Covid-19

[ByeByeBaby]

At some point, you are probably saying 'I can't take this anymore. It just is not worth it'. Which some have already decided to pack it in and I am sure many more will. When and if things get back to normal, the retail/hospitality landscape is going to look barren for awhile. I don't see a rush of entrepreneurs wanting to get into business after witnessing what happened to other owners.

It may depend on who absorbed the cost of all these closures. The owner? The bank if loans were defaulted on? Is government backstopping this in the COVID relief programs? (if so, just add it to the growing debt tab)
If banks or other financing sources have taken a hit across the country (we are talking tens of thousands of businesses in this same predicament), they will be much more reluctant to load out to new ventures.

The three main categories of expenses for restaurants are wages, ingredients and rent; there are/were government supports -- I'm not saying sufficient or generous supports -- for both wages and rent, and presumably the ingredients expense is zero for a closed restaurant. Of course, the inconsistency of opening and closing means that there is more waste than usual. Restaurant receipts in Alberta in the first year of the pandemic (Mar 20-Feb 21) were 70% of what they were during the previous 12 months, which is really tough, but not as bad as I was expecting, honestly. It's been painful for the restaurant owners, backers or staff -- and they've had the year from hell; and as much as I rag on Kenney, they were always going to have a bad year (even if they could have had a better one with more consistent opening/closing and less COVID -- restaurant receipts in Atlantic Canada were 77% of the previous 12 months).

But with all that said, restaurants failing are a part of the landscape; 60 percent of restaurants fail in their first year and 80 percent in their first five. No one lends (or at least no one should lend) to restaurants without expecting a lot of them to fail. If there's one sector in the entire economy that's well equipped to handle the turnover of businesses closing, it's the restaurant sector.

Oil? Sure, we've passed peak oil, I'm sure that starting up in that space doesn't have as strong an outlook as before. Offices? They've been saying since the late 80s that soon everyone will work from home, but this time the technology might be good enough that office use is permanently lower (or it might be that the social capital companies had before the pandemic is depleted and there's a move back).

But does anyone think that once dining out is safe again people won't go back, that the sector is permanently going to contract; we're all just so in love with our own cooking and cleaning up?

 

[JonnyCanuck]

But does anyone think that once dining out is safe again people won't go back, that the sector is permanently going to contract; we're all just so in love with our own cooking and cleaning up?

Just like big box stores and on-line retail has been a killer of small business, the advent of Skip the Dishes may have a more permanent impact on dining establishments. The truth is we just don't know what return to normal is going to look like for ..... working in offices, personal shopping in store, dining in restaurants. I just think habits and preferences may have changed for some because of this pandemic. If it is a significant change then that does not bode well for small business.

 

[darwink]

Restaurant receipts in Alberta in the first year of the pandemic (Mar 20-Feb 21) were 70% of what they were during the previous 12 months, which is really tough, but not as bad as I was expecting, honestly. It's been painful for the restaurant owners, backers or staff -- and they've had the year from hell; and as much as I rag on Kenney, they were always going to have a bad year (even if they could have had a better one with more consistent opening/closing and less COVID -- restaurant receipts in Atlantic Canada were 77% of the previous 12 months).

First time I've seen that direct comparison statistics. Good find!

 

[CBBarnett]

But with all that said, restaurants failing are a part of the landscape; 60 percent of restaurants fail in their first year and 80 percent in their first five. No one lends (or at least no one should lend) to restaurants without expecting a lot of them to fail. If there's one sector in the entire economy that's well equipped to handle the turnover of businesses closing, it's the restaurant sector.

This is a key point. I wonder if restaurant net openings/failings went up or down from the pandemic supports compared to any other year? Surely it's different than normal after such a major event but I wouldn't be able to guess which direction the trend line went. There's also a reporting bias in this info, lots of traction for the owners that blamed the restrictions for their failures in media, but not a lot of deep diving into whether their business was successful in the first place. Success is individual while failure is someone else's fault after all.

Many of the prominent closures that were pointed to early as "caused" by the pandemic in Kensington and 17th Avenue have been replaced with new ones or soon to open restaurants/retail. So if we don't have a stake in any particular winner or losers, the perception I have is the overall restaurant picture hasn't changed as much as I would have thought. There always seems to be a new restaurant.

From a restaurant's perspective, a more valid critique of the government's role in all this comes from the uncertainty that was largely Kenney's and his communications team's fault - they are the ones in charge of making changes to business regulations and communicating them after all. If the buck stops anywhere at a policy level, it's there. A year of trying to pander to all sides with half-assed restrictions, contradictions, flip-flopping and outright lies, Kenney's efforts led to prolonged frustrations of partial closures, failed to prevent the pandemic from getting completely out of control, and huge uncertainty on what will happen next for businesses and individuals. Terrible climate for making decisions as a business or individual.

 

[darwink]

A great point. Same is true of small businesses. The problem isn't the failures, though they are individual tragedies for sure, and it is likely that the pandemic moved forward a good portion of what would have been 2, 3 years of future failures into the pandemic. It is in normal times there are net additions most of the times, and there are fewer additions these days. This will make the net additions in coming years look amazing in comparison to even before times.

 

[JonnyCanuck]

After dropping under 2000 cases the day before, there was big spike up yesterday. The increase was all in the Calgary zone. We went from 600+ new cases on Tuesday to 1100+ yesterday. WTF???

 

[Surrealplaces]

After dropping under 2000 cases the day before, there was big spike up yesterday. The increase was all in the Calgary zone. We went from 600+ new cases on Tuesday to 1100+ yesterday. WTF???

I've seen different numbers for Calgary in the last few days.....not sure if the zones are different for these numbers but either way, a large spike. Definitely seeing a much larger spike here than in Edmonton for example. Not sure why so many more cases here.

 

[Col du Edworthy]

Kenney spoke this morning on the eyeopener and was quite candid about the government really struggling to understand why the active case rate is so high in Alberta. He pointed to Montana as a comparison they have been monitoring with similar restrictions, openings, vaccinations etc but are seeing a much lower active case rate.

I don't have any ideas why we are so much higher other than perhaps we are much better at getting tested but to be such an outlier I'm not sure. Any other ideas? Are Albertans just trying to get sick (I know that's not likely but it feels that way sometimes)?

 

[zagox]

Kenney spoke this morning on the eyeopener and was quite candid about the government really struggling to understand why the active case rate is so high in Alberta. He pointed to Montana as a comparison they have been monitoring with similar restrictions, openings, vaccinations etc but are seeing a much lower active case rate.

I don't have any ideas why we are so much higher other than perhaps we are much better at getting tested but to be such an outlier I'm not sure. Any other ideas? Are Albertans just trying to get sick (I know that's not likely but it feels that way sometimes)?

Montana has 41% one dose vaccinated, 31% second dose
Alberta has 31% one dose vaccinated, 7% second dose

If our transmission R has been around 1.05-1.10 for the last few months, a 10%+ difference in vaccination could make Montana R .95-1.0 instead - that seems minor but becomes huge over time.

 

[Urban Outdoorsman]

Honestly I'm reluctant to pass all the blame on the Kenney government for the rise in cases. The fact is people get Covid because they take risks. Everyone knows what we're 'supposed' to do. It's not as though we need Jason Kenny to tell people how not to get/spread Covid. Fact is the average person is tired of doing what they're 'supposed' to do. The perceived risk of getting Covid, versus the perceived benefit of having a social life is more and more shifting to the latter. I know it's easy to blame the government (and I'm no particular fan of Kenny) but the blame here lies squarely on the shoulders of the average Albertan who chooses to risk getting Covid in favor of having a social life.

 

[darwink]

Fact is the average person is tired of doing what they're 'supposed' to do.

So we gotta force em to reduce contacts. And that is what the province fianlly did.

The worst part is that if we had done this much earlier, before the variants were dominant, we would have had a shot at keeping k-6 schools open and R below 1.

Instead we waited for variants to be dominant in a big way, and now have to come down harder to get below 1.

