18 ms·

Pirate Joe’s, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe’s Products, Shuts Down

374 points by artsandsci 9y ago

heynk 9y ago
I live in Bellingham, WA, which has (I think) the closes TJ's to Vancouver. The parking lot is already about 50% British Columbia plates, and maybe now it'll be even more. I certainly welcome more friendly neighbors shopping in town, but it's a bummer they have to shut down.
- passivepinetree 9y ago
  A previous article on Pirate Joe's (http://www.piratejoes.ca/legalandpress/2016/1/16/how-why http://www.piratejoes.ca/legalandpress/2016/1/16/how-why, also a great read) mentions that indeed Bellingham has the closest Trader Joe's to Vancouver.
- glonq 9y ago
  That's the one I shop at. Thanks for tolerating so many canucks in your city! Sorry about bogarting all the milk.
- kayone 9y ago
  I live in Vancouver, I travel a lot to Seattle and San Francisco for work, I used to make sure Trader Joe's was a stop before I head home. After this move I'll try and actively avoid Trader Joe's. If Trader Joe's feels so strongly about Canadians buying their products then I have no reason to give them money. keep in mind I never actually went to the pirate Joe's even though I walked by it frequently.
thefalcon 9y ago
There's protecting your brand, and then there's whatever the heck it is Trader Joe's did here, which seems senseless and malevolent.
- TillE 9y ago
  Aldi Nord (owner of TJ) has done such an incredibly poor job of expanding the Trader Joe's brand outside of the USA. For example, all you get in their German stores are some random crappy products with the TJ label. It makes so little sense to go after this tiny company when you're not even competing in Canada. Which they probably should! I'm sure there's demand in cities like Toronto for the actual unique products that TJ offers.
  - passivepinetree 9y ago
    A previous article on Pirate Joe's (http://www.piratejoes.ca/legalandpress/2016/1/16/how-why http://www.piratejoes.ca/legalandpress/2016/1/16/how-why) mentions that Michael Hallatt, the guy behind Pirate Joe's, said he'd close up shop if the real Trader Joe's ever moved into Canada.
  - mabbo 9y ago
    There is demand in Toronto. I am sitting in Toronto, and I still crave a lot of the good stuff I bought there when I lived in Seattle. I can't believe they opened stores in Germany, but never bothered to open one in Vancouver, where there was proven demand for their products.
    - germanier 9y ago
      There are no Trader Joe's stores in Germany. It was bought in 1979 by the German family that owns the Aldi Nord chain of discount stores[0]. That German chain uses the Trader Joe's brand for some American-themed fast food ingredients, nuts, and sweet ice tea. [0]: Which is different from the Aldi Süd chain of discount stores which runs stores under the "Aldi" brand in the US.
    - goatforce5 9y ago
      I'm sitting in Toronto, and am in the process of getting my Canadian citizenship. One of the things I was looking forward to was getting a Canadian passport and having easier jaunts in to upstate New York for Trader Joe's runs.
joncp 9y ago
I'm not clear on how US courts were allowed to hear a case about events in Canada. Is that a thing?
- sp332 9y ago
  A court said that since the "harm" (devaluing the trademark) happened in America, the case could move ahead. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/court-infringement-lawsuit-trader-joes-pirate-joes.html?action=click&contentCollection=Business%20Day&module=RelatedCoverage&region=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/court-infringement-law...
  - fivestar 9y ago
    It seems like after you buy something at point of sale whatever you do with it is fair game. I can buy Coke from Sam's Club or Costco and sell it in my restaurant. How is what Pirate Joe's did any different?
    - sp332 9y ago
      This is a trademark infringement case. The (alleged) problem is that he set up a store which billed itself as being basically a Trader Joe's.
      - ska 9y ago
        Except he didn't. It was always clear what he was doing. This is pretty straightforward legal bullying, in my opinion.
        hinfaits 9y ago
        The guy clearly tried to position himself as a pseudo-Trader Joe's though. He called it Pirate Joes and only sold products from Trader Joe's. It seems like everyone thought of it as a kind of Trader Joe's. Even though copyright infringement might not have been his intent, intent doesn't matter. That said, this does look like egregious legal bullying even if the case holds water. IANAL
kefka 9y ago
Gotta love capitalism, eh? Just like votes, more money = more protection. This certainly wasn't a trademark issue. Trader vs Pirate. There was no question this store wasn't run by Trader Joes/Aldi North. They were buying in bulk to stock a store where they couldn't normally get the goods. Reselling should be 100% A-OK. Any trademarks go along with the products. And as far as I would guess, the grocer certainly wasn't tampering with anything - if (s)he was, they'd go out of business quick. This is just normal SLAPP-style punitive legal actions that a large monied corporation can do to stop the little guy from doing legal behaviors that they don't like.
- duozerk 9y ago
  > Just like votes, more money = more protection. That's what I find strange with the often-seen "well, just vote with your wallet" argument when a company screws up; it's almost literally the definition of an oligarchy (IE, more money = more decision power).
  - kefka 9y ago
    It's the similar power arrangement when an employee has legitimate grievances with their employer. Individually, they are a speck. Nothing. They can be gotten rid of like the chattel they are. However, when Unions show up, they are the equal and opposing force that keeps a company in check with regards to their employees. Some have issues with Unions, as some of them are significantly corrupt. But by and large, unions are the equal and opposite force. What protects small companies from large companies? In reality, nothing. That's what allows fake-patent shakedowns like the "SSL Patent", or others. And that's by exploiting protections in law... But what happens when one side has *10000 the resources? You capitulate and go bankrupt due to legal fees, legal harassment, and a continual defense against a legal monied attack. In the end, there's fuck-all you can do. Well, other than whatever the monied plantiff wants.
  - baddox 9y ago
    To be fair, that phrase usually applies to everyday consumer purchases, not a firm using large amounts of money to apply legal pressure to another firm. The normal usage of the phrase is fairly reasonable.
chaostheory 9y ago
Is Trader Joe's that much better than anything else Canada has to offer?
- goodcanadian 9y ago
  Trader Joe's is different from other stores, not necessarily better or worse. When I lived in California, we did a lot of shopping at Trader Joe's, but you couldn't really get all of your groceries there. Conversely, you could not get equivalents to a lot of Trader Joe's products at other stores. Canada has grocery stores that are 100% equivalent to regular grocery stores in the U.S., but it has nothing that is really equivalent to Trader Joe's.
  - unethical_ban 9y ago
    TJ's doesn't carry garbage bags. I remember that being pretty frustrating, since it's one of those things most grocery stores have had for decades.
  - anigbrowl 9y ago
    Traditionally groceries refers to foodstuffs only. Hence the creation of the word supermarket where groceries, household good and other things things were all sold under one roof. TJs carries a few personal care items like toothbrushes and soap but they're probably only about 2% of the shelf space in a store. They're in the food business, that's it.
