Erik ([info]writer00) wrote in [info]pittsburgh,
@ 2007-11-28 11:51:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:food: groceries

The East End Food Coop drama
Behind the cut you will find my e-mail to the co-op's general manager regarding the increasing costs in products, as well as other disturbing changes. Following that is his response, as well as an explanatory document he included. This is FYI if you are a co-op member/shopper. It's a lot of reading, but well worth it.



Rob,

As a longtime member, I've continued to watch with alarm some of the changes that have taken place in the Co-op. In particular, prices on many of your items are totally out of line with what other co-ops and your local competitors charge. On top of that, I was disturbed by how the whole union drive was handled by management.

It now appears that you will be continuing this trend, raising prices in the cafe. About a year ago, you and I had a discussion about why prices were sometimes 50% higher (and more) for many items. I gave you specific examples, including certain cereals and Emergen-C products. You said that you needed to re-examine some items as loss leaders. You never addressed whether you really did pay so much more than Whole Foods or Trader Joe's for these items that pricing them fairly would actually cause the Co-op to lose money.

I've continued to shop at the Co-op because I take the ideas of ownership and cooperatives seriously. Unfortunately, my visits are becoming less frequent, and I fear you will price me out all together.

If you are going exclusively for the upscale market in order to take market share back from Whole Foods, my opinion is that it will be a losing battle and the death knell for the Co-op. You will not be able to compete. The Co-op is not like other businesses, responsible to shareholders for continued growth. It is a true community property, supposedly dedicated to fair pricing and a living wage. If you deviate from this mission, all we will ultimately have left in this community are large chain stores subservient to outside interests and rapacious shareholders.

I urge you to reconsider the Co-op's change of direction.

Thank you.

Sincerely,



His response:

Dear,
please read the attached file to better understand what is going on with the Cafe/Deli. In addition, I can assure you we are not price gouging our shoppers. Sometimes it can be very difficult to understand, but we generally charge a basic margin across the board for product like cereal and EmergenC. While we have narrowed the gap in recent years, we often still struggle to get the same kind of deals as our much larger competitors and have to pay more because of our lower volume of sales. If we had not banded together with over 100 other co-ops to get the deals we do, we would be a lot more expensive.

Our overall store margin (what is left of the money you give us once we pay our cost for those products) is in the bottom half of the pack for the 30+ Northeast Co-ops that we affiliate with through NCGA. Over the last year, we have consistently been at or near the bottom of the list on margin in the cafe when compared to these other co-op's cafe/deli performance. This is an issue of waste and disorganization as well as pricing in the cafe.

We had a profitable summer quarter (3 month financial period), making under $10,000, but are likely to have a loss for the present quarter that will offset that. We are just getting by right now. The primary reason we are not as profitable as in past years is that we have raised our wages, and labor costs (which account for almost a quarter of our expenses and is the largest expense after the cost of goods) over 17% since April of 2006 in order to get closer to a living wage. We also have a few more staff than we used to. Please keep in mind, competitors like Whole Foods are always under 15% of expenses on labor. As a
percentage, they pay less than we do to our staff.

Edward, if we don't run our co-op more efficiently, than our future WILL be in doubt. That is what this is all about in the end. Those co-ops that balance being a business and being a co-op are succeeding. That's what we try to do. Those that were co-ops first and businesses second are generally not around, as at least 300 our our fellow consumer co-ops went out of business in the 90's alone as competition arrived. Just this spring, the only consumer co-op in Pheonix, AZ closed it's doors.

I am working to assure our future and improve our co-op, and I hope you can understand how necessary this all is. Ultimately, the mission I am responsible to is the ends policy our board has created. They feel I am doing a good job there.

I have no interest in going more "upscale" to challenge Whole Foods. I think improved service, creative marketing, and quality product will do that just fine.

If you have any more comments or questions, I would really appreciate it if you could email me back.

Regards
Rob Baran
GM-EEFFC

The attached document:

Rob’s Corner-December

It’s a very busy time with heavier-than-expected sales this fall and lots of work on the table as we continue laying the groundwork to get out of the basement and into a new location within the neighborhood, hopefully sometime in the next five years.

