Fremantle Markets - Ann Meyer and grand visions

Ann Meyer put people offside right from the beginning. Another business was reduced in size to make way for her coffee shop. She moved someone else’s stock from the coolroom and took over that space; the tenant left the market because of that shabby treatment and the newly announced rental increases.

Soon after, Ann introduced herself as the new Business Development Manager. People came out of her introductory meeting seething with anger. She took a hard line and said she was not there to talk about the past or problems or to answer questions. Basically it was “I’m here to speak and you are here to listen”. That was incredibly insensitive considering that the stallholders had just heard of the rental increases and felt betrayed and afraid.

It was generally understood that the Murdoch brothers had employed her to avoid the angry conflict that was festering; she was now the ‘go to guy’ and the Murdoch’s referred everything back to her. She was generally disrespected and disliked and many of the changes she instigated had dire effect on previously well run, successful businesses.

No one has ever mentioned a good idea that Ann Meyer implemented but there are many accounts of extreme chagrin at the detrimental changes she has made. What enflames everyone most of all, is that she over-rides experience, logical argument and even obvious facts by quoting or stressing her research. She is often mimicked with statements like, according to my survey, my data says, our market research, due to customer demand…

Her coffee shop was taken over by her daughter. There has been a lot said about ‘conflict of interest and nepotism’ and a lot of animosity has brewed as the daughter took over prime positioning and other advantages.

What I find most interesting about this shop is that it should reflect the validity of Ann’s qualifications and must be an example of how a shop should be run and how successful a shop can be according to the management’s expertise, positive attitude, qualified research and visions of their 21st century innovation. One would think that this shop would be a prototype for all others to aspire to – wouldn’t one?

Without even going into the fact that the coffee shop is for sale and everyone is really angry that a casual stall is for sale, when permanent stalls can’t sell and are being walked away from, let’s compare advantages and disadvantages.

The first point is that not only is this a casual stall which has only operated a little more than a year but the sale comes with an exclusive right to take over a permanent shop which has never even been occupied by the girl. The previous owner was ousted after paying around $30,000 for only ½ the space. He has recently walked away with nothing. How is it that his shop becomes her asset?

This might make her sale look more secure or more appealing but on closer inspection a potential buyer would find that that space needs to be fitted out and equipped according to regulations. I would estimate they would be looking at another $50,000 to do that.

Currently the girl is in a casual location of 3X3 metres. If you put a table at the front and side that gives you enough space to work in equivalent to a baby’s playpen. The rent on this little space is $100 per day. If the buyer takes on the permanent shop it is probably triple that size so I assume it would be at least double that rent.

The casual 3X3 shop is for sale for $20,000neg. If you take on the permanent shop your outlay would be around $70,000 plus rent around $600 per weekend. My figures are rough of course, but close enough for this estimation I am sure.

According to the girl, her profit is around $1,000 per month or $250 per week. If you round that out at 8 hours a day, trading 3 days at the market, and include another 8 hours to do all the things that need to be done to run the business, you have around 32 hours work. That means you make around $8 per hour!

The minimum basic wage for an employee would be twice that. Who in their right mind would pay $20,000 to do that? This of course, this is only if you take the 3X3 casual. I can’t imagine that anyone would take on a lease with the larger shop based on these figures.

I must also add that the figures did not include outgoings, insurances, car, phone or office expenses and other costs that would be usual in running a business so I do believe that the profit was exaggerated.

So, if this is the baby of Ann Meyers and Jamie Murdoch; with all of that management advantage, market research, the questionnaires, positive/professional attitude, retail experience, expertise and grand visions for everyone – then let the proof be in their puddings.

On another note though, I will add, that a potential buyer contacted Jamie Murdoch and enquired about the 5 year lease and also asked for information about the 3 month trial. The request was ignored. An EOI was sent instead. A second request to see a copy of the lease was also ignored.

Yes, you get to buy the coffee shop but you are only given a 3 month trial – and then… (???)

If this is the outcome for the ‘favoured one’ then what hope does anyone have?

For the latest post:http://sonyagreen.blogspot.com

Murdochs evict spokesman and force out long term tenants

New councillor Andrew Sullivan’s comments in last weeks Herald should make the new mayor sit up and pay attention. Andrew is impressive on two counts:
His refusal to be censored (gagged) and the balls to speak his truth.
He seems to grasp the importance of looking at new ideas or better options to help the disenfranchised stallholders. He simply states that the stallholders don’t need to be told to get on with it when they are obviously working through grief and suffering.

To me, the mark of a great leader is the rare combination of intelligence AND heart. This is a guy to watch.

Mayor Brad Pettitt’s rather beige comment about the eviction of Colin Wright was not much more than a political exhalation. “Colin and the Murdoch’s are clearly not able to work together any more. It’s best for everyone if they go their separate ways. I can’t see any way forward.” So what’s that – a personality conflict?

Has Brad completely missed the point? Colin Wright was elected by the stallholders to represent and speak on their behalf. Elected and supported because he had the ethics, intelligence, tenacity and most of all the courage to risk his own successful business to protect the vulnerable. Through Colin Wright the council was alerted to very major problems more than a year ago and his predictions and warnings have all now come to this final conclusion.

Removing Colin Wright is not the end of the plight of the stallholders or the predictable conflict to come. The markets are very close to collapsing and when Colin Wright is out of the picture the power of play will be between the Murdoch’s and a council who has so far been happy to deflect their responsibility in the whole sorry saga.

With council planning to spend in excess of 4 million dollars on the markets my suggestion would be to work out first of all if there will be a market by the time the debt is repaid. At a very rough estimate the Murdoch’s will be making squillions but the council will be lucky to break even after ten years.

It would do council and the Murdoch’s well to firstly define what a market is.