    - goodcanadian 9y ago
      When I said "groceries," I was referring to food. I wouldn't be happy having to buy 100% of my food at Trader Joe's.
- gregw134 9y ago
  Everything at Trader Joe's is delicious, plus they have $3 wine that actually tastes good.
  - 9y ago
captainmuon 9y ago
I don't understand with what right trader Joe's can prohibit somebody from reselling their products. If he clearly states where he bought them from, and that he is not affiliated, and doesn't misuse their trademarks (impersonate them), it should be absolutely legal. A side remark, people often say how great the US / north America is for entrepreneurs, compared to (continental) Europe where there is a lot of red tape and regulations. But in my opinion, if I were to do this in Germany there is no way ALDI (whom trader Joe's belongs to iirc) could sue me out of business. Not even with the old frivolous "we are wrong but you can't afford the defense" trick. There is just so much legal uncertainty in NA that it would give me nightmares doing business there.
- TommyBombadil 9y ago
  Yeah, I don't really understand the difference between Pirate Joe's and every snack stand that resells candy and soda they bought from somewhere else like Costco.
  - slg 9y ago
    I think the difference is the focus on the specific products and their brand. If someone named their candy stand "Silly Wonka" and only sold Nerds and Runts, I am sure they would have Nestle come after them too.
    - fnordfnordfnord 9y ago
      Was Pirate Joe's selling counterfeits or knock offs? I thought they were reselling TJ's products.
    - rhizome 9y ago
      Nestle has the single word "wonka" itself trademarked, so you're going to need a better example.
      - wavefunction 9y ago
        Willy Zonka
beatpanda 9y ago
>>For one trip, he hired a couple who he said did not look like conventional Trader Joe’s shoppers. They had dreadlocks, tattoos and piercings. “They looked like they just walked off the set of a Burning Man documentary,” he said. I'm sorry? Trader Joes, in at least 4 locations I've seen in California, does special signs and displays the week before Burning Man to market to Burners. Where is this writer from?
- kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
  This was in Northern Washington, close to the Canadian border, and more than 1000 miles away from Burning Man.
stevewillows 9y ago
It's sad to see Pirate Joes go away. I don't know anyone who shopped there on a regular basis, but I do think TJ would do well in that neighborhood. The main draw to Trader Joe's is that its part of the journey across the line. This week I'll be doing this same old routine -- pick up some packages at the mail place ($2 per package), hit up a few grocery stores for different hot sauces and staples (including condensed milk in a squeeze tube), have lunch in Bellingham, go for a walk around Fairhaven, then return home. Trader Joe's is part of that journey, much like Target (who had a massive, depressing attempt to break into Canada). Strip away that special-trip aspect, and all you really have is another grocery store with a few exceptional items.
miiiiiike 9y ago
The StartUp Podcast tagged along with him a few years ago: https://gimletmedia.com/episode/pirate-needs-pirate-season-3-episode-3/ https://gimletmedia.com/episode/pirate-needs-pirate-season-3...
ryanSrich 9y ago
Does anyone else feel like he didn't raise the money because he didn't use a sensible crowd funding site like GoFundMe?
debacle 9y ago
Makes sense. If it was called Pirate Pete's I would understand. The same thing happened with South Butt, which was a weaker case in my opinion.
pthreads 9y ago
"At one point, Mr. Hallatt dropped the “P” from his store sign so it read “Irate Joe’s” — a signal of his determination to fight the grocery chain." Hilarious!!!
echlebek 9y ago
That's really too bad. Pirate Joe's fit nicely into our cultural tradition of thumbing our noses at the Americans.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
rfdub 9y ago
Trader Joes doesn't have a goddamn peg-leg to stand on in this dispute. If Trader Joes had made any indication whatsoever they were seeking to satisfy the clearly substantial demand for their products in Vancouver I might better be able to see their side of the story, but they have done absolutely nothing to expand into what would be ludicrously lucrative market. I know multiple people who have sent bloody hand-written letters to Trader Joes begging them to open a store in Vancouver and yet they would rather spend hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting a local small-business owner than satisfy the demand themselves. Regardless of the legality of this situation Trader Joes has not won the moral high ground.
- culturalzero 9y ago
  Yeah, I just don't understand capitalists that actively fight against capitalizing on clear opportunities. I would have just opened a store down the street or something.
  - noonespecial 9y ago
    It's because legal departments are not capitalists. They're a kind of ultra-conservative entity motivated entirely by fear/anger of any perceived change. What we have here is a COO/CEO asleep at the wheel. One of the CEOs most important jobs is to watch the legal department for signs they're about to draw the old foot-gun and start playing "this little piggy" with company toes.
    - anigbrowl 9y ago
      No, no, no. Legal departments are fiduciaries and where the law itself is weird (as in trademark protection where companies are virtually forced to sue potential infringers) it's not their responsibility to reform the legal system. https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverherzfeld/2013/02/28/failure-to-enforce-trademarks-if-you-snooze-do-you-lose/#2923830c6c22 https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverherzfeld/2013/02/28/failu... motivated entirely by fear/anger of any perceived change Oh don't be such a baby, that's like saying engineering departments made up of social cripples who can't hold a conversation like regular business people.
hallalex831 9y ago
I'm surprised Trader Joe's hasn't gone to Amazon yet to have all of these listings removed yet... https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=trader+joes https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3...
- giarc 9y ago
  Have them removed? They are the seller. >by Trader Joe's
  - upvotinglurker 9y ago
    The "by" line in the Amazon listing refers to the manufacturer. The sellers in the linked example have names like "TopPicks" and "South Side Enterprises" (and are probably doing what Pirate Joe did, but without crossing national boundaries, for a customer base of people like me* who live 1.5 hours drive from the nearest TJ's but like the products). TJ doesn't officially sell online. *I've never actually patronized any of these sellers, but I've been tempted.
settsu 9y ago
While this was arguably a legally heavy-handed act on Trader Joe's part, it also seems like Mr. Hallatt became increasingly bold and antagonistic as his revenue increased. I mean, he did change his store name to Pirate Joe’s (from the far more ambiguous Transilvania Trading) and his actions seem to betray less charitable motivations than his words would lead you to believe ("This is not a business I should be doing from a personal profitability standpoint” - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/21/pirate-joes-trader-joes-smuggled-canadian-border-vancouver-store. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/21/pirate-joes-tr...) That said, seems like Trader Joe's missed an opportunity for a win-win partnership with someone who had already developed rudimentary logistics to meet a demonstrated demand. But then it doesn't surprise me based on my 30+ years shopping at Trader Joe's: I would never describe them as innovative, instead I'd say they are very focused on what they've been doing well for decades.
