Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
The lease terms - while onerous, are not uncommon for newer construction strip malls. They do that so that they can ensure the foot traffic stays up and they are not leasing out to companies that will devalue the property to the left and right of them. They also get into types of displays, signage, windows, hours of operation and a whole host of other issues that - seem ridiculous until you look at why those clauses are written into the lease.

I myself wouldn't consider signing it for a game store (too volatile of an operation) but depending on the local market - it might have been the only facility that fit their needs as a business.

Regarding "taking money" till the last minute... Quite common to be honest. More often than not - the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency for a small business is the difference between a good day of sales on Monday and a bad day of sales on Friday. If the sales had come in strong over the weekend - it might have allowed them to have the capital to keep the business open. If they didn't...that would mean bankruptcy. You roll the dice, and hope you win.

That may or may not apply to Spikey Bits/FTW (never bought from them - have no knowledge of the owners) - but simply trying to keep the business running by maintaining the website doesn't immediately mean they were looking to fleece anyone.

Thank you for the clarification on the lease terms being standard practice.

 Stevefamine wrote:

 judgedoug wrote:

 vitki wrote:

 keas66 wrote:
Just curious as I have no idea about leases on shops but why would the terms of a lease include stuff like that ? - I mean a landlord wants his/her rent ....what does he/she care about sales figures/number of employees/stock levels ?

It depends on where the shop is. I know a lot of malls require a certain minimum number of employees be in the store during business hours. Not sure of the other stuff though.

If he signed that lease, he's a moron. FTW is in the same shopping center as a used book store that has like 2 old lady employees and probably does 1/8th of FTW's sales per month.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stevefamine wrote:
Rob is a stand up guy, he's in a rough spo here

The majority of people ITT and the other thread that are harping on him never actually had IRL dealings with him

You're kidding, right? FTW is not the first game store he's opened, and it won't be the last, nor is it the first time he's screwed people out of collection of miniatures/store credit/magic cards, and I can guarantee you it won't be the last. Maybe 6 years ago it was a sad story and it wasn't his fault and he shouldn't feel bad for all the poor gamers he owed money too, cry cry cry. But now it's a pattern. Ask anyone from the Tidewater area about his dealings with Atlantis Comics & Games and his destruction of Legends in Hampton, VA, and why he's reviled in that area.

Let's also talk about his track record with the local community. FTW was suspended from selling GW product at least _twice_ for violating their trade terms, and one time, One Eyed Jacques allowed FTW to place several GW stock orders through their account, and the second time, Dragon's Den did the same thing. Rob then rewarded both of them by reporting them to his GW sales rep that they had GW product in their ebay stores, promptly getting them placed on notice and suspended for a few weeks.

I've been gaming in RVA since '94 or so and Rob Baer is synonymous with super shadiness - almost as bad as Rusty, but at least Rusty when to jail. There will always be apologists no matter the years - decades - worth of evidence against this guy.

Who are you again? Have you ever even spoken to him in person?

1994? Yes tell me more about how a 50 year old man is tarnishing a rep of someone who he's never met.

While i don't have a dog in this fight.... since when does gaming since 1994 make you 50 ?

I've been mini gaming since 1989. I'm 35.

Also you keep saying he's never met him in real life, but the weird thing about that is, he seems to have at least a lot of (albeit) anecdotal facts. You just have this hollow assertion he doesn't know Rob. But it seems like he knows a lot about him.


I feel bad for the people that are owed money. IT appears to me that the guy signed a lease which was a poor business decision and his loyal customers are the ones who are eating crow because of it.

Other than that.... game store closes, holy gak, in other news sky is blue, pigs don't fly, waters wet, and North Korea's leader is flying rodent gak insane. Shocking, all of it.

-- haight

 Haight wrote:
Other than that.... game store closes, holy gak, in other news sky is blue, pigs don't fly, waters wet, and North Korea's leader is flying rodent gak insane. Shocking, all of it.

-- haight

You've obviously never been to Cincinnati ...

