Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Toys ‘R’ Us Didn’t Have to Die

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 226 posts

Re: Toys ‘R’ Us Didn’t Have to Die

#161

Post by isostatic »

kgwgk wrote: post #156
isostatic wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK some people are taxed at >100% on income, but that aside If you have 100 shops, and rent 11 at $10k a month, and the rest are empty, you get $110k a month If you have 100 shops, and rent 60 at $2k a month, and 40 are empty, you get $120k a month Now lets assume a 50% tax In the first example you keep $55k In the second example you keep $60k Great, go for the second. But now if you make the empty shops a tax…

That wouldn’t fly, at least in the US: http://www.habifproperties.com/can-landlords-take-a-tax-dedu...

If the landlord donated $50k to a charity, is that a writeoff? If that charity rents $45k of space from the donor does that count?

A similar loophole was being used in the UK a few years back: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16692556

Re: Toys ‘R’ Us Didn’t Have to Die

#162

Post by seanmcdirmid »

randomsearch wrote: post #141
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have a flat charge, so if you buy a lot it can work. A lot of third party IKEA resellers on Amazon exist because of this (they basically run to the local IKEA to fulfill an order with better low volume shipping options).

> They have a flat charge, so if you buy a lot it can work. They don't, at least in the UK. You pay a variable charge depending on what is shipping.

Sorry, I met the USA. Other countries will be diffferent of course, like China where deliveries are expected and rediculously cheap even including assembly.

Re: Toys ‘R’ Us Didn’t Have to Die

#163

Post by sasaf5 »

organsnyder wrote: post #139
sasaf5 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdote time: I took my cousin (12) to a toy store once. First it was difficult to get him out of his iPad and get out of home. Second he was completely indifferent to anything in the store. We ended up buying some card games and credit for mobile games. + There aren't many kids anymore.

That's on the older end of the customer demographic, though. My kids (oldest is seven) would have a blast, and would definitely be begging to bring something home.

Maybe it's my inexperience with kids then. Perhaps I should have taken the boy to the local apple store?

Thanks~

Re: Toys ‘R’ Us Didn’t Have to Die

#165

Post by zer0faith »

mkirklions wrote: post #158
zer0faith wrote: post #152

I worked for a home improvement retailer for a long time, around 2008 they stopped building 120k sq ft stores and moved down to 80k sq ft, Then staff was cut (2010), a few years later (2012) more staff was cut, now they are talking about replacing some staff members with self help robots that have video conferencing to help customers(2014). These traditional retailers are trying hard to stay in the game but i just do…

Things that make me go to a store >Instant >Helpful employees Prices didnt matter if I showed up to the store, but it should be cheaper than shipping to your home. Employees should be knowledgeable and helpful. Instead most stores have the exact products or fewer online, higher prices, and an empty store.

I once tried to stock up on some generator connectors and like electrical items in my department before Hurricane Sandy. My orders were denied because last year sales and previous three week trends weren't enough to justify the order. The shelves stayed empty for almost 2 months.

Re: Toys ‘R’ Us Didn’t Have to Die

#166

Post by kgwgk »

isostatic wrote: post #161
kgwgk wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That wouldn’t fly, at least in the US: http://www.habifproperties.com/can-landlords-take-a-tax-dedu...

If the landlord donated $50k to a charity, is that a writeoff? If that charity rents $45k of space from the donor does that count? A similar loophole was being used in the UK a few years back: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16692556

I'm not sure if you read the link I sent. If I give $100k to a charity and they use the money to rent something from me for $100k I won't be paying any less taxes that if I had not done the whole "tax dodging" scheme... [1] Maybe it was possible to deduct "virtual" donations in the UK, but it's not hard to disallow if people abuse the system. I could also donate a stone to a charity saying that it's worth $1bn to get a deduction. Would that count?

Edit: reading your link it seems unrelated to deductions on taxable income. It's about council taxes on businesses, which are lower for charities than for regular businesses or unoccupied stores. So it makes sense for the owner to let a charity use the space rent-free and pay their 20% of the tax instead of paying 100% of the tax for the empty property.

[1] Actually I may end up paying less taxes if my costs raise, because I will be making a lower profit. But that would result in lower after-tax profits, which is probably not the objective of the scheme.

Re: Toys ‘R’ Us Didn’t Have to Die

#167

Post by bunderbunder »

brandonsometig wrote: post #116
duxup wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. It's just strange as I've seen large % of commercial areas stay empty, they keep up the place, but almost nothing in the spaces, for years.

They can borrow against the property at the stated rent instead of what the market would actually pay. As soon as they accept lower rents they can no longer claim it's worth as much in collateral.

Hmm. I would never have expected the kinds of lenders who might be in a position to accept a large commercial property as collateral to be so gullible as to just accept that number at face value without paying any attention to other factors that might call it into question.

Or are the "lenders" in this case actually retail investors who are buying into dodgy REITs and suchlike?

Re: Toys ‘R’ Us Didn’t Have to Die

#168

Post by astura »

ben1040 wrote: post #155
pandapunchpower wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is some scope for a brick and mortar toy store provided they are willing to be double as a pseudo-playcenter. Toy aisles and toy stores are frequently populated by exhausted parents standing around while their children entertain themselves checking out the toys. The kids are happy enough. The parents are content just to have a few minutes to themselves. Toy retailers typically try and dissuade this behavior. Me…

>Meanwhile indoor playgrounds/play centers are a huge and growing business. They are happy for parents to unleash their children while they make their money from entry charges, selling cups of coffee to the parents and snacks for the kids. There's a mom and pop place like this near me. They rented an old dead big box store (I remember shopping there when it was a Circuit City) and filled it with bounce houses and arc…

So Discovery Zone?

That business model appeared not to work in the 90s, because they all closed down, I wonder why. Unsustainable business model? Good business model but taking on too much debt? Kids get bored after a couple visits and don't come back? Rising rents? Admission prices too high?

Around me there was a Discovery Zone and there was two more independent ones that opened up around the same time as Discovery Zone and closed a little after too. From what I could gather, seems like the business model just didn't work, at least not at the time.

For those of you outside the US or too young to remember: https://youtu.be/33QpqR-fN0c

Re: Toys ‘R’ Us Didn’t Have to Die

#169

Post by rtkwe »

oliwarner wrote: post #78
duxup wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't get is there are a lot of empty storefronts and places moving that I see... and retailers say the rents are still sky high for those storefronts. Is it really worth the property owners keeping them empty?

At least in the UK, they're more likely to get permission to convert to residential if it's long abandoned. Housing demand in cities is much higher than the normal available space on the boundaries. Carving a big box into 300 apartments more than justifies a couple of years of doing nothing with the place.

That might make sense for older downtown department store and street store fronts but doesn't make sense for malls and big box stores here in the US. I don't really see any way to meet code requirements like bedrooms requiring windows in those buildings.

Re: Toys ‘R’ Us Didn’t Have to Die

#170

Post by owie829 »

toufique wrote: post #98

Begs the question, what kinds of local businesses are structurally safe from being disrupted by Amazon? Some that come to mind: * Food - restaurants, fast food, pizza, takeout * Social experiences - bars, cafes, arcades, comedy clubs * Things that can't be shipped - gas stations, perishables * Things you want right away - milk, delis, convenience stores * Things that can't be commoditized - Copying keys * Services -…

perishables - Amazon ships goods including PrimeNow delivery and leveraging their acquisition of Whole Foods to ships fresh food

things you want right away - Prime Now, 2 hr delivery in select markets

services - Amazon has an entire section of services, from auto detailing to household cleaning

Post reply on HN