even without covid restrictions, this business is only pulling in $56,000 a month in lower Manhattan? That’s less than $2000 a day. God bless ‘em but I’d say that’s probably not a good business.

Is this normal? I managed a restaurant in midtown in 2009-2012 that made about 3x this and we didn’t even have a liquor license.

59

koreamax t1_ixbd8jv wrote

Replying to pigeonsmasher (#610,087)

I agree. I'm all for local businesses but so many of them just don't make money. I'm sorry, but being unproductive in one of the most expensive places in the world just won't work

29

NicoleEastbourne t1_ixbtzyg wrote

Replying to sysyphusishappy (#611,097)

The constant sound of ambulance sirens was in the air. There were refrigerator trucks parked outside of hospitals to hold the dead. NYC was hit really hard at the beginning before vaccinations became widespread.

8

nim_opet t1_ixc08ff wrote

My favorite local bar has been boarded up and empty for over a year now, I’m guessing the landlord is waiting for DR or Chase to rent the space

3

sysyphusishappy t1_ixc2035 wrote

Replying to Appropriate-Sport-22 (#612,621)

https://www.economist.com/international/2022/07/07/covid-learning-loss-has-been-a-global-disaster

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/nov/15/europe-faces-cancer-epidemic-after-estimated-1m-cases-missed-during-covid

https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o29

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9386128/

What's it like being an authoritarian? Oh, authoritarianism with an excuse you like is still authoritarianism.

2

blunted1 t1_ixc8rej wrote

The fixed costs associated with running a bar in this city is absurd. Add that to the amount of $ it takes to get the business up and running, looking at you State Liquor Authority, and you'll find it's a loosing proposition.

5

krizzlec t1_ixcao9a wrote

My favorite local bar became a 711. Rip B.O.A.

4

SoulfulYam t1_ixck8yp wrote

The sad thing is that at least people living in NYC can enjoy local bars, restaurants, etc. to hang out and meet other people. Most places in the country, especially the suburbs, don't have this luxury.

7

brotie t1_ixckfbe wrote

Replying to pigeonsmasher (#610,087)

Yeah, this article seems less like lamenting COVID’s impact on the hospitality industry and more a case study in why bar and restaurant experience does not inherently mean you’re ready to own your own business. In the article the guy details how they opened in a space next to a church so they couldn’t sell liquor and had to get a second space to make cocktails (probably should have figured that out before leasing the first space…), appears to admit to using illegal labor (employee moved back to Mexico because they couldn’t get them hours, they would have been on PUA if legal and probably made more than they did at the bar) and regularly not paying bills. They make it sound like the government left them high and dry until admitting they got forgiven PPP loans to pay their staff the whole time. It was a hectic time and caused a ton of suffering for everyone but at least the city tried ideas (such as the outdoor dining, togo drinks that the author is complaining about) to keep you in business while offering unprecedented unemployment supplements and forgivable loans.

This just doesn’t seem like a viable business even if it is somebody’s favorite bar.

19

GoHuskies1984 t1_ixclszn wrote

Replying to sirzoop (#611,613)

Cocktail bar probably averages higher than $10 per drink not to mention patrons are probably averaging more than one drink per visit.

Article example sounds too low volume to survive.

11

Delaywaves t1_ixcmt9h wrote

Replying to koreamax (#611,187)

Why is everyone being so unforgiving to this guy?

Should you not be allowed to run a bar in NYC if you're not maximally "productive"? Isn't the point of this article that regular, neighborhood bars should be given the support they need to survive even if they're not some perfectly efficient business operation?

12

Delaywaves t1_ixcokhj wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#614,358)

It's plainly untrue that they "can't sell drinks" — they're popular, they bring in tens of thousands of dollars a month, and the bar is very well-reviewed online.

They just can't sell enough drinks to meet the arbitrary threshold we've set in the city, once you take into account the many ways that our government fails small businesses.

6

Brodie_C t1_ixcrh0d wrote

Mine doesn't, RIP Saint Jerome's at 155 Rivington

1

SeaworthinessOne2114 t1_ixcxgvi wrote

My favorite local bar closed down a month after my partner died. And now, with people running around throwing bricks at gay bars and spitting at gay customers on sidewalks, it's hard to know where it's safe.

7

GND52 t1_ixcxxbz wrote

Replying to Delaywaves (#614,287)

The problem is the extreme cost of operating in NYC.

That is a problem we can fix. Chiefly by reducing rents. Not by mandating lower rents, but by losening zoning and building regulations. We need dramatically more mixed-use space to allow more people to open small businesses in their neighborhoods.

This particular policy has the added benefit of growing the population of the city, expanding the customer base for these small businesses. We need, like, millions of additional people living in this city and we need even more new apartments to not just house them, but give us all more housing choice to drive rents down.