Shorel 9y ago
He could have started to make his own products in this time, and slowly replacing the Trader Joe's ones with his own. Right now he would simply stop buying the other products while having his own brand.
chx 9y ago
Let's review one of the court documents because it has a very important detail. https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/08/26/14-35035.pdf https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/08/26/1... > Defendant Michael Norman Hallatt purchased Trader Joe’s-branded goods in Washington State, transported them to Canada, and resold them there in a store he designed to mimic a Trader Joe’s store. Trader Joe’s sued under the Lanham Act and Washington law. Repeated later: > It is uncontested that Defendant Michael Norman Hallatt purchases Trader Joe’s-branded goods in Washington state, transports them to Canada, and resells them there in a store he designed to mimic a Trader Joe’s store. Emphasis mine and it's a big deal. Trader Joe's would have had a hell of a time bringing a suit if it would be called Hallat's Little Shack and would look like any random grocery store.
- belorn 9y ago
  I know that many stores have different design on where they places products, but I doubt if that design is covered under copyright or trademark law. There could be fraud claim if he intend to fool a customer, but a store called pirate joe store do have a rather strong message that it isn't the true store.
- fnordfnordfnord 9y ago
  Sounds more like he was moving them with names like Pirate Joe's, and Irate Joe's at one point.
- Chaebixi 9y ago
  > he designed to mimic a Trader Joe’s So what? The mimicry occurs in Canada, where Trader Joe's apparently does not operate. I thought the whole point of trademark law was to prevent customer confusion, not to give a party property-like rights to some retail "style." I'm really surprised this is an issue for the US courts at all, and that they didn't refer Trader Joe's to the Canadian court system.
  - chx 9y ago
    > to some retail "style." So says Wikipedia: > Trade dress is a legal term of art that generally refers to characteristics of the visual appearance of a product or its packaging (or even the design of a building) that signify the source of the product to consumers. IANAL but selling Trading Joe's products and those alone in a store that looks like Trading Joe's could at least give rise to a trade dress claim. As to extraterritoriality, NAFTA applies, trademarks are recognized across the border.
nfriedly 9y ago
That's too bad. I loved it when they took the "P" out of their sine after Trader Joe's sued them! ("Irate Joe's")
mazameli 9y ago
Relevant episode of "Reply All" podcast: https://gimletmedia.com/episode/pirate-needs-pirate-season-3-episode-3/ https://gimletmedia.com/episode/pirate-needs-pirate-season-3...
- gkoberger 9y ago
  It's Startup, not Reply All. But both are Gimlet!
CodeWriter23 9y ago
Well, that's one way to deal with a guy who has spent the money proving the market for your product line. I think a better move would have been to take a page from Dave Thomas' (Wendy's) play book and open a Trader Joe's down the street.
dawnerd 9y ago
So if Trader Joes is so concerned why don't they just open up shop in Canada? I've heard the podcast about it and original articles way back and it's amazing they're shutting out a market that seems to be very welcoming. Maybe they see Target Canada failure and are scared away by that?
massung 9y ago
I'm looking at this as though Trader Joe's was a different company... say Disney. Disney goes to great lengths to work out how its products are used, packaged and distributed to not only maximize profits, but also to maintain a certain image. If I go to DisneyWorld, purchase a Mickey Mouse doll, an take it home. I have the right to do with that doll whatever I want: burn it, give it to my daughter, or resell it at whatever price I see fit. However, I don't believe I have to right to go - as an agent of another (presumed competitor), purchase that same doll, and then resell it in my own store. I have no resell agreement with Disney to do so. In a typical reseller arrangement, wouldn't a store (e.g. Target) have an agreement with Disney to purchase bulk product for resell, presumably at a reduced price, but also under strict guidelines as to how it could do so? For example: cannot be sold above a certain price, cannot be sold next to adult content, etc. On a side note: I have to believe that (while not a TJ problem or related to the lawsuit) there were other issues with what Pirate Joe's was doing related to imports, possible tariffs not being adhered to, etc. /IANAL
- rhizome 9y ago
  In a typical reseller arrangement, the constraints on reselling are tied to the discount. There's nothing about Mickey Mouse that contravenes the first-seller doctrine when bought at retail.
- dawnerd 9y ago
  Disney is a really bad choice because the Disney resell market is absolutely massive. Anytime they release limited release items there's a line of people buying as much as they can just to dump it on ebay.
  - massung 9y ago
    I picked it more as an example of a company that goes to great lengths to maintain its image and quality. And one which I think reasonable people could understand why they choose to defend that image in court if their products were used in a way that could damage it.
SeeDave 9y ago
Pardon my ignorance, but... why would Trader Joe's have a problem with their products being resold in Canada if they don't have a presence there? Does their parent company have a competing brand that sales are being cannibalized from? From my perspective: every product sold in Canada was purchased in the U.S. so... if anything, this Pirate Joe fellow has provided additional sales for Trader Joes and proved that there is demand for Trader Joe's products in Canada at an incredible 40% markup! If they're not interested in servicing Canada, would it not be to Trader Joe's advantage to enter a formal franchising or wholesaling agreement with Pirate Joe? There must be more to this story in terms of Trader Joes objectives as opposed to Pirate Joe's methods or the legal proceedings.
- giarc 9y ago
  I obviously can't comment from Trader Joes perspective, but did work in food safety for awhile so I can comment from that perspective. The problem I imagine they have is that someone is selling Trader Joe products (with their label) after handling it themselves, and often having random Craiglists employees handle the items. Prior to this, Trader Joe's (or companies hired by them) are handling the products. Imagine someone begins tampering with the food items and a few Canadians get sick or injured. This might prompt a recall of all Trader Joe's cookies, not just the ones imported into Canada for example. The FDA wouldn't be able to say that the tampering happened after the products were purchased by Pirate Joe's. The same argument applies to temperature sensitive products as well.
- ci5er 9y ago
  1) Liability 2) Brand Dilution 3) Trademark Protection
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
tryitnow 9y ago