With that in mind, I wish to speak for a moment about our Café/Deli Department. We make good food here at EEFC and are blessed with some really talented cooks. It’s hard to find at other places the kinds of foods we offer here. Unfortunately, and in spite of our product, at the end of the day, we usually lose a pretty penny in our kitchen as it has been the department seeing the greatest loss for many, many years. If we are to be successful in relocating the Co-op, this cannot continue.

Café/Deli has been the fastest growing segment of the co-op market for many years. It’s quite literally the future of our Co-op and is a department that needs to be expanded, developed and improved, rather than downsized or closed. Moving a business like ours is pretty expensive, and it will not happen unless we improve the Co-op’s profitability (we are around break-even these days) and build a large nest egg in the upcoming years. Ultimately, we need a Café/Deli that is as good as or better than our awesome Produce Department--one that provides great products, great service, and is profitable. This can be done, and has been done, at other co-ops around the country.

The biggest issues in the Café are systems/organization, and pricing, and consistency. We have not costed out all the food we make and as we get caught up on this we are likely to find we’re charging a lot less than we need to on some products--juices and smoothies likely being a prime example. For instance, we have recently discovered that we are paying more for wheatgrass than we charge. Before labor, rent, utilities, or any other expenses are considered; we have lost money on wheatgrass.

Additionally, we generally have not been raising our prices in tandem with our cost increases in the Café for several years. We have in the rest of the store; otherwise we would be in big trouble. Café prices today are more reflective of what it cost to do business in 2004, as opposed to in 2007, and we all know everything is more expensive now than it was three years ago. For instance, we presently charge 5.99/lb for the salad bar/hot bar. Our closest competitors are charging 7.99/lb and they don’t usually have any organic or local products on their bar like we often do. Doesn’t make sense does it? Our labor costs are also higher and we have much more expensive ingredients, yet we charge significantly less. That’s obviously a recipe for disaster--financial disaster at least--and that’s what our Café/Deli has been for years--a financial disaster.

We also have big issues around systems and organization. When you look at other successful co-op cafés around the country (we have access to up-to-date financial data for over 100 stores as part of our membership in the National Cooperative Grocers Association), one thing defines the good ones and that’s systems. Everything done in those kitchens comes from a plan, with detailed job descriptions and task lists for everyone, along with clear expectations for productivity and schedules of menus based on what has been proven to sell in the past. This kind of organization can dramatically reduce waste, but unfortunately, we are pretty lacking in this area as we have chosen instead to support a more hectic and unorganized creative process that sometimes produces amazing food, but with a loss in the consistency of our product and a loss in efficiency.

And consistency is definitely an issue with our products. We give our staff too much leeway in how they use the recipes and this creates an environment where product can have very different quality and taste depending on who cooked it. Obviously, we would like our food to have the same high quality and taste every time we make it.

So we have to raise some prices, and we have to get organized--literally changing the way we do business in the Café across the board. This is not going to be easy for us, for you, for staff, for the café manager (we have had several this year already) as we struggle to find the right ingredients for cultural and structural change in the Café.

I would ask several things from you as we begin to make some necessary changes. Try to be understanding if we don’t have that favorite item of yours because we found out it costs us more to make it than what we have been charging. Moreover, I would not be surprised to see us hit some bumpy spots with out-of-stock items as we are sure to have some staff turnover during this difficult transition. And remember, it is not the staff person to whom you may be talking who is at fault, but the managers, including myself, who have allowed this to continue to the point that radical change is the only alternative.

Once again, I ask for your patience and your belief in what we are doing. For EEFC to be a vibrant and thriving business 5 or 10 years down the road, we have to accept change now. The Café/Deli has to be our best department, not our weakest. It has to have the best products, the best service, and be profitable. That is my commitment, worst to first, and if I did not make these changes now, I would be failing in my job, which includes ensuring a bright future, and giving the best possible service to you--our loyal members/owners. Thank you for your consideration.



