SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Local Businesses | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Site Feedback | Advertising | Contact
Geddes Hairdressing & Barbering Studio One Armstrong & Co Solicitors


Post Reply  Post Topic 
How a toy shop closed to pay for pupils at Dulwich College (and Alleyn’s and JAGS)
Author Message
Brujo


Posts: 7
Joined: Mar 2012
Post: #1
17-02-2016 11:36 AM

Jay Rayner article about the behaviour of Dulwich Estates

http://www.jayrayner.co.uk/news/dulwichcollege/

Find all posts by this user Reply
P1971


Posts: 816
Joined: Feb 2009
Post: #2
17-02-2016 12:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Reply
Ligersaur


Posts: 60
Joined: Sep 2014
Post: #3
17-02-2016 02:31 PM

The Dulwich Estate is a registered charitable trust with defined beneficiaries, see: http://www.dulwichestate.co.uk/beneficiaries/

Someone is stating that a local private enterprise (the toy shop) that is not one of the beneficiaries of the charitable trust should have a below market rent.

From light reading, I believe that the charitable trust is mainly to provide bursaries to underprivileged children so that they can attend local private schools. I imagine that the toy shop is mostly frequented by well off families and the toys that it sells are actually more expensive than those from high street alternatives. Is it really better to decrease social mobility by removing one or more bursaries so that the a toy shop can remain where it is and continue to sell toys to the well off? I could imagine a similar article out-crying that situation.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Anotherjohn


Posts: 347
Joined: May 2005
Post: #4
17-02-2016 05:23 PM

People are jumping up and down because the article and the petition both state that the shop's rent is to be increased by 70% but does anyone know what the rent was - or how long it has been since the last rent review?

I don't suppose the shopkeeper has stated what mark-up they charge on their stock or what their turnover is?

I wonder if the shopkeeper also happens to own a house or flat in the London area and, if so, how much that property's value has increased over the past few years?

Many, many years ago, at a 5yr rent review, my landlord increased the annual rent on my shop from £2,250 to £6,500 and on the following review it went up to £12,000. People in business should know what can happen when they take on these Leases and they shouldn't expect everyone to weep for them when things don't go their way.

Find all posts by this user Reply
P1971


Posts: 816
Joined: Feb 2009
Post: #5
17-02-2016 06:07 PM

Just found what the rent was from an article a while back in SLP

Rent was £22,500 & increased to £31,200
Didn't say when the last rent review was but said the shop had been there for 11 yrs.

I think this toy shop has a few more branches in I think East Dulwich, Beckenham & Clapham.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Anotherjohn


Posts: 347
Joined: May 2005
Post: #6
17-02-2016 07:18 PM

Thank you.

But the sums don't add up.

£31,200 (proposed rent) - £22,500 (existing rent) = £8,700 (proposed increase).

The proposed increase, therefore, equates to 38.75%.

If the proposed increase were 70% (£15,570) the new rent would be £38,250.

Find all posts by this user Reply
edpaff


Posts: 51
Joined: Apr 2012
Post: #7
17-02-2016 08:48 PM

The shop lease is being advertised at £42k, so looks like the rental increase offered might have been a good deal...

That being said - the Dulwich Estate's treatment of the Half Moon pub definitely looks suspect.

Find all posts by this user Reply
P1971


Posts: 816
Joined: Feb 2009
Post: #8
17-02-2016 08:51 PM

Here's the article Mr x

And I will stress to everyone reading this post that Anotherjohn is the fairest shop landlord in FH by far so he probably knows a lot more about this than the rest of us.

   

Find all posts by this user Reply
P1971


Posts: 816
Joined: Feb 2009
Post: #9
17-02-2016 10:35 PM

I will add I did sign this petition purely because kids were upset about the closing of this shop.

Myself, Anotherjohn & Michael are very good friends but don't always have the same opinions. I think this is healthy to share on this forum as we all have our own opinions but want the same outcome for FH.

Running for cover now with my Nerf gun Anotherjohn & Michael! I'll get ya with custard pies Xxx

Find all posts by this user Reply
chrisse23


Posts: 13
Joined: Oct 2013
Post: #10
18-02-2016 11:27 AM

Anotherjohn, an £8,700 increase on £22k is around 70%. If it fell from £31k to £22k, it would be a fall of 38%.

