RON DAVIS -- Through My Eyes
In last week’s editorial in the Independent, my editors argued that
Wards and Burlington Coat Factory “deserved” to stay at the rejuvenated
mall, soon to be called The Crossings at Huntington.
While I recognize that I’m biting the hand that feeds me, I must say
that I find their reasoning both troubling and fuzzy headed.
My editors claim that both of these retailers “deserve” to stay for
various reasons, among which are that Wards remained at the mall during
the “dark times,” when other tenants abandoned the mall. In essence, they
argue that the city and the residents should respond to this mistaken
belief that Wards has been loyal.
My editors further argued that both retailers should remain because
they “want” to be a part of the new mall.
In their zest to be warm and fuzzy to these two national retailers,
they failed to consider the rules under which both of these retailers
operate in any community -- the rules of business, rules that give little
weight to loyalty and such emotional terms as “deserve.”
While not particularly germane to the discussion, in my opinion, Wards
contributed to the “dark times.” In the past, the city has approached
Wards to remodel the site for the benefit of the city and the other
tenants. Had they done so, they might have shed some light.
But Wards officials never remodeled, preferring instead to be a part
of the darkness. Big business, whether that’s Wards, Burlington, the
Broadway, JCPenney and others, play by one single rule: the profit rule.
Concerns about community, sales tax revenue, aesthetics or other tenants
are concerns solely when they relate to profits.
Neither Broadway nor JCPenney cared about what our mall would look
like, how the other tenants would manage or our sales tax revenue when
they folded their tents and headed for happier camping sites. And Wards
did not care when its representatives did not remodel their store.
Wards has closed a number of stores throughout the nation despite the
effect on other tenants, the community and the community’s need for sales
tax revenue. Why? Because the profits at these stores didn’t meet company
expectations, that’s why.
I don’t doubt for an instant that Burlington and Wards would jump the
good ship Huntington Beach in an instant if they were capable of
producing a better bottom line elsewhere.
That either of these businesses “want” to remain at the mall is
completely unpersuasive.
Suppose I had a line of auto parts I wanted to sell through
Burlington. Do you think they’d allow me because I wanted to? Don’t you
think they’d look at whether they could use that space selling other,
more profitable and compatible goods than my auto parts?
And does anyone believe that a vendor who has sold goods for the past
30 years to Wards but who no longer sells goods that fit the new Wards
product line would get to first base with the loyalty argument? I
certainly don’t.
I concur with the city and Ezralow’s observation that the time of the
department store-anchored mall has long since bypassed Huntington Beach.
I applaud their vision of constructing something on the order of an
Irvine Spectrum, which focuses on smaller retail establishments, anchored
by higher end restaurants and entertainment. That configuration really
doesn’t exist at our end of the county, and we have an ideal location,
coupled with great demographics, which will allow Huntington Beach to
duplicate that regional success. We will do so as long as we play by the
same business rules that the retailers play by.
And the test under those rules for our new mall is simply what tenant
mix and configuration is in the best interest of the city and the
residents, rather than what’s in the best interest of either Burlington
or Wards. * RON DAVIS is a private attorney who lives in Huntington
Beach. He can be reached by e-mail at o7 RDD@socal.rr.com.f7
All the latest on Orange County from Orange County.
Get our free TimesOC newsletter.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Daily Pilot.