Edit: My original issue was that they were charging $14-$16 for packages of Emergen-C that could be had at Trader Joe's and Whole Foods for $9-10. There were similar price disparities on some cereals my family uses. These are pretty dramatic differences, and you'd think that by banding together to enhance their purchasing power, co-ops would be able to at least be a bit more competitive with WF and TJ. I don't mind paying a little premium to keep the co-op locally owned and healthy, but I'm sure not going to pay that much more!

Fact is, someone needs to go to the co-op and make a list of prices for all of the items they share in commmon with WF and TJ and see just how dramatic the price differences are. (I'm just the idea guy, by the way!) :-p



(Post a new comment)


[info]qlarue
2007-11-28 05:02 pm UTC (link)
Sounds like they need to hire a good cost accountant to figure some things out.

(Reply to this)


[info]melisser
2007-11-28 05:09 pm UTC (link)
Where are they planning on moving to?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]beeporama
2007-11-28 07:30 pm UTC (link)
I get the impression from reading this that they don't plan to move presently... they're saying that they need to expand the cafe, which implies needing to find a larger building, since the co-op is already pretty cramped. But they can't move until they get their financial house in order, which means picking a new location is probably premature.

That's just my reading of the attachment; I have no inside knowledge.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]writer00
2007-11-28 07:50 pm UTC (link)
I think this is the correct interpretation.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]melisser
2007-11-28 08:02 pm UTC (link)
I've always thought the location was the biggest problem with EE. I was a member when I lived in Pgh and now in Philly I'm a member of Weaver's Way, a coop so ridiculously successful that they've given members end-of-year cash rebates for the past two years. And the number one thing I think WW has over EE is location. It's in a neighborhood that borders a bunch of others just like it: upper middle class, super-liberal, way activist (with the occasional impoverished graduate student like myself).

I think if EE could move to one of the neighborhoods that's blowing up like that - like certain parts of Friendship or even Lawrenceville, they'd be walking distance for a lot of people who would become members and shop there for the sake of convenience.

Then again - this success for WW is pretty recent - they had money management problems a few years back, as well (complete with embezzlement, if I remember correctly). Anyway, sorry for the epic response, but that comment from Rob really irritated me - there are plenty of old, successful coops all over the country. If you do it right, there's plenty of demand. No one in my neighborhood would choose to drive to Whole Foods or Trader Joe's when there's an awesome, inexpensive coop within walking distance.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]hopita
2007-11-28 08:08 pm UTC (link)
See my comment below.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]hopita
2007-11-28 08:05 pm UTC (link)
Hi. I work at The Co-op.

In the current situation, I'm not sure what exactly is and is not confidential.

That being said, the simple answer re: moving is that our lease will be up soon (in 2012 maybe? Something like that) and we're investigating whether there's a better space available nearby.

It's a red herring -- it has nothing to do with what's going on right now.

Edited at 2007-11-28 08:06 pm UTC

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]headtilt22
2007-11-28 05:14 pm UTC (link)
The part about not raising the prices for years reminds me of the occupational tax going from $10 to $52 - I don't think it would have been greeted w/ quite as much rancor if it had been a GRADUAL increase instead of all at once. I mean, what do they expect, that people are going to say "hey, your prices are really comparatively low, you should raise them"? When you hit people with a giant blizzard they bitch about it a lot more than they do light snowfalls over the course of a week.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]writer00
2007-11-28 07:55 pm UTC (link)
That's a good point. My original issue was that they were charging $14-$16 for packages of Emergen-C that could be had at Trader Joe's and Whole Foods for $9-10. There were similar price disparities on some cereals my family uses. These are pretty dramatic differences, and you'd think that by banding together to enhance their purchasing power, co-ops would be able to at least be a bit more competitive with WF and TJ. I don't mind paying a little premium to keep the co-op locally owned and healthy, but I'm sure not going to pay that much more!

Fact is, someone needs to go to the co-op and make a list of prices for all of the items they share in commmon with WF and TJ and see just how dramatic the price differences are. (I'm just the idea guy, by the way!) :-p

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]melisser
2007-11-28 08:19 pm UTC (link)
I'm sorry if I come off as a coop spaz, but in case it's helpful, our coop out here does that every few months and publishes the results in the newsletter. They have the archives here and if you look at, for example, July 2007 on page 18 they have price lists of differences between the coop and whole foods.

