The Planning Association for the Richmond (PAR) posted a news release on their website yesterday, which states that “Local pet store owners and supporters of locally owned small businesses in general” are organizing to block the arrival of an Unleashed by PetCo store at 5411 Geary near 18th Avenue, a former Walgreens.
The release was put out by John Todgya, the owner of B&B Pet Supplies on Geary near Park Presidio. Todgya is arguing that there is no need for PetCo to move in since there are already 4 pet stores within a 12 block radius of the Geary location.
“Clearly, PetCo has seen a market and is making a move to put my store and the others out of business,” Todgya says.
Their movement to block the Unleashed store also has support from Kathleen Dooley, a member of San Francisco’s Small Business Commission:
“We’re not supportive of formula retail coming in and poaching business from small, locally owned stores. Their ability to have predatory pricing and undercut small businesses is bad for our neighborhood corridors,” Dooley said.
The news release does not specify which other pet stores in the neighborhood are banding together with Todgya in the effort. He lists several other reasons to block PetCo including their “reputation for treating animals improperly and over-charging customers” (PetCo and 5 Counties Settle Consumer Lawsuit), “its status as a national chain, which means that much of its profits do not stay in San Francisco”, and one head scratcher: increased traffic on Geary Boulevard.
The group will show up tonight at the neighborhood meeting about the new PetCo store, being held at the Richmond District Recreation Center at 6:30pm. Anyone is welcome to attend.
It should be an interesting meeting – there’s been lots of debate on both sides of the issue here on the blog.
Sarah B.
I’m not ever going to support blocking a business because the potential competitors don’t want the competition. I shop at a mix of locally owned places and chains, and feel that our neighborhood is MUCH better for allowing chains like Starbucks, Walgreens, and Gordo’s, even though I may not always (or even most of the time) shop at such places.
Now, if these folks can show me that PetCo engages in corrupt, illegal, or unethical business practices, I might be willing to listen. Additionally, if it can be shown that PetCo would negatively affect the urban layout of the street or support policies that I disagree with, again, I’d listen. More often than not though, it seems that it’s the local places that want to block transit, bicycling, or pedestrian improvements to the area.
As someone interested in the long-term economic interests of our city, I sure am happy that most other cities/regions are not blocking the construction of Gap stores or the playing of Zynga games.
I can’t make the meeting, but is there a way to send a letter to the Planning Dept. or Planning Assoc. voicing my opinion?
@ Chris
Local stores keep the $ in the City while national or multi-national chains take $ out of the City. Local owners live in the community so they have a stake in keeping the area thriving while the owners of large chains – usually stock holders who may own the stock for a month or two – have absolutely no connection to the City. And profits the store makes are not recycled locally but are moved out of the City (to those that own the most stock and to the top execs probably based somewhere besides the Richmond District).
Yeah these local pet store owners don’t want to lose business but the people of the Richmond District are also helped by them thriving instead of out-of-town, stock holder-owned entities.
@Bill,
I’ve never been particularly convinced that a local entity (city/county) can really help itself by restricting trade. If you have problems with the way that national retail chains operate, that’s really something that needs to be tackled at a state/national/international level.
If you’re seriously going to complain about publicly traded companies and the effect that those companies have on SF, I’m just going to dismiss you. Every economist in the US will tell you that the only region that may have seen more benefit than SF and the Bay Area from the stock market over the last half century is the New York area. Vast, VAST amounts of wealth have been drawn into and stayed in the Bay Area because of the amount of human capital here.
Even if you want to look just at retail companies, we draw in more to our area through companies like Gap and Williams-Sonoma (which are based here with hundreds or thousands of high-paying jobs) than we lose to the few chains that operate in our city and send a small portion of profits somewhere else. Having every city become a retail fiefdom that “keeps” all of their own dollars locally would be financially disastrous to us.
To expand further, if we started doing the same in other industries, our standard of living would fall through the floor. I’m a partner in a boutique tech consulting firm, with about 40% of total business in SF proper. The remainder comes primarily from two companies, one in Santa Clara County and one in King County, Washington. If either one of those places decided that they “wanted to keep the dollars local,” SF would be losing out on hundreds of thousands of dollars – dollars that I use to pay rent in SF, spend at restaurants and retail stores in SF, and invest in other companies being founded in SF (and other places, of course).
Any place that has a reason to exist locally and provides a service that I desire locally gets my money – the reason why I live here are the better local restaurants, the friendly shop owners for places that need to be local (like veterinarians), or the places that simply offer better service and convince me to pay a premium (I have a local groomer, for example). Pet food? Total commodity, give me the lowest cost provider that acts ethically and legally.
One more thing, Bill, I do take issue with this quote of yours, specifically with the Richmond in mind:
“Local owners live in the community so they have a stake in keeping the area thriving while the owners of large chains”
I’ll agree that that should be the case, but I’ve got a long list of (mostly) local retailers that I boycott entirely because they’ve gone out of their way to make the area less thriving in my mind, by needlessly delaying and driving up the cost of various transit and pedestrian improvements.