Exorbitant rents, lack of savvy traders, loss of customers, inappropriate stall positioning and unviable businesses are what this year turned up – where to now?

http://sonyagreen.blogspot.com/

Fremantle market - evictions and heartbreak

When Richard Murphy and Colin Wright took on the role as spokesmen for the Fremantle Market stallholders they had no idea of the grief and personal loss to come. This was a voluntary, unpaid position and they were both elected by the stallholders as ideal candidates. Both had operated successful businesses within the market for more than twenty years; they are intelligent, rational, objective, astute and fair negotiators.

Originally, and probably now with hindsight - naively, they expected their role to be representative of the stallholders point of view in matters concerning the smooth operation of the markets. It was never meant to be adversarial, in fact quite the opposite, they could sort out most minor issues on the ground and save management being involved or speak for the collective and negotiate with management. To a very large degree they acted as mentors and advisors to the stallholders.

They never wanted to act as critics or antagonists by any means. Ideally they would work with management and local council as part of a team to maintain or improve a highly successful retail business, tourism icon, heritage building and real estate asset.

The council needed to work on behalf of the ratepayers and care for the heritage aspect and physical structure of the building; its tourism status and commercial viability. It should have positioned itself as the main body or major stakeholder in the three part enterprise. The Murdoch management held the main lease on the Market which made their role primarily landlord and administrators. The stallholders input should have been in regard to customer requirements and satisfaction and the smooth running of the retail and service side of things.

The stallholders pushed hard to be part of a working group so that the three parties could get together on a regular basis and exchange ideas. When the new lease was signed off the stallholders found they had not been included as a voice in the new working group.

For reasons unknown and incomprehensible to anyone, including a number of commercial lawyers, the new lease appears to give the Murdoch’s full power and the council very little if any recourse. Although the lease was drawn up after much discussion, many promises and grand ideas nothing was committed to paper.

There were approximately 150 independent businesses operating under the Market roof. Most had paid tens of thousands of dollars for their businesses and many have been there for more than 10 years. These are the people who have created and nurtured repeat custom and are the real reason the markets evolved into such a phenomenal success. They understand customer relations, pricing, marketing, promotion, display, atmosphere, product and service supply, demand and competition.

Overall the markets have never and will never be a matter of bricks and mortar or administration. The markets exist only to the service of the customer.

The very obvious and most destructive element at the moment is the Murdoch’s delusional grandeur and posturing as The Boss of the Minions. The attitude that the stallholders are disposable ‘workers’ makes us wonder if they actually believe that they run a third world sweat shop. Even in their presentation they said they had never ‘sacked’ a stallholder. Was that a Freudian slip or an insight into their opinion of themselves? Well, let’s be clear about this: landlords don’t sack anyone; stallholders are not unpaid employees. They might argue that they meant to say that they hadn’t EVICTED anyone - but then that would be a lie.

When Richard Murphy (a previous surveyor) disputed the Murdoch’s estimate of his stall measurement and questioned the insecurity of the new lease proposal he sought legal advice. As president of the stallholder association he had every right to challenge and define the legal implications of what appeared to be a rather dodgy document.

He was evicted.

And the Murdoch’s might give all kinds of reasons now for that eviction but at the time he was evicted without explanation. I doubt that anyone else would argue that he wasn’t victimised and persecuted for one reason only: he was too effective as the stallholders’ champion.

In a democratic system, in a land of free speech and social justice this is diabolical. This is akin to sacking a Union leader. In mainstream workplaces this would be illegal and Unions throughout the country would have closed down shop. But once again the new lease proved that everyone is vulnerable and no one is protected.

When Colin Wright stepped into Richard’s position he was well aware that he risked the same treatment. Ethically, he could not back down. Very few people would be aware of the hours he worked; the thousands of phone calls, the meetings, reports, the out of pocket expenses, the research and overall stress and heartache he endured.

Colin Wrights shop was probably one of the most popular and most profitable shops in the markets. He could afford the higher rents and he could have kept quiet and continued a successful business. Richard Murphy and Mark Scott were also running successful businesses. It was never about self-interest but the integrity of the markets and the fair treatment of everyone.

Communication with the Murdoch’s became impossible. The only course of action was to address the council and hold them accountable for signing off on the lease. They had dug themselves into a hole and by the time they sat up and took notice most of them were astounded at the repercussions unfolding and the indifferent and belligerent response by the Murdoch’s.

Initially, half the councillors were fiercely opposed to re-signing the lease with the Murdoch’s. Others were not convinced but reached a stalemate and reluctantly swayed under legal advice. Ex mayor Tagliaferri seemed very pro Murdoch for reasons unknown but highly speculated about. When the Shit hit the fan Tagliaferri retreated. He ended up losing his campaign in the by-elections and gained himself immense negative media attention. Outside of council offices you would be hard pressed to find anyone who wouldn’t say they screwed up big time.

Throughout it all the biggest problem was that the council would have had to deem themselves responsible and accountable and in effect the council lawyers were being asked to find themselves at fault. Legally this could have exploded, so understandably, it was never in their interest to find fault with the lease, and without doing that, the lease became ironclad. Long term, the council is stuck with the Murdoch’s for near on twenty more years and pretty powerless in a volatile partnership.

Anyway, that’s their problem now. Although, from the sideline, I might just point out that truck loads of money have been spent by the Murdoch’s and the Council and although they have treated the stallholders as the enemy they really should be grateful for the education they have both received this early in the game. Ironically, if the council had been more open to constructive criticism and the research done by the stallholders they probably should have paid them for this work. If they had not been so defensive and had listened to their predictions they would have saved themselves a lot of money, a lot of heartache and public embarrassment.

As for the Murdoch’s, I imagine that their ineffective market research and legal costs would be so substantial that had they have been more honest and ethical right from the beginning they could have paid out the few stalls that they wanted to remove and not only would that have given them smooth access but would have saved them the expose of their reputation as well as their almighty $’s.

Much of this has been said before, but I wanted to recap because this month the saga has hit an all time low. The vindictive actions of these nasty little creatures have stunned the Port City with the news that Colin Wright has now also been evicted.

It seems very obvious to me and others that the timing has been very well calculated for maximum impact. Knowing full well that pre-Christmas is the most profitable time of year for the stallholders, to evict someone on the 30th of November just shows how spiteful these people are. In normal circumstances retailers would invest as much money as they could afford to buy in their Christmas stock.

As disgusting as this is, it was also predictable so no, Colin was not caught out. But many others were hit up with notice to sign on or move out and this week-end at least six people have been forced to walk away. Unbelievably, they have been offered, or actually been manipulated into signing, what is nothing more than a month to month tenancy.

Let’s be very clear about one fact: Colin Wright has been evicted for speaking up for and on behalf of the majority of vulnerable and intimidated stallholders. He has never acted out of self interest and his words have always been the words of the collective. Getting rid of Colin or getting rid of the association does NOT get rid of the anger, resentment or the complaints to come.

It is also very obvious that the other people being forced out this week, and previously, have been those who have supported the stallholders association. Mark Scott has been a much loved market character who has mentored most of the fruit and vegetable traders over a span of more than twenty years. He has worked as the unofficial ‘go to guy’ and has done much to promote and improve the markets. Last year the Murdoch’s didn’t mind taking a photo opportunity with Mark to bask in his success and award for trader of the year. Ann Meyers didn’t mind calling on Scotty when she needed support or advice when she first started out either. Both she and the Murdoch’s have now shafted him -they have refused to offer him the 5 year agreement that they promised.

There are so many stories that I would love to write about to allow people to really see what has taken place, but as many are identifiable, I can not break their confidence at this point. Many people have been forced to walk away and have lost their investment, have been left with unsold stock and without an income. Some don’t have the luxury of leaving with nothing. These people have families and mortgages and unpaid bank loans. To walk away would mean certain bankruptcy and their only option is to sign onto another lease, pray they can manage the high rents, hope they might break even or sell out and try to make enough to walk away someday - managing their loses.

When you hear the Murdoch’s make statements like most of the stallholders have happily accepted the rent rises or some people have chosen to leave, I just want to slap them.

I would challenge anyone to ask the 30, yes that is 30, stallholders who have ‘chosen to leave’ WHY? You might also ask the 6 leaving this week why they would choose to leave a month before Christmas after investing in additional Christmas stock.

I also take offense at Ann Meyer's in this week’s newsletter when she expresses her cheerio and good wishes to Gloria; stating that Gloria has sold her business and moved on. Actually, there has been a few references to people having sold their business but never once has it been mentioned as to how much less than value it has been sold for; how much each of those people have lost. Gloria had no choice – she wasn’t offered a new agreement.

Nothing is said about the people who have paid for a business, which has now been relocated into a smaller space, in a lower traffic area, and has lost the right to on-sell their lease or goodwill. Robbed of a business but compromised into a shadow of hope. These are ‘the happy’ ones.

One lawyer stated he had been contacted by eight stallholders in one week; three had been terminated without negotiation or notice.

Jamie Murdoch claimed that 15 of the 20 stallholder who had left this year had sold their licenses for an average of $40,000. Again it is 30 stallholders that have left, a good number are there on monthly tenancies and planning to pull out or are probably going to be forced out. This outrageous statement can be easily disputed by asking the X-stallholders for the correct figures and if anyone did sell for $40,000 then it is also worth asking how much they lost. I don’t think selling out for forty grand is much to sing about if the seller paid seventy grand to buy it.

Let’s also talk about the accuracy of Jamie’s statement that the Wednesday’s growers market was “A successful trial”. Let’s ask those stallholders who invested in the plans, promises and propaganda of that venture if they were aware they were investing in a trial. Successful? It lasted about 6 weeks and it was an abysmal failure.

Or the claim that closing down Friday night trade was based on ‘research’ and had also has been a trial.

We have it in black and white that the markets would not trade on Thursday and yet here it is again dressed up as a Christmas trial. Then there were the opening and closing hours on trial; the sheer stupidity of closing Friday nights but opening early on Sunday mornings. The only person who would have had any customers would have been the girl selling coffee to the other stallholders who sat around in the cold waiting for customers to arrive at the usual time. Did I mention that Ann’s daughter owns that coffee shop? (A prime location fortuned to her after only a few months trading when normally it would take years. – I would love to know how much rent She pays?)

I guess if your market research consists of asking the new coffee seller if it was worth opening earlier in the morning and closing Friday nights she would probably agree. My guess is that not too many people are looking for caffeine late in the day but probably business is very good for a captive early morning crowd of stallholders.

No one I spoke to recalls being asked if they thought they should close down Friday night. In fact, I hear there was disbelief and outrage from the stallholders and the customers.

Anne claims she discussed closing with stallholders and was surprised that those same people objected when she followed through. They tell me that she didn’t say she was planning on closing, she asked how business was and many said it was slow. They thought it was casual chit-chat and they meant slow compared to other years. She never stated that she was researching the viability of being open and she later acted like they had deliberately misled her.

This week she issued a newsletter entitled Bollocks and sarcastically claimed that some stallholders were speaking disrespectfully of the Murdoch management. Jamie has also made public statements which lamented that the stallholders were casting aspersions on their reputation. Ha! They are wiping the floor with people, destroying lives and have bought heartaches and devastation into the city and yet they blame the publicity. No, they blame the stallholders for the publicity. Poor babies, they feel they are being bullied – Boo Hoo.

NOTE: You have been exposed and put under a spotlight and we see who you are. That IS your reputation. No one is doing anything to you - we are all just observing. Everything that I have said, the press has said, the stallholders have said - is all on record and can all be checked and double checked. Your reputation is directly related to your actions and your word.

I am pleading with people to seek legal advice before signing any agreement with these people. It is always good business practice to understand the fine print in a lease and it’s essential with this one.

Although the Murdoch’s have made grand statements about the new restoration work and renovations, I am amazed that more people have not asked how business will be trading whilst that work is being carried out. What does a lease mean if you are entombed in scaffolding? Will customers be wearing hard hats? It seems clear to me that it will be impossible for anyone to trade for some months while this work is being done. It’s obvious that there is not space for relocation and I can’t see that it can happen without stalls being put out of business for a matter of months. Has anyone even seen the plans? If people are setting up and equipping businesses now will they be dismantled soon? Will those fittings and fixtures work in the new version or are stallholders expected to refit all over again if they make it back.

The council estimated over $4million dollars worth of works a few years back but since then there has been mention that it might be much greater than that. Sounds like very substantial work to me. I won’t even go into how or why the council or really the ratepayers ended up footing the bill for this, when clearly, it is primarily to the advantage of the Murdoch’s. Why? Has anyone even done the sums? I can see that while the Murdoch’s will be making huge profits the ratepayers will be waiting at least a decade before they see a cent of rent from the Murdoch’s. That is, if the markets are still operating in ten years; could be a very expensive white elephant.

It still remains perplexing that the city didn’t take control from the beginning and then re-lease it after the work was complete. If the council had taken control then, all of the profit could have gone towards the restoration and been paid for in a fraction of the time.

Do the ratepayers even know that more than 4+ million of their dollars are going into the markets and that the council has very little power to ensure that the markets are well run or even viable as a long term business?

Well, it’s worth thinking about if anyone cares, but right now, I can see that the people who have cared and did try to do something are the ones who will be under the guillotine this week-end.

To Richard Murphy, Colin Wright, Mark Scott and the stallholders who can’t be named yet - we thank you.

To Les Lauder, Donna Haney, John Dowson, Georgie Adeane, Shirley Mackay, Alice King and Bill Massie we thank you. Also a special thanks to the other councillors who jumped on board a little late but at least you stood up.

To the Fremantle Herald, especially Jenny Danger - we thank you.

Adele Carles, Annie St James, Paul Masten, Rod Hagar, and the people of Fremantle – we thank you.

To John and Jamie Murdoch, Ann Meyer, Phil Dawson, Robert Fittock, Freo Council legal team and Peter Tagliaferri – shame on you all.

To Mayor Brad Pettitt – Good luck.

http://sonyagreen.blogspot.com/

John and Jamie Murdoch - Retail 101

“The Fremantle Market is one of the key elements to the growth of Fremantle and an integral part of the local community providing various social and economic benefits.”

The above quote is just another example of the delusional statements made by the Murdoch management. Their ‘key elements to the growth of Fremantle’ should be compared to the growth of a melanoma. Regular visitors and long term stall holders have complained bitterly all year about the decline of the markets; the loss of soul, loss of customers, loss of livelihood, loss of businesses and traders and loss of goodwill.

Fremantle council meetings were filled beyond capacity as angry stall holders’ and their supporters pleaded with the mayor to undo or redo the lease with the Murdoch’s. A public rally was also held outside town hall to encourage council to ‘evict the Murdoch’s’

Is that what they meant by ‘an integral part of the community’?

Many speakers told stories of intimidation, desperation, loss of livelihood, insecure tenure and the sadness and shock of seeing their much loved and respected Richard Murphy being evicted. Richard had been their spokesperson, articulating professionally and calmly THEIR voices.

Most spoke of being crippled by high rents and as many as thirty businesses had to walk away as it was no longer financially viable to continue. Many of these people had paid many thousands of dollars for specific stall spaces, but were unable to sell out due to their inability to secure a long-term secure lease.

Would that be the social and economic benefits referred to in the above quote? No, economic benefit is a one way street and that street runs a truck load of money to the doors of the Murdoch kingdom.

Many of the stall holders have had their stalls downsized or relocated to inferior or inappropriate positions. New traders have been bought in and are in direct competition with others. Apart from massive rent hikes, many new administrative charges and costs have been introduced as well as some stalls having to re-equip or re-fit their shops.

Their grand vision and media hype about the ‘New Wednesday Growers Market’ contradicted their previous promises about trading hours. They grossly exaggerated its viability and it badly impacted on the rest of the markets. They talked it up with statements like ‘food from heaven’.

It ended up being a complete embarrassment and a total flop. It was a small, dark, dingy collection of trestle tables, selling nothing more than common grocery items. AS PREDICTED. The gourmet cheese and wine tastings were pathetic and the celebrity chef cooking school was akin to watching a bloke cooking a barby in any local picnic area.

Sadly, the twenty or so vendors who believed in the Murdoch propaganda have lost whatever costs they incurred and have become the new collateral damage at the Fremantle Markets. True to form, the Murdoch’s statement about the closure of the Wednesday market completely dismisses the abysmal failure and they were recently quoted as saying that it was “A successful trial”.

“Mr Murdoch, did you ever tell the press, the community or the vendors that the Wednesday growers market was a TRIAL?

Would you please define successful?

Your trial lasted about 6 weeks. Each week saw less customers and less stalls and finally it simply snuffed out. The traders have done their dough and you are in denial. I am not the first to say “I told you so,” nor will I be alone in saying Ha ha!

And now for your further edification, let me address your preposterous claims about local artists and craftspeople:

So far, you have lost most of the great crafts-people you already had. As they have pointed out, they can’t afford those rents. Also, most of the work they do is done from home in workshops. They might retail on the weekend but they work and create throughout the week. Your vision of having potters, ironworkers and artist working on site is simply another example of ignorance. Why not do the unthinkable and actually ASK those people what they require?

Let me give you just one example:

A potter works with wet clay. The wet clay takes days to dry and can not be moved or relocated – it is very fragile. The pieces then need to be baked in a big oven called a kiln. Do you expect a casual potter to bring down their wheel, tools and kiln each week or will they need to pay for a massive space and set up a permanent stall? My estimate is that such a potter would need to turn over a couple of thousand dollars a week just to cover the costs. How do they sell the pottery with their arms up to the elbow in mud?

Why not speak with a welder before you encourage ironwork on site. Ask a glassblower about trestle tables and Fremantle winds. Ask a dressmaker how she will fit, draft and sew a frock while serving her customers. I notice on one of the newsletters a suggestion to demonstrate sheep shearing. Now that’s probably worth serious consideration…

I know you will take offense at what I am saying. You will probably run this by the legal team. You seem to interpret constructive criticism as possible defamation, but wait and think…

You have forked out a bomb on market research, legal advice, advertising, additional office staff, security, evaluations, PR and loss of time in disputes and conflict. Your reputation is sullied and your working environment is toxic, hostile and stressful. Do the unthinkable – just listen and put the ego back in its cage for a minute.

I am not trying to attack you, I am simply pushing you to step up and be a leader. The Stall Holders are not employees; they are savvy, experienced business men and woman. Many have been trading successfully there for more than ten years. This in itself is evidence that they know their demographic and are catering to it.

Richard Murphy and Colin Wright have not been your enemies and have never tried to be adversarial or counter-productive. Both were elected to speak on behalf of the Stall Holders in view of fair treatment, market improvement and ongoing success. Both these men have been supported and endorsed by the collective. You have victimized and persecuted them!

Richard Murphy had one of the nicest and most patronised stalls in the market. Colin and Marilyn Wright's shop is arguably the best stall there; bringing regular repeat custom and they have over twenty years experience.

Mark Scott, Richard Murphy and Colin Wright have mentored so many and have acted freely and generously in holding a large section together; acting as spokes-people, settling disputes, supporting new traders and bringing competitors together to compliment each other.

These three men have sat and consoled crying and distressed stallholders, arbitrated and resolved conflicts, advised, supported, mentored, encouraged and advocated of their own accord; for no reasons other than decency and caring. Not one of them has been paid to do these things, but God only knows how much time, money and grief they have saved you in taking on this position. Most of this went unmentioned and certainly unrewarded.

These guys are worth a thousand Annie Meyers’ who seems to live in her ‘happy place’ and quotes facts and figures like little tom-thumb crackers. Is she there to feed you or is she just an apron to hide behind? We’ve all heard what she says, but what has she actually done?

I mention these three men specifically, but I also call your attention to the many that believed in you, supported you and championed your bid on the new lease. Without naming names, I remind you that you wiped the floor with them and continue to ruin them. Why?

There is a wealth of knowledge there from the front line and the common interest is to maintain and improve what works. The hay days of the market were the result of minimal interference from management. Every stall has a vested interest in doing well and to be successful; they need to know their business, their product and their customers. Why do you disregard knowledge and experience in favour of external market research or Annie’s magic wand and fairy bread or Tagliaferri’s self-interests?

Your need for control and structure is interfering with the natural ecology of the market. It has always been the eclectic mix that worked. Departmentalising the markets takes away the free flow and the leisurely browsing which encourages impulse buying. The markets are an exhibition or an entertainment - not a snatch and grab venue. Vendors used to compliment each other and feed off each other, but now you are creating competition and aggravation.

You need to encourage people to wander the full circuit, not direct them in and out in the shortest possible time. This is not a hardware store. This is also why the markets work as a week-end business and why other retail functions mid-week. You can’t have it both ways – stick with what works.

One of the best things about the way things were is that the blend of aromas and sounds created atmosphere. The smell of coffee beans led gently through to fresh bread and then incense or mangoes. Now with all the food being compressed you have garlic, sausage, fruit, ice-cream etc and everything fusing into an obnoxious stench.

The spaced music of the cd shop, the bar, buskers, meditation and other genres worked very well, but now there is an irritating din creating a stressful noise. Most of the excellent buskers are now outside the market and in the mall – no longer at Freo Markets.

You are pushing to exclude merchandise made in China or other such countries but your understanding on this is quite ignorant. China, India, Taiwan and other such countries are the manufacturing Mecca’s of the world. Most of your so called designer label products are imported from these countries. In recent years, most western manufacturing has gone offshore and it will continue to do so. Get real, be discerning and get yourself educated. Again, talk with the guys on the ground – you must.

Obviously the markets can do without tacky junk but you fail to understand that there is a huge demand for bargains; cheap T-shirts, sunglasses and $2 bits and pieces are as valid as anything else. No one goes the market to buy Vuitton or Prada. Do you have any idea about your demographic?

Closing down half the market on Friday evening is ludicrous. It’s one of the busiest trading times of the week. You don’t seem to fathom how embarrassing and insane that was. Chasing customers out of an establishment has never been written into the retail act, simply because, no retailer other than you, would have ever considered such a thing.

Retail 101 – Don’t yell at customers to F…Off.

Seriously, you have been pathetic, cruel and vindictive. Unless you get back into the drivers seat and work with the people who matter you will destroy the markets and be shamed out of town. No one wants you to fail and perhaps you don’t like the teacher, but at least be smart enough to learn the lesson.


http://sonyagreen.blogspot.com/

michael willicombe - too easy

Prior to the Murdoch’s lease renewal, mayor Tagliaferri suggested that the council could buy out the last couple of years left on the lease. He had been looking into Eastern States markets and wanted to adopt some of their ideas.

Most, if not all, council owned markets are managed within council. Not only are they well run but the highly lucrative returns stay in the pocket of the ratepayers rather than private companies.

There had already been disputes and tensions between council, stallholders and market managers. Many of the councillors did not want the Murdoch’s to have the lease renewed. There was some talk that the Murdoch’s had threatened to run the markets into the ground and they also threatened legal action. At the time, they still had about 2 years left on the current lease.

Buying them out was an ideal solution and one that the stallholders association has suggested many times. No one seems to know why council suddenly turned and allowed the renewal to go ahead without fully exploring other options.

Now with 20-20 hindsight it all seems so logical and simple. Interesting though, that in last weeks Herald, Michael Willicombe put it together in nice bite sized pieces just on the off chance that any new mayoral candidate might step up and actually do something.

This would be the way to go in the interest of ratepayes, council, customers and stallholders. Perhaps, it’s even a perfect out for the Murdoch’s. Take the money and run. Retail is obviously not their forte and they could make as much, if not more, doing something they are more suited to. Surely the money is not worth the aggravation or humiliation of the last year or two.

Excerpt from an article in the Fremantle Herald’s thinking allowed column.
Written by Michael Willicombe.

A dedicated market manager employed full time by council could easily manage the markets. All the profits from stallholders would then come direct to council instead of the head lessees.

Genuinely affordable rents could then be set directly by council at the same time as it achieves a much higher overall income return for ratepayers; a genuine win-win scenario. The much greater income coming to council under this plan would then allow for proper maintenance and the final full restoration.

All council has to do to activate my market plan is get out of the new 21 year lease agreement without crippling penalty…D’oh

More market madness at Fremantle

In the words of the great philosopher Forrest Gump,‘Stupid is as stupid does’. The mayhem and madness at Fremantle Markets continues.

Although daylight savings has recently been voted against in Western Australia the Murdoch management has turned around and right in the cold, dark, wet days of late winter / early spring, they have extended trading hours. Although most customers have left by about 4 pm the stallholders are now forced to sit around until 6pm before they can pack up and leave. Many need to make multiple trips, carrying boxes of stock, to cars parked down the road, in near dark and often wet conditions.

Lately, the trading hours look like something from a lotto draw. As previously predicted the markets are now operating as two separate entities. The outdoor area has become known as the yard and the indoor area is now referred to as the hall.

Actually it’s really three separate markets now that they have the new Wednesday markets.

The yard is almost entirely food related and the hall is predominately merchandise. Not to forget the little table with the thimble sized plastic cups set up as the new wine tasting area and now grandiosely referred to as Fontes Pool.

The hall is open Friday from 10am til 8pm. Saturday and Sunday from 10am til 6 pm.

The yard is open Friday Sat and Sun from 8am til 6pm, although on their website today I noticed they still advertise Friday as open 9am til 8pm and Sat and Sun from 10am til 6pm, and no reference to halls and yards. Also noted is that public holidays are open from 10am til 6 pm. (not sure if that's halls and yards)

Wednesday the yard is listed as 10am til 3 pm or maybe that is 8am til 2pm. Doesn’t really matter much, as talk is that it might be changed to 12 til whenever. This is because they now look to be opening Thursdays throughout the Christmas season and it has been bought to the attention of management that the regular stallholders can't set up to trade on Thursdays if the new markets are operating on Wednesday.

The Wednesday market is a huge flop already but how do those people even imagine making a go of a business which opens at noon. (Will they still pay the same rent?)

Confusing? Not really, when you remember the Murdoch’s stated clearly that after the previous dispute about Thursday trading hours they had agreed that the markets would not be opening on Thursdays.

And now it just gets stupider. They have decided to close down the fruit and veg section on Friday night. Friday nights and Sundays are the two busiest times for trading and regular customers have shopped for fresh veg’s on Friday night for years and years. Last Friday the stallholders were horrified as market management herded out their customers by dropping tarpaulins, pinning up signs and calling out something along the line of 'everyone out - you must leave now – this section is closed'.

Yep, believe it or not, customers were cattle called out of the outdoor area but told they could walk around the outside of the market to re-enter the hall area.

There you have it, the produce guys can open on Thursdays when there are very few customers and close on Friday nights when they have established huge customer following. Not to mention the almighty $’s in the Murdoch pocket once again; Thursday trade is of course another way of increasing rents even more.

Friday night you can shop in the hall but you can't continue through to the yard for any food related product. Sunday you can buy your lunch at 8am but then you would need to wait around a few hours to enter the indoor area.

Seriously, if you would like to shop at the markets, don’t rely on the website it’s a bit complex and contradictory at the moment. When they do get it streamlined it will probably look like a train timetable. Why not just email or phone and ask for today’s hours. If enough people call they might put a recorded message on which they could update each week. They could even add a press 2 button for people wondering what stalls might still be operating each week.

If this year's mayhem is an indication of their 21st century vision then I have a great idea:
Why not put the stalls on ebay and auction trading times? Customers can bid on when they would like to shop and even select what stalls they would like to browse. Stall sizes and location are already being changed at whim so why not trading hours? Why not individualize it rather than section it?

Phone (08) 9335 2515
Fax (08) 9336 1704
email info@fremantlemarkets.com.au



http://sonyagreen.blogspot.com/

Look before you lease. What didn't they get?

Fremantle Markets Pty Ltd presentation to council Feb 26th 2008.
(Some of the questions raised by councillors prior to the lease being granted)

Summary of question asked by Cr Bill Massie: So the current stallholders are guaranteed security?

Summary of response from Jamie Murdoch They are guaranteed security under the working group and under the lease. The lawyer that the stallholders have engaged, there was a meeting that a couple of the Councillors went to prior to Christmas and the lawyer said that the stallholders will have more security under the new lease then the old lease. The new lease allows us to offer our stallholders a 5 year lease, with the opportunity for a 5 year option. We want our stallholders to continue, we have a database, as I said, of 200 stallholders who are all fantastic people. There are initiatives that we want to implement, so the 3 day a week markets stays but there are various sections of the market that can come alive on the Tuesday or a Wednesday or whenever to suit the various need that Lee and Anne have identified.

Summary of question asked by Cr Bill Massie: So the weekend market would not be forced into working 7 days?

Summary of response from Jamie Murdoch

No. We have gone through that process with the Thursday trial. These initiatives are just initiatives, to sit down and discuss and consider. )

Summary of question asked by Cr Les Lauder: In your presentation you showed a food court, is that towards the centre.

Summary of response from Jamie Murdoch

It is between the fruit and vegetable section and the main building. We think there is an ideal opportunity to explore having that as a food court, it's a good link between the Henderson street mall foot court, down the lane way and into a nice area under the tarpaulin before you get into the main heritage building. We think that could be created into some sort of food court and entertainment area, which is one idea that we have.

Summary of question asked by Cr Les Lauder: What would happen to the stallholders that are currently there?

Summary of response from Jamie Murdoch

They would be relocated to other places. These are purely ideas and we are going to
have to discuss them further. They have not been discussed with anybody outside of this room. We don't want to loose any stallholders, we want all the stallholders we have to come along.

Summary of question asked by Cr Les Lauder: But you said that the ones that will be displaced by the food court will be put elsewhere. I don't understand what would happen to the ones who are elsewhere now.

Summary of response from John Murdoch A lot of those stalls that are in that section, are casual stalls anyway, so they would be easily relocated to other casual spots and if it got turned into a food court, we would look after the stallholders that are there.

Summary of question asked by Cr Bill Massie: If you open 6 or 7 days a week, the current stallholders, are they going to be mobile or will they still have their positions?

Summary of response from Jamie Murdoch They will still have their position. The whole Market will still come alive on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. All stallholders are welcome to come along for the future of the Fremantle Markets for the next 20 years that the Council and the Working Group will govern, we are not precluding anyone. We have a database of 200 fantastic stallholders and we want to give them the opportunity to come along for the next 10-20 years.

Listed below are some of the concerns raised by stallholders at the time:
(on record - verbatim of some of the responses from those aware of the business plan)
- Have heard that the rents will be going up 10% market rent...if rents go up crafts people will not be able to afford the rent and I feel that $2 type shops would move in and change the markets.
-Only that rents remain at a fair and reasonable rate given that it is a market, markets are a low rent situation
-I'm concerned that not enough attention has been put into the size of rent increases that we can expect the new business plan. Rent increases need to be strictly controlled.
- Fee increases have occurred.
-They are putting up rents unnecessarily to squeeze people out and put more tenants in.
- Stop putting up rents.

Uncertainty about tenure:
- They are stripping the stallholders of all rights, they can ask you to leave or move your stall.
- No protection to stallholders
-Make sure that leaseholders rights are protected when it comes to resale of stalls
-Regarding relocation of our site or moving us out all together - I would like some clarification on this.
-Will they start anew and will we lose our current location.

Lack of involvement and representation of the stallholders association:
-Why is the stallholders association not recognised in this lease?
-We don't have a voice anymore, the association of the stallholders will be eradicated and not given a voice
-Meeting should be more open and not behind closed doors, it seems too buddy-buddy; you scratch my back. They are unprofessional and unapproachable. They should include a stallholders representative in all meetings.
-The stallholders association has not been mentioned in the new business plan.

And then the amazing quotes and promises from the Murdoch's;

At Fremantle Markets, we will create WA's gourmet heaven. A food retailing, entertainment and educational centre that will rival...

More efficient and effective use of the community asset,but retaining existing traditional 3 day trading market.

Commitment to continue to provide a low cost trading environment despite capital expenditure and trading initiatives

We support internal changes but only if space is used effectively, maximize stallholder/customer interaction. Number of stalls must not decrease.

To provide goods and services that exceed the shoppers expectations.
To provide quality, range,uniqueness and value for money
Develop range of local produce - uniquely West Australian
Goods handmade on site to encourage interactivity - glassblowers/metalworkers/pottery makers

In Summary:
We subsidise rents to make a low cost trading environment
We have the support of a large majority of stallholders
We have NEVER "sacked" a stallholder
In conclusion:
It's time to end the uncertainty
Time to allay stallholders' fears about the future
Time to give ratepayers a better return on their asset
Time to stop the bickering and let us get on with the job

Jamie Murdoch's curious bean counting

John and Jamie Murdoch have an accountancy background. They understand that if you double a tenants rent you can make off with a truckload of money. As businessmen though, they don't quite grasp the fact that if you kill the golden goose it stops laying golden eggs.

Reading through the transcript of last Fridays nights Stateline telecast leaves me very curious about their sums.
http://www.abc.net.au/stateline/wa/content/2006/s2644274.htm

Quote JAMIE MURDOCH: The average stall is still paying about $300 a week to trade at the Fremantle markets for a Friday, Saturday and Sunday. It equates to approximately $12 per trading hour. So we still think that's a low-cost environment.

Quote PENNY BANNISTER, FORMER STALLHOLDER: I'm told my rent is going to be times three, like treble what it had been. So I thought - I laughed at first, I think, it was so over the top it was ridiculous.

Quote BOB WILLIAMS, FORMER STALLHOLDER: I was told I couldn't sell it as a fish shop and what was the future? - $1,700 extra out of my pocket each month. So I thought it was the time to leave.

REBECCA BOTELER: Mr Murdoch says he's been forced to increase rents because the owner of the building, the City of Fremantle, put his rent up by about 12 per cent. But that doesn't wash with the Stallholders' Association, which says the Murdochs have passed on increases of 50-100 per cent.

GRAEME MACKENZIE, CEO, FREMANTLE COUNCIL: The Council's intent was always to recognise that it's a market. It's not a shopping centre, it's a market, and it's a low-cost environment. And I guess that's probably where the rents that have actually been imposed under the valaution have been unexpected, because we don't think it's probably a low-cost environment anymore under those arrangements.

Of course we all laughed when we heard the Murdoch's research (The council didn't check the figures but the stall-holders crunched down the numbers)
The asserted that 40,000 people attend the markets each week end and spend on average $45 per person =$1800000 that divided by approx 170 stall holders means that they average a weekend turnover of $10,588. (Is there a stall in there that would even hold that amount of stock? Aparently most of them are millionaires!)

And beautifully put by Penny Bannister when she spoke about how it was:
The whole place was like an ecological system, you know, a really wonderful dynamic system that fed off each other and itself and the energy in there was great.
It's changed because they've upset the balance, and in the process of doing that, by trying to take far too much money out.

http://sonyagreen.blogspot.com/

The end of an era for Freo markets

I have the highest respect for most of the councillors at Fremantle council. In a previous post I have named the extraordinary people who have stretched themselves in their determination to get things right for Fremantle and specifically the Fremantle Markets and the stall-holders.

Personally, I don’t understand the motivation of community-minded, ethical and passionate people taking on the thankless and sometimes sacrificial tasks of council. It impresses and heartens me to see the hard work, long hours and commitment they have demonstrated. But, how they function in such a dysfunctional environment is truly beyond my comprehension.

Obviously it is naïve of me to believe that government operates on a system of ‘the ultimate good of the majority’; fair play, common sense, community protection, environmental respect, prosperity and progress, heritage and tradition, well equipped services and support. I think some of these issues are the motivations for good people to step up and serve on council, but cynically, I do seriously wonder how anything can be done without enormous frustration, delay and nit-picking. On a more subtle level, are the personality conflicts, political posturing and personal agendas. You need to understand the languages of jargon, spin, dodge, bamboozle, gobble-de-gook, dismiss, talking without saying and open-minded-non-commit. You might receive an answer as a synopsis which has no content or a lengthy document which numbs the brain and convinces you that you don’t understand the answer. Unless you are very tenacious, you just might not get an answer at all.

Probably the most frustrating and time consuming but seemingly vital consideration, is ‘the legalities’. Everything is filtered through legal rights and responsibilities and the interpretation of…

And this leads me to where we are today.

The council renewed the Fremantle Market lease with the Murdoch brothers after much opposition, debate and legal advice. The councillors voted 6-7 in favour. It later came to our attention that the councillors were not privy to confidential information and had to vote according to direction given by the council’s lawyers.

Three, have since stated off record, that they would not have voted in favour if they had known then what they now know. Well that and other discrepancies are all water under the bridge now and I won't go into all the details but to say that the lawyers who drew up the lease and the councillors who were either ill-informed or indifferent to the predictions of the stall-holders or the 500 letters of opposition are now left with the reality that the Fremantle Markets are in a state of collapse.

As much as I would love to tell of individual and tragic stories of betrayal, intimidation, vendettas and sheer nastiness, I can not at this point, as it would identify people still struggling with the reality that they will soon need to shut up shop and walk away from their business. The council was warned this would happen and gave reassurances (not in writing) that stall-holders would be protected. And yet, no consideration or legal protection was written into the head lease. The stall-holders association was actually taken out of the renewed lease. (How could the lawyers get it so wrong?) Not only that, but they didn’t even give the council itself any real power. In effect they basically gave the Murdoch’s a free run for 20 odd years with virtually no accountability to either the council or the stall-holders.

The new head-lease did come with a rental increase of 12% which was probably fair at the time; considering it was at the height of the real estate boom and economic times in Western Australia were very, very good. The council confirmed that they had the rent valued by a licensed valuer. How the Murdoch’s could justify passing on an 80% increase to stall-holders is gobsmackingly incredulous! Why the council didn’t jump into action at the first notification is beyond me. No one said anything until the stall-holders showed up, and even then, the council dived for cover and said it was out of their hands and a matter for the Murdoch’s and the stall-holders to sort out. (Legally we don’t need to do anything, we are not accountable. Basically, ‘go tell someone who cares.)

The stall-holders had nowhere to go but to their own lawyers and begin what was to become a year long battle to get council to agree to another valuation. This was only done after the stall-holders themselves employed a valuer; who strongly confirmed that NO rent increase was justifiable. Understandably so, due to the current economic recession, falling interest rates and estimated 20% drop in real estate right across the board.

Strangely, the head lease stated a 12% rise between council and the Murdoch’s and yet the stall-holders rents were to be determined by “Fair Market Rent”. Why? And this is the main issue of contention.

How is fair market rent determined or interpreted and how flexible is the scale?

Wouldn’t you think that the fastest and easiest way to sort this out would be to have a completely new independent valuation done? That’s what the stall holders thought when they had theirs done, but unfortunately, as they were not given access to the markets, the valuation was considered incomplete. However, it was compelling enough to force the council to have their own done – even if it took a year! I also mention that the stall-holders report was completely transparent and the methodology was explained throughout; price comparisons to other markets in the Eastern States as well as WA, shopping centres and businesses within the Fremantle CBD.

This week the Murdoch’s sent a press release out stating that the new appraisal has justified their 80% increase. No one from the council informed the stall holders and even after two requests from Colin Wright and two more from the stall-holders lawyers the council did not speak with or notify the stall-holders. Colin Wright found a synopsis of the findings on the Fremantle council website. The council did not even have the courtesy to direct him to the website! I find this contemptuous act of disrespect so offensive I will be writing to the Minister of Local Gov and the council myself.

It was NOT a new and independent valuation. It is a report given under the direction of the lawyers to assess if the Murdoch’s valuation was done by acceptable methodology and that the increase was “WITHIN THE RANGE” of fair market rent.
(Would zero to 100 be within the range?)

The details of the report remain private and confidential. No one, not even the councillors get to see how the report was compiled and I don’t think anyone (other than the lawyers and the council administrators) knows what the lawyer’s direction was.
(Bear in mind the same lawyers implemented the lease and it is in their own interest to find in favour of the Murdoch valuation)

Why is this report not transparent to all concerned parties?

The report is dated 30th of June. Why has it been with the Murdoch and Council lawyers for a month?
(Surely, the valuers report, written in his own words and in full should be presented without any tampering or interpretation by biased parties.)

The bottom line is that the Stall-holders have agreed that they will accept the umpire’s decision and unfortunately this is it. No-one is fooled by any of this, but it is blatantly obvious that this is how the game is played and will continue.

Semantics aside, there is only one definition of fair market rent. The tenant’s right to refuse to pay it.

Already the markets are struggling to find new tenants. There are empty stalls there now and new, casual traders are being offered reduced or more succinctly, ‘subsidized’ rents. Long term tenants have walked and I personally know of at least twenty more making the transition out within the next few weeks. The markets over the past twelve months have taken on a tired, tacky lifelessness and still the Murdoch’s and the council live in denial.

Ironically, if they hadn’t been so defensive and hostile with the stall-holders they could have saved and maintained a much loved icon. Greed, incompetence and arrogance basically, but totally ignorant of the fact that it was always the stall-holders and the customers who made the markets the success that it was. 20 years is a long time, but hey, they climbed into bed together...


http://sonyagreen.blogspot.com/