Skip to main content

Red Lobster: Another One Bites the Dust

 




Too many shrimp? Or, are shrimp small enough and fungible enough that we can say "too much shrimp"?

In a statement on X, i.e. twitter, last week, Red Lobster reacted to some of the distressed reactions regarding its filing for bankruptcy the preceding weekend. 

"Bankruptcy is a word that is often misunderstood" it said. "Filing for bankruptcy does not mean that we are going out of business. In fact, it means just the opposite. It is a legal process that allows us to make changes to our business and our cost structure so that Red Lobster can continue as a stronger company going forward." 

I appreciate the Pollyanna-ish note there, but ....

To speak more strictly, chapter 11 is a legal process that allows a court to make a decisions on fundamental changes to a business, (dissolution remains a possible result), inclusive of changes as to who owns what interests in it -- changes to the content of the "we" and "us" in that statement.  

There has been talk about how Red Lobster miscalculated on shrimp. It has been pushing its "ultimate endless shrimp" promotion --a loss leader to get people in the door, where they will presumably buy stuff other than shrimp while there.  

But then there are contrary arguments: Red Lobster was a portfolio company of Golden Gate Capital, a private equity concern, from July 2014 until August 2020. There have been accusations that GGC engaged in "asset stripping" during that period at the expense of RL's liability as an ongoing concern, and that RL has never been able to recover. 

There is another hypothesis: that the problem was a spiking of labor costs.

It all may provide a fascinating case study for business schools in training the next generation of MBAs.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...
9 comments
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
17 comments
Read more

Recent Controversies Involving Nassim Taleb, Part I

I've written about Nassim Taleb on earlier occasions in this blog. I'll let you do the search yourself, dear reader, for the full background. The short answer to the question "who is Taleb?" is this: he is a 57 year old man born in Lebanon, educated in France, who has been both a hedge fund manager and a derivatives trader. He retired from active participation from the financial world sometime between 2004 and 2006, and has been a full-time writer and provocateur ever since. Taleb's writings for the general public began where one might expect -- in the field where he had made his money -- and he explained certain financial issues to a broad audiences in a very dramatic non-technical way. Since then, he has widened has fields of study, writing about just about everything, applying the intellectual tools he honed in that earlier work. As you might have gather from the above, I respect Taleb, though I have sometimes been critical of him when my own writing ab...
4 comments
Read more