As much as I like to side with the little guy, I think it's pretty fair for an establishment to restrict whom they sell to (as long as it's not based on a protected class like race, gender, orientation, etc). Despite being banned from the store this guy still sought out ways to shop there, so I can't defend him too enthusiastically. Then again it kind of annoys me that TJ's just didn't open a damn store in Canada. And if they don't want to do that then why not just look the other way while someone else took on the risk of importing their products into another country?
- blacksmith_tb 9y ago
  But they weren't restricting selling to him (in fact, I am going to guess that the manager of the store he stocked up at was happy to see the artificial lift in sales). He didn't sue them for refusing to sell to him, they sued him for infringing (which he was quite boldly, but in a country they don't actually do business in, so it seems like a stretch).
- stale2002 9y ago
  Sure, you can stop selling to HIM. But there is nothing illegal about this guy convincing other people to buy stuff for him. You as a consumer, can sell your goods to whoever you want because of the first sale doctrine, and trader Joe's can't stop you. Yes they could then ban YOU from buying from there..... But then the guy could just convince someone else to shop there, and around and around it goes.
Noos 9y ago
Problem is it sounds like he was trying to rely on association to the Trader Joe's brand to make money, kind of a shadow franchise. That opens up the problem of brand dilution, and even the most ethical companies have to be ruthless about that, or they can lose their own brand and all the benefits they worked to build with it. He should have realized the need, and done things like match their product mix with his own brands, work on making the store's own feel, and dampened direct association to Trader Joe's. He didn't and it bit him in the ass. No sympathy here.
- Steko 9y ago
  The first thing I thought of was McDowells in Coming to America even though they weren't reselling McDonald's food and then it turns out that the guy behind Pirate Joes is (was) planning to open a "Big M" fast food restaurant. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pirate-joe-s-owner-plans-big-m-fast-food-joint-1.2421233 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pirate-joe-s-...
grizzles 9y ago
If I lived in Vancouver I would have an irresistible urge to start a Swashbuckler Joe's right now. If only for the mischief of it.
- glonq 9y ago
  I'd do "Traitor Joe's"
20150327ASG 9y ago
I have just lost my appetite for Trader Joe's products.
sailfast 9y ago
Assuming that taking care of customs duties and other food quality issues legally would not be that expensive, all I'm seeing is missed revenue. If the person wants to order 10,000 palettes of cookies at retail price, why wouldn't you sell the cookies to the person? He's not stealing from the back of the store, he's paying full price. I'm very confused why Trader Joe's would not have created a direct connection with the guy. This reminds me of major services cutting off API access because they thought they could do it better in-house. Just HIRE the person doing your own service better in a different way.
lsiebert 9y ago
I am not a lawyer, so I don't know that I am qualified to comment on the legal issues. I can say that this does make me upset at Trader Joe's, and I will be considering where else I can spend my money. They could have worked with this guy, eventually set up a Trader Joe's in Canada, and then offered to let this guy run it. That would have been better for their brand, in my view. I care about what companies do. Costco hires employees and treats them well. It pays above average, and it hires and keeps on people with disabilities and injuries, even if they can't do everything someone else can do. It makes me feel good to shop there. And it's employees are loyal, hard working, happy and friendly, and they have less pilferage then other stores. This idea that a company has a duty to be a dick is silly. Companies should care about their brand, and about being a good corporate citizen.
- CobrastanJorji 9y ago
  I totally get what you're saying, but if you're a business about to open in a new country, and you have to choose a manager for your first location there, would you pick some random businessperson or would you pick a guy you've banned from shopping in your store who's been sneaking into your Seattle stores in a wig and fake glasses in order to sell in Vancouver with inflated prices? Because I'd totally pick the random guy.
  - al452 9y ago
    I'd totally pick the person who has already shown extreme enthusiasm for my products.
    - sjwright 9y ago
      And has proven to be able to sell these products profitably.
    - nebabyte 9y ago
      It really depends upon the person, as I'd never want to go into a business partnership with someone who's just as likely to try and undermine or countermand me later over opinion, but yeah, my inclination would be to at least interview the guy.
bbarn 9y ago
Trader Joe's is a masterclass example in branding. The only reason anyone's surprised or outrage is that the store feels like a small, homey, good natured place full of organic this and that that's lower priced than you'd expect. That might have been true, 40 years ago. For a store that had the same name, but was a different entity entirely. Trader Joe's now is just a giant marketing and packaging front for 70 billion dollar a year Aldi, a multinational chain. It's a corporation. None of this behavior surprises me at all.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Simulacra 9y ago
This story has always baffled me and I've never really understood where Trader Joe's comes from on this. It seems like business opportunity exists, but they're either really full of themselves, or have some other tacit reason for avoiding the Canadian market. I just don't get it, and I don't like how Trader Joe's has behaved here. Right or wrong, as a consumer, I disagree, and I'm putting this down as another reason to never go to a Trader Joe's again.
jliptzin 9y ago
Lawsuit aside, what was this guy thinking. What an awful business model.
rdl 9y ago
I generally load up a few Amazon Fresh disposable coolers with TJ products as gifts for friends in Vancouver whenever I drive up -- Kerrygold butter is really hard to get in Canada, and has much better omega 3 ratio than grain fed butter.
halfnibble 9y ago
Trader Joe's doesn't want customers who spend a ton of money buying in bulk at full retail price. Furthermore, they clearly have no intention of expanding into a large market that desperately wants them. What kind of business is this?
- slantyyz 9y ago
  TJ's clearly had a opportunity - there's pent up demand for TJ products in Canada, but instead of investing in a couple of satellite stores in Canada and some bilingual labeling, they chose to spend their money on lawyers and lawsuits.
valuearb 9y ago
He spent so much time and effort creating and running the store and fighting this. I mean, paying $20/hour for people to shop Trader Joes to get him goods at retail? That's so incredibly inefficient. Why didn't he just create his own store with his own brand and mimic the Trader Joes products and aesthetic? He could buy goods in bulk at much lower prices. He doesn't have to worry (much) about legal issues or spend money on them. Clearly demand was so high he could still get away with charging very high prices.
Mankhool 9y ago
I live in Pirate Joe's neighbourhood. He's not running a Costco sized operation. It's a tiny little store. I wish I had 50K to fund his defense.
dang 3y ago
https://web.archive.org/web/20170610000147/https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/08/business/pirate-joes-trader-joes-vancouver.html?_r=0 https://web.archive.org/web/20170610000147/https://www.nytim...