Sorry Famine, but judgedoug is a long time member of the site who also claims to have a bunch of experience with the guy and has relationships with people who have had bad experiences. You're a guy with 24 posts calling him out. I don't know Rob, and I've had no interactions with him, but Doug is a pretty decent guy, and according to him, Rob has been in a very similar situation before. I'm certainly going to trust Doug before I trust you (seeing as how you're at opposing views). Experience is the name of the game, and this site has lots of experiences with "issue people".

Gone, but not forgotten:

http://spikeybitsblog.com/2014/10/the-return-of-spikey-bits-mail-order.html

Someone has a "Delaware store front" it seems. Or the name is being used by another person with a trade account just for brand recognition?

I rarely dealt with SpikeyBitz. Miniature Market and Warstore (more the latter) are my go to sites. I've met Rob a time or two, didn't seem like the business type to me, but what do I know? This just solidifies my "never leave store credit on the table" rule when dealing with game stores. I'm sorry for folks who are losing money in this, as well.

Since when did post count = validity? Personal battles should be kept out of the public sphere regardless. Unless you're in politics...

 juraigamer wrote:
Since when did post count = validity? Personal battles should be kept out of the public sphere regardless. Unless you're in politics...

For what it's worth, post count is at least a measure of involvement and recognition. You have more data points to cull from when judging the integrity or personality of the individual. Thus, someone with a handful is still an unknown quantity versus someone with thousands who has a standing persona (be it real, fake, or otherwise).

Essentially, to other regular goers, it's credibility of voice; be it either immediate discredit or respect, those are earned.

And when it comes to our (or any) niche hobby, we don't forget when getting burnt and history has a way of following people. I saw this in my Dad's hobby of RC aircraft much like we see it in our vendors and personalities. When you see a name attached that's been around for awhile, you can draw reasonable conclusions.

Or as the 43rd President of these United States once said:

KBob said it best. But yes, post count usually helps show character. Lots of posts give people a chance to see if you have anything worthwhile to say, or aren't worth listening to. Low post counts mean we have less to view to form an opinion. So when somebody with a high post count who has shown himself to be a decent guy on here calls out a store for doing the same thing twice in a row, and a low count guy attacks him for it...I know where I'll side. Every damn time.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
KBob said it best. But yes, post count usually helps show character. Lots of posts give people a chance to see if you have anything worthwhile to say, or aren't worth listening to. Low post counts mean we have less to view to form an opinion. So when somebody with a high post count who has shown himself to be a decent guy on here calls out a store for doing the same thing twice in a row, and a low count guy attacks him for it...I know where I'll side. Every damn time.

Or you could do the rational thing for someone with no direct involvement and no access to anything other than third-hand anecdotal information; don't "side" with anyone. Mr High Postcount could genuinely believe everything they've heard about this bloke, and it could still be total, absolute nonsense - I've seen someone branded as a rapist by people who never knew them, never met them, never even knew any individuals involved or related to the events that supposedly transpired, and they believed it utterly despite the fact it was a lie, indeed they still believed it even after I told them it was a lie and that I knew that for a fact as I had been friends with the person who started and spread the rumour because of some petty feud between the two of them.

Taking pre-orders right up to the closure of the store was sketchy, and even if it can be explained by the lease terms the fault would still technically be Baer's since he signed a lease with such onerous terms, but making any judgement beyond that given we have nothing more than hearsay to go on is just petty gossiping.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Sorry Famine, but judgedoug is a long time member of the site who also claims to have a bunch of experience with the guy and has relationships with people who have had bad experiences. You're a guy with 24 posts calling him out. I don't know Rob, and I've had no interactions with him, but Doug is a pretty decent guy, and according to him, Rob has been in a very similar situation before. I'm certainly going to trust Doug before I trust you (seeing as how you're at opposing views). Experience is the name of the game, and this site has lots of experiences with "issue people".

Conversely, I've met and gamed with Rob, while both you and judgedoug could be internet bots for all I know.

I can't speak to anything being discussed in this thread, but it certainly seems like poor behavior on judgedoug's part to be throwing around a lot of vague insinuations, especially when none of us are in command of the facts.

Interesting that he has joined up with Dicehead Games.

I know both Rob (SpikeyBitz) and Shane (Dicehead), knowing Shane a little better. Shane is a good, honest guy - loves the hobby and has done a lot to improve it - with the ATC to show for it. He has a great store that he and Mel (his wife) run in Cleveland TN. As good of a guy in the Game Store business as you will find.

I also think Rob is pretty ok - although others on here may agree/disagree. Regardless - there is no doubt of his love for the hobby and the fact that he adds a lot into it. A crap-ton of people - me included - have gotten great deals off of Spikeybitz on used miniatures as well as the place to go when you wanted a bit for conversion - but didn't want to buy the whole model. The things he posts around "armies on Display", Conversions, videos of model unboxing, reviews of upcoming books, etc - that's all GREAT stuff for the Warhammer hobby.

So - I'm sad about Rob losing his store. I'm excited for Shane and Rob to be working together and wish them all the best.

I'd be wary of any 'spikeybitz' the return until whatever bankruptcy/legal issues have been settled,

as the name and brand recognition could be considered an asset that could be taken away

(and there would always be the slight possibility that using it could be construed in taking on the debts of the old business)

Aeneades wrote:
Seems like a few people are upset as they were taking preorders and money up until last night when they knew they wouldn't be able to fulfil the orders (they claim that they couldn't have a closing down sale or advise customers as the tenancy contract they have lets the building owners store all assets if they do, all of which sounds very unusual).

That would not stand up in court. The fact that your store is going out of business and you are therefore incapable of fulfilling your side of a contract for future consideration (the goods being pre-ordered) is clearly relevant to the other party in this contract (the customer). Allowing the customer to enter into this contract while intentionally concealing this relevant fact is fraud. As such, an attempt to mandate that the tenant commit this fraud against their customers would be an illegal agreement and unenforceable.

 AlexHolker wrote:

Aeneades wrote:
Seems like a few people are upset as they were taking preorders and money up until last night when they knew they wouldn't be able to fulfil the orders (they claim that they couldn't have a closing down sale or advise customers as the tenancy contract they have lets the building owners store all assets if they do, all of which sounds very unusual).

That would not stand up in court. The fact that your store is going out of business and you are therefore incapable of fulfilling your side of a contract for future consideration (the goods being pre-ordered) is clearly relevant to the other party in this contract (the customer). Allowing the customer to enter into this contract while intentionally concealing this relevant fact is fraud. As such, an attempt to mandate that the tenant commit this fraud against their customers would be an illegal agreement and unenforceable.

Fraud requires intent, and as someone else pointed out earlier in the thread even if an owner knows a business is "on the ropes", one or two good days of trading could be enough to keep things going past the crisis point and allow them to dig themselves out of the hole. Unless the guy's been wandering the mall cackling maniacally and boasting about how he fleeced preorder customers, good luck proving in court that he was guilty of fraudulent intent rather than optimism that in hindsight appears hopeless.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 AlexHolker wrote:

Aeneades wrote:
Seems like a few people are upset as they were taking preorders and money up until last night when they knew they wouldn't be able to fulfil the orders (they claim that they couldn't have a closing down sale or advise customers as the tenancy contract they have lets the building owners store all assets if they do, all of which sounds very unusual).

That would not stand up in court. The fact that your store is going out of business and you are therefore incapable of fulfilling your side of a contract for future consideration (the goods being pre-ordered) is clearly relevant to the other party in this contract (the customer). Allowing the customer to enter into this contract while intentionally concealing this relevant fact is fraud. As such, an attempt to mandate that the tenant commit this fraud against their customers would be an illegal agreement and unenforceable.

Fraud requires intent...

If Aeneades is accurately conveying their attempted justification, that proves intent. They aren't claiming they didn't know how screwed they were, so why are you?

I've known Rob a long time and he is a class act. I wish the best for him.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 AlexHolker wrote:

Aeneades wrote:
Seems like a few people are upset as they were taking preorders and money up until last night when they knew they wouldn't be able to fulfil the orders (they claim that they couldn't have a closing down sale or advise customers as the tenancy contract they have lets the building owners store all assets if they do, all of which sounds very unusual).

