[HN Gopher] Crazy Eddie: The popular electronics chain that scam...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Crazy Eddie: The popular electronics chain that scammed America
        
       Author : yarapavan
       Score  : 254 points
       Date   : 2022-03-28 12:07 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (thehustle.co)
 (TXT) w3m dump (thehustle.co)
        
       | pjc50 wrote:
       | > "We arrogantly committed our crimes simply because we could and
       | we had no empathy whatsoever for our victims," Sam E. Antar later
       | wrote
       | 
       | Surprising moment of honesty there.
       | 
       | The fraud is a distinctly pre-21st century one, relying as it
       | does on handling large amounts of cash while operating parallel
       | books. Then pivoting to stock fraud to take in a bigger pie from
       | investors.
        
         | cannonpalms wrote:
         | At the time of that statement being written, he had taken a
         | plea deal in exchange for testifying against his son.
        
           | mritchie712 wrote:
           | It was likely written for him and he agreed to sign or say it
        
         | scrozier wrote:
         | I was struck by the same line. No real reason to add the part
         | about "no empathy." And it seems like something very close to
         | empathy to understand that one had no empathy....
        
           | mbreese wrote:
           | They probably had no empathy at the time, but after years of
           | reflection and a criminal plea, finding empathy (or something
           | very close to it) is possible.
        
         | rsynnott wrote:
         | > The fraud is a distinctly pre-21st century one, relying as it
         | does on handling large amounts of cash while operating parallel
         | books. Then pivoting to stock fraud to take in a bigger pie
         | from investors.
         | 
         | I mean, I'm not sure that either of these have exactly gone out
         | of fashion.
        
           | lotsofpulp wrote:
           | It is much harder with electronic payment systems forcing
           | accurate accounting.
        
             | mgbmtl wrote:
             | Today's equivalent might be to wire money back and forth
             | between companies in different jurisdictions.
             | 
             | I once spoke with tax auditors of Pornhub (while they
             | casually audited our company), many years ago, it seemed
             | like a pretty intense headache.
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | I am not sure what wiring to different jurisdictions
               | allows you to do, but I was referring to the parallel
               | books for the purposes of underreporting revenue for tax
               | purposes or stealing from other business partners. The
               | card processor always has your sales amounts available so
               | come tax time or audit time, you will not be able to hide
               | revenue, as seen on 1099-Ks.
               | 
               | https://www.irs.gov/payments/general-faqs-on-new-payment-
               | car...
               | 
               | This is always a funny video clip about electronic
               | payments making low level shenanigans more difficult. The
               | game nowadays is to do it legally, and getting involved
               | in the political machinery.
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gsz7Gu6agA
        
           | fuzzfactor wrote:
           | >handling large amounts of cash while operating parallel
           | books. Then pivoting to stock fraud to take in a bigger pie
           | from investors.
           | 
           | They were pretty advanced at this in the 19th century
           | already.
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | These days you have a lot more EPOS systems and a vast
           | majority of cashless transactions, especially for high value
           | goods.
        
         | fuzzfactor wrote:
         | Moments of honesty are always rare when predatory activity is
         | the prevailing attitude.
         | 
         | Sooner or later you end up with an Enron, Madoff, or even a
         | Theranos.
        
         | jefftk wrote:
         | Is it that surprising, given that he was testifying against his
         | estranged son in exchange for leniency?
        
       | fortran77 wrote:
       | Their former CFO has an active twitter account and is fun to
       | follow.
        
       | fishtacos wrote:
       | Surprised to see Systemax/TigerDirect and the Fiorentino
       | brothers, who were convicted of embezzlement, security fraud and
       | tax evasion, wasn't mentioned. Perhaps because they didn't
       | outright scam customers. (although I do think they with run-by-
       | night 0-support AV crapware we bundled with everything we could
       | as a value-added service, or pointless "optimization" services
       | that did absolutely nothing).
       | 
       | Don't have much to add here beyond the fact that I worked there
       | in the 2012-2013 strech and a little beyond. Run about as spartan
       | as could be, no LP but millions of dollars worth of equipment
       | that were there ripe for theft and fraud with nearly zero
       | oversight. (fraud was rampant in the store - can honestly say I
       | never engaged, but I was offered the opportunity multiple times).
        
