Even as sports bars go, it's a pretty crappy place. The ambiance in there is lousy. The place would need a serious makeover.

My first thought: "Isn't he dead?"

Can't imagine why current players wouldn't be in a hurry to jump at that offer.

I am surprised that the awful joint has lasted this long. Aren't Central Park South rents beyond sky-high?

I love the shock that player-agents aren't interested in funding his place.

"I'm calling with an investment opportunity for your client. It's in the restuarant busin..."
"No."
"Wait, let me re-phrase. The place is named after a baseball player who played for a team your client played for. Could your client just give me some money?"
<click>

I am surprised that the awful joint has lasted this long. Aren't Central Park South rents beyond sky-high?

Probably they signed a long-term lease at what are now crazily now rates but then were market. It's not unheard of to have 20 to 25-year leases. Since rents have jumped way over the rate of inflation on Central Park South, they could have a sweetheart deal by this point that lets them slug along at a profit, but no way of making market rent. This happens all the time in NYC and explains why seemingly lousy restaurants on, say, the Upper West Side stay open forever while seemingly successful new ones open and close within months. They're making hugely--sometimes by factors of 10 or 20--different rent payments for similar space. And very successful restaurants under old, long-term leases--say, Good Enough to Eat--absolutely cannot meet the new rent when the lease expires, so they go from Cy Young to sayonara right away.

Probably they signed a long-term lease at what are now crazily now rates but then were market. It's not unheard of to have 20 to 25-year leases. Since rents have jumped way over the rate of inflation on Central Park South, they could have a sweetheart deal by this point that lets them slug along at a profit, but no way of making market rent. This happens all the time in NYC and explains why seemingly lousy restaurants on, say, the Upper West Side stay open forever while seemingly successful new ones open and close within months. They're making hugely--sometimes by factors of 10 or 20--different rent payments for similar space. And very successful restaurants under old, long-term leases--say, Good Enough to Eat--absolutely cannot meet the new rent when the lease expires, so they go from Cy Young to sayonara right away.

A) This. This will also be my practice assuming I pass the bar.

B) GETE IS GOING OUT?!?!?!

I meant "crazily low" not "crazily now" rents. Egad.

I bet this practice area will be very lucrative. It is amazing to me to learn some of the differences in rents at comparable places, based on when the leases were signed. There are restaurants near us that pay $50,000 a month for spaces that cost older restaurants $6-7,000 per month. No wonder old restaurants can hang on forever...until they can't.

GETE's owner declined the new lease they offered her and is looking at locations in Harlem or elsewhere. Possibly all bargaining. Who knows? Amazing to think a restaurant could have 60-person lines and not be able to turn a profit, but the current market rate means that restaurants have to sell lots of alcohol late into the night to meet rent, and GETE has never been able to do that. And you can't make enough money off of brunch food to pay off market rent. So you get tiny places that survive off delivery, and big places that can keep people buying overpriced wine and booze deep into the night.

It's not unheard of to have 20 to 25-year leases. Since rents have jumped way over the rate of inflation on Central Park South, they could have a sweetheart deal by this point that lets them slug along at a profit, but no way of making market rent.

If you RTFA, the rent has gone from $250,000 a year when the place opened to $850,000 a year. Not sure if that's a lot or not. The guy hasn't paid rent in 4 months and is suing them, complaining about the Mantle family squeezing him for using the name, etc. He sounds like a deadbeat to me.

And you can't make enough money off of brunch food to pay off market rent.

Polonia on 1st and 6th was a sad victim of this.

If you RTFA, the rent has gone from $250,000 a year when the place opened to $850,000 a year. Not sure if that's a lot or not. The guy hasn't paid rent in 4 months and is suing them, complaining about the Mantle family squeezing him for using the name, etc. He sounds like a deadbeat to me.

There are plenty of restaurants along Columbus and Amsterdam Aves on the Upper West Side paying $600,000 a year for notably less space in a notably less lucrative location. The Upper West Side is nice but has nowhere near the foot traffic of Central Park South. I don't know though what would be current market rate for that spot with that frontage and that space but imagine it would be far higher.

There are plenty of restaurants along Columbus and Amsterdam Aves on the Upper West Side paying $600,000 a year for notably less space in a notably less lucrative location. The Upper West Side is nice but has nowhere near the foot traffic of Central Park South. I don't know though what would be current market rate for that spot with that frontage and that space but imagine it would be far higher.

