Hacker News Reader

Comment by TulliusCicero | Hacker News Reader

This would definitely be a great thing to add.

One thing that I don't like about American culture is that people are a little too hesitant about adding 'retail' into publicly-owned spaces. There's a reflexive attitude of that being A Bad Thing, even though most Americans who visit, say, Japan, really appreciate the various shops and kiosks they have in transit stations over there.

I also really enjoyed in Germany when at the top of some hike there'd be an inn+restaurant, something Americans seem to treat as nearly anathema.

View on HN

Given the rest of American culture is intensely commercialised, I can see why there is a desire to protect the remaining non-commercial spaces.

My local library has an indepenently run coffee kiosk out front, the Council (local govt) own the facility and lease it to the operator, and presumably have some lease terms about allowable signage and branding.

I'd probably feel differently if it was a mega franchise like Starbucks or McCafe right at the entrance of a civic building.

I understand why, but it often results in bad outcomes. Part of why transit in other countries is better is often precisely because of greater commercialization. It's not just that it's more convenient for travelers, but also it makes money to fund transit.

this. and of course, the financial structure of these arrangements matters greatly. If the food places in the stations are making good money and the trains themselves are breaking even, you want the money to be flowing to the same people who run the trains, lest the train operator stops operating and the food places suddenly find themselves without customers.

This means you can't for example have both the train operators and the food places pay rent to some third party that owns the station, it has to be the transit company owning the station to benefit from the footfall to it

I'd probably feel differently if it was a mega franchise like Starbucks or McCafe right at the entrance of a civic building.

I would too. It would be in the government's interest to chose an operator and lease out space, but only if it were done in the most fair manner possible. I have no clue about such matters, I confess, but I would not want to see the idea politicized; as in only certain people can apply, or preferences given to certain classes. Perhaps a little contentious in the short run, but in the long term it would be better.

And yes, alas, if it's Starbucks that has the best deal, then so be it. In fact, playing devil's advocate, what IF Starbucks said we'll give you 100% of our profits from this location on the sale of beverages?

Probably best that the library gets the money from leasing the space, and let's the local operator earn whatever they can.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com