| HOME | TODAY'S ANTHEM VIEW |
| The Trumpets Lessee Selection Process |
TO LEAVE A COMMENT, CLICK HERE
What's Behind Door Number One? The Trumpets Lessee Selection Process Did we end up with a booby prize?
With the Trumpets selection process down to the top three prospective vendors selected by the Trumpets Working Group (TWG), what are we to conclude? After having attended the three vendor presentations, I suspect that residents who attended the presentations were not too encourage by our eventual prospects. When I had suggested that the TWG might benefit from stepping back and taking another look at the overall process and what they had been able to accomplished with their top three choices, my comments were deleted from David’s Anthem Journal. Now, after concluding the vendor presentations, it seems appropriate to consider the need for an analysis of what went right and what went wrong before we continue down the path towards making a final selection. Or, should we proceed with a recommendation relying on what we have so far? For example, here are a few questions that might be worth asking, or does anyone care:
I’m sure you have others in mind. While I happen to believe the entire solicitation process needs reexamination, it's also possible to proceed with what we've been dealt. To suggest I'm disappointed in the outcome would be an understatement. Personally, I would have preferred that we had been able to secure interest from at least three more or less equally qualified prospective vendors. That did not happen. That failure suggested to me the solicitation/selection process was possibly flawed, or perhaps it reflects how dismal our prospects are at securing a quality operator. Ironically, the flawed process must rest not solely with the efforts of the TWG but with the lack of specific direction from the Board. From what I have learned, the TWG was essentially working blind on one key element that could, at least in the mind of some, make or break a lease agreement. That one element is the issue of banquet operations and the extent to which any prospective vendor could rely on their ability to hold banquet functions that would be open to the public, such as the City of Henderson and other outside groups and organizations that have used our facilities in the past. I am also advised that Board members may be conflicted over this issue, with some not disposed to allowing outside groups the use of our ballroom for catering operations. I also understand the Board is divided on the issue of whether or not there is an absolute need for public use of our catering opportunities to make any lease agreement viable. In other words, can a restaurant stand on its own financially without any public catering use, while allowing only Club and resident-related catering events to occur? Our past experience with that issue would suggest that should be a non-starter. Without that available opportunity, the chances of securing interest in our facilities will rapidly dwindle. There seems no pressing need to adopt a cut-off-our-nose-to spite-our-face policy on public catering access when the risk of denying public access to catering services and potential restaurant failure is simply too great. The one thing we do not want to do is to enter into any lease arrangement that has built in impediments to establishing a success business. In the end, a restaurant-only operation will benefit no one, despite what some may believe on the potential viability of doing so. We cannot afford the risk of being wrong. While we have had security issues and control problems in the past in managing outside groups in the foyer and member only areas, there is no reason to believe that a correctly worded lease agreement cannot properly address the issues of most concern to the Community. Deal or No Deal? Of the three contenders for Trumpets, will we want to make a deal with any of the top three? It all depends on what the Board wants and until we know the answer to that question, an acceptable deal may continue to be beyond our reach. Here are the three:
Below are a few of my impressions. Our readers will likely have other opinions and suggestions they may wish to share.
On LuvRules. Of the three, only two are viewed as being potentially viable, (1) and (2), unless you happen to be a high stakes gambler and are willing to accept a high degree of risk and believe that our customer base is willing to to pay S&D Café V prices and more. The potential risks of entering into a lease agreement with LuvRules are too numerous for our Association to assume: the proposal is based on the development of an 8-year vision of the promoter, David Moore; there is no available restaurant operation in the Las Vegas area; the principal and unemployed promoter has never owned or operated a restaurant, but has grand ideas for what he would like to achieve in a restaurant operation, working along with his UNLV friends and associates; the proposed staffing is all suggestive based on friends currently working at various Vegas restaurant locations; and there is no financing in place to support Mr. Moore's highly speculative proposal; project financing is dependent on Moore acquiring a substantial grant, with unknown prospects; proposed menu pricing, while realistic for the Las Vegas area, was viewed as being beyond the price range for the average Sun City customer who, in the end, must be willing to sustain and regularly patronize a higher-priced operation. If Sun City residents were not able to regularly patronize Trumpets in the past in part due to pricing concerns, with residents insisting on lower, more reasonable food prices, why would they patronize a like or even more expensive replacement restaurant? Answer: They wouldn't! LuvRules had somewhat extensive plans to reconfigure the bar, eating and fine dining space that would be limited to the west end of the restaurant, as well as enclosing additional outdoor space. Bottom line: a bad choice for Sun City that is too speculative, too expensive and carries the prospect of being a greater risk than our Association should assume.
On Alba Brother’s Italian Restaurant. Between (1) and (2), there is little to compare. Alba Bros., three brothers, would like Trumpets to be their next step in the restaurant business, having operated an Italian theme restaurant for only two years on Eastern Ave., following a successful pizzeria business. What the Alba Bros. team may lack in experience, they make up in enthusiasm and close family ties, which is a definite plus and should enable them to want to work hard in meeting our needs. Proposed pricing was quite low, perhaps designed to develop an initial customer base. The menu would be a combination of Italian (50%), American (35%) and Seafood (15%), with attractive member discounts of 15%, early bird pricing, etc. A number of residents who have eaten at the Alba Bros. Italian Restaurant were concerned about this prospective vendors inclusion in the top three. Before David Berman deleted their admittedly hostile comments on his blog, the overwhelming consensus was their profound disappointment on a range of matters. When homeowners attempted to raise food quality issues at their presentation, those questions were not accepted by the TWG. What scares me about Alba Bros. is their apparent willingness to move up at any cost, meaning that they will agree to lease arrangements that may be counter intuitive or self-defeating, like forgoing public access to our catering operations. Bottom line: a fair to poor choice lacking in experience, effective management, and quality control while offering a range of lower priced menu items.
On Boulevard Bar & Grill. (Click here to see pictures) The Boulevard presentation was clearly the more organized, professional and impressive presentation of the two vendors with existing restaurant operations. At the conclusion of their presentation, one could not help but to feel comfortable with Boulevard as our lessee. As with Alba Bros., the Boulevard group entailed a close knit Italian family operation, I believe an important key to a successful operation. It was less clear, however, who would be in charge at Trumpets given their existing restaurant commitments and plans to further expand their restaurant operations to other nearby locales. Menu pricing was customer friendly and reasonable, with, if I recall correctly, member discounts and early-bird pricing. The company had what appeared to be quality back-end organizational and management support, along with ample financial backing that would contribute to the venture’s financial success, all important considerations. Boulevard had plans to redecorate by warming up the décor for a more friendly dining experience. The only potential problem I can see with Boulevard’s proposal is their likely insistence and assumptions on securing public access for our catering operations. Without that guarantee and opportunity, I had the impression Boulevard would simply pull out of the selection process. That would leave us with Alba Bros., a less desirable alternative for a number of reasons. Bottom line: a good choice that should be able to meet our more traditional dining needs, making Trumpets a conveniently located dining experience with a great dining view. Conclusion.We are all here to learn. Homeowners are invited to add their Comments for others to learn more about the selection process and prospective vendors and to offer contrary opinions or alternate views. If you believe I made any reporting errors, please send me an email so that I may correct the record.
Ron Johnson, 21 March 2008 |