Special offer

The Corporate Growth by Chain Letter Method

By
Real Estate Agent with Bill Cherry, Realtor 0124242

            I call it the Corporate Growth by Chain Letter.

            Have you ever noticed how a company, say a restaurant company, will spring up over night and before you know it, they're building outlets everywhere?  And then they become the darlings of Wall Street so an Initial Public Offering follows, and the original private stockholders pocket a big profit.

            And then you'll drive by the new outlet that they built  near your house, and for awhile it will be packed with customers every time you do.  Then before long you'll be commenting to others that you don't see how the place stays in business.  There are rarely more than a few cars in the parking lot.

            Interestingly, that same scenario is happening almost everywhere in the U.S where that company is building its restaurants.  It becomes the out-place almost as fast as it had become the in-place.

            Yet the stock value continues to hold and its shares rise, and the company reports great earnings and growth every quarter.  How can that be when there are not enough people in their stores buying dinner, you wonder? 

            Well, these people developed the Corporate Growth by Chain Letter method long before Enron tried it  out.  In fact, Enron learned it from them.

            The restaurant corporation, the clothing outlet, the auto parts store, etc., forms a building company and, while it is a separate corporation, all of its stock is owned by the parent corporation.

            The parent corporation contracts with the building corporation to build its stores.  The building corporation borrows the money from the bank to build the stores, and then when they are finished, they are sold from the building corporation to the parent corporation with a marked-up profit.

            That profit is booked in as income to the building corporation, and the new store is put on the company's books at its inflated value.  Then, of course, the building corporation pays a dividend to the parent corporation.  That becomes a part of the parent's profits along with any that it made on the sale of food.

            So in reality, the parent corporation is really in the business of building its stores.  It hopes that as they are built, each will at least break even.  When one doesn't, there's even more pressure put on the parent corporation to build more stores.

            But like a chain letter, at some point the piper has to be paid.  The market is saturated with stores, and there is no demand to build more.  At that point, the parent corporation no longer has a source for profit. So unless the parent corporation has diversified into some other scheme to replace that source of income, within a short time it must be sold or merged with another corporation, or take bankruptcy.

            So if it can't find a buyer, everyone looses his shirt except the original stockholders who got rich at the time of the IPO.

             Here's your homework.  See how many businesses you can list that are obviously operating a Corporate Growth by Chain Letter scenerio.  I'd give you some hints, but I don't want to be sued.

BILL CHERRY'S BIO

Comments(6)

Jo-Anne Smith
Oakville, ON

Thanks for the explanation, Bill....I've often wondered how many of the restaurants and stores stay in business around here.  The other thing I've wondered about is stores in malls...all those stores that clearly aren't making enough to pay the monthly mall lease bill....I wonder how they manage to hang on as long as they do? Most of them appear to be chains....

Jo 

Oct 11, 2007 03:13 AM
Bill Roberts
Brooks and Dunphy Real Estate - Oceanside, CA
"Baby Boomer" Retirement Planner

Bill, I can't believe it. You and I on opposite sides of an issue. We almost always agree.

Anyway, Ray kroc said that McDonalds was in the real estate business, not the hamburger business. What's wrong with that?

Since I sell businesses I've become very interested in the economics of retail store (which includes restaurants) operations. It has become clear to me that the retailer "exists" only to make the landlord "fat." Since this is the case it makes perfect sense for retailers to be in the property business first and retailing only as a means of keeping their "stores" rented. What is wrong with that?

I began my sales career in the grocery business. I learned that one of the major food retailers in Los Angeles made more money on their real estate operations than they did operating their grocery stores. Nothing has changed in the last forty years.

Bill Roberts

BTW I don't think that it is like a chain letter, but it is a viable way of doing business.

Oct 11, 2007 05:18 AM
BILL CHERRY
Bill Cherry, Realtor - Dallas, TX
Broker & Wealth Coach

Bill, I didn't do a very good job of explaining a complex matter.  I probably shouldn't have written it at all. Thanks for your thoughts.  They are good ones, that's for sure.  Let me add a little more to my position.

You will acknowledge that stores in malls, for an example, are built-out with tenant improvement allowances basically controlled by the new tenant but that come from the landlord.  And you will acknowledge that in almost 100% of the cases, the tenant takes care of the build out using his own people.  The landlord just writes a check.

The tenant has to amortize those capital improvements to the other guy's property over the term of the lease, as you know, because at the end of the lease, they don't belong to the tenant.

He hires his "people" as a subcontractor to his building arm, he marks up the cost of the improvements to the value of his lease and the "profits" from the building arm are funneled into the corporation as income...a dividend, for lack of a better term.

The business that goes in there doesn't have to show any profit whatsoever from what it sells until its losses are in excess of the leashold gains. 

Hopefully that's not before the lease expires or the store owner's locations/business are sold to someone else.  If not the lease comes up for renewal just in the nick of time.

He goes back in to the property owner for another build-out allowence, and he's off and running again.

Meanwhile those with initial issue stock are able to make huge profits generated by the appearance of the company's financial strength and its perceived place in the market, when in reality a good portion of what that perception is attributed to is a modified-Ponzi scheme.

Mr. Krc was not one of those advocating or doing this. 

Oct 11, 2007 05:41 AM
Bill Roberts
Brooks and Dunphy Real Estate - Oceanside, CA
"Baby Boomer" Retirement Planner

OK Bill, Now we are on the same page. Major Mall Operators contribute (or even "force") this issue by their extremely high rents. Nobody can survive in a mall just by "retailing" unless they have some advantage. Anchor stores are given many incentives including ownership of the land under their store. Not so for everybody else. To survive they need to play the game.

Bill Roberts 

Oct 11, 2007 06:09 AM
Joan Mirantz
Homequest Real Estate - Concord, NH
Realtor, GRI, CBR, SRES - Concord New Hampshire

Bill...pardon my ignorance but does this scenario apply to some of the bigger RE "chains"?

Does the shoe fit?

Oct 11, 2007 10:55 AM
BILL CHERRY
Bill Cherry, Realtor - Dallas, TX
Broker & Wealth Coach

Miss Joan, It's one of those things that many companies use in various manners and contexts to allow their accounting to be smoke and mirrors, and their balance sheet and P&L statements to appear to be what they aren't.

Bill

Oct 11, 2007 02:06 PM