Here’s a vape shop opening a second location July 7th. No mention of the FDA and the deeming regulation in the article. Would you open a vape shop right now?
Wesley's to open second vape shop
Wesley's to open second vape shop
Wesley's to open second vape shop
- Thread starter CharTech
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
It does seem kinda Counter-Intuitive to open a 2nd Shop on July 7th. But the Owner(s) may have No Choice.
In that Opening a New Store does take a Substantial amount of Money. And that Money was spent Before the Deeming Regs were published.
So as an Owner(s), I would want to Recoup as much of my Start-Up Money, maybe even turn a Profit, in the next 12 ~ 24 Months.
In that Opening a New Store does take a Substantial amount of Money. And that Money was spent Before the Deeming Regs were published.
So as an Owner(s), I would want to Recoup as much of my Start-Up Money, maybe even turn a Profit, in the next 12 ~ 24 Months.
Then again, they may be playing the odds and counting on the FDA eventually losing in court. With many shops already closing their doors, they may feel that by sticking it out, they could be in a really nice position after the dust settles.
Strange they didn't even address the deeming regs. I would at least have a clause in the lease that if regulation caused me to close shop I could get out of my lease.
It's not uncommon. I’m no expert but I have negotiated leases for my IT Company and I work with lots of small companies and have seen this type of clause before. Anything is possible when you're leasing commercial space.
Yes... Many things are possible when drawing up a Lease.
But as a Leaseholder, and with the FDA being about 2 Years late in Releasing the Deeming, I wouldn't include such a Termination Clause in a Lease.
I can understand that and agree with you knowing what I know about what might be coming our way. I certainly wouldn't open a vape shop at this time but hopefully the owner of said shop has his basses covered for the uncertain future of the business. But, like you said things may have been in the works before the released deeming regs. Strange time on all fronts but interesting to see things play out.
I sure wouldn't want to pay poker against any of these guys. Kudo's and break a leg to them.
Offer it? Of course not. But accept it if the lessee insists on it? If the lessee is at all sophisticated, a lease for commercial space will involve some negotiation of terms, and I think you might be surprised how flexible a landlord with empty commercial can be.
As a Leaseholder, I wouldn't allow any Clauses for Termination due to Existing/Changes in Federal or State Regulations of e-Cigarettes or Tobacco Products unless the Lessee agreed to a Very Premium market price per foot.
And would want the Lease to be Heavily Front End Loaded.
I think much depends on local market conditions for the type of property in question here. I do not know the market in SoCal, but I do have something of a feel for it on the east coast and in places like Elkton, MD, where there's plenty of empty space of this type, and that tends to make landlords flexible.
I think much depends on local market conditions for the type of property in question here. I do not know the market in SoCal, but I do have something of a feel for it on the east coast and in places like Elkton, MD, where there's plenty of empty space of this type, and that tends to make landlords flexible.
True. The Invisible Hand is in play.
But here is a Big Question if you were the Leaseholder? What type of Wordage would you Except as a Means for Lease Termination due to a Change in the e-Cigarette Market?
Call me an Evil Landlord, but I don't like writing a Lease that is Basically Month to Month if the Lessee choses to make it so.
Not sure. I'd rather be a tenant than a landlord. In fact, I have been for the last 12 years -- office space rather than retail, but I think they're pretty similar. The most I've ever had to commit to was 3 years. Anyway, this kind of clause is not month-to-month if the tenant chooses to make it so, it's more like a force majeure escape clause for the tenant. The leases I've signed certainly have a number of those in favor of the landlord, so I don't think would be unreasonable for a tenant in this position to try to negotiate one in his favor.
zoiDman. You do have some wiggle room on the
That's exactly right. When the lease first comes to you it's all in their favor and it's up to you to balance it or tip it in your favor. I would also expect to pay more with my trap door. The first one I ever signed I thought it was like renting an apartment, I learned real quick.
That's exactly right. When the lease first comes to you it's all in their favor and it's up to you to balance it or tip it in your favor. I would also expect to pay more with my trap door. The first one I ever signed I thought it was like renting an apartment, I learned real quick.
It isn't Unreasonable for either the Leaseholder or the Lessee to want to negotiate Terms (where Legal) that are Favorable for their Position. That, to Me, is one of the Fundamentals of a Free Market. And Both Sides are Free to Not Sign.
Like I said, if someone wanted a Clause to Release them from their Lease because something changes in the e-Cigarette Market, either State of Federal, what would be wrong with the Leaseholder wanting a Premium Price? Or some Front Loading?
I wouldn't call you an Evil landlord. You said you wanted a heavily loaded front end so we can start there.
Heck I learned everything I know about negotiation from watching Pawn Stars so you probably don’t want to mess with me.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