That would not stand up in court. The fact that your store is going out of business and you are therefore incapable of fulfilling your side of a contract for future consideration (the goods being pre-ordered) is clearly relevant to the other party in this contract (the customer). Allowing the customer to enter into this contract while intentionally concealing this relevant fact is fraud. As such, an attempt to mandate that the tenant commit this fraud against their customers would be an illegal agreement and unenforceable.

Fraud requires intent...

If Aeneades is accurately conveying their attempted justification, that proves intent. They aren't claiming they didn't know how screwed they were, so why are you?

Erm, it doesn't really, and I wasn't. Not in the sense that I was claiming that was what they were saying, but also in the sense that's not an accurate summation of my argument - you can know you're screwed, totally and utterly, but as long as you can plausibly argue that, while you knew you could go out of business soon, it was not utterly inevitable while you were still taking preorders, and that you had every intention of honouring those preorders, then you have no intent to defraud.

I seriously doubt this lease would have a clause in it saying "you gotta fleece those mugs till the last moment even if you're goin under", just something along the lines of requiring the tenant to trade normally until they are no longer capable of doing so, which providing they were not trading in certain knowledge that they would be out of business on X date means the lease doesn't require them to commit fraud. My whole point here is that all we have to go on is third-hand hearsay so people staking out a position on this guy's character based on the postcount of whoever the gossip is coming from, or throwing around words like "fraud", is premature.

 totalfailure wrote:
Won't be missed my me. I ordered online a few times from them and found their service to be indifferent at best. I moved on to other providers.

Also, this will hopefully be the end of the terribly named 'Forge The Narrative' podcast, and maybe someone that actually cares about the game and lore can start using it instead. It was a joke to call a podcast that was mostly devoted to breaking and bending rules and WAAC tournament gaming that.

That was the joke. It was making fun of the direction GW went with 6th edition with less solid rules and playing them off as something the player should fix by 'forging the narrative'

I've met Rob before on occasion at FTW and while everyone might be a little irked by his buisness practices, Im ultimately not too miffed even though i think lost some 30-40 in store credit.

I have been in the nightclub buissness for about a decade now, and it kind of takes someone with a little cut-throatedness to put together the finances and running order of that place you like to go party with your friends. The gears of the funhouse do not turn on their own.

yes he is a little business minded, I wont go into the specifics of my grievances with him (incidentally an issue of store credit years ago), it is tiny by comparison to others and it was nothing that could not be remedied, and was very politely.

It is tough on the matter of the last minute closedown with no warning, taking pre-orders and whatever, but this is also nothing new, most venues Ive worked with that closed down did so usually over the course of two days. Its usually a realization close to the end of the month (Just like this one) when you do numbers and realize that you are slipping back into the whole, or have been for too long. For one of my owners I dealt with, it was realizing that it would take another 5 years of no profit to get back the money she put in while it was slow. or for another was simply an issue of a lending organization (Be it Bank Friend or Family) taking someone down with it.
These people are willing to go down to wire and risk it all to keep their business open. Robs gonna lose a lot of money and his job and his employees jobs, one of my venue owners actually managed to lose their house.

He may be a crook, but hes our crook, and unless you are at an investor level or lost a substantial amount of money, you should be thankful that you got enjoy the byproduct of his crook-ness while he went to bat against the financial universe for the abstract enjoyment of science fiction and fantasy storylines

 jeeb_sound wrote:


He may be a crook, but hes our crook, and unless you are at an investor level or lost a substantial amount of money, you should be thankful that you got enjoy the byproduct of his crook-ness while he went to bat against the financial universe for the abstract enjoyment of science fiction and fantasy storylines

Um... no. No need to be grateful for crooks, especially when plenty of gaming stores, FLGS, e-tailers etc.. manage to do a fine job running a profitable business selling wargaming miniatures (without ripping open the package for the shady extra profit of selling it in bits). It's not like this is some kind of ground-breaking no-precedent business-model.

Whatever he did to sink it, the least he was, was stupid. If he was a crook on top of it and left people with money short, whether it's a dollar or a million, he deserves to be publicly shamed for his actions, more so if there is a reasonable chance he could try his hand again in this industry.

