Bewleys set to close

L1011

Peregrinus wrote: »

SFAIK it can be used for purposes other than a cafe, so long as the listed elements of the structure are retained.

It could be a restaurant, for example. Perhaps quite a high-end one. And I dare say it could be adapted as a luxury goods outlet without too much problem.

There's two things here - other uses won't breach the protected structure rules if done right; but the city development plan has it restricted to a cafe so change of use wouldn't get through.

No restaurant could pay 1.5m rent either. Even some of the larger stores on Grafton Street are "only" paying 750k going on the commercial lease register

Loozer

It's worth a good bit in advertising value to have the flagship store even if it's losing money

Peregrinus

Loozer wrote: »

It's worth a good bit in advertising value to have the flagship store even if it's losing money

Which presumably is why they maintained it for so long. But if Bewleys have now made the decision that it isn't worth it to them for advertising value, it seems unreasonably to demand that the landlord, in effect, pay for the advertising that they decide not to pay for themselves.

L1011

Peregrinus wrote: »

Which presumably is why they maintained it for so long. But if Bewleys have now made the decision that it isn't worth it to them for advertising value, it seems unreasonably to demand that the landlord, in effect, pay for the advertising that they decide not to pay for themselves.

They asked the landlord to reduce the rent to market rates, which were decided by a tribunal and were around half of the passing rent. That's what they asked for.

dr.kenneth noisewater

Went once last year and the food and service was terrible and it was very overpriced. Most I know who went in the past few years thought the same. Sad for those to lose their jobs but dont think it would have lasted long term regardless of Covid

yourdeadwright

Darc19 wrote: »

None whatsoever.

The business lost €1.5m last year, so if the rent was free it would still not be profitable.

Basically the business itself failed and was unable to pay the rent.

It has always ran at a loss that the rest of the Bewleys business ventures where able to cover ,

They knew the Grafton street business would never turn profit but it helped them generate more business else where for there brand due to the prestige of having it .

I guess it just gone to far into the red for that to even make sense anymore

Hurrache

While the building itself is great, Bewleys is not. The services/food it provides has been stagnant since the 80s. Last time I was there was early 2000s when meeting someone for dinner and I've never been back.

Despite all the nostalgia (and a lot of it is along the lines of 'oh I meet my friends there once a year at Christmas, I'm so upset it's gone') it has little draw to it.

The bricks and mortar is its unique selling point, I've never seen a reason to go there for any sort of dining experience.

Wheety

Goldengirl wrote: »

Starbucks @ Bewley's Grafton St. ?

Yup. They did similar on Westmoreland Street.

Although I think it's now a a TGI Fridays.

Pawwed Rig

L1011 wrote: »

Its almost definite that the market rent for a protected cafe that can't be used for anything other than a cafe is a lot less than 1.5m

Why did Bewleys pay it then? Are you trying to say the Bewleys gave Jonny Ronan extra cash on top of rent for a laugh?
The fact that the money was paid on an arms length basis between two willing parties is the definition of market rates.

L1011

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Why did Bewleys pay it then? Are you trying to say the Bewleys gave Jonny Ronan extra cash on top of rent for a laugh?
The fact that the money was paid on an arms length basis between two willing parties is the definition of market rates.

The rent was a pre-crash rent. Then the crash happened. Ronan was quite involved in that, as you may be aware

Basically everyone else on Grafton Street managed to rebase rents to reflect this, even McDonalds. Ronan fought it all the way to the Supreme Court however.

So they're paying a pre-crash rent on a street where rental values have never recovered to that level; and which is facing multiple retail vacancies by the time shops reopen (Cath Kidson already gone, Oasis around the corner on SSG also)

Look at recent leases on Grafton Street on the lease register - there is not a hope in hell of Ronan acheiving the same rent or even anything close to it on what is an exceptionally restrictive unit - listed and restricted to cafe use in the city development plan.

