Cameron Mitchell to open 2 new restaurants
November 13, 2013 1:59 am at 1:59 am #99612
Good to see space on Lane and the old Hoggy’s location on Johnstown Rd. will be filled.Quote:Cameron Mitchell Restaurants has named the polished casual American grill taking shape at the Lane in Upper Arlington: Hudson 29 Kitchen + Drink.
The latest concept from Columbus restaurant entrepreneur Cameron Mitchell is expected to open early next year, with a second location planned for the New Albany Co.’s Market & Main development in 2015.
A second new concept, an upscale casual steakhouse, is expected to open in summer 2014 at the Market at Roger’s Corner on East Johnstown Road in Gahanna. The steakhouse has not yet been named.November 13, 2013 2:14 am at 2:14 am #554480November 13, 2013 2:16 am at 2:16 am #554481
ah ok. I just did a search for Hudson 29. Feel free to delete this thread.November 13, 2013 2:29 am at 2:29 am #554482
No worries. It’s new news about the name. Having an ongoing messageboard thread for these two new places is fine. ;) I was just linking to the old stories for anyone looking for more background (or without a paid Dispatch subscription).November 18, 2014 10:14 pm at 10:14 pm #1050943
I didn’t know where else to put this but someone lost a lot of money on this deal and it wasn’t Cameron Mitchell. I thought maybe they had a decimal in the wrong spot or something, but nope Ruth’s took a heck of a hit. Nothing like buying something then selling for near a tenth of the price four years later. The only thing I could figure is they paid that much early in 2008 planning they could grow the heck out of the brand, but then the recession hit and it didn’t work out.
Landry’s pays $10M for Mitchell’s Fish Market, Mitchell’s Steakhouse; sold in 2008 for $92M
Winter Park, Florida-based Ruth’s Hospitality (NASDAQ:RUTH), owner of Ruth’s Chris Steak House, acquired the chains from Mitchell in 2008 for $92 million. The sale to Landry’s, expected to close in 75 days, was for $10 million.
http://m.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2014/11/18/landry-s-pays-10m-for-mitchell-s-fish-market.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+bizj_columbus+%28Business+First+of+Columbus%29&page=2&r=fullNovember 18, 2014 10:57 pm at 10:57 pm #1050956
Yeah, that’s a pretty big drop in value in four years.
I guess the big question is… did they turn at least 82 million in profit from that batch of restaurants during those four years to at least break even? With 21 restaurants, that would be an average of $976,000 in profits per restaurant per year, which might not be a stretch for higher-end seafood and steakhouses, even if they weren’t doing super.November 18, 2014 11:16 pm at 11:16 pm #1050958
Yeah, that’s a pretty big drop in value in four years.
I guess the big question is… did they turn at least 82 million in profit from that batch of restaurants during those four years to at least break even? With 21 restaurants, that would be an average of $976,000 in profits per restaurant per year, which might not be a stretch for higher-end seafood and steakhouses, even if they weren’t doing super.
I work with a lot of these types of businesses and commodity markets were/are so high that it would shock me if they made that much money on those restaurants even with 20+ units. Now did they lose $82 million on the deal, absolutely(and I would hope obviously) not, but I would say they probably lost somewhere in the $10-20 million range without question. Their namesake brand is doing really well currently so I don’t think it hurts them all that much.November 19, 2014 7:19 am at 7:19 am #1051063
Not to say the restaurants didn’t turn any profit while Ruth’s owned it, but for the underlying value to drop that much is concerning. Usually you’re buying a business based on some earnings multiple or perceived synergies (except the tech industry where they just throw money at things), and for the math to change that much isn’t good. I agree it’s entirely possible the restaurants could or should be turning a profit of near $1M a year, but if that were still the case you think they could have gotten a lot more than $10M. Plus Ruth’s will have to take the loss on any Goodwill they had booked,but but they’re a big company and I’m not worried about them.November 19, 2014 11:53 am at 11:53 am #1051127
I’m wondering when they’re going to start work on the Grandview Ave steak house.November 19, 2014 12:39 pm at 12:39 pm #1051143
They are going to have to ballot issue the liquor permits for that spot. I don’t see the community giving them a hard time, but they need to get cracking on the signatures and legal process to get on the may ballot for a summer opening or wait a whole year to hope it passes.November 19, 2014 5:09 pm at 5:09 pm #1051226
CMR originally wanted 110 to 115 million for the seafood and steakhouses.November 19, 2014 11:40 pm at 11:40 pm #1051244
I appears those chains have had a pretty consistent downward slide under Ruth’s management.
In early 2008, when Ruth’s acquired Mitchell’s, executives predicted that the fish market and three steakhouses would add $98 million a year to company revenue.
But a recession that began in 2008 interfered. In 2009, the first full year Ruth’s owned Mitchell’s, the segment provided just $75.5 million in revenue.
In recent years, Ruth’s has struggled to improve Mitchell’s Fish Market’s sales and profits, and there are signs this year that the concept’s struggles have worsened. Profit at Mitchell’s has fallen 8.6 percent from 2011 through 2013, even as annual sales during that time increased by nearly $2 million.
Revenue and same-store sales at the fish market fell 2.8 percent during the third quarter ended Sept. 28, and profit fell 8.7 percent. Traffic at Mitchell’s fell 6.2 percent during the quarter.
Same-store sales at Ruth’s Chris rose 4.8 percent during the third quarter, including a 3.3-percent increase in traffic. Ruth’s took a $15.3 million loss on an impairment charge on Mitchell’s during the third quarter.November 20, 2014 9:01 am at 9:01 am #1051261
Not to be a hater but I haven’t heard one person (not in the reviewing biz) say anything good about Hudson 29 or the Barn place. Anyone here been?November 20, 2014 9:52 am at 9:52 am #1051281
I’ve been to Hudson, and it was a good but a little underwhelming. The service was great, as it is with all CM joints. The food was good but not great. I remember thinking everything on the menu seemed to cost $5-$10 more that it should.
I don’t know, maybe my expectations were too high. The place is fine, but with so many great restaurants in town, I don’t have a compelling reason to go back.
The Pearl, on the other hand, we love and go back every chance we get.November 20, 2014 10:27 am at 10:27 am #1051286
I had a great meal at Hudson 29. Everything I had was really tasty. I haven’t been to the Barn yet.
The forum ‘Dining’ is closed to new topics and replies.