       | frankfrankfrank wrote:
       | It's kind of interesting how every single time that some kind of
       | fraud damages the system, not only is there no effort to fix or
       | revert back to an undamaged version, but the damage is simply
       | allowed to grow and fester as copy-cat fraudster corporate types
       | latch onto the barrier that was breached.
       | 
       | It's literally every single time. Internet "bubble", housing
       | "bubble", "Affordable Care Act" fraud, and the mountain of other
       | frauds committed before and since; including all the various
       | "recovery act" type of Government fraud where the same class of
       | people who commit the fraud and cause the damage, are then the
       | primary beneficiaries being rewarded with billions, approaching
       | trillions now. And that's without even touching on the murderous
       | fraud of the type like the deliberate fraud of the Iraq war.
       | 
       | Just look at the common complaints today regarding work-life,
       | wages, and even supposed staff shortages (the claims of which
       | themselves are fraudulent); they all are directly linked to
       | things like this guy knocking yet another section of the wall out
       | through Sunday workdays that was then never reverted/rolled-back
       | even after the fraud was revealed. Is Chick-fil-A really just a
       | fluke in how efficient and happy it's employees are in spite of
       | the fact that they shut down on Sundays? I sure don't ever think
       | so.
        
         | at-fates-hands wrote:
         | >> It's kind of interesting how every single time that some
         | kind of fraud damages the system, not only is there no effort
         | to fix or revert back to an undamaged version
         | 
         | Enron
         | 
         | The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
         | 
         |  _The bill was enacted as a reaction to a number of major
         | corporate and accounting scandals, including those affecting
         | Enron, Tyco International, Adelphia, Peregrine Systems, and
         | WorldCom. These scandals cost investors billions of dollars
         | when the share prices of affected companies collapsed, and
         | shook public confidence in the US securities markets.[3]_
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron_scandal#Sarbanes-Oxley_A...
        
       | rsynnott wrote:
       | Hrm. So is Crazy Eddie in "The Mote in God's Eye" a reference to
       | this, or are they both a reference to some prior thing?
        
         | Metacelsus wrote:
         | I was wondering about this too.
        
           | rsynnott wrote:
           | Actually, I think there almost must be an earlier common
           | origin. The chain started in 1971 in New York. The book was
           | published in 1974, so probably written in 1973 if not
           | earlier. Neither Niven nor Pournelle lived in New York or
           | anywhere near New York, so it's unlikely to be inspired by
           | the store (unless it became so instantly culturally relevant
           | that everyone knew about it within a year or so, which seems
           | unlikely)...
           | 
           | I mean, maybe it's coincidence and they both just came up
           | with the same name, but that also doesn't seem likely.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | akeck wrote:
       | The full saga: https://whitecollarfraud.com/crazy-eddie/crazy-
       | eddie-saga-ta...
        
       | photochemsyn wrote:
       | This is a good story to compare and contrast with the 2008
       | subprime fraud cases, for example 'Crazy Lloyd Blankfein' of
       | Goldman Sachs.
       | 
       | https://www.cbsnews.com/news/feds-open-criminal-probe-of-gol...
       | 
       | "Goldman Sachs to Pay Record $550 Million to Settle SEC Charges
       | Related to Subprime Mortgage CDO, CBS 2010"
       | 
       | The amount of fraud committed was far greater than that, and
       | there were no criminal charges involving jail time for any of the
       | culprits. Kind of like doing armed robbery at a bank, getting
       | away with $100K, then being fined $50k for the crime with no jail
       | time. A profitable business model in other words.
        
         | jkaptur wrote:
         | This is the context of that story, right?
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs_controversies#20...
         | 
         | I think one important difference is that the story in the OP is
         | fraud directly against _individual retail investors_ (and the
         | government, to be fair), whereas the Goldman story is a
         | conflict between two hedge funds and an investment bank.
         | 
         | That seems important for the subtext of what you're saying.
        
         | johnebgd wrote:
         | Banksters really got away with a lot in the States.
         | 
         | Iceland at least held theirs accountable.
         | 
         | https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iceland-has-jailed-26-b...
        
         | okboomer9 wrote:
         | Never hear anyone suggesting we start charging people who lied
         | on their loan applications even though it was rampant.
         | 
         | People frequently would say they were going to make $X/yr where
         | that number came from the amount of money they expected the
         | home to go up, not actual income on a W2. Banks were selling
         | the loans so they often didn't care to get real documentation
         | of income either.
        
           | not2b wrote:
           | I've often seen this take, but what it misses is that at the
           | height of the liar loan boom, those loan applications with
           | the lies were often filled in by the loan originator, knowing
           | it was a lie, and they would then sell that loan off as soon
           | as it was issued. The borrower often didn't even know what
           | was on the form.
           | 
           | They thought they could get away with it because they
           | believed real estate could only go up, so if the borrower
           | defaulted the lender could get the house and still make
           | money.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | rr808 wrote:
             | OK charge the originator then too.
        
             | goodcanadian wrote:
             | Yep. Happened with my mortgage; I only know about it
             | because the bank actually asked for evidence to support a
             | level of liquid assets that I never claimed to have. In my
             | case, it wasn't really a problem as the mortgage was in
             | line with what I knew I could afford. What was surprising,
             | however, is that the bank offered to loan me considerably
             | more than I could afford. I found it all very odd, but I
             | didn't understand the meaning of it at the time. A few
             | years later when it all blew up, I realised what had been
             | going on. Again, I was fine as I did my own math, but I can
             | imagine many people were sold on mortgages that they were
             | never going to be able to afford.
        
               | at-fates-hands wrote:
               | Yep, happened with me too.
               | 
               | I remember my wife being adamant about a fixed rate
               | mortgage while the banker was being super pushy about
               | doing a 5 year arm. About a month after we got our house,
               | we started getting the letters, "Your loan was sold to
               | Bank XYZ, your new loan holder is ABC company." Literally
               | every month our loan was getting sold multiple times.
               | 
               | Then Wells Fargo started calling about re-financing our
               | mortgage around late 2006. We were like, "Huh? We're on a
               | fixed rate." and the guy was like, "Says here your 5-year
               | ARM you signed is expiring in 2008 and your rate is going
               | to go way up."
               | 
               | Alarm bells started going off. We made an appointment to
               | sit down with the guy at Wells Fargo. Sure as shit, the
               | guy who was pushing us to do a 5 year ARM falsified our
               | loan papers. Inflated a bunch of our assets to get us
               | qualified for a bigger loan that we didn't need. He put
               | us into a 5 year adjustable rate that was set to increase
               | wildly in 2008. We refinanced and got our mortgage into a
               | fixed rate again. We talked to an attorney about suing
               | them, but by then the crisis was starting to gain some
               | real steam and the company who did our original loan had
               | already been out of business for six months.
        
           | rconti wrote:
           | You're not wrong, but I always wonder why this is a reply
           | when suggesting we charge and prosecute the bankers. To
           | create an equivalency? To change the subject? Why?
        
             | otikik wrote:
             | There's a certain group of people who self-identify with
             | the super rich, even with the ones that are orders of
             | magnitude more wealthy than them. An attack on the rich is
             | perceived as an attack on "their group". So they retaliate,
             | usually against the poor, which they otherize.
        
             | rr808 wrote:
             | Because the investment banks took loans and repackaged
             | them, then didn't do anything illegal. The most sketchy
             | thing they were accused of was repackaging loans when they
             | should know the documentation was fraudulent, ie borrowers
             | were lying on their forms. Its a long chain of paper
             | pushers who are blaming each other, I'm not convinced
             | anyone is worse than the others, just GS is most famous.
        
               | bcrosby95 wrote:
               | Actually, the transfer and repackaging of loans was not
               | done legally, and courts had to rubber stamp massive
               | amounts of backdated paperwork when cleaning up the mess
               | so the houses could actually be foreclosed upon.
        
               | worik wrote:
               | > Because the investment banks took loans and repackaged
               | them, then didn't do anything illegal.
               | 
               | They did very illegal things. They lied, flat out lied,
               | to their customers about what was in the financially
               | engineered structures. Lied.
               | 
               | That is a crime (in civilised jurisdictions, and in the
               | USA)
        
               | rr808 wrote:
               | Please tell me which customers you are talking about? Is
               | it the hedge funds who bought billions of CDOs but says
               | they didn't understand what they were? Are they the
               | people you're concerned about.
        
             | LanceH wrote:
             | The bankers were doing what we wanted them to do by giving
             | us loans, even when we didn't qualify. Now they're
             | continuing to do what we want them to do by being the
             | villains. As long as they get paid...
        
               | Retric wrote:
               | Bankers where ultimately using other peoples money to
               | issue loans so they didn't care if the information was
               | accurate and therefore not only didn't check but actively
               | falsified the information themselves.
               | 
               | That's how you get this kind of crap: "How much do you
               | make? It varies, I made 50k last year. That's going to be
               | a little tough, hmm let's say next year went well, how
               | much could you make? I don't know 60-70k. Great 70k is
               | going to make this all very smooth."
               | 
               | The applicant assumes he's being clear when getting a
               | loan from the company he's talking to. Meanwhile the
               | company is only interested in selling Fake AAA bonds and
               | just needs warm bodies to sign some paperwork.
        