The idea bounced around that Starbucks, who have closed multiple units in the south city centre in recent years and are part of a group that is basically not trading at the moment, could afford to take it over is laughable.

swarlb

Evil Johnny Rohan... sitting in some squalid cave counting his cash...:rolleyes:

Ye know, I'm an aul fella... born in the 50's... in James' Street, and lived in Dublin for most of my adult life.... worked in the Dandelion Market till the 'evil developers' tore it down and built that monstrosity at the top of Grafton Street.
Then there was McBirneys.... evil Virgin man came in and turned it into a record shop

2 places I've never been to in Dublin, Croke Park and Bewleys, and the chances are, I'll never get to them.

mickdw

L1011 wrote: »

The rent was a pre-crash rent. Then the crash happened. Ronan was quite involved in that, as you may be aware

Basically everyone else on Grafton Street managed to rebase rents to reflect this, even McDonalds. Ronan fought it all the way to the Supreme Court however.

So they're paying a pre-crash rent on a street where rental values have never recovered to that level; and which is facing multiple retail vacancies by the time shops reopen (Cath Kidson already gone, Oasis around the corner on SSG also)

Look at recent leases on Grafton Street on the lease register - there is not a hope in hell of Ronan acheiving the same rent or even anything close to it on what is an exceptionally restrictive unit - listed and restricted to cafe use in the city development plan.

The idea bounced around that Starbucks, who have closed multiple units in the south city centre in recent years and are part of a group that is basically not trading at the moment, could afford to take it over is laughable.

Why would they continue to pay it if not sustainable. Surely every lease is open to review by both parties at certain time periods.

yourdeadwright

mickdw wrote: »

Why would they continue to pay it if not sustainable. Surely every lease is open to review by both parties at certain time periods.

As having the premises in Grafton street means a lot to there business its great for there brand and it makes them money else where ,
Basically it adds value to there brand (even if café loses money on the actually premises )

The money lost on it is covered by other parts of Bewleys

K.O.Kiki

Hurrache wrote: »

While the building itself is great, Bewleys is not. The services/food it provides has been stagnant since the 80s. Last time I was there was early 2000s when meeting someone for dinner and I've never been back.

Despite all the nostalgia (and a lot of it is along the lines of 'oh I meet my friends there once a year at Christmas, I'm so upset it's gone') it has little draw to it.

The bricks and mortar is its unique selling point, I've never seen a reason to go there for any sort of dining experience.

Why do you think your opinion means anything when you haven't been to a business in over a decade & after a management change?

Hurrache

Because I'm a member of the public, and a potential customer, with many colleagues and friends, all potential customers, who reads a lot of social media, involving a lot of potential customers, and yet to have anyone recommend I go there for lunch, dinner etc over any of the other large amounts of premises around the area.

And it's obviously not unique to me.

L1011

mickdw wrote: »

Why would they continue to pay it if not sustainable. Surely every lease is open to review by both parties at certain time periods.

Leases of that period generally had upward-only reviews and may not have had break clauses. For that was Tiger era Ireland.

expectationlost

does he want to change planning for it to be a pub?

Muahahaha

Deleted User wrote: »

And the very same reason why there will never ever be an Apple Store in Grafton Street.

Arent CompuB still on Grafton Street, AFAIK they only sell Apple products

L1011 wrote: »

Look at recent leases on Grafton Street on the lease register - there is not a hope in hell of Ronan acheiving the same rent or even anything close to it on what is an exceptionally restrictive unit - listed and restricted to cafe use in the city development plan.

Yeah you'd wonder whats Ronans game is here. Given he would have to apply for change of use planning permission that would be likely refused surely he is just making his own asset devalue? What other coffee chain is going to pay 1.5m a year in rent, none I would say. The rent is just too high for a coffee shop to make money there yet thats all the building can operate as. Seems bizarre to me unless he is planning on leaving it empty in an attempt to twist DCCs arm.

It would be some laugh if it ended up as a Wetherspoons just a few doors down from Brown Thomas

Robbo

L1011 wrote: »

Leases of that period generally had upward-only reviews and may not have had break clauses. For that was Tiger era Ireland.

Unless there was a deed of variation entered into since the Supreme Court judgment involving the premises, it's a lease executed in 1987 with a famously peculiar review clause. The original landlord was Royal Insurance plc.

L1011

Robbo wrote: »

Unless there was a deed of variation entered into since the Supreme Court judgment involving the premises, it's a lease executed in 1987 with a famously peculiar review clause. The original landlord was Royal Insurance plc.

