Their building got bought by Terry Black's BBQ and they are doing everything they can to force out DCH even though DCH has two years left on their lease. The BBQ guys are playing really dirty and have way more resources than Amanda, the DCH owner. It's pretty obvious that their strategy is just to bludgeon Amanda with legal nonsense until she runs out of money.Here's a column on the situation.

DCH has been in Deep Ellum since 2009 and while they could probably find a new building somewhere, the chances of finding an appropriate space in Deep Ellum are pretty slim. It's also hard to imagine it doing as well as it has in any other neighborhood in Dallas. It's a perfect fit in its current location.

It may honestly be too late for DCH, but if you are looking for something to do this week, you could check out a show or buy some cheap drinks at the bar.

-DCH is Aggie owned
-Just to clarify, this is not "Black's" BBQ proper.
-DCH is right down the street from Pecan Lodge, so there's a very strong likelihood that the restaurant fails and who knows what moves in

If any of that moves the needle for you, please try to swing by at some point this week. There's a free show tomorrow at 7:00 that I think will be really good even though it's not really traditional comedy. The 8:00 shows on Wednesday and Thursday feature two of my favorite improv troupes. If you're into standup, there's a show every Friday at 10:00 that features local standups, but also brings in up and comers from around the country.

Also, clearly I'm biased and I love DCH very much, but here's the response from Terry Black's BBQ in which they don't really refute any of the allegations.

So what is she hoping to gain here?

A two year reprieve? She was most likely going to be priced out of the neighborhood at that point anyway.

That's definitely a big part of it. An unplanned move would almost certainly mean some time without a theater to host shows. She'd most likely lose customers, students and performers during that time. Pretty much a guarantee she's not going to be able to find a move-in ready theater with two stages and classrooms next door. I wasn't involved when they moved into the current space, but I think they did at least a few months worth of reno to get it ready.

It's also not completely out of the question that she wouldn't be priced out under more normal circumstances. They've gone from 30 students in the back room of Ozona's in 2008 to over 1500 students and performers and a 6800 sq foot theater.

Good luck to her, but running to the media is pretty ****ty IMO.

Hope everything works out.

I will just see myself out.

I'm sure there's two sides. Amanda is probably omitting things that don't make her look good, but I don't see a smoking gun shaped hole anywhere in her story. The building did have code violations (that have been fixed), but I think the situation as I see it adds up. I admit I'm biased, but I'm looking for the most likely scenario. This is how I see it and I think it makes sense:

A restaurant wants to open up in a desirable location, so they buy a building even though it has a tenant with a lease. To get the tenant out, they get their lawyers to go over the lease/ contract with extreme detail and hit them with every violation they can, knowing that they have more resources for a legal fight. They had no intention of actually honoring that lease, even though it was transferred with the property. That doesn't seem unlikely, right? And I'm sure it's not exactly rare practice, but it doesn't seem very ethical to me.

You're under no obligation to support obviously. But, if people are interested in supporting a truly local/ small business, I wanted to let them know they have an opportunity to do it.

My note above about them not being Black's BBQ proper is just to let people know that we aren't getting this awesome well-known BBQ place. I'll edit it so it's a little more clear.

Signing this is an easy way to show support if you'd like to help.

https://www.change.org/p/black-market-keep-deep-ellum-funny?recruiter=871023705&utm_source=share_sponsor_thank_you&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=facebook_link&utm_term=psf_combo_share_initial.nafta_share_post_interaction.control&utm_content=ex87%3Av4

The ticket did a few segments in this. If what they reported was accurate (big if), then I'm not sure what Powerbelly has a beef with here. Seems like the public should definitely be on DCH's side.

mavsfan4ever said:

---

The ticket did a few segments in this. If what they reported was accurate (big if), then I'm not sure what Powerbelly has a beef with here. Seems like the public should definitely be on DCH's side.

---

Wilonsky rarely tries to tell the entire story in his attempt to keep Dallas from changing. I also think she is flat out lying to make her look good.

powerbelly said:

---

mavsfan4ever said:

---

The ticket did a few segments in this. If what they reported was accurate (big if), then I'm not sure what Powerbelly has a beef with here. Seems like the public should definitely be on DCH's side.

---

Wilonsky rarely tries to tell the entire story in his attempt to keep Dallas from changing. I also think she is flat out lying to make her look good.

---

Why do you think she is lying? And lying about what?

walton91 said:

---

powerbelly said:

---

mavsfan4ever said:

---

The ticket did a few segments in this. If what they reported was accurate (big if), then I'm not sure what Powerbelly has a beef with here. Seems like the public should definitely be on DCH's side.

---

Wilonsky rarely tries to tell the entire story in his attempt to keep Dallas from changing. I also think she is flat out lying to make her look good.

---

Why do you think she is lying? And lying about what?

---

Mostly the timing regarding notices from the new owners. I also think she may be omitting knowledge of ownership changes.

powerbelly said:

---

walton91 said:

---

powerbelly said:

---

mavsfan4ever said:

---

The ticket did a few segments in this. If what they reported was accurate (big if), then I'm not sure what Powerbelly has a beef with here. Seems like the public should definitely be on DCH's side.