374 points by artsandsci 9y ago

I live in Bellingham, WA, which has (I think) the closes TJ's to Vancouver. The parking lot is already about 50% British Columbia plates, and maybe now it'll be even more. I certainly welcome more friendly neighbors shopping in town, but it's a bummer they have to shut down.

passivepinetree 9y ago
A previous article on Pirate Joe's (http://www.piratejoes.ca/legalandpress/2016/1/16/how-why http://www.piratejoes.ca/legalandpress/2016/1/16/how-why, also a great read) mentions that indeed Bellingham has the closest Trader Joe's to Vancouver.
glonq 9y ago
That's the one I shop at. Thanks for tolerating so many canucks in your city! Sorry about bogarting all the milk.
kayone 9y ago
I live in Vancouver, I travel a lot to Seattle and San Francisco for work, I used to make sure Trader Joe's was a stop before I head home. After this move I'll try and actively avoid Trader Joe's. If Trader Joe's feels so strongly about Canadians buying their products then I have no reason to give them money. keep in mind I never actually went to the pirate Joe's even though I walked by it frequently.

thefalcon 9y ago

There's protecting your brand, and then there's whatever the heck it is Trader Joe's did here, which seems senseless and malevolent.

TillE 9y ago
Aldi Nord (owner of TJ) has done such an incredibly poor job of expanding the Trader Joe's brand outside of the USA. For example, all you get in their German stores are some random crappy products with the TJ label. It makes so little sense to go after this tiny company when you're not even competing in Canada. Which they probably should! I'm sure there's demand in cities like Toronto for the actual unique products that TJ offers.
- passivepinetree 9y ago
  A previous article on Pirate Joe's (http://www.piratejoes.ca/legalandpress/2016/1/16/how-why http://www.piratejoes.ca/legalandpress/2016/1/16/how-why) mentions that Michael Hallatt, the guy behind Pirate Joe's, said he'd close up shop if the real Trader Joe's ever moved into Canada.
- mabbo 9y ago
  There is demand in Toronto. I am sitting in Toronto, and I still crave a lot of the good stuff I bought there when I lived in Seattle. I can't believe they opened stores in Germany, but never bothered to open one in Vancouver, where there was proven demand for their products.
  - germanier 9y ago
    There are no Trader Joe's stores in Germany. It was bought in 1979 by the German family that owns the Aldi Nord chain of discount stores[0]. That German chain uses the Trader Joe's brand for some American-themed fast food ingredients, nuts, and sweet ice tea. [0]: Which is different from the Aldi Süd chain of discount stores which runs stores under the "Aldi" brand in the US.
  - goatforce5 9y ago
    I'm sitting in Toronto, and am in the process of getting my Canadian citizenship. One of the things I was looking forward to was getting a Canadian passport and having easier jaunts in to upstate New York for Trader Joe's runs.

joncp 9y ago

I'm not clear on how US courts were allowed to hear a case about events in Canada. Is that a thing?

sp332 9y ago
A court said that since the "harm" (devaluing the trademark) happened in America, the case could move ahead. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/court-infringement-lawsuit-trader-joes-pirate-joes.html?action=click&contentCollection=Business%20Day&module=RelatedCoverage&region=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/court-infringement-law...
- fivestar 9y ago
  It seems like after you buy something at point of sale whatever you do with it is fair game. I can buy Coke from Sam's Club or Costco and sell it in my restaurant. How is what Pirate Joe's did any different?
  - sp332 9y ago
    This is a trademark infringement case. The (alleged) problem is that he set up a store which billed itself as being basically a Trader Joe's.
    - ska 9y ago
      Except he didn't. It was always clear what he was doing. This is pretty straightforward legal bullying, in my opinion.
      - hinfaits 9y ago
        The guy clearly tried to position himself as a pseudo-Trader Joe's though. He called it Pirate Joes and only sold products from Trader Joe's. It seems like everyone thought of it as a kind of Trader Joe's. Even though copyright infringement might not have been his intent, intent doesn't matter. That said, this does look like egregious legal bullying even if the case holds water. IANAL

kefka 9y ago

Gotta love capitalism, eh? Just like votes, more money = more protection. This certainly wasn't a trademark issue. Trader vs Pirate. There was no question this store wasn't run by Trader Joes/Aldi North. They were buying in bulk to stock a store where they couldn't normally get the goods. Reselling should be 100% A-OK. Any trademarks go along with the products. And as far as I would guess, the grocer certainly wasn't tampering with anything - if (s)he was, they'd go out of business quick. This is just normal SLAPP-style punitive legal actions that a large monied corporation can do to stop the little guy from doing legal behaviors that they don't like.

duozerk 9y ago
> Just like votes, more money = more protection. That's what I find strange with the often-seen "well, just vote with your wallet" argument when a company screws up; it's almost literally the definition of an oligarchy (IE, more money = more decision power).
- kefka 9y ago
  It's the similar power arrangement when an employee has legitimate grievances with their employer. Individually, they are a speck. Nothing. They can be gotten rid of like the chattel they are. However, when Unions show up, they are the equal and opposing force that keeps a company in check with regards to their employees. Some have issues with Unions, as some of them are significantly corrupt. But by and large, unions are the equal and opposite force. What protects small companies from large companies? In reality, nothing. That's what allows fake-patent shakedowns like the "SSL Patent", or others. And that's by exploiting protections in law... But what happens when one side has *10000 the resources? You capitulate and go bankrupt due to legal fees, legal harassment, and a continual defense against a legal monied attack. In the end, there's fuck-all you can do. Well, other than whatever the monied plantiff wants.
- baddox 9y ago
  To be fair, that phrase usually applies to everyday consumer purchases, not a firm using large amounts of money to apply legal pressure to another firm. The normal usage of the phrase is fairly reasonable.

chaostheory 9y ago

Is Trader Joe's that much better than anything else Canada has to offer?

