And now you know...the rest of the story.
August 2, 2010 9:15 AM   Subscribe

A heartwarming story about the resurrection of a beloved neighborhood bar.

Or not.
posted by anazgnos (30 comments total) 3 users marked this as a favorite

 
I remember hearing about the second part, I didn't realize the first article is part of what precipitated it.
posted by Badgermann at 9:20 AM on August 2, 2010


It's a shame that the place got another black eye. It's reputation really suffered when The Accused was released.
posted by Mayor Curley at 9:21 AM on August 2, 2010


Two sides to every story, as they say, or maybe just one?
posted by emhutchinson at 9:21 AM on August 2, 2010


That they used the exact same picture for both stories is hilarious for reasons I can't quite articulate.
posted by saladin at 9:28 AM on August 2, 2010 [2 favorites]


A heartwarming story about the resurrection of a beloved neighborhood bar.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 9:36 AM on August 2, 2010 [1 favorite]


Goodwill was soon at the bar and when owner Travis Kevie – the man who answered her question – found out that she was a Corona drinker and none was in stock, he scooted over to the store across English Colony Road to buy a case.

*Wipes tear from slightly bloodshot eyes*

Now THIS is a bartender. I hope they go light on him and he's behind the bar (and not behind bars) real soon.
posted by three blind mice at 9:48 AM on August 2, 2010


Now THIS is a bartender. I hope they go light on him and he's behind the bar (and not behind bars) real soon.

From the follow-up...

the property manager says that...if the bar were to re-open legally, he would recommend Travis based on his work ethic.
posted by anazgnos at 9:51 AM on August 2, 2010 [3 favorites]


That they used the exact same picture for both stories is hilarious for reasons I can't quite articulate.

CBS 13 had one original picture of Kevie being arrested - the rest were pictures from the period of time that the bar was illegally open, probably taken for the first article in the Auburn Journal.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:51 AM on August 2, 2010


Whatchyou talking about Horace?
posted by psycho-alchemy at 9:52 AM on August 2, 2010


i saw the 2nd half of the story last week--about him being homeless & opening a shuttered bar. i thought it was extremely industrious of him to perform such a wonderful community service. and i'm not kidding.
posted by msconduct at 9:53 AM on August 2, 2010 [3 favorites]


Fox News: Homeless man breaks into shuttered California bar and starts selling drinks
Whether it was a homeless happy hour or a less-than-legal burst of entrepreneurial spirit, there was no ribbon-cutting ceremony at the grand reopening of a Northern California club this month when a local transient broke into the bar and started selling drinks.
Complete with the mugshot picture where Kevie, with bloodshot eyes, looks dejectedly at the camera. Because bums will always be bums, right Fox News?
posted by filthy light thief at 9:57 AM on August 2, 2010


Ah yes. The "V-C". We had a friend take us there a few years ago. A seedy, locals only dive bar. Just what I wanted.
posted by Big_B at 10:03 AM on August 2, 2010


Yet another fine example of why cities across the U.S. need to institute the Shit or Get Off the Pot Act of 2010. What was the reason for the business being empty in the first place if a homeless guy reselling beer bought across the street can turn a profit?

No, better to let the building sit vacant, a rotting hulk of a reminder of when entrepreneurism meant more than sitting on property until an Angel Investor comes along. The parasites that suffer from the upcoming commercial property collapse can suck my dick.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:14 AM on August 2, 2010 [10 favorites]


That guy's revolution is exactly the kind I want to be part of.

I love how when he's presumed to be a business owner, he's a rodeo cowboy. When it turns out that he's not, he's just a "homeless man."
posted by freshwater_pr0n at 10:38 AM on August 2, 2010 [3 favorites]


The parasites that suffer from the upcoming commercial property collapse can suck my dick.

I doubt they can, at least in any way that would be at all satisfying. The proboscises of most parasites are far too small.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 10:39 AM on August 2, 2010 [1 favorite]


What was the reason for the business being empty in the first place if a homeless guy reselling beer bought across the street can turn a profit?

Well I can't seem to find a stated reason why the previous owners shut down, but there is mention of surrendering a liquour license. And this is the kind of place where I could definitely see some law "bending" occuring. But go on with your anger. We should totally let anyone go into a shuttered business and reopen it. With no license. What could possibly go wrong???
posted by Big_B at 10:43 AM on August 2, 2010


What was the reason for the business being empty in the first place if a homeless guy reselling beer bought across the street can turn a profit?

The homeless guy was turning a profit because he wasn't paying any fixed costs (liquor license, utilities, taxes, etc. etc. etc.)

I made a lot of money in high school, buy candy from Costco and selling it to my classmates under the table. That doesn't mean I could open a convenience store and turn the same profit, even with a much higher revenue.
posted by muddgirl at 10:44 AM on August 2, 2010 [1 favorite]


We should totally let anyone go into a shuttered business and reopen it.

No, we should charge 10x property taxes for business space that is unoccupied. Go read the bill.