           | heavenlyblue wrote:
           | > Never hear anyone suggesting we start charging people who
           | lied on their loan applications even though it was rampant.
           | 
           | Loan industry operates on "victim blaming" philosophy. If you
           | give money to someone who could not afford the loan you are
           | on the hook. That's reasonable.
        
           | ryanmarsh wrote:
           | It's because these loans usually don't make it through
           | underwriting. Most of the time they don't even make it past
           | the originators desk. Banks have no incentive to prosecute
           | people who "forget" to mention there's a lien on their house.
           | Also, who is to prosecute in cases where documentation of
           | income isn't required? For instance, if I say I make $200k/yr
           | because my boss told me I'd make that much in this new sales
           | job am I lying if it turns out I won't make that much and
           | documentation wasn't required?
           | 
           | People have such a school-house view of how the world works.
        
           | lupire wrote:
           | > were going to make
           | 
           | That's a documented risk the lender knew about and
           | encouraged.
        
       | smm11 wrote:
       | The 80s have not left us, to this day.
        
       | alephnan wrote:
       | > Crazy Eddie stores stayed open on holidays and Sundays, at a
       | time when many retailers still followed a Chick-Fil-A schedule.
       | 
       | Wait. Retailers weren't always open on Sunday?
        
         | mbg721 wrote:
         | Grocery stores often weren't, as recently as the 90s, at least
         | in New England.
        
         | 52-6F-62 wrote:
         | People are acting like this is a relic of the past, and I'm
         | surprised you're surprised. I live in a small-medium-sized
         | Canadian town at the edge of the GTHA (not the hub of economic
         | activity, but not exactly the boonies) and many shops are still
         | closed on Sundays. To the extreme even--many only open for
         | short hours (4-8) during the weekdays and a half-day Saturday.
         | It's a relatively quiet place. We've wondered how some can stay
         | in business. Given the area, our guess is wealthy families
         | backing them. I don't think massive profit is their primary
         | motivator, just involvement in the community. And social
         | influence, I'm sure.
        
           | pythonaut_16 wrote:
           | Consider that for a lot of shops and restaurants demand might
           | be inelastic over the course of the week. If everyone in town
           | is closed on Sunday and consumers don't have convenient
           | access to other options it's likely that demand will simply
           | shift to other days, thus being closed on Sunday would reduce
           | operating costs without significantly affecting revenues.
           | 
           | This is arguably a big factor for both Chick-fil-a and liquor
           | stores that are prevented state-wide from opening on Sundays
           | (in the US)
        
             | Melatonic wrote:
             | The problem for me (at least with Chic-fil-a) is that I am
             | really only eating fast food ever on Saturday or Sundays.
             | Those are the days I have off and the days I am most likely
             | to be traveling (by car or other) and when I would be
             | mostly likely to indulge in fast food. Probably about 2/3
             | of the times I would have gone to Chic-fil-A I could not
             | due to the Sunday closure.
        
             | 52-6F-62 wrote:
             | In some cases for sure. Our speculating was about some
             | oddball cases--like clothing stores that are _never_ busy
             | and only open a few hours a week. And dealing in odds or
             | purely consignment goods. They must be hobby projects
             | (expensive ones, considering the rents around here).
             | 
             | But for others, definitely that's the case. And it's been
             | this way for so long I'm sure it's just a known and we're
             | essentially tethered to Hamilton via transit and highways
             | so there are a ton of options just a few minutes further
             | down the road.
        
         | astura wrote:
         | For many, many years they were prohibited from being open on
         | Sundays due to so-called "blue laws" which were ubiquitous, at
         | least where I live on the East Coast. They started to be
         | repealed in the 1970s for general retail and the 2000s for
         | alcohol. In some locations (a couple towns in New Jersey IIRC)
         | blue laws are still on the books and stores are closed on
         | Sundays.
         | 
         | When stores first started opening on Sundays it was usually for
         | only limited hours. I remember everything shutting down around
         | 4-5pm on Sundays when I was a kid. That's not really the case
         | anymore. When I was a teenager in the late 90s I was paid $1
         | more an hour on Sundays.
         | 
         | This was published in the NY Times in 1986
         | 
         | https://www.nytimes.com/1986/10/19/nyregion/sunday-shopping-...
         | 
         | >Similar changes are being felt throughout the region and
         | indeed in most parts of the nation. Like New York, many other
         | states in recent years have struck down legal restrictions that
         | prohibited the sale of most goods on Sundays. The curbs, called
         | blue laws, date from colonial New England, with the observance
         | of the Sabbath being their main purpose.
        
         | Schiendelman wrote:
         | Costco Business Center isn't open on Sunday! I nearly found out
         | the hard way yesterday.
        