goodcanadian 9y ago
Trader Joe's is different from other stores, not necessarily better or worse. When I lived in California, we did a lot of shopping at Trader Joe's, but you couldn't really get all of your groceries there. Conversely, you could not get equivalents to a lot of Trader Joe's products at other stores. Canada has grocery stores that are 100% equivalent to regular grocery stores in the U.S., but it has nothing that is really equivalent to Trader Joe's.
- unethical_ban 9y ago
  TJ's doesn't carry garbage bags. I remember that being pretty frustrating, since it's one of those things most grocery stores have had for decades.
- anigbrowl 9y ago
  Traditionally groceries refers to foodstuffs only. Hence the creation of the word supermarket where groceries, household good and other things things were all sold under one roof. TJs carries a few personal care items like toothbrushes and soap but they're probably only about 2% of the shelf space in a store. They're in the food business, that's it.
  - goodcanadian 9y ago
    When I said "groceries," I was referring to food. I wouldn't be happy having to buy 100% of my food at Trader Joe's.
gregw134 9y ago
Everything at Trader Joe's is delicious, plus they have $3 wine that actually tastes good.
- 9y ago

captainmuon 9y ago

I don't understand with what right trader Joe's can prohibit somebody from reselling their products. If he clearly states where he bought them from, and that he is not affiliated, and doesn't misuse their trademarks (impersonate them), it should be absolutely legal. A side remark, people often say how great the US / north America is for entrepreneurs, compared to (continental) Europe where there is a lot of red tape and regulations. But in my opinion, if I were to do this in Germany there is no way ALDI (whom trader Joe's belongs to iirc) could sue me out of business. Not even with the old frivolous "we are wrong but you can't afford the defense" trick. There is just so much legal uncertainty in NA that it would give me nightmares doing business there.

TommyBombadil 9y ago
Yeah, I don't really understand the difference between Pirate Joe's and every snack stand that resells candy and soda they bought from somewhere else like Costco.
- slg 9y ago
  I think the difference is the focus on the specific products and their brand. If someone named their candy stand "Silly Wonka" and only sold Nerds and Runts, I am sure they would have Nestle come after them too.
  - fnordfnordfnord 9y ago
    Was Pirate Joe's selling counterfeits or knock offs? I thought they were reselling TJ's products.
  - rhizome 9y ago
    Nestle has the single word "wonka" itself trademarked, so you're going to need a better example.
    - wavefunction 9y ago
      Willy Zonka

beatpanda 9y ago

>>For one trip, he hired a couple who he said did not look like conventional Trader Joe’s shoppers. They had dreadlocks, tattoos and piercings. “They looked like they just walked off the set of a Burning Man documentary,” he said. I'm sorry? Trader Joes, in at least 4 locations I've seen in California, does special signs and displays the week before Burning Man to market to Burners. Where is this writer from?

kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
This was in Northern Washington, close to the Canadian border, and more than 1000 miles away from Burning Man.

stevewillows 9y ago

It's sad to see Pirate Joes go away. I don't know anyone who shopped there on a regular basis, but I do think TJ would do well in that neighborhood. The main draw to Trader Joe's is that its part of the journey across the line. This week I'll be doing this same old routine -- pick up some packages at the mail place ($2 per package), hit up a few grocery stores for different hot sauces and staples (including condensed milk in a squeeze tube), have lunch in Bellingham, go for a walk around Fairhaven, then return home. Trader Joe's is part of that journey, much like Target (who had a massive, depressing attempt to break into Canada). Strip away that special-trip aspect, and all you really have is another grocery store with a few exceptional items.

miiiiiike 9y ago

The StartUp Podcast tagged along with him a few years ago: https://gimletmedia.com/episode/pirate-needs-pirate-season-3-episode-3/ https://gimletmedia.com/episode/pirate-needs-pirate-season-3...

ryanSrich 9y ago

Does anyone else feel like he didn't raise the money because he didn't use a sensible crowd funding site like GoFundMe?

debacle 9y ago

Makes sense. If it was called Pirate Pete's I would understand. The same thing happened with South Butt, which was a weaker case in my opinion.

pthreads 9y ago

"At one point, Mr. Hallatt dropped the “P” from his store sign so it read “Irate Joe’s” — a signal of his determination to fight the grocery chain." Hilarious!!!

echlebek 9y ago

That's really too bad. Pirate Joe's fit nicely into our cultural tradition of thumbing our noses at the Americans.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

rfdub 9y ago

Trader Joes doesn't have a goddamn peg-leg to stand on in this dispute. If Trader Joes had made any indication whatsoever they were seeking to satisfy the clearly substantial demand for their products in Vancouver I might better be able to see their side of the story, but they have done absolutely nothing to expand into what would be ludicrously lucrative market. I know multiple people who have sent bloody hand-written letters to Trader Joes begging them to open a store in Vancouver and yet they would rather spend hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting a local small-business owner than satisfy the demand themselves. Regardless of the legality of this situation Trader Joes has not won the moral high ground.

culturalzero 9y ago
Yeah, I just don't understand capitalists that actively fight against capitalizing on clear opportunities. I would have just opened a store down the street or something.
- noonespecial 9y ago
  It's because legal departments are not capitalists. They're a kind of ultra-conservative entity motivated entirely by fear/anger of any perceived change. What we have here is a COO/CEO asleep at the wheel. One of the CEOs most important jobs is to watch the legal department for signs they're about to draw the old foot-gun and start playing "this little piggy" with company toes.
  - anigbrowl 9y ago
    No, no, no. Legal departments are fiduciaries and where the law itself is weird (as in trademark protection where companies are virtually forced to sue potential infringers) it's not their responsibility to reform the legal system. https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverherzfeld/2013/02/28/failure-to-enforce-trademarks-if-you-snooze-do-you-lose/#2923830c6c22 https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverherzfeld/2013/02/28/failu... motivated entirely by fear/anger of any perceived change Oh don't be such a baby, that's like saying engineering departments made up of social cripples who can't hold a conversation like regular business people.

hallalex831 9y ago

I'm surprised Trader Joe's hasn't gone to Amazon yet to have all of these listings removed yet... https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=trader+joes https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3...

giarc 9y ago
Have them removed? They are the seller. >by Trader Joe's
- upvotinglurker 9y ago
  The "by" line in the Amazon listing refers to the manufacturer. The sellers in the linked example have names like "TopPicks" and "South Side Enterprises" (and are probably doing what Pirate Joe did, but without crossing national boundaries, for a customer base of people like me* who live 1.5 hours drive from the nearest TJ's but like the products). TJ doesn't officially sell online. *I've never actually patronized any of these sellers, but I've been tempted.

settsu 9y ago

While this was arguably a legally heavy-handed act on Trader Joe's part, it also seems like Mr. Hallatt became increasingly bold and antagonistic as his revenue increased. I mean, he did change his store name to Pirate Joe’s (from the far more ambiguous Transilvania Trading) and his actions seem to betray less charitable motivations than his words would lead you to believe ("This is not a business I should be doing from a personal profitability standpoint” - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/21/pirate-joes-trader-joes-smuggled-canadian-border-vancouver-store. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/21/pirate-joes-tr...) That said, seems like Trader Joe's missed an opportunity for a win-win partnership with someone who had already developed rudimentary logistics to meet a demonstrated demand. But then it doesn't surprise me based on my 30+ years shopping at Trader Joe's: I would never describe them as innovative, instead I'd say they are very focused on what they've been doing well for decades.

