Wednesday, January 14, 2015

About the Manitoba's post


[Image via Facebook]

In this space today we had a post about Manitoba's being in danger of closing... including a letter from co-owners Handsome Dick Manitoba and Zoe Hansen.

The letter was not quite ready for public consumption. So we pulled the post for now and will update when everything is ready. Our apologies. The updated post will include the original comments from today.

28 comments:

  1. Hey Grieve,

    Thats odd because the Manitoba item is still up on Eater, letter and all. I guess they didn't get the memo:

    Manitoba May Be Forced To Close

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yea I noticed that too. And does the state/federal law comment have to do with the chapter 11 bankruptcy they filed in 2011? Sending the letter to EV Grieve and not thinking it would be posted and commented on was probably another mistake. Bad deal for them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I bet that tv show they were on put them out of business. They came off so snotty

    ReplyDelete
  4. What sort of person KNOWINGLY rents an apartment above a bar/club/music venue and then has the nerve to COMPLAIN about "noise"?

    ReplyDelete
  5. About half the commenters here chris. Apparently manitobas noise is good. Nyu bro noise is bad. The hypocrisy is astounding.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sorry about your opinion about the TV show I guess it's okay you didn't like it because the people in power loved it and want us to do more

    ReplyDelete
  7. Manitoba's... if that's the legacy of East Village cool we're in bad shape... most everything I've met and known in the East Village is humble and not so full of itself- polar opposite of the Manitoba's.

    ReplyDelete
  8. EVGrieve, What kind of journalist are you, removing a story? Pshaw!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Chris, Do you really think people can pick and choose where to live? You live where you can afford to live, and if a business violates the law, you respond.

    ReplyDelete
  10. If only they revamped it into a rock 'n roll speakeasy bar and renamed it Beg Your Handsome?

    ReplyDelete
  11. To anon 4:13

    What is your favorite NYU bro bar?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anon 7:42- since my college days ended 20 yrs ago I don't have one. When this was originally posted plenty of commenters made the point I did. Don't like the message so you make comments to me. Whatever. You would b happy if this was a bro bar possibly going under. And wasn't the apt building there before the bar was? And they opened in 99? Doesn't that make them gentrifiers?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Definitely a double standard here.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anyone can start their own blog and have their own "double standards". Write away kiddo, write away. I personally like this blog, so I read it. There are plenty of blogs I do not like, so I do not read them. Try it.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The owners of Manitoba's are two very long time residents of the neighborhood and were living there long before most of the Aholes who are making comments here have. The jerkoffs who moved above the bar knew where they were moving and don't give me that crap about moving where you can afford it BS. F them ! Manitoba's is pretty much the very last place left owned by people who are Old Skool and whose bar both knows and welcomes long time LES punk rockers,residents and even LES Jewels when he was alive. They are also not charging NYU student bar prices and if Manitoba's goes people should hold an old Skool TSP funeral because it will be just about the last nail in the Punk Rock LES coffin.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous 6:42: Do you happen to know WHEN the tenant moved in above Manitoba's? It's unlikely that he's been living there since before 1999, when Manitoba's opened, so the current tenant, as well as the tenants before him, KNEW they were moving into a space directly above a music venue. What did they EXPECT????

    There ARE plenty of other places on the LES (what makes you think that apartment above Manitoba's is "affordable"????) This is NOT the only place this guy could have moved into -- as he CHOSE to occupy that apartment, he has NOTHING to complain about.

    And, how do you that ANY law has been violated? REAL people know how to resolve issues and problems without getting others in trouble. This guy appears to be more interested in looking to score a monetary settlement than in finding a mutually-agreeable solution, like the addition of sound-proofing.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This storefront was a bar before it was manitoba's (was it blue b bar - or something, then something else..)- at least since 1990 it has been in continual use as a bar. FYI

    ReplyDelete
  18. I think its easy to bash the tenant. But do we know the entire story? Why does Manitobas want to settle and pay this what seems to be a major amount of cash? If they legally in the right (as all of you assume they are) then how and why are they in this position? Why are lawyers telling them to pay the guy? Because they did nothing wrong? If Manitobas had the leverage why settle for a ton of cash? Seems more likely they screwed up somehow and now they want a bailout from the public. Also, this notion that he moved above a business so he has nothing to complain about is ridiculous. How many people here complain about others bars and restaurants that make noise/have smells etc? Manitobas is not above the law regarding noise. If they pulled the letter it seems that it was a mistake. We don't have the entire story.

