We have 1300 member households with huge additional potential.  "Starting small" would mean trying just as hard to get less funding, not satisfying our members, having higher prices, being in an unknown space, and not revitalizing this building.

Smaller would not have made it any easier to get funding.  And the member equity would not have been nearly enough to get going without more funding, no matter how small.

We also believe that most members want us to revitalize the old Ashbourne Market building in particular.  Starting smaller would not satisfy this desire.

A smaller store would mean less inventory, and therefore less sales, but not proportionately less staff and expenses.  Which means higher prices and also means less shopping that could be done at the co-op.

Not a single funder, other co-op, consultant, or advisor has said that we're asking for too much money or starting too big.

The idea that we could/should have started smaller is admittedly more intuitive, but not correct.  It makes the wrong assumption - that our proposed size has been a stumbling block for us.  It simply hasn't.

Last updated on May 20, 2011 by Creekside Co-Op