Wonderwolf wrote:

 jeeb_sound wrote:


He may be a crook, but hes our crook, and unless you are at an investor level or lost a substantial amount of money, you should be thankful that you got enjoy the byproduct of his crook-ness while he went to bat against the financial universe for the abstract enjoyment of science fiction and fantasy storylines

Um... no. No need to be grateful for crooks, especially when plenty of gaming stores, FLGS, e-tailers etc.. manage to do a fine job running a profitable business selling wargaming miniatures (without ripping open the package for the shady extra profit of selling it in bits). It's not like this is some kind of ground-breaking no-precedent business-model.

Whatever he did to sink it, the least he was, was stupid. If he was a crook on top of it and left people with money short, whether it's a dollar or a million, he deserves to be publicly shamed for his actions, more so if there is a reasonable chance he could try his hand again in this industry.

Selling bits is not "shady", it's a service, one that third parties stepped in to provide when GW couldn't be arsed any more. Businesses go bankrupt, it's a shame, particularly for the employees, but losing your business does NOT make you a crook, and nobody deserves to be "publicly shamed" unless you can PROVE they have done something wrong.

Kinda jumping the gun a little calling him a crook. This has been less than a week. If it was me, I'd be trying to process and regroup - and still figuring out what the go forward plan is going to be.

I would think Rob would be a stand up guy who will do his best to make things right with people - especially anyone who paid but didn't get product. Store credit might be harder - but maybe they can get their product back if he hasn't sold it yet.

All I'm saying is give him a chance and see if he makes right....and if he does be stand up enough to post back here that he did.....

Bought from spiky bits before. Prices and service was great. Sad to see them go.

I want to state that I use the word crook endearingly. as I pointed out he dealt with the real universe so we could all act like it didn't exist for long enough to enjoy ourselves and for this im thankfull

From personal experience I was delt a shady deal by Spikey Bitz over an eBay sale of scarabs. Ordered the Bitz and time came and went without receiving them. Contacted Spikey Bitz and was told to wait despite a tracking number that was not active. Ended up having to file for a refund and won because to legitimate tracking number was never provided and subsequently was blocked from spikey Bitz eBay sales. All I wanted was a refund and to order the set they refused to replace. Very shady business practice, IMO.

hmmmm

A lot of people are jumping to conclusions based on hearsay and even less. I've been talking to people directly involved and it wasn't shady and it happened very fast, as in a weekend they went from good times to forced to close. Yeah, I lost some, but it wasn't from crookedness, just lousy business sense.

 MWHistorian wrote:
A lot of people are jumping to conclusions based on hearsay and even less. I've been talking to people directly involved and it wasn't shady and it happened very fast, as in a weekend they went from good times to forced to close. Yeah, I lost some, but it wasn't from crookedness, just lousy business sense.

Even if this is true, even if the business genuinely went from good times to bankruptcy over a weekend, a business that is this volatile has no business taking preorders or offering store credit. Barring a sinkhole opening up underneath your store or something similarly unpredictable, a customer who has given you money in advance for your product should be safe in assuming your business will still exist the following week.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
A lot of people are jumping to conclusions based on hearsay and even less. I've been talking to people directly involved and it wasn't shady and it happened very fast, as in a weekend they went from good times to forced to close. Yeah, I lost some, but it wasn't from crookedness, just lousy business sense.

Even if this is true, even if the business genuinely went from good times to bankruptcy over a weekend, a business that is this volatile has no business taking preorders or offering store credit. Barring a sinkhole opening up underneath your store or something similarly unpredictable, a customer who has given you money in advance for your product should be safe in assuming your business will still exist the following week.

What I'm saying is that it was very sudden and very drastic and had no idea that the business would go under until the day it did. (Think TSR type situation.)
Of course they would continue taking pre-orders. They were in a slump that was normal for this time of year. (Just before the holidays.)

Yeah, come on guys, if somebody gets a court order that says hand over your bank account, you're out of business that day. Who knows what happened here, but I'm sure it's something similar.

Good luck to Rob. I have enjoyed the FTN podcast for some time - I hope they keep it up.