USVI-On-Line

I know there already is a thread about the Surly Cantina closing, but I wanted to highlight the fact that the people who are taking over the spot intend to keep on using the same name. I think that is a deceitful practice.

The real Surly Cantina is owned by Craig and Suzanne. They had to leave their spot at Wharfside due to the outrageous rent. Hopefully they will find another location and reopen soon.

In the meantime, be forewarned that the fake Surly Cantina that remains at Wharfside is just that. Personally, I won't go there because I think that what the new owners are doing is wrong.

If you agree, post and say so.

I agree.. and I am sad!

like i said--boycott until the true surly cantina is back (under whatever name --) it STINKS what is happening to those nice folks. and didn't someone say their rent was 6K???? that's INSANE

They shouldn't use the name UNLESS they bought the restaurant and the name from the previous owners.......

byado18 wrote:They shouldn't use the name UNLESS they bought the restaurant and the name from the previous owners.......

The new owners did not buy the name or the business...they simply took over the location when the previous owners no longer could afford the rent.

Pete (Mr. Marcia) wrote:

byado18 wrote:They shouldn't use the name UNLESS they bought the restaurant and the name from the previous owners.......

The new owners did not buy the name or the business...they simply took over the location when the previous owners no longer could afford the rent.

then it is not OK and people should let them know in the way it matters...not eating there!

this is our 1st time to STJ but we too will not go to the new "surly cantina" for the simple reason that if they aren't "ethical" & considerate w/fellow business people on the island. Then how are they going to treat the customers? Where will the corners be cut but the prices reflect differently?
How can you trust a business owner who can't even treat the reg. St Johnians decently?

Plus I thought there was a law against being able to use a business name unless you pay for the right?

I am pretty sure you have to register a trade name when getting a business license. Hopefully their trade name is Surly Cantina, but I feel like they got the busniness going befoer they decided on a name.

We will be on St. John next week and I was looking forward to some real tacos from the real Surly Cantina. Now I will spend my money elsewhere. I sure hope legal action is being taken.

I just will not eat there. Using some elses name even if they did not register it is just wrong.

I would like to hear the other side of the story, but I am getting the feeling we pretty much have and it is just plain mean.

It's one thing to take over the space and pay the gross rent. It's a totally gross thing to steal the name.

Bad. Mean people suck.

The whole situation seems really really sketchy.

There are many businesses that keep the old name when a new person takes over. Usually they put up an "under new management" sign. Not sure how that works- whether the name is sold or the previous person did not register the name. That is an important piece of information.

There seems to be more here than meets the eye. A local on another thread mentioned she was there the day before this news broke and even spoke to the owner. You would think there would be scuttlebutt prior to this happening. Rumors about other restaurants were swirling prior to recent closings.

I understand that some of you have an emotional investment in the previous owners but it is not fair to disparage the reputation of the new owners without knowing all the details.

I agree with Greenskeeper - that is a common practice.

Greenskeeper wrote:There are many businesses that keep the old name when a new person takes over. Usually they put up an "under new management" sign. Not sure how that works- whether the name is sold or the previous person did not register the name. That is an important piece of information.

There seems to be more here than meets the eye. A local on another thread mentioned she was there the day before this news broke and even spoke to the owner. You would think there would be scuttlebutt prior to this happening. Rumors about other restaurants were swirling prior to recent closings.

I understand that some of you have an emotional investment in the previous owners but it is not fair to disparage the reputation of the new owners without knowing all the details.

The previous owners detailed the events on their facebook page. I also have information from other reliable sources.

It is common for new owners to assume the name of the business IF the previous owners actually sold them the business along with the rights to the name. This did not happen here.

The new tenant in the space previously occupied by the Surly Cantina simply is using the name, without permission, in an attempt to confuse those who don't know better into thinking it is the real Surly Cantina. The purpose of my original post was to alert people to this fact so that they can decide for themselves whether to give these people their business.

"The previous owners detailed the events on their facebook page. I also have information from other reliable sources.

It is common for new owners to assume the name of the business IF the previous owners actually sold them the business along with the rights to the name. This did not happen here.

The new tenant in the space previously occupied by the Surly Cantina simply is using the name, without permission, in an attempt to confuse those who don't know better into thinking it is the real Surly Cantina. The purpose of my original post was to alert people to this fact so that they can decide for themselves whether to give these people their business."

I read the Facebook posting and it lacked details. Many people have asked the same question "was the name registered"? There has not been an answer to that. The Facebook posting stated the new owner informed the previous owners, in writing, that he was using the name so this was not a clandestine plan. I stopped reading when someone suggesting "burning the restaurant down".

While your intentions might be noble, people are still saying very negative things about the moral character of these new owners. Even you are making allegations that they are keeping the name to be deceitful and called for a boycott. If they are telling people that the old owners who seem to have a very loyal following, are still the owners, to garner business, then that is deceitful. But if they are keeping the name because the place is known and, signage etc. is very expensive then it's a smart business decision.

I don't know either party involved so my view is an unbiased business person and is void of the obvious emotion many are exhibiting.