Help Save Market Basket!!!

Farfrumbehavin · 08-05-2014, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAXUM

For local competition, why touch MB? At this point why buy out the "competition" when it's internal strife is booming your business and it's not costing you a dime to benefit from it. If anything you can bet they are all cheering for this to never end anytime soon.

Why not buy it when value of the company is at an all time low, Operate as a MB and control the whole market. Eliminate the competition completely. You might think that no body would touch this with a ten foot pole, but where are you going shop when this is over? If ASD maintains control cuts employees beneifits and raises prices than what seperates MB from everyone else. At that point I'd go to the store that is the most convenient. I'm sure the competition is loving the effect it is having on thier business and I bet they would love to see it stay that way. But we know that's not going to happen. We can get by with a lot of things in life but canned peaches are a must! We will only be left with a few choices, no matter who owns the stores. ATD and ASD have become house hold names around here but like after any war, eventually every body will go back about their daily lives and grocery shopping is part of that. I guess I was thinking this is economics 101, and when the competitor goes into a wobble you move in for the kill. I doubt that these international companies are interested in local concerns. Just throwing something else out there!

nhcatrider · 08-05-2014, 02:30 PM

T and his family own more of the real estate than S and his cronies. That being said, it was the root cause of all of this, S and his side feel that they are being cheated on that end. If the company does fold, they will both own empty stores. T has the experience, knowledge, skill and available work force to start over again. S has no idea how to run a grocery store, which is pretty obvious at this point.

dave603 · 08-05-2014, 03:57 PM

That's news to most of us I think.
How does T come to own most of the real estate?
I always thought most of the real estate was company owned? Not by T personally or his side of the family.
If true, then that does sort of put a different light on things, no wonder S would be mad.

Rusty · 08-05-2014, 04:08 PM

SHAREHOLDERS ALIGNED WITH ARTHUR T. DEMOULAS
Ownership stake: 49.5 percent
The children of Telemachus Demoulas:
Arthur T. Demoulas
Frances D. Kettenbach
Glorianne D. Farnham
Caren D. Pasquale

SHAREHOLDERS ALIGNED WITH ARTHUR S. DEMOULAS
Ownership stake: 50.5 percent
The children of George Demoulas
Arthur S. Demoulas
Diana D. Merriam
Fotene J. Demoulas

nhcatrider · 08-06-2014, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dave603

That's news to most of us I think.
How does T come to own most of the real estate?
I always thought most of the real estate was company owned? Not by T personally or his side of the family.
If true, then that does sort of put a different light on things, no wonder S would be mad.

If you look at tax records, some of the stores are owned by RMD, which is owned by Mike Kettenback Sr., who is T's brother in law. More are owned by a real estate company owned by T's wife. The grocery store does not own any of the buildings, they instead have long term leases on them.

TiltonBB · 08-06-2014, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nhcatrider

If you look at tax records, some of the stores are owned by RMD, which is owned by Mike Kettenback Sr., who is T's brother in law. More are owned by a real estate company owned by T's wife. The grocery store does not own any of the buildings, they instead have long term leases on them.

There are many reasons why seperate entities would own the real estate.

The first may be taxes. The depreciation on the real estate can be used to offset the taxable income for the company. If the company is very profitable higher rents can be charged, the net income will decline, and the increase in property income can be offset by the depreciation, thus reducing your income tax liability.

Liability may be another reason. If someone sues it is better to have isolated your assets than put them all under one name.

Only the family knows why they structured it the way they did. And really, with a privately held company it is really none of our business!

Winnisquamguy · 08-06-2014, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nhcatrider

. The grocery store does not own any of the buildings, they instead have long term leases on them.

That's not true they do own some of there buildings!

08-05-2014, 04:08 PM	#4
Rusty Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 2,028 Thanks: 603 Thanked 687 Times in 425 Posts	SHAREHOLDERS ALIGNED WITH ARTHUR T. DEMOULAS Ownership stake: 49.5 percent The children of Telemachus Demoulas: Arthur T. Demoulas Frances D. Kettenbach Glorianne D. Farnham Caren D. Pasquale SHAREHOLDERS ALIGNED WITH ARTHUR S. DEMOULAS Ownership stake: 50.5 percent The children of George Demoulas Arthur S. Demoulas Diana D. Merriam Fotene J. Demoulas __________________ It's never crowded along the extra mile.

08-05-2014, 02:30 PM	#2
nhcatrider Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Posts: 167 Thanks: 19 Thanked 29 Times in 27 Posts	T and his family own more of the real estate than S and his cronies. That being said, it was the root cause of all of this, S and his side feel that they are being cheated on that end. If the company does fold, they will both own empty stores. T has the experience, knowledge, skill and available work force to start over again. S has no idea how to run a grocery store, which is pretty obvious at this point.

08-05-2014, 03:57 PM	#3
dave603 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Nashua/Winnisquam Posts: 282 Thanks: 106 Thanked 96 Times in 49 Posts	That's news to most of us I think. How does T come to own most of the real estate? I always thought most of the real estate was company owned? Not by T personally or his side of the family. If true, then that does sort of put a different light on things, no wonder S would be mad.