Regardless of what the local market rates are, a rent hike of 70% would likely massively affect the profitability of any business. I'm absolutely sure that the costs to Dulwich Estates have not risen in the last 5-10 years as inflation has been near zero for a long time and therefore the only justification for this rent increase is profit. Regardless of the bursaries supplied to kids (the social value of which can be debated), the fact is that the school has a limited number of places and is unlikely to expand massively. I suspect all this free money that the landlords are intending to acquire will be spent on improving the facilities for current pupils and reducing the need for increased fees. Or, just as likely, will go towards the commission the estate manager receives.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #11
18-02-2016 03:14 PM

Quote:
Anotherjohn, an £8,700 increase on £22k is around 70%. If it fell from £31k to £22k, it would be a fall of 38%.


Hang about!
A 100% increase on £22k would give a new rent of £44k.
A 50% increase on £22k would give a new rent of £33k - an additional £11k. Without doing much maths, clearly the increase is a little lower than 50%.

What you have calculated is what fraction the old rent is of the new rent - 22/31 or 70%. If the rent was unchanged, then this figure would be 100%!

Calculators do not have much common sense at times.

Find all posts by this user Reply
michael


Posts: 3,210
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #12
18-02-2016 03:41 PM

I don't see the problem. If shops are being priced out of Herne Hill then they would be most welcome in Forest Hill. Perhaps a friendly landlord with a spare shop in Forest Hill could contact Just William and invite them to open in Forest Hill.

Or is there something special about Herne Hill that makes it more valuable to run a toy shop there rather than Forest Hill? And if so, shouldn't they expect to pay a higher rental price than in Forest Hill?

Find all posts by this user Reply
chrisse23


Posts: 13
Joined: Oct 2013
Post: #13
18-02-2016 04:54 PM

Perryman, you are correct, I was distracted by other things and completely forgot how to do simple calculations.

I stand by my second paragraph, however.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Anotherjohn


Posts: 347
Joined: May 2005
Post: #14
18-02-2016 08:42 PM

Perryman - thank you.

chrisse23 - even though your numbers are well skewiff there's nothing wrong with your sentiment. However, this is business in the real world and people just have to get used to it or get out - but without crying and whipping-up the sympathy vote. Oh yes, and it makes me die how they mentioned the flood in Herne Hill as if the landlord should have to make allowances for it.

But, as I said before, even apart from the wildly exaggerated headline ('70% rise'), there doesn't seem to have been enough detailed information from the shopkeeper for me (or anyone else?) to be able to form a proper balanced opinion on this whole thing.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Sandpiper


Posts: 20
Joined: Nov 2013
Post: #15
18-02-2016 11:40 PM

There is some more detail in this thread, albeit the two parties do not seem to agree on the facts... http://www.hernehill.org.uk/comment/8489#comment-8489

Find all posts by this user Reply
P1971


Posts: 816
Joined: Feb 2009
Post: #16
19-02-2016 12:22 AM

I see you right there Mr Man.

The figures don't add up for sure, so I think much more info is needed.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Anotherjohn


Posts: 347
Joined: May 2005
Post: #17
19-02-2016 10:51 AM

Thanks for the link Sandpiper.

It's clearly unfortunate for the business that new tenants have recently come into the parade on very high rents, which has prejudiced their prospects of getting the rent review they wanted, and even though the landlord has, in accordance with their mandate, made some allowance for them as a long-standing tenant - and in the interests of the community as a whole - it's left me wondering if they could have done a little bit more.

As I see it the bottom line is this:-
Even if the rent increase is out by £5,000 pa, that's roughly £100 pw, which is £16 per day (Mon-Sat) that they'd need to find in extra profit to cover the unforeseen and less comfortable part of the increase. If there's no scope for the business to cover this £16 per day by adapting slightly (perhaps by using the internet or by opening an extra hour or two per week or by negotiating a slightly better deal with their suppliers) to generate that additional profitability then that is very unfortunate for them and, possibly, for the community as well.

I feel some sympathy for both parties because I'm sure they will have both tried very hard to do the right thing. It's tough out there.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Londondrz


Posts: 1,538
Joined: Apr 2006
Post: #18
19-02-2016 11:14 AM

There are only certain shops that can afford very high rental these days. Starbucks etc.

Find all posts by this user Reply

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields