SFist: Elite Shuns "Big Box" American Apparel Store on Valencia

agent_torpor

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:22:45 -0800

So was I, but that diptwerp apparently couldn't read. And if he's older than me, he really should be packing up and moving the hell outta the mission already. Seriously, that's just pathetic.

aj

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:21:20 -0800

I was born here You win. Argument over.

aj

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:16:49 -0800

Why would anyone want to shop on Valencia anyway, with this kind of attitude?

riguna

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:47:13 -0800

I wish those greedy landlords the best of luck in securing a chain-store tenant despite the downward spiral of consumer spending, they'll need it. AA's expansion is the exception, not the rule. I certainly wouldn't worry about a Starbucks invasion anytime soon: http://seattlest.com/2009/01/23/starbucks_to_lay_off_1000_at_hq.php This is what confuses me: When exactly did AA become too mainstream for the anorexic-hipster set? I guess I was so busy selling out to the man I didn't notice his deep-V and pink jeans. That explains the foreign chest hair I found in my 401K statement. SFist nailed this one with two words: Who Cares? The Mission is a pit and y'all already have a Sketchers, but AA -see comments 10, 40- is an anathema to the hood? Whatever. It could be worse. http://www.theonion.com/content/news/shitty_neighborhood_rallies

iii

Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:18:53 -0800

Exactly. When someone with no control of their spending habits wants to spend $15 on a pair of pink undies, they can go up to Haight Street. If they walk, they might eventually even look good in them.

iii

Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:50:14 -0800

Sorry, but I've lived here longer, I was born here and ATA has been in SF since 1984. Valencia Street isn't so long that you've never walked down it is it? You should get out more often. Also, you guys should make up your minds: is Valencia Street in the Mission or not? Personally I don't care about your real estate boundaries.

agent_torpor

Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:55:17 -0800

Sorry, sounds like your problem lies with the greedy slumlords, not AA. Frankly, i've lived in the Mission all my life (Mission High, class of 94) and i've never heard of this ATA you mention - so whatever on that. Not every twerp with his hand in his pocket needs to have some sort of nonprofit to call home.

Matt Garr_n

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:05:26 -0800

If you're wondering how will this will invite more chain stores: '#1 reason to fight AA in the mission... It will destroy Artists' Television Access(ATA), which is next door to the proposed AA location AND has been for 25 YEARS!!! Greedy slumlords, like the one that owns ATA, will jump on the bandwagon and look for an AA-like tenant.' -sgreen A few years ago a new landlord bought the space that ATA has been renting since the 80's and bumped up the rent significantly. ATA almost shut down. Think of this as a packaged deal. You get two chain stores almost immediately and an all-volunteer run non-profit space that has been a longtime mission resident is forced out.

lardtub

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:00:30 -0800

sketchers is on mission street because it has cheap work shoes. like, because the mission is supposed to be working class. besides, there are already 3 other american apparels on the peninsula alone. if you are too lazy to walk 25 minutes up to the other one on haight street, you should move to walnut creek. people there have cars.

sgreen

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:23:00 -0800

#1 reason to fight AA in the mission... It will destroy Artists' Television Access, which is next door to the proposed AA location AND has been for 25 YEARS!!! Greedy slumlords, like the one that owns ATA, will jump on the bandwagon and look for an AA-like tenant.

sgreen

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 12:48:33 -0800

iii

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 12:08:22 -0800

Making their products in the USA does not make them an ethical company, I think. Say that to the people that live in other countries and are AA stores neighbors. That's just a business model that sells here in the US. Anyway, I am not sure we need an AA in every neighborhood in San Francisco.

iii

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:43:35 -0800

The company's expansion into retail was the fastest retail roll out in American history.[30] In 2003 American Apparel opened company stores in Los Angeles, Montreal, and New York to nearly $80 million dollars in sales[31] As of 2008 the company has more than 200 stores worldwide and continues rapid retail growth, with new stores in the United States, Israel, Japan, Korea, Netherlands, Switzerland, China, Germany, Canada, France, Sweden, Mexico, United Kingdom, Brazil and Australia. Stores are planned or under development for Belgium, Italy, Iceland, Spain,[23], China[32], and Hawaii.[33] American Apparel retail stores are marketed and designed individually rather than homogeneously.[34] Store designs are sparse and typically cost between $100,000 and $400,000 to develop.[34] The company tends to reject midtown, high rent locations and generally avoids in-mall stores.[34] The stores are often hubs for urban renewal since the company looks for low-rent but high traffic locations like Houston, Little Tokyo, New Orleans, college towns and most recently across from the Apollo Theater on 125th in Harlem.[35][34] In some stores, the decor features Penthouse Magazine covers from 1970s and 1980s - a style that has been controversial.[36] When scouting for locations, it considers urban areas that can be revitalized.[37] After opening on Southwest Stark Street in Portland, Oregon American Apparel was joined by a vintage clothing store, sushi restaurant, shoe shop and modern-styled hotel.[37] In some cases, the company sublets parts of retail locations to other businesses of the same demographic, bringing additional retailers to previously unoccupied space.[37] The bulk of American Apparel retail venues are in New York City and California.[38][34] AmericanApparelStore.com[39] is the company's e-commerce sales hub.[40] It carries an online inventory of roughly 250,000 SKUs and receives 1.5 million visitors per month.[41] Online sales grew from $13.3 million in 2006 to $29.3 million in 2007.[41] The company site runs on the Yahoo Stores platform and is included in the Internet Retailer 500 Index.[41][42] In late 2007, American Apparel opened a retail location for vintage clothing called California Select in Echo Park, a district of Los Angeles[43]. Shortly afterward, the company began selling vintage clothing through an Ebay store of the same name.[7][44] In 2008, the company was named "Retailer of the Year", following Calvin Klein and Oscar de la Renta.[45][46

craeg

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:35:37 -0800

If you are a landlord and you boot an existing paying tenant to raise the rent by multiples in this economy then you deserve what you get. NO ONE is expanding. I'm honestly surprised that AA is planning on it. At any rate, I dont support an artificial depression of a local economy to subsidize what some white folk consider meaningful culture. Again, are the actual working class people of the mission lining up to protest AA? or are they - you know- WORKING for a living. Where would the latinos be without the white progressives saving their neighborhood?

DrWhodunit

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:33:38 -0800

American Apparel is one of the last made in USA apparel companies. Isn't that exactly what we would want on Valencia? I mean, at least they're trying to meld ethics into the business. You'd rather have nothing there instead of encouraging that behavior?

chiliberto

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:59:03 -0800

I work at Artists' Television Access which is right next door. We've been there for about 20 years. It wasn't so trendy back then. We had a landlord that gave us a great deal because he inherited the business from his father. But then Victor Makras bought the building a few years ago and our rent tripled immediately. We freaked out, of course, but we managed to pull it together. The space that AA is going to occupy was renting for $7500/month the last time I checked. Nobody could take on that outrageous cost. Now AA has stepped up to the plate. The landlords in this neighborhood are all drooling over this. If they can get huge trendy chain stores to pay the outrageous rents, they'll jack up our rent and everyone else's too. We're all going to be screwed by this. Say "Bye Bye" to your neighborhood, and say "Hello" to Starbucks, The Gap, and monoculture. By the way, I'd say come by ATA and tell us how you feel. We're open most nights of the week, http://www.atasite.org

BlueFairlane

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:34:37 -0800

I can always trust sfist to supply a hefty dose of self-absorbed, bigoted whiners pretending to be the progressive front of America. A couple of things: 1. The only reason American Apparel wants to move to this neighborhood is that the neighborhood has filled over the last few years with the aforementioned self-absorbed, bigoted whiners pretending to be the progressive front of America. Such people have money. Such people also tend to complain about the fading authenticity of neighborhoods they colonize, somehow forgetting their colonization started the fading. It's called gentrification. It happens everywhere. 2. Your city is the size of my big toenail. I can walk from one end to the other in about a half hour at a stroll. You talk about Mission douchebags and Marina douchebags as if you're not all the same douchebags. You're little more than a bunch of cliques arguing over a corner of the playground.

markroquet

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:04:07 -0800

yes, thank you, you've perfectly expressed what i was trying to say. as i've made clear, this is pretty much all about me.

markroquet

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 09:46:38 -0800

also, you need only look at the letters from business owners (and list of supporting businesses) on the website to see that this is not (at least in whole) an effort of naive trust fund hipster self-involved xenophobic ideologue radicals, as people here like to charachterize anyone they disagree with in order to diminish their argument, but of normal people that are concerned about their neighborhood.

craeg

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 09:41:26 -0800

So in other words Mark, you're fine with letting stores other than ones you personally disagree with into the neighborhood. What a wonderfully twee economic policy. News flash SF, Valencia is now one of the most bustling commercial strips in town! Anyone interested in opening a retail space on the strip should speak personally to Mark.

markroquet

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 09:34:33 -0800

i like the picture people keep painting of the entire mission as this worn down, economically depressed neighborhood on the verge of collapse. there are parts of the mission that are certainly suffering, and the neighborhood has a wide array of problems (that i agree are much bigger than this one) but the commercial strip on valencia street has, over the past couple years, become one of the most bustling and desirable in the city (which is of course why aa wants to move in); it's not like this is some kind of lifeline to a blighted neighborhood. there is plenty of demand for storefront space on valencia street.

zinzin

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 08:14:02 -0800

whatever your thoughts on it, i urge you to get involved. the number on the poster hanging in the storefront is: 575-9084. The planner’s name is apparently Melissa LaValley. Her email is melissa.lavalley@sfgov.org. call her, email her and tell her what you think. the notion that AA represents “them” is ridiculous and arcane. the notion that the neighborhood “5 years ago” is something for which we should strive reeks of the very worst type of ideologue bullshit. the notion that a “precedent” would be set, and that this is a reason to halt development - to forbid a business from setting up in a currently derelict storefront in these trying times - is naive and selfish. there is NO GOOD REASON to prevent AA from moving into this small storefront in the neighborhood. NO GOOD REASON. if no one likes their stuff…they won’t shop there. but guess what….we all know people DO like their stuff….and THEY WILL SHOP THERE. that’s reason enough to call this entire protest a sham. a complete sham.

davey k

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 02:20:04 -0800

I don't buy that AA is a "big-box" retailer... but if you're looking for reasons not to shop there, you can start with the megalomaniacal asshole that runs the company, its sweatshop practices, its violations of labor laws, its wholesale hiring of illegal alien labor... Starbucks is a much more ethically run company than AA is.

wolf1

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 00:21:23 -0800

They let the Gap in on Haight & Ashbury and look how far that hood went down..........

SFBurke

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 21:44:34 -0800

mr808: I have never been in an AA so you may be right that there will not be any latinos in the front of the store -- but those are not the only jobs that AA will create. In any case, I think it is bizarre the way certain hipsters are insistent that only whites with cutting-edge body art and latinos should be allowed to the enter the Mission.

magdelyn

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 21:39:26 -0800

mr808

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 19:43:28 -0800

AA in the Mission?? How ironic! SFBurke, AA won't create jobs for working class latinos, not cool enough unfortunately, they only employ self interested hipster douches. Go to anyone of their stores anywhere in the world and you'll see what I mean. Markroquet, in response to your comment "but we don't need to add marina douchebags onto our mission hipster douchebags." The Marina douches are already here! Go see them being dropped off at the door of Medjool on Mission or Double Dutch on 16th... oohh how edgy!!, then getting their valets and taxis from the door back to safety ;)

markroquet

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 18:32:49 -0800

i don't know, i am. i guess a couple other people are. i don't think it's as big a problem as the murder rate. who did you hear say that? if, as you think, no one else really cares, then nothing will happen, and american apparel will open as planned, and you can get angry that people care about some other small issue. i don't see the problem. i don't think anyone thinks that using the s.f. planning commission as it was intended to be used makes them a hero. who did you hear say that?

craeg

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 18:12:46 -0800

Where is this groundswell of support people keep alluding to? So far all is see is the whining of some white middle class dude. You honestly think with the vastly disproportionate murder rate in the mission that "many people" are concerned with a single AA store? I want to have that view of the world, where being a hero is as simple as taking a narcissistic meaningless stand against a perceived threat.

markroquet

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 17:59:17 -0800

haha, asking the planning commission to block a chain store that many people in the neighborhood don't want is class warfare?

SFBurke

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 17:48:53 -0800

I really don't understand how AA inevitably begats Starbucks etc. It is amazing how scared people can be of the slightest bit of change and of people who are different from them.(and how ironic it is that it is progressive hipsters who are so scared and prejudiced). The fact is that Valencia St. has lots of vacant retail space. AA is not forcing anybody out nor is going to compete with any other businesses in the area. It will probably just make the street a bit nicer and it might even provide some jobs for the working class latinos in whose name this opposition is being launched.

craeg

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 17:10:38 -0800

What is it about SF that breeds this brand of extreme Xenophobia? "boutiques that cater to people from outside the neighborhood" SF is barely 7x7 - neighborhood boundaries vary block to block. It may offend your evidently well developed valencia by 24th south side of the street identity, but we ALL live in this city. Neighborhoods in the city are not cities unto themselves. There is a very real problem in the mission of drugs, murder, underage prostitution - shitty t shirts is not a real threat to the mission. It's actually pretty GD Bourgeois to take this fight on at all - actual working class mission residents are too busy working for a living to engage in class warfare.

Belgand

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:33:13 -0800

Very true. AA alone didn't ruin the Haight, but it's the same sort of small overpriced boutiques that cater to people from outside the neighborhood that did. Well, not to mention the tourist-focused smoke shops and crappy t-shirt places. It's basically all clothing stores and bars. Neither of which really serve my needs. Now, a few decent restaurants (hey, I like pizza a hell of a lot, but maybe a few more options would be nice other than a bunch of cheap Thai places and what is probably the worst Indian place in town) we need. Aside from just the taquerias and the overpriced trendy places (because Spork is going to live forever and be remembered long after its gone, right?) there are at least good places to get some food along Valencia and elsewhere in the Mission. Amoeba, on the other hand, is a large destination shop that actually benefits the neighborhood. At least we got rid of the Gap (and replaced it was something even more odious).

fizzandpop

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:32:32 -0800

Stinky hippies who overstayed their welcome ruined the Haight. Stinky hippies who commute in for the weekend are ruining the Haight. You can see where I'm going here; and Hobson's Choice of course.

Belgand

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:25:59 -0800

Would you prefer Uggs and those terrible suede boots that we keep seeing? How about more pointy-toed heels?

markroquet

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:12:30 -0800

like stephen elliot wrote, the problem isn't with american apparel, the merits of which seem to be the main issue of discussion here, but with the introduction of chain retail on valencia st. american apparel could easily bring in a slew of other chains - starbucks, the gap, and especially urban outfitters - that are going to drive rents up, threatening both the character of the neighborhood and the continued existence of some of the best bookstores, video stores, thrift stores and taquerias in the city. and worse, they will bring a lot of douchebags into the neighborhood. that's the difference between american apparel and places like sketcher's and kfc, which serve(d) both the low- and middle-income mission populations. does the mission have a lot of douchebags now? yes, plenty. but we don't need to add marina douchebags onto our mission hipster douchebags. the mission has a shaky identity right now. while still a very multicultural, heavily latino neighborhood with a strong arts culture and a history of working class left wing politics, it is also increasingly a hip, expensive shopping and dining destination, and increasingly-expensive apartments are slowly being gobbled up by condos for rich white people who think they are too hip for noe valley. the lines are, as always, much blurrier than that, and its not definite that american apparel would ruin the neighborhood forever, but it would definitely change the mission, and if you like the way the mission is now (or even better, was 5 years ago), it’s obviously cause for concern. american apparel didn't ruin the haight, but stores of that ilk are a large part of why the haight kind of sucks, and valencia street is still pretty cool.

Brock Keeling

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 14:19:09 -0800

everyone needs to calm thyself. like at most gap stores, you can find somewhat decent separates here.

Greg

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 14:10:28 -0800

personally I find it hilarious one of these is opening up in Burlingame, of all places. I mean, once you've opened one of these there, I think any hip or cool attributes fall by the wayside.

Generic

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:38:19 -0800

Yeah, no, I'm with you. I read "Mission women looking even slutier" and my vote is already cast.

Brock Keeling

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:07:16 -0800

That shoe made me vomit all over my keyboard.

Belgand

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:58:35 -0800

Odd that the shoe you linked to is actually one of the least ugly shoes I've seen in the past week. It's kinda cute really. As for AA though. I agree. There are too damn many of them in SF as it is. It would certainly be nice if we could get rid of the Haight store as well though. The Haight needs less crappy shopping (Villains I'm looking squarely at you), not more.

xyz123

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:51:44 -0800

It's not their chain store status that stops me from shopping at AA, it's that their clothes look like crap. I've tried because they manufacture in the USA, but I don't want to look like an extra from Flashdance.

munidiaries1

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:42:36 -0800

To echo what ChesterY and Oznog are saying, yes, I don't quite get how American Apparel is a big box store. Chain, yes, but a damned decent one. I used to flail about and protest all things capitalist, but then I grew up and realized that there are such things as responsible businesses. And the kicker is, sometimes they actually help their communities. Lord knows the Mission could use the help.

TeamAwesome

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:40:52 -0800

i want more slutty clothes. bring on the AA.

periqueblend

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:57:10 -0800

Well, actually, very stores survive in the mission because the neighborhood shops there. There aren't enough dollars. So the only recourse the neighborhood has is to not let it open in the first place - if there truly is a concern. The boutiques and curio shoppes that currently litter the Mission, are not somehow more authentically Mission than AA - so I don't know exactly what the point of this protest is, but whatever. I also don't see how my quality of life will be affected if the people wearing AA in my neighborhood don't have to leave to buy it... but whatever, there's a Foot Locker in the Mish right now.

Oznog

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:45:17 -0800

Can someone please educate Mr. Elliot on what a "big box" retail store actually is? American Apparel is slightly different than, say, a 50,000 square foot Wal Mart or Home Depot.

ChesterY

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:44:47 -0800

Seriously. Fighting against a WalMart or a Home Depot is something entirely different from fighting against an American Apparel or a Red Mango yogurt shop. That said...it's all in the process: if enough people in the neighborhood raise enough of a stink to get it blocked, then I guess it oughta be blocked. It's not like slim-fitting unisex cotton clothing is a civil right.

Oznog

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:39:22 -0800

Can someone please educate Mr. Elliot on what a "big box" retail store actually is? American Apparel is slightly different than, say, a 50,000 square foot Wal Mart or Home Depot.

SFBurke

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:31:13 -0800

So AA is sorta a "gateway" chain store, the pot of the retailing industry? Hmmm, I am not sure that is a very strong argument. It seems to me if the people of the neighborhood like a store they will shop there and it will prosper, if not it will fail. I don't see why we need someone like Mr. Elliot claiming to speak for the neighorhood. Seems like mature adults can make their own decisions on this. I actually like the trendy shops on Valencia St. and certainly won't be shopping at AA; but it is tough for me to see how allowing that ratty storefront (along with so many other ratty storefronts on Valencia) to remain vacant improves the neighborhood.

fizzandpop

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:52:28 -0800

There are never enough places to buy ball bags.

jimH

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:39:17 -0800

What would the hours be? Let's hope they stay open late, for those who have to work overtime. Didn't there used to be a KFC just a block away? How did we survive that?

bottombracket

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:37:34 -0800

eh, we've already got one in the Haight, right?