---

Wilonsky rarely tries to tell the entire story in his attempt to keep Dallas from changing. I also think she is flat out lying to make her look good.

---

Why do you think she is lying? And lying about what?

---

Mostly the timing regarding notices from the new owners. I also think she may be omitting knowledge of ownership changes.

---

She has two years left on her lease. Why would ownership changes matter? And if she is going to get priced out at the end of two years, so what? She still gets the benefit of her lease for the next two years. Knowing that she will be priced out of the market at the end of her lease again means absolutely nothing.

I literally don't see what party of the story wilonsky could be admitting here. She has a lease and it's clear the new owners want her out ASAP and will go to great lengths to get her out before her lease is over.

I thought this article from the Observer did a good job covering it.

http://www.dallasobserver.com/arts/dallas-comedy-house-could-be-on-the-verge-of-closing-if-black-market-investments-has-anything-to-do-with-it-10589287

She did not know about the ownership change before she reached out to her old landlord about permits for a festival. The only thing that I see that could be relevant that Wilonsky omitted is that the Black family met with her in November about buying her out of her lease. But I don't think that really changes the crux of the issue. That they are trying to force her out of her lease using some questionable tactics. That's where every sign I see is pointing.

Hard to know if a tenant is in default without reading their lease, but there are plenty of ways to be in default other than failure to pay rent.

Occams razor - big investment to capitalize on and therefore motivated to push tenant out. Probably a few legit findings of issues (likely nothing to evict over, at least not a landowner operating in good faith) mixed in a whole ****pile of bad faith.

Goose said:

---

Hard to know if a tenant is in default without reading their lease, but there are plenty of ways to be in default other than failure to pay rent.

---

Nope. It is the evil landlords fault

And fwiw, I have no dog in this hunt. But my parents were always active in real estate with plenty of situations where they were the landlord, residential and commercial. And sometimes they were probably seen as the evil landlord. The pain in the ass of it all never appealed to me, so it's a business I never pursued for myself. But this one does put up some smoke.

Do you agree that black market has incentive to get DCH out of the space?

How likely do you think it is that every one of Black Market's claims is 100% legitimate?

I understand where you're coming from. You're skeptical about the media and public outcry. But, really, look at just the facts have been presented and take a stab at the most likely scenario. Is the idea of a relatively small business getting screwed that unlikely just because they're asking for help?

COOL LASER FALCON said:

---

Do you agree that black market has incentive to get DCH out of the space?

How likely do you think it is that every one of Black Market's claims is 100% legitimate?

I understand where you're coming from. You're skeptical about the media and public outcry. But, really, look at just the facts have been presented and take a stab at the most likely scenario. Is the idea of a relatively small business getting screwed that unlikely just because they're asking for help?

---

My guess is that she is getting screwed because of her own negligence and not understanding the lease than anything else. But all the media hysterics and claims of bullying make me doubt her even more.

You are obviously entitled to your opinion.

In my opinion if you don't think any lawyer could find violations of any commercial lease agreement if that's specifically what they're looking for, I think you are being fairly naive.

They have specifically fixed all of the violations that the fire Marshall found in the timeframe they were allotted. I don't know what other violations are being claimed by the land lord.

Exactly. You dont know. I have seen enough clueless tenants ***** about being treated unfairly to know I would rather wait for both sides of the story before freaking out.

I'd ask my first two questions from my last post again.

Do you agree Black Market has incentive to kick them out?

How likely do you think it is that all of the violations they are claiming are 100% legitimate? Or beyond reproach May be a better standard.

COOL LASER FALCON said:

---

I'd ask my first two questions from my last post again.

Do you agree Black Market has incentive to kick them out?

How likely do you think it is that all of the violations they are claiming are 100% legitimate? Or beyond reproach May be a better standard.

---

Of course they do. That isnt up for debate.

I think it is likely that more are legitimate than arent.

I feel like there is enough out in the open to say that this is not a run of the mill situation. Like someone said earlier, there seems to be a lot of smoke. Even the head of the Deep Ellum Foundation said they hadn't seen something like this before in the Observer article. I guess we will agree to disagree at this point.

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Put it this way - does anyone buy that they were cool to buy that property and then be looking at upwards of 2.5-3 years before they can open their BBQ joint? But, oh my what good fortune, the tenant is in violation.

Certainly, there are olenty of bad tenants out there worthy of getting the boot. But this one is not passing the smell test.

---

Agreed. They want us to believe they are acting in good faith like any commercial landlord should or would, but does anyone believe they are in the real estate business for any reason other than securing a location for a new restaurant(s) ? Maybe they are. Maybe Terry Black and his family have a large portfolio of commercial real estate holdings that are completely unrelated to the restaurant business. Personally, I don't believe that. There is a brand new 17 story residential tower catty corner from DCH, making DCH a perfect spot for a restaurant. There is also a vacant parking lot directly across the street where Terry Black could have built new but that is obviously a longer time frame and more expensive. My guess is they thought the most direct path was to buy the occupied building (with existing kitchen facilities) and push out DCH as quickly as possible.

There is probably little strategic value for them giving any fuel to the story at all.

Fortunately for the landlord, Dallasites are fickle - and if they make a good product, people will show up even if they shut down DCH.