Fish 0 Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 It's not over priced, it's had the extra costs that come with satisfying YOU, the boaters, desire for convenience, a tax for being lazy you could call it. As you the boater wants convenience the chandlers have to be by where you park your boat and those areas cost freaking moonbeams in many ways. The chandlers are where it is most convenient for the boaters and that does come with a price. If ya don't like paying 'I'm a lazy prick tax' then no one is stopping you from shopping elsewhere. Occasionally, when you open you mouth, it confirms you really don't know what you are on about. Said with the utmost of respect, of course. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mattm 106 Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 So they refuse to honour gift cards, and sell a bunch of stuff with no warranty or returns at questionably ‘discounted’ prices, then do a rebrand, as part of simply one owner buying out the other? I’d have thought that might loose them a fair amount of good will around the place and hurt the business for a while, good location or not? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
raz88 97 Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 It certainly has lost any Goodwill I had for them. I won't be darkening their door in a hurry. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
waikiore 501 Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 KM has one thing right -the cost of doing business on Beaumont st will see a number of changes this year.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
raz88 97 Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 People, if you don't like them don't go there. It's a free market and they are entitled to charge whatever they like, close down as often as they like and play every legal retail strategy known to man. I dont get the resentment, if they are holding a couple of million in stock and paying 10 sets of wages so you can stroll the aisles and choose a shackle to pop into your trolley that gets you sailing today 2 minutes from your dock in the central city then I call that service. Its not like you cant push your zimmer frames over to Burnsco or up to Fosters for an alternative. You could get on your smartphone and compare prices then show them what the competition is doing and ask to match it... You could even drive all over town for 2 hours to save $10 or order from America and wait a couple of weeks. Yes there's a legal loophole that allows it, but it seems mean-spirited at best and immoral at worst for the owners to declare insolvency to avoid their liabilities then opening again a day later under a new name. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
waikiore 501 Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 They didnt. It was liquidated to a point where the leaving partner was happy, then the remaining partner purchased the remaining stock off the liquidator and good luck to them in the future the trading environment is very tough out there even without Westhaven type rents... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Deep Purple 530 Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Sorry but I call bullshit on this. The company is only insolvent if you include the owners capital. Here are some extracts from the liquidators report. Firstly they see no money for almost $200k of preferential and unsecured because the owners have registered charges that give them first bite of the $1.5m assets. Nothing wrong with liquidating to establish buy-out for partners and I oversaw this for a client a couple of years ago and even though there was a multi million dollar deficit as regards capital, the owners set aside their securities to ensure the unsecured got paid in full. But in this case the future actions of the owners is going to be watched closely. They could be intending to do the right thing but on paper at the moment there is no sign off that. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
raz88 97 Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Sorry but I call bullshit on this. The company is only insolvent if you include the owners capital. Here are some extracts from the liquidators report. Firstly they see no money for almost $200k of preferential and unsecured because the owners have registered charges that give them first bite of the $1.5m assets. Nothing wrong with liquidating to establish buy-out for partners and I oversaw this for a client a couple of years ago and even though there was a multi million dollar deficit as regards capital, the owners set aside their securities to ensure the unsecured got paid in full. But in this case the future actions of the owners is going to be watched closely. They could be intending to do the right thing but on paper at the moment there is no sign off that. So of I'm understanding correctly your customers did the right thing and set aside their personal securities to make good on their debts, while the sailors corner owners did not? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Fish 0 Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 As a FYI - Current lease rates for space in Westhaven $580 correction, $596 per square meter + gst. That comes with 3-4 car parks shared amongst a couple of places, a shared amongst a few business's toilet, an empty shell. Rates $36 +/- a sq on top of that. 10 minutes down the road $173.00 + gst. That comes with 12 exclusive carparks, 2 dunnies, one shower and a couple of offices plus a staffroom. Rates $22 +/- a sq on top of that. On top of those 2 costs is EVERYTHING else. Westhaven is a very expensive part of town to operate in so why would you pay 6 hundy when you could pay less than a 1/3rd of that? Sounds like you've been investigating opening a new branch, sugarlump? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Priscilla II 450 Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Have the Innes Jones Bros squared away the debt owed to employees,out of pocket suppliers and the tax department. Probably not and as Puff points out the stock value matches the general security holders interests. Km you obviously have a vested interest in this so called liquidation as you have previously pointed to the trade it has generated for yourself. Waxing lyrical about the trading costs and onerous environment for the remaining Innes Jones bros would be like swallowing a cup of cold sick for those left out of pocket. The company liquidation laws in this country are continually offering cold comfort and poor respite for those that have the most to lose and this little swifty just adds more foul odour to the smelly pile. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Deep Purple 530 Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 So of I'm understanding correctly your customers did the right thing and set aside their personal securities to make good on their debts, while the sailors corner owners did not? Mine did, sailors corner might. To be fair at this stage of my clients liquidation the reports showed a similar situation but as both parties intended to continue in the trade then both were keen to leave no one unpaid which might have affected future supplies There is also always an element of doubt in these matters. Where did the loan accounts come from? cash invested or dividends capitalised? If the latter there is considerable doubt over the legitimacy of the claim and substantial case law on the matter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.