 

[ByeByeBaby]

Honestly I'm reluctant to pass all the blame on the Kenney government for the rise in cases. The fact is people get Covid because they take risks. Everyone knows what we're 'supposed' to do. It's not as though we need Jason Kenny to tell people how not to get/spread Covid. Fact is the average person is tired of doing what they're 'supposed' to do. The perceived risk of getting Covid, versus the perceived benefit of having a social life is more and more shifting to the latter. I know it's easy to blame the government (and I'm no particular fan of Kenny) but the blame here lies squarely on the shoulders of the average Albertan who chooses to risk getting Covid in favor of having a social life.

So your interpretation of this chart:

Is that government restrictions have no effect, that the average Albertans are just choosing to do or not do things as they like it. And the only logical conclusion that is consistent with the data and your idea is that all the average Albertans who wanted to do things moved out of the province in early December, and moved back in mid March.

 

[Surrealplaces]

Honestly I'm reluctant to pass all the blame on the Kenney government for the rise in cases. The fact is people get Covid because they take risks. Everyone knows what we're 'supposed' to do. It's not as though we need Jason Kenny to tell people how not to get/spread Covid. Fact is the average person is tired of doing what they're 'supposed' to do. The perceived risk of getting Covid, versus the perceived benefit of having a social life is more and more shifting to the latter. I know it's easy to blame the government (and I'm no particular fan of Kenny) but the blame here lies squarely on the shoulders of the average Albertan who chooses to risk getting Covid in favor of having a social life.

I think the blame can be pointed at a few different parties. Kenny should shoulder some of the blame for acting slowly and trying to keep his base happy by not imposing restrictions until it was too late. In the end a lot of that blame goes to the UCP as a whole. They sent out mixed messages, like taking trips to Hawaii while asking others to stay home, and there are a number of MLAs in the party who have been vocally opposed to restrictions.

The average person needs to accept some blame also. There are a number of people who have been skirting the rules of meeting up in homes, etc.. I personally some who are NDP supporters who have done it, as well as people who are UCP supporters. That issue seems to be less related to politics, and more to the average person not taking it serious enough, and not tough enough to hunker down and stick with it.

 

[Silence&Motion]

The reason is pretty simple. I'm not sure why Kenney has such a hard time wrapping his head around it. We eased restrictions during the second wave when daily case counts were still double what they were at the height of the first wave. There was so much active virus spreading through the community it was inevitable that things would shoot right back up.

You can't just focus on R values. You also have to look at where you started from.

 

[Stephen Ave]

This is a key point. I wonder if restaurant net openings/failings went up or down from the pandemic supports compared to any other year? Surely it's different than normal after such a major event but I wouldn't be able to guess which direction the trend line went. There's also a reporting bias in this info, lots of traction for the owners that blamed the restrictions for their failures in media, but not a lot of deep diving into whether their business was successful in the first place. Success is individual while failure is someone else's fault after all.

Many of the prominent closures that were pointed to early as "caused" by the pandemic in Kensington and 17th Avenue have been replaced with new ones or soon to open restaurants/retail. So if we don't have a stake in any particular winner or losers, the perception I have is the overall restaurant picture hasn't changed as much as I would have thought. There always seems to be a new restaurant.

From a restaurant's perspective, a more valid critique of the government's role in all this comes from the uncertainty that was largely Kenney's and his communications team's fault - they are the ones in charge of making changes to business regulations and communicating them after all. If the buck stops anywhere at a policy level, it's there. A year of trying to pander to all sides with half-assed restrictions, contradictions, flip-flopping and outright lies, Kenney's efforts led to prolonged frustrations of partial closures, failed to prevent the pandemic from getting completely out of control, and huge uncertainty on what will happen next for businesses and individuals. Terrible climate for making decisions as a business or individual.

It’s possible a lot of the businesses that have gone under were treading water and the pandemic was the tipping point, causing them to go under earlier, but they were already in that course. I mean, we see plenty of businesses turn over all the time. Pandemic or not some of that was going to happen anyway.