Reading the reports on that clause it looks as if you could have continued flipping interpretations back and forth through infinity levels of appeal courts

35 year lease from 1987 would mean the original lease hasn't got particularly long left although I think they'd have met all the requirements to require renewal.

nailer54321

This will not close down, drumming up a lot of free pu licity for when it does open up, look at when they reopened, a lot of hipe about this, lines of people wziting to get in, smell a rat here, call me synical if you like but have seen it before with this place, can't understand all the hype abiut overpriced food and coffee, only time will tell.

Biker79

I would tend to agree. Its perhaps part of a strategy for rent reduction which has to be resisted, at least in the short term, by the landlords.

I would be concerned about civic life in the city centre. So many hostels and apartments are filling up with junkies and alcoholics. With that and small-business closures, life could get pretty grim around here. It was not in good shape before the lockdown, for the same reasons.

Dravokivich

Deleted User wrote: »

And the very same reason why there will never ever be an Apple Store in Grafton Street.

No it isn't. The only reason there isn't one on Grafton Street, is because there isn't any in the country.

Jizique

Muahahaha wrote: »

Arent CompuB still on Grafton Street, AFAIK they only sell Apple products





Yeah you'd wonder whats Ronans game is here. Given he would have to apply for change of use planning permission that would be likely refused surely he is just making his own asset devalue? What other coffee chain is going to pay 1.5m a year in rent, none I would say. The rent is just too high for a coffee shop to make money there yet thats all the building can operate as. Seems bizarre to me unless he is planning on leaving it empty in an attempt to twist DCCs arm.

It would be some laugh if it ended up as a Wetherspoons just a few doors down from Brown Thomas

Compulsory purchase if that is his game - although knowing Dublin City council, it will be like that chancer Keane and the Iveagh markets

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Not sure if you're serious or not, but, out of curiosity, when's the last time you set foot in / purchased anything in Bewleys?

Many years ago

I am serious about not having a heritage structure destroyed. But I do know some types would be happy to see eg Christ Church knocked down to make way for a McDonalds.

super_furry

It's been ****e ever since they didn't just let you go in and sit wherever you wanted.

Muahahaha

Jizique wrote: »

Compulsory purchase if that is his game - although knowing Dublin City council, it will be like that chancer Keane and the Iveagh markets

Yeah I dont think compulsory purchase would happen, DCC dont have tens of millions to splash on a coffee shop/restaurant. Id wonder is he lining up a change of use application that then gets refused and he takes it further into the High Court claiming a coffee shop cant make money there and it needs to be changed to a luxury clothes shop or the like.

Because if it has to remain as a coffee shop who is he going to get in there, I couldnt see Starbucks taking on a loss making venue just to promote their brand when they already have five or six outlets within a few minutes walk of it. Definitely not Costa either, they tend to go for cheaper units than whats on the high streeet. Location and size wise it would be a good fit for Wetherspoons but the rent is just too high to make money off 3 euro pints and cheap food. There would be some horrors from the other tenants on Grafton St too if that happened.

From what I can see the only way he gets 1.5m of rent is to change its use. If thats his plan its a big risk.

L1011

'spoons usually buy not rent too; but they'd be buying on the value of the building as it is now - untenanted listed cafe with no change of use possible under dev plans. Which I suspect would be rather horrifyingly less than Ronan has it valued at.

Muahahaha

Yeah the only reason I thought Spoons was that they have a long history of running pubs inside listed buildings with preservation orders, its not something that would put them off. It would actually be a good location for them as it would fill in that void between their Camden St and Middle Abbey street pubs. The 1.5m rent would be way too high for them though and Id suspect that any application for change of use to a pub would come with uproar from tenants on the street. The Duke, the Bailey, John Kehoes, etc would all be objecting too saying theres already enough pubs in the area.

Its just really hard to see what could go in there without it undergoing a change of use. Ronan has been pretty vocal at taking on DCC over the height of his buildings along the quays, he spent a lot of money engaging a PR firm who took out newspaper and magazine ads criticising them in an attempt to get his way. Would imagine we might see him do something similar with the Bewleys building, he could leave it empty until such time as DCC relent.

Pawwed Rig

Just reading elsewhere that Bewleys used to own the building but did a sale and lease back on it. Article here gives a good insight into how they ended up where they are today

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/business/commercial-property/row-tied-to-20-year-lease-agreed-when-bewley-s-sold-grafton-street-to-raise-cash-1.1852021%3fmode=amp