A
group of traders recently signed a petition complaining about the proliferation
of Sunday food festivals in Queen St. which compete directly with existing food
traders around the market. Are these food festivals a response to global
changes in food retailing, a response to customer feedback or just a cash-grab
for more rent?
Our
CEO, Jenny Hibbs, has responded to the petition in a letter which gives a
candid overview of management thinking on this issue. One of the key statements
was - "Our analysis shows that Queen Victoria Market is dramatically under
represented in its ready to eat foods".
Traders
will know from industry and press reports over the last 18 months or so that
food is adopting a higher profile in shopping precincts. A US retail executive
recently said that food and restaurants were becoming more important in the
leasing mix - "When you think about ecommerce and the impact it is having
on brick and mortar, you can't go online and have lunch." Last year the
Sydney Morning Herald reported "The savvy retail landlords that have
spotted this trend are now changing the mix of their malls to offer more food
and less fashion. Furthermore, the shopping centres up for redevelopment in the
coming years will all shift space away from the big box department store and
allocate more space to the food courts and supermarkets."
QVM
have responded by continuing to develop the top of F Shed as a dine-in food
precinct along with the VicMarket Place Food Court, Elizabeth Street and Deli
Lane and a further 4 ready to eat food premises (513 Elizabeth Street, 69
Victoria Street, Food Court – Queen Street kiosk and 22 F Shed) which are
scheduled to open in the coming months. The trader’s petition was prompted by
the additional introduction of a “Tastes of the Market Festival” that ran in
Queen St. leading up to the end of the financial year.
It
is all very well for management to identify new trends in ready to eat food
retailing. There is no denying that consumers are eating out more. We can also
argue that a thriving, competitive food sector is a good thing. However if the
primary reason for introducing more food is to add to the markets rental
income, this is a flawed response that neglects existing food traders. When you
only measure market performance by rubbery customer counts and rental income,
and virtually ignore the business health of traders, you are neglecting the
core reason for this market’s existence. QVM is not a rental cash cow. It is a
place of business between traders and consumers. Both have to benefit.
Management's
cavalier attitude to the markets product mix is unacceptable. Introducing a
last minute food festival under the guise of meeting consumer needs is short sighted.
Failure to clearly explain new management thinking on the market’s food mix is
inexcusable. We would expect management to sit down with traders, explain their
intent, introduce analysis that supports that intent, establish guidelines for
achieving their aims, and consult on a time frame that allows small business to
integrate and adapt. In other words, provide a considered vision for the
future. That approach is definitely missing here and, if it is an indicator of
how QVM intend to consult on future issues, we have reason to be deeply
worried.