Judge bars Starbucks from closing 77 failing Teavana stores

[Right_in_Virginia]

Judge bars Starbucks from closing 77 failing Teavana stores
NY Post, Dec 1, 2017, Lisa Fickenscher

An Indiana judge has taken an unusual step and temporarily barred Starbucks from closing 77 failing Teavana stores in Simon Property Group malls because the real estate giant was less able to handle the financial pain.

Starbucks said in July it planned to shutter its 379-store Teavana operation — but Simon rushed to court to block 77 stores in its malls from going dark — claiming such a move by a high-profile tenant could spark other stores in its malls to close.

***

Welch, in a 55-page order, found that the very profitable Starbucks could absorb the financial hit — estimated by Starbucks to be $15 million over five months — better than Simon could. The mall operator did not provide an estimate of how much the closings of the Teavana stores would hurt them.


More: https://nypost.com/2017/12/01/judge-bars-starbucks-from-closing-77-failing-teavana-stores/

[Right_in_Virginia]

 :wtf!:

[Bigun]

So now we have judges making business decisions for private business concerns!   

[Texas Yellow Rose]

 

[jpsb]

Have you forgotten "You didn't build that" so no you can't close it either. The Marxist conquest
of the USA is almost complete.

But Starbucks is a big lefty operation so screw them. No mercy for them what so ever. They
should be forced to open a store in every getto in the country and made to hire locally. Force
them to Starbuck every run down mall everywhere.

[Bigun]

Have you forgotten "You didn't build that" so no you can't close it either. The Marxist conquest
of the USA is almost complete.

But Starbucks is a big lefty operation so screw them. No mercy for them what so ever. They
should be forced to open a store in every getto in the country and made to hire locally. Force
them to Starbuck every run down mall everywhere.

Sorry but no!  Hell no in fact!  If we allow this kind of sh*t to happen to those we don't like how do we stop them for doing it to those they don't like?  Just NO!

[INVAR]

Waiting for our resident Leftist to arrive to tell us all that the Judge is correct and it's SELFISH for a giant corporation to close stores and thus 'harm' those dependent upon them for income.

The fact a Judge can tell people what to make and whom they must make it for AND that they cannot close stores that are failing or fire bad employees is indeed a marker of just how Soviet we have become.

[jpsb]

Waiting for our resident Leftist to arrive to tell us all that the Judge is correct and it's SELFISH for a giant corporation to close stores and thus 'harm' those dependent upon them for income.

The fact a Judge can tell people what to make and whom they must make it for AND that they cannot close stores that are failing or fire bad employees is indeed a marker of just how Soviet we have become.

Don't they do that already in France? I think it is funny that a big lefty org like Starbucks is
finally taking it in the shorts. Is it right? Of course not, but if it's nice that it's Starbucks that's
getting screwed.

[Ghost Bear]

Pretty much predicted in Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged", with Directive 10-289.

[WingNot]

:wtf!:

What the hell is the World coming to.  This is pure communism, plain and simple

[truth_seeker]

Pretty much predicted in Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged", with Directive 10-289.

Covered in Point Two, therein:

"Point Two. All industrial, commercial, manufacturing and business establishments of any nature whatsoever shall henceforth remain in operation, and the owners of such establishments shall not quit nor leave nor retire, nor close, sell or transfer their business, under penalty of the nationalization of their establishment and of any and all of their property. "

[INVAR]

All industrial, commercial, manufacturing and business establishments of any nature whatsoever shall henceforth remain in operation, and the owners of such establishments shall not quit nor leave nor retire, nor close, sell or transfer their business, under penalty of the nationalization of their establishment and of any and all of their property. "

Yup.  We're almost there.

Next big giant financial crisis after the bubble pops - and you betcha the the above becomes a reality in some form.

[Neverdul]

Sorry but no!  Hell no in fact!  If we allow this kind of sh*t to happen to those we don't like how do we stop them for doing it to those they don't like?  Just NO!

 

[Frank Cannon]

If a shitty tea shop no one shops is keeping your real estate empire afloat, you have bigger problems then you think.

BTW this will be overturned in a second. No way a judge can do this.

[truth_seeker]

Simon is the nation's largest shopping center owner, btw.

So their ability to financially absorb Teavana closures would be second to none.

The court which made the ruling is based in Indiana, like Simon.

In my local area, Starbucks has opened and closed many locations.

Teavana is a failed business concept, of placing the Tea business in a separate storefront, instead of merely a separate branded product in Starbucks stores.

I could have this wrong, but I just took a quick look-see at this.

It looks to me like simon is going after Starbucks since they have deep pockets.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

This is the same judge that decided that IBM owes a lot of money because its welfare was not automated.  Leftist judge.
STATE OF INDIANA AWARDED $128 MILLION IN IBM CASE
http://www.btlaw.com/STATE-State-of-Indiana-Awarded-128-Million-in-IBM-Case-08-07-2017/

[Cyber Liberty]

Where in the Hell is Teavana that they have 379 Starbucks?  What kind of place is this?

[Oceander]

Perhaps you all should have read the article.  There is, apparently, a "continuous operations covenant" contained in the leases that Teavana signed, and the judge was merely enforcing that covenant.

So, this isn't a case of a judge just making it up out of whole cloth, but one who is enforcing a contractual obligation the parties voluntarily agreed to.

[Cyber Liberty]

Perhaps you all should have read the article.  There is, apparently, a "continuous operations covenant" contained in the leases that Teavana signed, and the judge was merely enforcing that covenant.

So, this isn't a case of a judge just making it up out of whole cloth, but one who is enforcing a contractual obligation the parties voluntarily agreed to.

I had to look up "Teavana" and it appears they are a tea company wholly owned by Starbucks since 12/31/12.  I wonder if that complicates anything?  Who is this entity with whom Starbucks has a contractual obligation?  Itself?

[Oceander]

I had to look up "Teavana" and it appears they are a tea company wholly owned by Starbucks since 12/31/12.  I wonder if that complicates anything?  Who is this entity with whom Starbucks has a contractual obligation?  Itself?

Uhh, with the mall owner.  It's in the lease.

[WingNot]

Perhaps you all should have read the article. 

Heresy.  Stone him now before he spreads more of his nonsense.

[Cyber Liberty]

Uhh, with the mall owner.  It's in the lease.

Works for me.  Starbucks just learned a valuable lesson, as will the mall owner.

[INVAR]

Perhaps you all should have read the article.  There is, apparently, a "continuous operations covenant" contained in the leases that Teavana signed, and the judge was merely enforcing that covenant.

The article stated (even in the headline) that the Teavana stores were failing.  These are also not anchor stores whereby other businesses are dependent on the existence of them.  Sears has gone dark in multiple hundreds of malls.  Should this judge tell Sears they have to continue operating in those locations when they are on the verge of bankruptcy?

How does a judge mandate a failing business continue to operate, even when it has a 'covenant' - when economic and business climates change and are not static? 

There's a blood and turnip thing going on with this ruling.

[thackney]

Covered in Point Two, therein:

"Point Two. All industrial, commercial, manufacturing and business establishments of any nature whatsoever shall henceforth remain in operation, and the owners of such establishments shall not quit nor leave nor retire, nor close, sell or transfer their business, under penalty of the nationalization of their establishment and of any and all of their property. "

Also known as "Venezuela".

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

Also known as "Venezuela".

FWIW, you can't use Venezuela as an example of failure anymore.  They just totally fixed all of their problems.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-03/petro-venezuelas-maduro-announce-launch-first-government-backed-cryptocurrency