    ReplyDelete
  19. The apartments above manitoba's are owned, not rented (it's a coop with fairly strict rental rules). I just want to straighten that out. And most of the residents of that building have been there for 25+ years (I live there). I have no idea when the person that is suing moved into the building but it is very possible they pre-date the bar. And even if they don't, the idea that you know what you are getting into before moving into a place is ridiculous. Open houses are not at 3am and you can't know the noise level in apartment unless you are in said apartment at that time. And there are noise laws (even for the East Village) for a reason, to create balance between fun and normal life. Its not unreasonable to want Manitoba's to comply with these laws (just like every other bar). Lastly, I love this blog but whoever commented on the hate for bro noise but love for "old EV" noise is hilariously hypocritical. I like illegal noise as long as its MY noise! That line of thinking has NEVER caused any problems in history...

    ReplyDelete
  20. None of this has anything to do with the neighbor who complained about noise.

    It has to do with wheelchair access — something most EV bars aren't in compliance with.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The people who own Manitoba's have a BAD ATTITUDE. They are snobby and rude. I hope that they are closed down soon. The sooner the better.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ha Ha wheelchair access. Gee EV you really got a lot of debate going for the wrong problem. One thing, if I am going to buy a place and it is over a bar I would have to be prettty dumb not to think there would be noise until the bar closed but since this isn't even about noise the jokes on all of us.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Wheelchair access? Wow. So this is ADA related? WTF

    ReplyDelete
  24. That makes more sense - it didn't seem likely that the lawsuit was related to noise.

    This is all very confusing though - are the owners still asking for donations? If so, what are the donations for? Why was the original letter pulled after publication?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Don't have the facts so can't speculate on blame etc but I do know that in my numerous occasions in Manitoba's over about 5 years now I have never had a rude bartender/employee - quite the opposite. The owners and all employees I have encountered have been really nice, down to earth and I think they are just the best neighbors. They were open during Sandy with beers on ice and candles with such a nice homely community vibe (with EV punk spirit of course!). I always feel at home at Manitoba's, never judged, and am heartbroken at the prospect of it closing.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Now I get what they meant by the interplay between state and federal law. Did they get hit by the shady lawyers who sue small businesses for ADA violations? Its a cottage industry that should be addressed somehow. If that's the case this is outrageous. So they somehow are in violation of the ADA and they have no legal protection?

    ReplyDelete
  27. What double standard? If you live above a bar --whether it's a frat or roch n roll joint, or a restaurant, music venue..., it'll be loud. The problem with frat bars is that the noise spill out onto the streets and the neighborhood and other neighborhoods with their grunts, constant WOOOOOO and fist pumping as if they're the masters of universe, and their sorostitues shrieking and crying like YAH! The noise in Manitoba's is contained within the bar, which reverberates to the upstair neighbor and next door neighbors, but you should know that when you've moved in.

    And what happened to the original post and comments. Promises, promises. WOOOOOOOOOO!

    ReplyDelete
  28. I doubt this is a wheelchair-accessibility issue; small businesses are not required to be wheelchair-accessible.

    So John Penley thinks living where you can afford to live is BS, but he lives in North Carolina! This proves my point more than disproves it.

    Chris, I don't mean affordable by the city's definition, I mean what a person can afford. People live where they can afford to, regardless of what dollar amount that is.

    ReplyDelete

Your remarks and lively debates are welcome, whether supportive or critical of the views herein. Your articulate, well-informed remarks that are relevant to an article are welcome.

However, commentary that is intended to "flame" or attack, that contains violence, racist comments and potential libel will not be published. Facts are helpful.

If you'd like to make personal attacks and libelous claims against people and businesses, then you may do so on your own social media accounts. Also, comments predicting when a new business will close ("I give it six weeks") will not be approved.