Shorel 9y ago

He could have started to make his own products in this time, and slowly replacing the Trader Joe's ones with his own. Right now he would simply stop buying the other products while having his own brand.

chx 9y ago

Let's review one of the court documents because it has a very important detail. https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/08/26/14-35035.pdf https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/08/26/1... > Defendant Michael Norman Hallatt purchased Trader Joe’s-branded goods in Washington State, transported them to Canada, and resold them there in a store he designed to mimic a Trader Joe’s store. Trader Joe’s sued under the Lanham Act and Washington law. Repeated later: > It is uncontested that Defendant Michael Norman Hallatt purchases Trader Joe’s-branded goods in Washington state, transports them to Canada, and resells them there in a store he designed to mimic a Trader Joe’s store. Emphasis mine and it's a big deal. Trader Joe's would have had a hell of a time bringing a suit if it would be called Hallat's Little Shack and would look like any random grocery store.

belorn 9y ago
I know that many stores have different design on where they places products, but I doubt if that design is covered under copyright or trademark law. There could be fraud claim if he intend to fool a customer, but a store called pirate joe store do have a rather strong message that it isn't the true store.
fnordfnordfnord 9y ago
Sounds more like he was moving them with names like Pirate Joe's, and Irate Joe's at one point.
Chaebixi 9y ago
> he designed to mimic a Trader Joe’s So what? The mimicry occurs in Canada, where Trader Joe's apparently does not operate. I thought the whole point of trademark law was to prevent customer confusion, not to give a party property-like rights to some retail "style." I'm really surprised this is an issue for the US courts at all, and that they didn't refer Trader Joe's to the Canadian court system.
- chx 9y ago
  > to some retail "style." So says Wikipedia: > Trade dress is a legal term of art that generally refers to characteristics of the visual appearance of a product or its packaging (or even the design of a building) that signify the source of the product to consumers. IANAL but selling Trading Joe's products and those alone in a store that looks like Trading Joe's could at least give rise to a trade dress claim. As to extraterritoriality, NAFTA applies, trademarks are recognized across the border.

nfriedly 9y ago

That's too bad. I loved it when they took the "P" out of their sine after Trader Joe's sued them! ("Irate Joe's")

mazameli 9y ago

Relevant episode of "Reply All" podcast: https://gimletmedia.com/episode/pirate-needs-pirate-season-3-episode-3/ https://gimletmedia.com/episode/pirate-needs-pirate-season-3...

gkoberger 9y ago
It's Startup, not Reply All. But both are Gimlet!

CodeWriter23 9y ago

Well, that's one way to deal with a guy who has spent the money proving the market for your product line. I think a better move would have been to take a page from Dave Thomas' (Wendy's) play book and open a Trader Joe's down the street.

dawnerd 9y ago

So if Trader Joes is so concerned why don't they just open up shop in Canada? I've heard the podcast about it and original articles way back and it's amazing they're shutting out a market that seems to be very welcoming. Maybe they see Target Canada failure and are scared away by that?

massung 9y ago

I'm looking at this as though Trader Joe's was a different company... say Disney. Disney goes to great lengths to work out how its products are used, packaged and distributed to not only maximize profits, but also to maintain a certain image. If I go to DisneyWorld, purchase a Mickey Mouse doll, an take it home. I have the right to do with that doll whatever I want: burn it, give it to my daughter, or resell it at whatever price I see fit. However, I don't believe I have to right to go - as an agent of another (presumed competitor), purchase that same doll, and then resell it in my own store. I have no resell agreement with Disney to do so. In a typical reseller arrangement, wouldn't a store (e.g. Target) have an agreement with Disney to purchase bulk product for resell, presumably at a reduced price, but also under strict guidelines as to how it could do so? For example: cannot be sold above a certain price, cannot be sold next to adult content, etc. On a side note: I have to believe that (while not a TJ problem or related to the lawsuit) there were other issues with what Pirate Joe's was doing related to imports, possible tariffs not being adhered to, etc. /IANAL

rhizome 9y ago
In a typical reseller arrangement, the constraints on reselling are tied to the discount. There's nothing about Mickey Mouse that contravenes the first-seller doctrine when bought at retail.
dawnerd 9y ago
Disney is a really bad choice because the Disney resell market is absolutely massive. Anytime they release limited release items there's a line of people buying as much as they can just to dump it on ebay.
- massung 9y ago
  I picked it more as an example of a company that goes to great lengths to maintain its image and quality. And one which I think reasonable people could understand why they choose to defend that image in court if their products were used in a way that could damage it.

SeeDave 9y ago

Pardon my ignorance, but... why would Trader Joe's have a problem with their products being resold in Canada if they don't have a presence there? Does their parent company have a competing brand that sales are being cannibalized from? From my perspective: every product sold in Canada was purchased in the U.S. so... if anything, this Pirate Joe fellow has provided additional sales for Trader Joes and proved that there is demand for Trader Joe's products in Canada at an incredible 40% markup! If they're not interested in servicing Canada, would it not be to Trader Joe's advantage to enter a formal franchising or wholesaling agreement with Pirate Joe? There must be more to this story in terms of Trader Joes objectives as opposed to Pirate Joe's methods or the legal proceedings.

giarc 9y ago
I obviously can't comment from Trader Joes perspective, but did work in food safety for awhile so I can comment from that perspective. The problem I imagine they have is that someone is selling Trader Joe products (with their label) after handling it themselves, and often having random Craiglists employees handle the items. Prior to this, Trader Joe's (or companies hired by them) are handling the products. Imagine someone begins tampering with the food items and a few Canadians get sick or injured. This might prompt a recall of all Trader Joe's cookies, not just the ones imported into Canada for example. The FDA wouldn't be able to say that the tampering happened after the products were purchased by Pirate Joe's. The same argument applies to temperature sensitive products as well.
ci5er 9y ago
1) Liability 2) Brand Dilution 3) Trademark Protection

