Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Mark L
    Post count: 0

    My local Lumber Liquidators store is hidden deep in an industrial park. You have to really want to go there, and then spend 30-40 minutes to drive there and find it. Honestly, it’s a part of town that I have never been to!

    My question is, why are we paying tons of money to relocate HQ when we won’t spend any money to relocate these terribly positioned stores?

    You can’t expect me to believe that this store is performing as good as one that’s in a commercial strip mall! Imagine if it was in the same strip mall as a Public or a Lowes. It would be so much easier for potential clients to just take a look around, whether they were seriously I’m the market, or not.

    Seems like the execs don’t appreciate the long commute, but have no problem subjecting their clients to this.

    I’ve never seen a management team hold such contempt to their clients and shareholders. Change your style, or take a hike!

    If cancelling the HQ relocation could save us 150k at this point, I think we should do it. Even if that could help us to relocate 1 location, that will help us to improve this suffering bottom line.

    Chris L
    Post count: 0

    Simple answer is 2-fold: 1. High-visibilty locations = higher rent (higher overhead costs), and 2. mgmt in charge of real estate has been in rush / under pressure to open stores (without doing complete due diligence on store location/effective access/neighborhood).

    Under-performing stores will be closed at lease term end.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
Reply To: Relocate stores instead of HQ?
Your information:





<a href="" title="" rel="" target=""> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <pre> <em> <strong> <del datetime=""> <ul> <ol start=""> <li> <img src="" border="" alt="" height="" width="">