When I shop, I’m usually enticed by the “bait” that a retailer offers. Because I’m pisspoor, that bait is usually the lowest rate. Hence, I try to patronize the cheap Chinese stores with Chinese knockoffs, cuz wtf, it’s all Chinese-made at the chains anyway.
So between ADA issues and competition, local businesses have it real tough. Local biz used to be known for local loyalty, maybe they still are, and if that’s your bag, then patronize. Unfortunately, national venues such as PetCo also try to appeal to local needs….I know you can have some pet services done at PetCo. That used to be a strong point for local vendors, but it’s no longer exclusive. The competition is tougher than ever. It’s the same reason I don’t sip coffee at JavaBeach or DogPatch, cuz those mofos charge two clams when I know any Starbucks will be a buckforty with my own mug. On my budget, I need to know my outflow, which I don’t know at some overpriced ma-and-pa place. Furthermore, a lot of ma-and-pa places don’t believe in impulse buying. I like to look around and figure out things instead of being hounded about what specifically I came in for, if anything.
When PetCo moves into the ‘hood, what will you local biz do to entice customers? What kind of bait will you offer? If you wanna stay in business, you gotta offer something other than a crybaby appeal. Maybe go talk to the folks who run those cheap Chinese stores.
I would have to say the many animals that die in their stores or shortly after, their practices that end up harming animals would qualify as un-ethical. Courts have decided on more than a few suits they are not following laws either. This is about the small business and the humane treatment for animals too
Just to be clear, Unleased by PetCo stores do not sell live animals or offer grooming services. See my article from a couple weeks ago for more info:
https://richmondsfblog.com/2011/01/07/public-meeting-about-new-geary-street-petco-store-january-20/
Sarah B.
Chris makes considerable sense in comments #4 and #5. If Petco opens, it will be managed and staffed by LOCAL people from the community, whose salaries will go back to this area. I take odious exception that it’s necessary to prevent businesses from starting up, in order to protect existing firms from the healthy competition that will be generated. If the existing firm is so fearful of the competitive clout of the newcomer, than perhaps they should be considering how to better attract customers.
Moreover, what right does anyone have to tell the public where or where they should not be shopping?
@administrator. Thanks for the clarification, I was referring to the parent company PETCO Inc. sorry I was not clearer
I would be glad to have them in the Richmond District.
Thanks Chris for your comments on #1 and #4. I find it ironic that pet store owners and some other neighborhood residents have been posting flyers in the neighborhood objecting to this Petco because it’s “formula retail”. So where were they when Peet’s, Starbucks, Walgreens, and numerous fast food outlets opened on Geary? And Bill how do you define “community” When you say owners of “local owners live in the community” do you mean they live in SF? How do we know that is correct? What if they live in another SF Bay Area county and their profits are banked there? is that close enough “community” to support them? For all you posters who object to this campaign to block Petco — be sure to forward your comments to the Planning Dept. Because you know the meeting will be full of people objecting to “formula retail” and that’s all the city staff will see and hear.
I am totally in support of petco coming to our neighborhood. more retail means more foot traffic and more business for surrounding merchants. Geary Ave. is becoming a blighted street with much higher vacancy than the rest of the city. This affects property values as well. The argument that a local business has the exclusive right to operate is ridiculous, anti capitalist and frankly not what this country was built on. We need competition to keep the market healthy. If B and B and Cal’s have such a great community following then why are they worried about losing customers? clearly, this is about them having all of the pie and not sharing it. What if another local pet store came in? would they be embraced with open arms? the unintended consequences of formula retail are the soaring vacancy rates in our neighborhood. what if it was a different national retailer? some local merchant is going to be affected. Thats called competition and in the end, what helps customers not hurt them. I am not convinced petco will close down local merchants. there simply is no proof of this and the market her is plenty big enough to support another store.
# Brian Jones Said,
I’m the locksmith in question. Since you asked. There is an ACE hardware on 25th and Geary and they do effect my business. They cut more keys in a day then I do in a month. Also there is a paint store up the street from me that cuts keys and there is a key cutting operation at a liquor store on Balboa st just 2 blocks from me. There is another ACE hardware on clement and 11th. ACE hardware is always getting the city to step in for them to stop Home Depot from interfering with their business but I’m not big enough to stop ACE or Benjamin Moore to not interfere with my business. And i can’t buy from a co-op like ACE either but I charge less for my keys and I tend to have more selection and I have better rates of success. If ace mis cuts a car key that they charge 65.00 dollars for they can return it to the vendor and get a replacement. If i have a miscut i have to absorb the cost so i tend to keep my key machines better adjusted. But again i don’t have the clout to stop ace from interfering with my business but when ever home depot wants to move in there are thousands screaming on behalf of ace that they will be put out of business. Its a double standard that i don’t like but i accept. I have a store front because i want people to trust me and have a place they can go where they know they won’t get scammed. If you don’t want my business to survive because of a lack of foot traffic i understand. But when the independent locksmiths are all gone you can go to people like this. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1060955050168791694#. I’m a free market guy and if I am not able to stay in business it’s my own fault. But I don’t think it’s fair for the city to choose to allow for some businesses to survive at the peril of others. And that’s what’s going on here. The city steps in for ACE Hardware on the one hand which effects my business. Then they step to stop a company from utilizing a store front that could have a positive effect on my business as well as others. I’m not going to cry about though.
# Brian Joens Said,
I want to make a follow up comment because unfortunately when I first posted I was pressed for time and couldn’t explain myself in any detail.
The argument at the meeting was Petco, a big bad corporation, was going to come to the neighborhood and destroy the small businesses. The fact is that the businesses that are going to maybe be adversely effected by Petco are those in the same industry as Petco namely the other pet product businesses. But my argument is that there are more businesses in the neighborhood that are not pet product businesses then there are that are pet product businesses. . And everyone I speak to think that Petco moving in will be good for their business. So do we help more to save fewer or do we sacrifice more to help fewer. I think that is a question we should be asking. But it’s based on the false assumption that Petco is going to destroy B&B and Cal’s when there is no evidence that it will. Both these operations claim they offer superior product, service etc, and I don’t doubt that they do. That will be the deciding factor here. They may loose some of their business to Petco for a while but inevitably their customers will come back if Petco doesn’t meet their customers demands. Why should B&B and Cal’s be afraid to compete if they know they offer better product and service? The customers who are shopping based on price are not their customers because they will buy their dog food from Safeway, Smart and Final or Costco like I do. Just because someone doesn’t have Petco to shop at doesn’t mean they shop at Cal’s or B&B. More then likely if they are shopping based on price the are probably picking up their pet food from Petco at the old Gets shopping center or maybe even from a chain that is out of SF. Why should we continue to have an edifice on Geary sit empty just to assuage the fears of those who are afraid of competition? When I was at the meeting the thing that bothered me most was the fact that everyone was railing about the corporations coming in and destroying poor little small mom and pop businesses, but when the kid suggested that Apple move in these same anti corporate mom and pop advocates suddenly applauded. Are you kidding me. Apple is a corporation that is a hundred times bigger then Petco. Their stock value places them just as having more value then Microsoft and being 2nd to Exxon in terms of value per share. What about the small businesses in the neighborhood, the repair businesses and independent computer businesses that would seemingly be adversely effected by Apple moving in. You want to talk about the mal treatment of animals. What about the stories one hears about Apples human rights violations in China Etc.. Just google Apple Human Rights Violations and see for yourself. The mom and pop small business anti corporate advocates loose their credibility when they applaud Apple over Petco. But look I’ll be honest with you if I could choose between Apple and Petco I would take Apple any day because I think it would be better for business. The fact is that Apple hasn’t made a move to locate on Geary and they wont but Petco has. A space that big has to be a formula retail of some sort. If not a pet store its going to be something else that will adversely effect some other business. I say give Petco a chance.
The reason I opened my shop was in 2008 I was laid off from my job at SFUSD. I looked for work for 6 months until my Unemployment insurance ran out. I guess I could have filed for an extension and it seems like if I did I could still be collecting it today. I opened my shop because I couldn’t find work. At the time I opened Walgreen’s was still at that location. The foot traffic brought people from Walgreens to Rite Aid and back because people were comparison shopping. The fact that Walgreens closed a month after I opened was devastating to me. I had really counted on that traffic. I had no idea Walgreens was going to close. A year later Joe’s moved across the street. Now the traffic in front of my store is almost none existent because they don’t walk between the two locations or go to Joes. The Armenian Market next door is not very helpful for my business. That is just bad luck on my part. I’m no stranger to bad luck. As a kid I grew up in foster homes and group homes. I live in 13 different foster homes growing up. I lived in 3 foster homes before I was 2 years old. Army brats talk about moving from location to location, at least they still had the consistency of a stable family. I never had that kind of stability for more then a year. Never had a stable school or friends or anything. I know what it’s like to have to deal with adversity. That’s why I opened a shop instead of relying on unemployment when things got tough for me. There is nothing that I have that I haven’t had to work hard for. I never had any parents or extended family I could go to for help when things got bad for me. So frankly I have little sympathy for people who think the city government should step in for them because of a little competition especially when the government doing so is going to adversely effect me, and yes a store the size of Walgreens just sitting empty for two years getting covered with graffiti and garbage has a direct negative impact on my business and those around me since I’m just a block away from the site. Please don’t ask me, a foster kid, someone who had nothing, and has had to work for everything he has to have to subsidize investors from Sea Cliff who invested in their neighbors business because they felt sorry for him. Let Petco move in, let them compete, let them fall on their sword if they can’t. Thank You. Brian Jones Rhinoceros Security.
Why Rhinoceros? Because it’s a tough ancient animal who stands it’s ground in spite of all the adversity it’s had to face especially from superstitious idiots who think that it’s horn (which is made of the same stuff as your hair and nails) is an aphrodisiac, and therefor kill it or amputate it in a cruel fashion because they are stupid and superstitions.