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

tryitnow 9y ago

As much as I like to side with the little guy, I think it's pretty fair for an establishment to restrict whom they sell to (as long as it's not based on a protected class like race, gender, orientation, etc). Despite being banned from the store this guy still sought out ways to shop there, so I can't defend him too enthusiastically. Then again it kind of annoys me that TJ's just didn't open a damn store in Canada. And if they don't want to do that then why not just look the other way while someone else took on the risk of importing their products into another country?

blacksmith_tb 9y ago
But they weren't restricting selling to him (in fact, I am going to guess that the manager of the store he stocked up at was happy to see the artificial lift in sales). He didn't sue them for refusing to sell to him, they sued him for infringing (which he was quite boldly, but in a country they don't actually do business in, so it seems like a stretch).
stale2002 9y ago
Sure, you can stop selling to HIM. But there is nothing illegal about this guy convincing other people to buy stuff for him. You as a consumer, can sell your goods to whoever you want because of the first sale doctrine, and trader Joe's can't stop you. Yes they could then ban YOU from buying from there..... But then the guy could just convince someone else to shop there, and around and around it goes.

Noos 9y ago

Problem is it sounds like he was trying to rely on association to the Trader Joe's brand to make money, kind of a shadow franchise. That opens up the problem of brand dilution, and even the most ethical companies have to be ruthless about that, or they can lose their own brand and all the benefits they worked to build with it. He should have realized the need, and done things like match their product mix with his own brands, work on making the store's own feel, and dampened direct association to Trader Joe's. He didn't and it bit him in the ass. No sympathy here.

Steko 9y ago
The first thing I thought of was McDowells in Coming to America even though they weren't reselling McDonald's food and then it turns out that the guy behind Pirate Joes is (was) planning to open a "Big M" fast food restaurant. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pirate-joe-s-owner-plans-big-m-fast-food-joint-1.2421233 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pirate-joe-s-...

grizzles 9y ago

If I lived in Vancouver I would have an irresistible urge to start a Swashbuckler Joe's right now. If only for the mischief of it.

glonq 9y ago
I'd do "Traitor Joe's"

20150327ASG 9y ago

I have just lost my appetite for Trader Joe's products.

sailfast 9y ago

Assuming that taking care of customs duties and other food quality issues legally would not be that expensive, all I'm seeing is missed revenue. If the person wants to order 10,000 palettes of cookies at retail price, why wouldn't you sell the cookies to the person? He's not stealing from the back of the store, he's paying full price. I'm very confused why Trader Joe's would not have created a direct connection with the guy. This reminds me of major services cutting off API access because they thought they could do it better in-house. Just HIRE the person doing your own service better in a different way.

lsiebert 9y ago

I am not a lawyer, so I don't know that I am qualified to comment on the legal issues. I can say that this does make me upset at Trader Joe's, and I will be considering where else I can spend my money. They could have worked with this guy, eventually set up a Trader Joe's in Canada, and then offered to let this guy run it. That would have been better for their brand, in my view. I care about what companies do. Costco hires employees and treats them well. It pays above average, and it hires and keeps on people with disabilities and injuries, even if they can't do everything someone else can do. It makes me feel good to shop there. And it's employees are loyal, hard working, happy and friendly, and they have less pilferage then other stores. This idea that a company has a duty to be a dick is silly. Companies should care about their brand, and about being a good corporate citizen.

CobrastanJorji 9y ago
I totally get what you're saying, but if you're a business about to open in a new country, and you have to choose a manager for your first location there, would you pick some random businessperson or would you pick a guy you've banned from shopping in your store who's been sneaking into your Seattle stores in a wig and fake glasses in order to sell in Vancouver with inflated prices? Because I'd totally pick the random guy.
- al452 9y ago
  I'd totally pick the person who has already shown extreme enthusiasm for my products.
  - sjwright 9y ago
    And has proven to be able to sell these products profitably.
  - nebabyte 9y ago
    It really depends upon the person, as I'd never want to go into a business partnership with someone who's just as likely to try and undermine or countermand me later over opinion, but yeah, my inclination would be to at least interview the guy.

bbarn 9y ago

Trader Joe's is a masterclass example in branding. The only reason anyone's surprised or outrage is that the store feels like a small, homey, good natured place full of organic this and that that's lower priced than you'd expect. That might have been true, 40 years ago. For a store that had the same name, but was a different entity entirely. Trader Joe's now is just a giant marketing and packaging front for 70 billion dollar a year Aldi, a multinational chain. It's a corporation. None of this behavior surprises me at all.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

Simulacra 9y ago

This story has always baffled me and I've never really understood where Trader Joe's comes from on this. It seems like business opportunity exists, but they're either really full of themselves, or have some other tacit reason for avoiding the Canadian market. I just don't get it, and I don't like how Trader Joe's has behaved here. Right or wrong, as a consumer, I disagree, and I'm putting this down as another reason to never go to a Trader Joe's again.

jliptzin 9y ago

Lawsuit aside, what was this guy thinking. What an awful business model.

rdl 9y ago

I generally load up a few Amazon Fresh disposable coolers with TJ products as gifts for friends in Vancouver whenever I drive up -- Kerrygold butter is really hard to get in Canada, and has much better omega 3 ratio than grain fed butter.

halfnibble 9y ago

Trader Joe's doesn't want customers who spend a ton of money buying in bulk at full retail price. Furthermore, they clearly have no intention of expanding into a large market that desperately wants them. What kind of business is this?

slantyyz 9y ago
TJ's clearly had a opportunity - there's pent up demand for TJ products in Canada, but instead of investing in a couple of satellite stores in Canada and some bilingual labeling, they chose to spend their money on lawyers and lawsuits.

valuearb 9y ago

He spent so much time and effort creating and running the store and fighting this. I mean, paying $20/hour for people to shop Trader Joes to get him goods at retail? That's so incredibly inefficient. Why didn't he just create his own store with his own brand and mimic the Trader Joes products and aesthetic? He could buy goods in bulk at much lower prices. He doesn't have to worry (much) about legal issues or spend money on them. Clearly demand was so high he could still get away with charging very high prices.

Mankhool 9y ago

I live in Pirate Joe's neighbourhood. He's not running a Costco sized operation. It's a tiny little store. I wish I had 50K to fund his defense.

dang 3y ago

https://web.archive.org/web/20170610000147/https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/08/business/pirate-joes-trader-joes-vancouver.html?_r=0 https://web.archive.org/web/20170610000147/https://www.nytim...