The homeless guy was turning a profit because he wasn't paying any fixed costs

Except the margins would be considerably higher buying from a distributor than going across the street to the local Gas 'n Sip.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:59 AM on August 2, 2010 [1 favorite]


On the other hand, it also seemed like he was paying retail prices for the alcohol since he was buying the beer from the liquor store across the street (and making that seem like it was a superb moment of customer service is a special kind of brilliance)

Still, though, I agree it's a bad idea for the world at large but I still admire his gumption, if not his idiocy for thinking that publicity was a good idea.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 10:59 AM on August 2, 2010


Except the margins would be considerably higher buying from a distributor than going across the street to the local Gas 'n Sip.

The mark-up on a bottle of beer from the Gas N Sip is significantly lower than the mark-up a bar or restaurant would take. I don't have, like, a full prospectus or anything but I will bet that the fixed costs of running a bar are higher per-bottle than the differences in the variable cost between buying from a distributor and buying from a gas station (ie, the markup). Otherwise, bars would not need to mark up the cost so much.
posted by muddgirl at 11:28 AM on August 2, 2010 [1 favorite]


Goodwill was soon at the bar and when owner Travis Kevie – the man who answered her question – found out that she was a Corona drinker and none was in stock, he scooted over to the store across English Colony Road to buy a case.

Some bells went off in my head when I read this - anyone with a liquor license would know that it's illegal to buy beer from the store to sell in a bar. Guy's got balls, but he ain't that smart.
posted by The Light Fantastic at 11:34 AM on August 2, 2010 [2 favorites]


This comment What was the reason for the business being empty in the first place if a homeless guy reselling beer bought across the street can turn a profit?
reminded me of this
posted by HappyHippo at 1:58 PM on August 2, 2010


anyone with a liquor license would know that it's illegal to buy beer from the store to sell in a bar

Maybe in California, but not everywhere. It's not here in Texas - at least it's not a TABC regulation or a state law. From time to time, the bar I work at picks up a few cases at the discount beverage store of Bud Lite or Heineken or whatever's currently popular with our douchebag patrons.
posted by item at 2:32 PM on August 2, 2010


wow - my last sentence above is quite the syntax nightmare. Forgive me - I'm waiting to be seen in the ER right now. Mefi is both numbing the pain and warding off some damn major anxiety.
posted by item at 2:40 PM on August 2, 2010


The mark-up on a bottle of beer from the Gas N Sip is significantly lower than the mark-up a bar or restaurant would take.

Ah, but that's not what we're talking about. You're comparing the markup between the Gas 'n Sip and their distributor vs. the markup between the bar and their distributor. I'm talking about the difference between the markup between the distributor and the price of a bottle at the Gas 'n Sip.

The question is, is it cheaper to go across the street and buy alcohol retail, or is it cheaper to go through a distributor. Because that's the situation at hand. And I would contest that it's cheaper to buy through a distributor. Otherwise, why bother? Why not just go across the street?

BIG difference.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:01 PM on August 2, 2010


Huh? I don't think you understand what I am trying to point out.

Profit = Revenue - expenses.

The con artist had one expense: a pack of beer sold at distributor price + 20% mark up from gas stations. His revenue is distributor price + 20% markup + like 20% markup. His profit is the 20% mark-up.

The legal bar owner has thousands and thousands of expenses on top of the price of beer from the distributor. I can't even believe that I have to point this out. The total mark-up on the beer may be the same in each case (40% in my example), but his total expenses are also way higher.

I can't believe this is an issue.
posted by muddgirl at 4:23 PM on August 2, 2010


Is the confusion over the fact that a gas station can sell a case of beer at a cheaper unit price than a bar can sell a bottle?
posted by muddgirl at 4:36 PM on August 2, 2010


I worked as a bartender for a while in a joint that purchased about 80% of their liquor from the distributor and the other 20% from the local liquor store or A&P in the case of beer. The cost per unit was much higher, but it made sense in an underhanded sort of way. The reason was simple. Tax avoidance. When they got audited, the tax man made all sorts of assumptions about what profits should have been based on bottles purchased from distro. 20% of business became a truly cash business.

Maybe this cowboy thought he could buy the business for $1 and assumption of debt like this guy did with Newsweek.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 8:17 PM on August 2, 2010


The question is, is it cheaper to go across the street and buy alcohol retail, or is it cheaper to go through a distributor. Because that's the situation at hand. And I would contest that it's cheaper to buy through a distributor. Otherwise, why bother? Why not just go across the street?

In most places that would be illegal because of the three-tiered alcohol distribution system.
posted by peeedro at 10:00 AM on August 3, 2010


On the other hand, it also seemed like he was paying retail prices for the alcohol since he was buying the beer from the liquor store across the street (and making that seem like it was a superb moment of customer service is a special kind of brilliance)

This was the first indicator that it wasn't a legal business - generally alcohol sold at bars has to be purchased with taxes already paid - and the taxes are different for restaurant vs retail sales. Which is one of the reasons beer at bars is generally more expensive than take-home retail - it's a different, higher tax. So bars usually *have* to buy wholesale.
posted by atbash at 10:31 AM on August 4, 2010


« Older "Security officer demonstrates how to easily hack ...  |  Indie Bookstores Rising:... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments