This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

The Disappearing Bodega/Corner store — Brooklynian

The Disappearing Bodega/Corner store

Are bodegas/corner stores in the neighborhood destined to meet the same fate as video rental stores?

http://clintonhillchill.wordpress.com/2008/08/06/the-disappearing-bodegacorner-store/

Speak on it....

Comments

  • Dunno. The only one I can think of that closed recently that I used was on the corner of Washington and Myrtle and it was due to being seized by Marshals due to the owner's son dealing drugs.

    There are still at least three managing to compete on the same block as the Associated on Myrtle.
  • there's plenty that have closed over the years. Commercial strips like myrtle , fulton, etc. will always have them.
  • I don't know what you mean. There are at least 4 in my area.
  • Perhaps they have changed ownership (the one on my corner [Classon/Putnam]) used to be owned by a Latino (Domincan?) guy, but is now owned by Arabs (Yemeni?). That seems to be in line with the ethnic progression over the years as different immigrant groups take adavantage of family owned business opportunities. There is some welcome competition from better capitalized "Korean" groceries which generally seem to provide a wider variety of items. But generally over here on the Fulton corridor there seems to be a "bodega" every block.

    I guess a parallel between neighborhood video stores/netflix might be bodega/freshdirect. You give up immediacy for higher quality and greater selection.
  • Karka wrote: Dunno. The only one I can think of that closed recently that I used was on the corner of Washington and Myrtle and it was due to being seized by Marshals due to the owner's son dealing drugs.
    ha. I didn't know that's why that one closed. it was the worst deli in the world.

    For years they would have nothing on their shelves. I always joked it a was a drug front. Guess I wasn't joking.
    Karka wrote: There are still at least three managing to compete on the same block as the Associated on Myrtle.
    Yep.
  • Ya, its noteable because the case involved the use of "willful blindness" to justify taking the property, tho in the appeal it looks like that might have been flawed but the outcome the same regardless, I'm not a lawyer so its a bit confusing.

    http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/348/348.F3d.323.03-6074.html

    So the willful blindness rule was improperly applied, but the defendant was shown to be compliant with illegal activity anyway.
Sign In or Register to comment.