I don't know why I get so worked up over all this. Maybe I'm a coop spaz after all. :)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]writer00
2007-11-29 03:04 am UTC (link)
Thanks for posting this. It's a great idea . . . and a deomcratic one in keeping with the co-op spirit.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]writer00
2007-11-29 03:04 am UTC (link)
err . . . democratic . . .

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]jessieknits
2007-11-28 05:38 pm UTC (link)
Thanks for sharing this - I'm not a customer there, but as a board member of relatively financially-healthy Pittsburgh Filmmakers, I have witnessed this kind of financial management problem at other local non-profit organizations that have asked PF to 'rescue' them (they can't be named because they are in financial straights).

I don't know if this is an issue unique to Pittsburgh but it is curious to me that these smaller, community-based organizations have a really hard time keeping it together financially.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]writer00
2007-11-28 08:00 pm UTC (link)
I wondered the same thing. There are several co-ops in Asheville, NC which is a much smaller community than Pittsburgh. I wonder how they manage long-term survival.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]jessieknits
2007-11-28 09:59 pm UTC (link)
From reading the comments below, it may be a board issue. If boards are active and involved, usually the BS doesn't happen. The non-profits I've seen with financial management issues usually have uninvolved boards.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]lilostitch
2007-11-29 02:06 am UTC (link)
The board of the co-op is actually extremely involved. The board also encourages the general membership to have their say by participating in meetings, certain retreats, etc. The board meeting for December is on the 17th if you are interested. However it is not the board's function to micromanage the day to day operations of the store.
That's the manager's position. The board's job is long-term planning, and that is exactly what it's doing.

The co-op is a small specialty store being run out by other specialty stores with similar products but with a lot more capital, so these other stores can afford to out-price them. The co-op doesn't compete on price because it simply is not possible. Co-ops and grocery stores are entirely different business models. Whereas a co-op can be like a grocery store, it just is not a grocery store, it is a community entity that requires entirely different operations principles.
The co-op is losing sales and customers because it can't afford to under-price its competitors, and as a result has to raise prices to stay in business, which then causes it to lose more customers (such as, ostensibly the OP)
Co-ops are a member driven entity. If the members all leave, the co-op caves, plain and simple.

Sorry, didn't mean to turn this into a lecture.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]writer00
2007-11-29 03:05 am UTC (link)
You make some very good points. It's one of those issues where there are no bad people; just those who disagree.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]jessieknits
2007-11-29 02:49 pm UTC (link)
There are no bad people. However, each person has their own degree of financial management skills, and just like parenting, don't need to take a class or get a license to open their doors as a small non-profit.

All it takes is chutzpah and a little seed money.

Then the personally-invested egos get involved and hooray, we've got an interesting little drama going on.

You are really, really good at communicating your criticism with someone with alot of respect. I personally am really cranky with a cold right now.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]jessieknits
2007-11-29 02:43 pm UTC (link)
The function of a board is to ensure the survival and continued existence of the entity, regardless of the business model of the entity.

Co-ops are a member driven entity. If the members all leave, the co-op caves, plain and simple. The coops that I used and was associated with in Madison Wisconsin frankly had different attitudes and more financially active boards. Its really easy to lay blame at a disappearing membership, when poor financial management and poor communication with them has driven them away ... AND that's not the only reason coops fail.

However it is not the board's function to micromanage the day to day operations of the store. That's the manager's position.
This is arguable. You should see how financially accountable (i.e. micromanaged) a successful non-profit organization is. I happen to be a board member of a successful non-profit that is regularly solicited to bail out floundering ones.

Other failing non-profits have used similar rhetoric as their ship has sunk. "We're powerless over factor L, and with factor L goes the financial success of our organization, and factor L is dying!!!" Hmm. Crack open the books and one finds a financial model built to fail usually because of the wierdnesses of small organizations -- in Pittsburgh, its because "this is the way its always been done".

