It's pretty interesting that someone would effectively offer to profit share with a landlord. I'm not a restaurant guy, but I am a business guy and this type of arrangement seems like business suicide for the restaurant proprietor. I wonder if Gusto entered into a similar agreement, then this gentleman came along and offered a bigger slice of the pie? If this is the case, I suspect that maybe Gusto, after writing a few profit sharing checks was unwilling to give up more???
It's all speculation on my part, I have no idea what is going on here. But I am very disappointed that Gusto left that location. I really think that they hit their stride there, the food was wonderful, their events well thought out and entertaining, hopefully they can keep that stride going back across the street in a smaller space.
My issue with a profit sharing scenario is that the share comes out of the restaurant's gross profit... most likely. There is a lot of competing needs for that money, including equipment and maintenance needs, expansion needs, debt, cash flow needs, it just goes on and on. If not well designed, the landlord could end up with a bigger ultimate payout than the people putting the blood sweat and tears into the business take home.
Again, I have no personal understanding of what is actually transpiring here, but if it's correct, it does explain why businesses have struggled in this location. I hope that the new restaurant does well and lasts a long time. I'm certainly going to give it a few tries.
|