Will The Woodlands ever get rid of all the chain restaurants?

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by jek74

Are you saying the people of the community who pay taxes (very high taxes I might add) shouldn't have a say in what businesses they want in their community? Come on now...

I actually agree with that, I just think there's a lot of hypocracy
The people that claim to be in favor of "economic freedom" (mostly suburbs) are the first ones to pass laws banning certain businesses.
And when people in the inner city do the same, everybody goes crazy.

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by EasilyAmused

What about the Walmart in Sterling Ridge? The parkway and 2978

That Walmart is in Magnolia, TX

Murphy USA - 30202 FM-2978 - Magnolia, TX - Houston Gas Prices

[EasilyAmused]

Originally Posted by Dopo

That Walmart is in Magnolia, TX

Murphy USA - 30202 FM-2978 - Magnolia, TX - Houston Gas Prices

Might be wrong, but i recall the land that that walmart sits on was owned by the woodlands development co., Therefore part of the master plan. The woodlands real mailing address for a majority of it is Spring, some of the back part, along 2978,would most likely be Magnolia. the woodland was, or still is, just a development, not a physical town.

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by EasilyAmused

Might be wrong, but i recall the land that that walmart sits on was owned by the woodlands development co., Therefore part of the master plan. The woodlands real mailing address for a majority of it is Spring, some of the back part, along 2978,would most likely be Magnolia. the woodland was, or still is, just a development, not a physical town.

You might be right,
but I don't think is a coincidence that all the Walmarts are just outside of The Woodlands.
So there's a pretty good chance that I'm right.

[SouthernBoy205]

Originally Posted by jek74

I see there are a lot of people here who don't understand economics or maybe even business 101. The reason large cities in general have high end restaurants or more expensive "independent" type places is because cities in general have a higher percentage of single or married people without kids. In other words, they have more disposable income. That demographic can afford to pay $30 to $50 for a meal because it's usually just one or two people they are paying for. When you are married and have kids you have far less disposable income. Plus going to eat often means you are paying for 4 or 5 people. At $40 a pop, that could be $200 for one meal!!!! Seriously, in this economy that is a non starter. Families don't go out to dinner to have a meaningful cultural experience, they go out to eat just to get out of the house and give mom the night off. They want cheap, convenient and predictable.

Second, markets are pretty efficient. If there was huge demand for a certain type of place, trust me, it would be built. The reason those types of restaraunts don't exist in the Woodlands is because the people don't want them. It's that simple. There is no law banning those types of places. They just would not stay in business.

Let me ask you guys something. Would you invest your savings, your hard earned money in a independent restaurant in the Woodlands? Or would you put make that investment in an area in the city with a high end demographic, preferably where a lot of single people live where you get a lot of date traffic.

Of course no one wants to invest their own money and take the risk, they want someone else to do it. They just want the upside of having a nice place they can go to. Who cares if the owner goes down in flames. There is no conspiracy here, the restaurateur business is very formulaic. It's all about money. This whole "giving back to the community" is crap because if the place goes under, they have nothing to give back! LOL.

This is so logical and well thought out.