Sorry, didn't mean to turn this into a lecture.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]pghwob
2007-12-01 01:59 pm UTC (link)
I think the Board is involved in some ways, but since the Policy Governance was adopted around 2004, the Board has not only taken a more hands-off approach to anything remotely associated with personnel and store management issues (different from "micromanaging," which is the word proponents of "Policy Governance" like to throw around), but has used this as an excuse to continue what has got to amount to willful blindness.

Many times, the Board has been informed that they are not getting the complete story from the Co-ops day-to-day management, but to me, having worked there for just about five years, it seems they never changed this problem. I think it is somewhat hard to fault the Board for not having knowledge about certain things when they usually rely on what the GM tells them, but the Board should have noticed a systemic problem by now, and could try to fix parts of it by being proactive with the questions they ask the GM. I have been to many, many, Board meetings (more than you have I am sure), and I have not seen the Board ask probing and necessary questions of management.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]beeporama
2007-11-28 07:24 pm UTC (link)
Thanks for sharing!

If employees unionized, there would either be higher labor costs (which would have to be reflected in higher prices) or the employees would be losers under the union (because they'd be paying dues without an increase in compensation). I have my opinions on unionization at the co-op and they're just opinions, but it seems pretty clear that asking a business to be pro-union and to lower its prices are contradictory goals.

Or maybe they need to run themselves better, to cut out waste, which Rob admits in his letter. If anybody reading this thinks that, well... every year there are signs all over the co-op begging people to run for the board. So, please run for the board, if you have any ideas.

Personally, so you know where I stand, I'm a paid-up co-op member who also shops at Whole Foods, Trader Joe's, Giant Eagle, and CostCo regularly. Each does different things better. (As a side note: as far as I know, of these, only Giant Eagle is unionized. So if you only want to shop in a union grocery, that's it. Please let me know if I'm mistaken.)

Edited at 2007-11-28 07:26 pm UTC

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]writer00
2007-11-28 08:03 pm UTC (link)
I think you bring up some valid points regarding unionization. Frankly, if a business is in touch with their employees' needs, and are willing to share the profits more equitably, and the employees are generally satisfied, I can understand push-back on a union drive. Unfortunately, this is rarely the case. As for the specifics of the Co-op, my issues had more to do with some of the whispering campaigns and other less-than-ethical ways in which some in managment conducted themselves.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]beeporama
2007-11-28 08:18 pm UTC (link)
Ah, I figured I wouldn't be able to resist spilling my opinion (OPINION!) on the matter... I think unions are vital to protect the interests of a very large group of workers who do difficult work but are easily replaced. On the other hand, needing a union in a co-op with a headcount in the twenties (?) seems absurd. A dozen folks can just sit around a table and send someone to talk to management. Or they can just run for the board and change working conditions themselves. So yea unions in general, boo unions at the co-op, given my facile understanding of the situation.

I don't know much about specifics and whispering campaigns and stuff. However, I do hang around goths a lot, and I've learned to smell manufactured drama and when to roll my eyes instead of digging into specifics.

Gosh, this post is going to come off as serious flamebait, and that's not my intention.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]hopita
2007-11-28 08:20 pm UTC (link)
headcount in the twenties (?)

Closer to mid-sixties.

Which sounds like some sort of bad pun about hippies, I realize.

Edited at 2007-11-28 08:21 pm UTC

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]beeporama
2007-11-28 08:27 pm UTC (link)
Wow, I had no idea... just estimating based on seeing a lot of the same people over and over. It's nice to have someone with the facts to set us straight. Thank you.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]kimberlin
2007-11-29 03:43 pm UTC (link)
goths & manufactured drama? surely, kind sir, you jest!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]pghwob
2007-11-29 01:53 am UTC (link)
If a business is "in touch" with employee needs, then why would they push back on a union drive if employees feel that is what is needed. It is a bit of an oxymoron.

The GM always harps on labor costs. Fact is, they raised wages as a result of union activity in the past, and I have a feeling some of those labor costs are the pricy management salaries, too. I'd have less of an objection to paying a manager or coordinator if there was some competence involved.