How much does a restaurant have to make to keep afloat in a place like that? Labor is your biggest expense, right? Or is it different in the restaurant business?

Good question. My vague understanding is that for nice restaurants the literal costs of the food can be quite high, which makes even expensive dishes only marginally profitable. I'd imagine Mickey Mantle's is cutting food costs a lot by using crap frozen chicken and so on.

And yet even after all this, if only The Mick were still around and could be spotted at the bar every so often, chances are they might still be making a go of it. There are likely more than a few geezers living in Florida who'd be making pilgrimages just to be able to say they saw Mickey Mantle passed out under a bar stool.

I'd imagine Mickey Mantle's is cutting food costs a lot by using crap frozen chicken and so on.

They must be really hurting now that orders from the Red Sox clubhouse have stopped.

And yet even after all this, if only The Mick were still around and could be spotted at the bar every so often, chances are they might still be making a go of it.

I was sort of interpreting the article as saying the owners are trying to look for a player who's less than 80 years old to help turn it into "Mickey Mantle and Goose Gossage's Restaurant" or something.

I was sort of interpreting the article as saying the owners are trying to look for a player who's less than 80 years old to help turn it into "Mickey Mantle and Goose Gossage's Restaurant" or something.

They run the place crappily. The food sucks, and if you work in the neighborhood and want to go for drinks after work, you're probably going to nearby Whiskey Park instead (I hear you can even find hookers there) or some other place.

The people who stay on Central Park South are really too snooty to be a sports bar crowd, and the tourists passing through likely don't care about old Yankees players. The place is best suited for company events following the Corporate Challenge or some such.

And you can't make enough money off of brunch food to pay off market rent.

Polonia on 1st and 6th was a sad victim of this.

Did they not try appealing to Luis's former teammates for an infusion of cash?

Eh, if Ray's right, the world won't be a worse place with one less sports bar, and it might even be just a bit better.

I remember when Bill Mazer did his daily sports talk show on WFAN from Mickey Mantle's. I always had the impression that it was a bustling place that constantly had current and former sports celebrities walking through it. I guess that's not happening anymore.

My brother in law who manages a restaurant says that a mediocre manager can easily lose the entirety of the kitchen's profit margin by not carefully watching the food ordering. No manager wants to sell out of popular dishes and have to face irritated customers, so it's tempting to over-order fish, meat, produce. Then you're either going to sell not-fresh food or you're going to throw away a lot of food all the time, and that can easily wipe out all food-based profits. Alcohol is the whole business--you can overcharge more and people will order 4 drinks but not entrees and alcohol never goes bad!

To call this place a tourist trap is to insult all self-respecting tourist traps. It's the kind of place where anyone dumb enough to go there deserves to be fed awful, overpriced food and overpriced, watered-down drinks by listless waiters and waitresses. It's like a tax on foolishness.

And such small portions!

There are likely more than a few geezers living in Florida who'd be making pilgrimages just to be able to say they saw Mickey Mantle passed out under a bar stool.

They could still install him under one today. Weekend at Mickey's!

Polonia on 1st and 6th was a sad victim of this.

Are 1st and 6th street names or the grade levels of his dates?

Maybe they should start selling booze at the Fan Cave? What on Earth could go wrong?

To raise the dough, he’s trying to persuade former pinstripers including David Cone, Ron Guidry and Goose Gossage to chip in as little as $10,000 each.

Hey, the same business plan as the Mets! Got to be a winner.

Sorry to hear about GETE. When my wife and I lived on the UWS we would eat their all the time. Either get takeout, or go early sunday for brunch before the lines.

I walked into Mantles once. It looked like a hole so I walked out without having anything.

Rule of thumb: restaurants can afford to pay about 8% of sales in rent. So $850,000 implies annual sales of around $10-11 million, or $30,000 per day, if you're open 365.

That sounds high.

I'm sorry to hear GETE might be moving. When I lived on the West Side, I'd hit it up all the time. Shame.

FTFA:

But he says he stopped paying rent four months ago because of “issues” with landlord ATCO

This does not sound true. The non-payment case was in Court in mid-September. With the initial notice period and then the filing of the petition and waiting for a Court date, the Tenant probably has not paid rent in 9 to 12 months. He likely won't pay rent until he vacates or is evicted several months from now.

WebHousing - Appearance Detail

County:New York
Index Number:79377/2011
Case Name:40 Cps Associates Llc vs. Majestic Sports Ltd., D/b/a Mickey
    
Appearance Information

Appearance Date/Time Calendar Category Judge/Part Calendar Marking
Apr 19, 2012 9:30 a.m. Motion Clerk'S Office Notification Part 52, Rm.353 Judgment On Consent Per Stip

Feb 15, 2012 9:30 a.m. Non-Housing Adjourned Non-Payment Deborah Samuels Part 52,Rm.353 Dism. No App. Either Side

 Feb 7, 2012 9:30 a.m.Adjourned Motion Deborah Samuels Part 52,Rm.353 Off Calendar

 Feb 1, 2012 9:30 a.m.Motion Deborah Samuels Part 52,Rm.353 Adjourned

Jan 10, 2012 9:30 a.m.Non-Housing Adjourned Non-Payment Peter H. Moulton Part 52, Rm.353 Adjourned

Nov 29, 2011 9:30 a.m. Non-Housing Adjourned Non-Payment Andrea Masley Part 52,Rm.353 Adjourned

Oct 18, 2011 9:30 a.m. Non-Housing Adjourned Non-Payment Peter H. Moulton Part 52,Rm.353 Adjourned

Sep 13, 2011 9:30 a.m.Non-Housing New Non-Payment Margaret A. Chan Part 52,Rm.353 Adjourned

Good question. My vague understanding is that for nice restaurants the literal costs of the food can be quite high, which makes even expensive dishes only marginally profitable. I'd imagine Mickey Mantle's is cutting food costs a lot by using crap frozen chicken and so on.

Food costs generally come in at somewhere around 25-30% of the menu cost. So a steak dish that sells for $32 costs the restaurant $8, for example. Generally, as I understand it, Labor, depending on the market, is approx. 25-50% of the cost. Overhead is 8-10%.

Someone told me a while ago, and I don't really know if it's true, that most restaurants fail because they don't do a good job at calculating costs and they set menu cost too low.


Side note: this is from hotel restaurants, so it may be different I guess. McCoy or PreservedFish would know better.

GETE sucks, and it has long lines at brunch because every ######## serving slop on that stretch of the UWS has long lines at brunch. Not like the other options in the area are much better, but, jesus, people, you don't need to go home with a girl that night if the cutest dame at the bar has yellow teeth and sun-wrinkled skin.

GETE does suck.

#31 I remember an accounting course I took decades ago focused on restaurants. I suspect the instructor did so because he was tired of people kvetching about how much a restaurant meal costs. The conclusion we were forced to come to after working the numbers was pretty much what you note in the second last paragraph.

He also noted that many restaurants initially start with low lease costs. The previous tenant failed and they get a short term deal. And thus fail as soon as they're forced to pay market rates.

High end restaurants traditionally have high food costs and low labor. Low end restaurants generally have low food costs and higher labor. In terms of % that is which is a bit of a red herring. Some chef can sell an entree that costs $20 for $50 and has a sky-high food cost of 40% while some other guy sells some chicken dish for 15 dollars that costs 2 bucks or 13.33%. Which would you rather have? The dish that has a profit of 30 bucks or a dish that has a profit of 13 dollars? The labor, in terms of real dollars, stays relatively constant.

High end restaurants traditionally have high food costs and low labor. Low end restaurants generally have low food costs and higher labor. In terms of % that is which is a bit of a red herring. Some chef can sell an entree that costs $20 for $50 and has a sky-high food cost of 40% while some other guy sells some chicken dish for 15 dollars that costs 2 bucks or 13.33%. Which would you rather have? The dish that has a profit of 30 bucks or a dish that has a profit of 13 dollars? The labor, in terms of real dollars, stays relatively constant.

I was speaking more in terms of average than a specific dish, but yeah. If you spend $20.00 on food, it's generally at the type of place that has a lot of drink sales.

#31 I remember an accounting course I took decades ago focused on restaurants. I suspect the instructor did so because he was tired of people kvetching about how much a restaurant meal costs. The conclusion we were forced to come to after working the numbers was pretty much what you note in the second last paragraph.

People are weird about prices. People are really, really bad at figuring in things like overhead and standard business costs.