15

Darrackodrama t1_ixcyqu6 wrote

Replying to GND52 (#615,387)

But why not, have the government just asses properties and set rents? Like will the market really collapse if rents come down 10-20% sure some commercial landlords will sue likely win. But it seems to me you all are way too wedded to the private market like it’s some kind of infallible god

6

GND52 t1_ixczyv7 wrote

Replying to Darrackodrama (#615,495)

Rent control is one of the few ideas with near universal agreement among economists: it doesn’t work. It stifles new development, reduces quality of existing homes, reduces city tax revenue, makes it harder for people to move, causes shortages, and doesn't even keep prices down.

https://www.nmhc.org/news/articles/the-high-cost-of-rent-control/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/06/15/comeback-rent-control-just-time-make-housing-shortages-worse/

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-01-18/yup-rent-control-does-more-harm-than-good

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2019/09/19/rent-control-will-make-housing-shortages-worse

https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/RentControl.html

12

Exotic_Philosopher42 t1_ixdbhpi wrote

Replying to GND52 (#615,655)

“Universal agreement” lol. Then you go on to only post blatant propaganda while ignoring the fact that their is global precedent showing rent control and public property assessment/seizure consistently helps the working class.

−1

Darrackodrama t1_ixdizzg wrote

Replying to GND52 (#615,655)

Correction rent control doesn’t work if you believe in a world where landlords and developers are the only providers of houses. Other countries have shown time and time again that the public sector can do good housing you just need to invest in it as a priority.

6

Dichotopotamus t1_ixdki4h wrote

All mine were replaced during the gentrification of the 2000s with artisanal craft yoga bars servicing Midwestern transplants

0

Marlsfarp t1_ixdlmj1 wrote

Replying to biggreencat (#617,846)

First one he listed lays it pretty straightforwardly. Rent control reduces both the quality and quantity of housing available, in more or less the same way price controls for other things typically do. The theory is straightforward, but it's not just theory, it is extremely well documented in practice. It benefits entrenched interests at the expense of all future residents, and destroys the livability of cities.

2

biggreencat t1_ixdn1yw wrote

Replying to Marlsfarp (#618,036)

the problem i'm trying to bring up is that it's a benefit to the people who are receiving rent control. there aren't a lot of policies that are quite as socially protective as that is. of course those of us who aren't benefitting from it aren't going to consider it beneficial.

I'm also sceptical (to put it mildly) that the general population of renters would benefit from more development and the changing of zoning laws.

1

Marlsfarp t1_ixdo78w wrote

Replying to biggreencat (#618,156)

The people who manage to land a rent controlled home will be able to live cheaply as their home and their city decays around them, together with their grown children who can't afford to leave. Sometimes it's worth it for that select group, but overall it's a disaster. Supply and demand is not some trick made up by evil economists.

2

d2d2d2d2d2 t1_ixdp274 wrote

This is perhaps ancillary at best, but I couldn't help cringe at the supposedly "surprising" info that commercial tenants pay for property tax. I think you'll find that residential tenants also pay property tax. You know, through their rent.

1

Darrackodrama t1_ixe6g66 wrote

Replying to GND52 (#615,655)

To be fair though we have had rent control multiple times throughout history in the past 100 years and landlords survived.

It has always been profitable to be a landlord in New York City, it’s a question of how profitable we want to make that proposition.

Also so many fundamental assumptions Econ professors are political zealots for free markets selling their vision of a profitized housing system. So to say universal agreement is rich.

4

SoulfulYam t1_ixe9t3e wrote

Replying to iStealyournewspapers (#620,136)

Not necessarily although that is certainly true. I'm talking more about suburbs where the residential and commercial areas are segregated and far apart and you essentially have to drive out of your neighborhood just to do anything outside your house. It's a vastly different experience than being able to just walk a few blocks from where you live to the bagel shop.

4

ghiaab_al_qamaar t1_ixefbas wrote

Replying to Darrackodrama (#617,803)

Which other countries have shown this “time and time again”?

Off the top of my head, I can think of ambitious public housing programs in Austria (which in the modern day is increasingly utilizing public-private partnerships) and Singapore (whose 99-year lease concept alters the game quite a bit).

2

SoulfulYam t1_ixefv8f wrote

Replying to iStealyournewspapers (#620,685)

That's funny cause I used to work with someone who was from Connecticut and would just shit all over the entire state. She said drunk driving was a problem there.

I can't blame her though. I live on Staten Island myself and I never turn down an opportunity to shit talk this place because I hate it so much.

3

iStealyournewspapers t1_ixenbcy wrote

Replying to SoulfulYam (#621,031)

I grew up there too, and while I love it so much, I also talk plenty of shit. Like how every fucking white woman is blonde. (Obviously not every, but it’s a ridiculously common thing for ladies to do there)

1

FutureGT t1_ixequd8 wrote

Replying to GND52 (#615,387)

I'm completely all-in for YIMBY/upzoning everything, however I dont think this will make these specific business rents cheaper in this case, since the vast majority of retail/bars want to be on the first (or first few) stories, which is already very saturated real estate. If anything, i'd imagine greatly increasing density will lower housing costs (obvi) but dramatically increase the now more coveted street level space. If a business cannot operate now with all the foot traffic, chances are it won't be able to operate in the future either.