Moreover, having a union is not just about wages but the quality of treatment, respect, and the ability to fight back against unilateral changes in wages, benefits, and working conditions.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]hopita
2007-11-29 02:01 am UTC (link)
they raised wages as a result of union activity in the past

I think Pennsylvania voting to raise the minimum wage had more to do with it than anything -- they were going to *have* to raise the base pay anyway.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]pghwob
2007-11-29 04:49 am UTC (link)
I wasn't just talking about recent experience, though they did make sure to get those profit sharing checks out quickly. Used to be that the co-op would actively intimidate workers from talking about their wages with one another, too. That was taken care of by some unfair labor practice charges, and getting everyone to become more accepting of talking about their wages with one another.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]writer00
2007-11-29 03:10 am UTC (link)
Well, it may appear to be an oxymoron, but as the son and grandson of union members in New York, I am well aware of the fact that there have been some well-documented cases of union intimidation when people have decided not to join. I would say it's definitely the exception, and not the rule, but nothing in this debate is perfectly clear and obvious. Remember, in New York at least, the unions were infiltrated by organized crime to a great degree. Of course, I'd throw my fate to the unions over some megalithic corp. any day, but I was just pointing out that there are exceptions, and there are gray areas in this debate.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]pghwob
2007-11-29 04:52 am UTC (link)
You wrote:

"if a business is in touch with their employees' needs, and are willing to share the profits more equitably, and the employees are generally satisfied, I can understand push-back on a union drive"

Who is doing the "push-back"? If it is the employer, I don't see their concern about the "corrupt unions" being any legitimate paternalistic instinct (which is also a problem), but rather a desire to avoid ceding any of their authority to their wage slaves.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]beeporama
2007-11-29 04:11 pm UTC (link)
Or maybe they thought the union would at best siphon off wages in "dues," at worst drive the co-op out of business. I guess we'll never know.

You use a lot of loaded language. An employer offering health benefits to its employees could be seen as "paternalistic," but I think it's a good thing. I imagine the wage "slaves" could pretty easily quit and get comparable jobs a few blocks away at Giant Eagle. (Where they would be unionized.)

Or, you know, maybe you're right and the ruthless profit-driven fat cat capitalist pigs running the co-op are willing to crush their employees to increase the bottom line, and only organizing can protect them from unfair treatment. I don't work there, I don't know.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]pghwob
2007-12-01 02:08 pm UTC (link)
"Or, you know, maybe you're right and the ruthless profit-driven fat cat capitalist pigs running the co-op are willing to crush their employees to increase the bottom line, and only organizing can protect them from unfair treatment. I don't work there, I don't know."

I think that sums it up alright ;)

The paternalism I was referring to was not provision of health care (considerably scaled back in recent years), but rather the idea that the employer needs to educate the dumb, naive employees about unions and to urge them to not support the idea, and take other action on its own to "protect" them.

And slaves could be sold to another plantation but they were still slaves. I am not saying wage slavery is as bad as chattel slavery, but the idea is that in general, there are limited economic options for most people under the present economic arrangement, and if they want to eat, most are going to be stuck in fairly low-paying jobs unless they fight to improve those conditions. Just moving somewhere else (even to Giant Eagle with the notably morally bankrupt UFCW -- see, I do agree with you about some unions) is not going to improve conditions.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

The Board
[info]hopita
2007-11-28 08:14 pm UTC (link)
well... every year there are signs all over the co-op begging people to run for the board. So, please run for the board, if you have any ideas.

FYI -- you don't just have to be on the board. At any (open) board meeting, any co-op member can bring up any issue they feel needs attention.

The Board usually meets the last Monday evening of the month. This will be different for December because of the holidays; unfortunately, I can't tell you whether the meeting will be on the 10th or the 17th, because it doesn't appear to be posted on our website. If you call the store (412-242-3598), someone at Customer Service should be able to tell you when the next board meeting will be.

Edited at 2007-11-28 08:18 pm UTC

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: The Board
[info]writer00
2007-11-29 03:12 am UTC (link)
If anything comes out of this debate, let's hope it is that those co-op members who have taken EEFC for granted (I include myself in this) wise up and educate ourselves and begin to act as if we're share holders in this enterprise, which of course we are.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…