1

Pool_Shark t1_ixevjs6 wrote

Replying to GND52 (#615,387)

I know this is a popular arguement for housing but it makes less sense for small business. Walk around NYC and see how many empty storefronts there are throughout the 5 boros. This isn’t a building problem it’s a landlords have incentives to keep stores empty until they get the insane rents they want

1

iStealyournewspapers t1_ixf91vo wrote

Replying to sleeptrain123 (#623,318)

Awesome!! What a great bar to start out in. It kinda smells, they have a just above average selection on tap, a one armed Irish bar maid, a great juke box, darts in the back, and an overall classic dive bar look. It’s also where the sad alcoholic locals often hang out, plus there’s a banksy next door that you can go drunkedly look at while having a smoke break outside. I realize some of the things I mentioned may not have been there when you visited, but I’m sure it still has the same charm that you loved.

2

Darrackodrama t1_ixfhdjk wrote

Replying to ghiaab_al_qamaar (#620,967)

Austria and Singapore and in part Hong Kong, these are the only places it’s been tried in part at least.

It works 100% you just have to do it

Also I want to add to that list some of the Soviet republics, they at least showed you do not need private landlords to house people. Sure the housing wasn’t the best quality but modern Russian housing is just as poor but far more expensive even for krushchev blocks.

For their time Soviet housing blocks were revolutionary walkable communities

4

pixel_of_moral_decay t1_ixfsnk5 wrote

Replying to pigeonsmasher (#610,087)

Bars are in general a horrible investment. Most bar owners best way to make money is to sell it to someone who thinks "it would be soooo cool to own a bar".

People come in, buy an "expensive" drink, and hog a chair for a long period of time. Revenue per square foot is pretty low while they sip that drink slowly and talk.

If bars were big money makers, there's be way more corporations running bars around the globe. But reality is, that's the one industry they never got a foothold in. The closest you've got is "Bar and Grill" places, which mostly exist because of a giant menu of Sysco Foods based crap they can microwave or drop in a fryer and sell at a huge margin.

Bars exist because people have midlife crisis's all the time.

0

Darrackodrama t1_ixh4mwu wrote

Replying to GND52 (#620,404)

But people aren’t building more apartments precisely because it would make the system less profitable?

You see the problem with your logic? It rests on the assumption that the private market needs to build except reality has actually shown the private market doesn’t ever want to build.

Then you circle back around and introduce some hypothetical actions that a private market hasn’t ever provided assuming by magic that they will.

2

ctindel t1_ixii2ys wrote

Replying to SoulfulYam (#620,386)

Driving 5 minutes to a bagel shop is no different than walking 5 minutes to a bagel shop.

Yes for going out drinking, not having to drive is better but honestly once Ubers are automated and the price drops down to be like taking a $5 or $10 train ride home life in the suburbs will be very different.

−1

Darrackodrama t1_ixiplki wrote

Replying to ctindel (#635,716)

Build what then, more “luxury buildings”? And why does it matter that they take a loss when you’re providing an essential human need?

This is why the government needs to get back into the business of social housing

2

take_five t1_ixiqh2t wrote

Replying to GND52 (#615,387)

Random question for anyone, but why don’t we convert some of the empty office space to commercial? In other countries and cities I saw many more commercial places on second floors, or even third or fourth floors.

1

ctindel t1_ixjb8m5 wrote

Replying to Darrackodrama (#636,547)

> Build what then, more “luxury buildings”?

No, I think the government should remove FAR restrictions but only for owners who will build coops that are affordable to purchase by the middle class and must be owner-occupied as a primary residence.

> And why does it matter that they take a loss when you’re providing an essential human need?

Because this is the real world and nobody is going to take a loss on purpose. Yes the government could get in the game but if they're just providing rentals it won't solve the problem. We need more middle class homeownership here not more lifetime renters.

1

MrMiracle100 t1_ixl8vsi wrote

This is purely anecdotal, but from what I've seen as a bar patron of over 25+ years, COVID is, in the minds of patrons, "over." Every bar that is still HERE now has the same volume of customers they ever had in 2019. The difference is these bars now also have outdoor spaces and, more importantly, their drink prices have increased 35% or more from what they were pre-pandemic.

Honestly, what I predicted back when bars were slowly reopening with pandemic restrictions in place is exactly what actually happened. Those of us who wanted to support our local businesses and keep them open were happy to pay incredibly inflated prices on liquor to do so, but the bar owners themselves were taking the gamble that IF they could survive the pandemic they would then be able to make money hand over fist after it was all "over," because they had increased margins and prices never go down again once they're up.

I have been to PACKED bars at least once a week for the past few months and every time have paid $10 or more on well liquor that used to cost $7 and used to be a heavier pour, to boot. That's before a tip, which of course has now gone up as well, both due to basic math and due to the fact that regular bar patrons want to make sure the bartenders they like who were struggling aren't struggling anymore.

So it's a little frustrating to see some bar owners pretend that they're still suffering from a pandemic that they are now really happy to completely ignore in the actual bars.

It's just hard for me to imagine anything other than what other posters have posited--some of these suffering bar owners are just A. Not good at running a bar or B. Not running a good bar.

People spent nearly two years managing to NOT go out every night and I think maybe some of us are now a lot more cognizant of the fact that if you plan on having more than two drinks in any given night you are far better off just buying a bottle and inviting some friends to hang out.

2