         | onionisafruit wrote:
         | From my memory opening on Sundays slowly became the norm
         | through the late 80s and early 90s in Texas.
        
           | daniel-cussen wrote:
           | Yeah it's tied to the rise of rent and the fall of wages.
        
         | the-dude wrote:
         | In The Netherlands, opening times were strictly regulated by
         | law up to 1984 : no openings on Sunday, weekdays not later than
         | 18:00 and Saturday no later than 17:00.
         | 
         | This scheme was common up till the mid nineties. Since then it
         | has been relaxed, but it is still regulated.
         | 
         | One of the reasons listed for the regulation is the protection
         | of 'Mom & Pop' stores.
        
           | zozbot234 wrote:
           | > One of the reasons listed for the regulation is the
           | protection of 'Mom & Pop' stores.
           | 
           | A silly motivation. Smaller-scale businesses on the
           | "convenience store" model are _more_ likely to provide
           | extended opening hours than any large store operation. That
           | 's as close to "Mom & Pop" as it gets.
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | The motivation was religious.
        
               | mangamadaiyan wrote:
               | Probably in Gelderland, I guess? Not too sure about the
               | rest of NL.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | Limburg and Brabant are in the present day a lot more
               | religious than Gelderland, as is Zeeland and a large
               | chunk of the area North-East and East of Amersfoort.
               | 
               | NL is percentage wise (or rather, was) one of the
               | countries were religion was 'on the way out',
               | unfortunately that trend seems to have first stabilized
               | and is now reversing. It's a pity because personally I
               | think religion should have absolutely no place in
               | politics or organized society, though I do believe that
               | people should be free to practice whatever religion they
               | want as long as it does not negatively affect others.
        
               | mangamadaiyan wrote:
               | I last visited NL about two decades ago, and spent most
               | of my time in a Gelderland village. I must say that I was
               | reasonably well-tolerated as a visiting heathen ;)
               | 
               | As you mention, it's the religious intolerance that one
               | finds disturbing, not religion (of any kind) itself. It
               | is fairly rare to have one without the other these days,
               | it would seem. The phenomenon is not limited to NL alone,
               | I think.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | That's fair but the strong Islam presence has lots of
               | people upset to the point where I would say the Dutch (as
               | a group, of people without religion or subscribing to
               | some religion) are now less tolerant of (other)
               | religion(s) than they were 20 years ago. This is a factor
               | in the right wing extremist presence who use this to
               | drive a wedge between people who otherwise probably would
               | not care that much, it is clearly positioned as 'Islam
               | against the rest'. Most notable for this is Geert
               | Wilders, who is a complete asshole but there are others
               | as well.
               | 
               | Gelderland (where my family is from) is definitely more
               | religious than say Amsterdam, but far less than the South
               | of Limburg or the 'Bible Belt'. At the same time, those
               | are all various offshoots of Christianity, whereas if you
               | were to look at Islam you will find the opposite, it is
               | strongly represented in the big cities, where there is
               | hardly any Christian offshoots left (and if they are they
               | are dying).
               | 
               | Churches are disappearing, Mosques are rising up
               | everywhere, and I'm not sure if the longer term will find
               | NL with a more tolerant version of itself or if it will
               | regress at some point.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | It's not really the Islam presence that bothers people,
               | it's specifically _intolerant, militant_ religion that
               | happens to be of the Muslim type. Let 's be clear, nobody
               | there is complaining about an overabundance of wise Sufi
               | mystics.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | No, but there are many more people complaining about
               | morning calls to prayer than there ever were to complain
               | about church bells (with the exception of Tilburg).
        
               | the-dude wrote:
               | The Winkeltijdenwet was instated in 1976 when we had the
               | Den Uyl government, which consisted of Partij van de
               | Arbeid (PvdA), Katholieke Volkspartij (KVP), Anti-
               | Revolutionaire Partij (ARP), Politieke Partij Radikalen
               | (PPR) en de Democraten 66 (D'66)
               | 
               | That is a lot of left radicals and only 1 religious
               | party.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | As you are no doubt aware concessions are often made to
               | smaller parties in order to secure their votes on other
               | subjects is well established in Dutch politics.
        
               | the-dude wrote:
               | There is no reason to assume the left wanted to work on
               | Sunday.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/kst-24226-3.html
               | 
               | And many others besides.
               | 
               | Really, why would you even try to argue something that is
               | pretty much settled history at this point in time? The
               | Netherlands historically had a very strong religious
               | streak running through it and one of the last vestiges of
               | their direct influence on Dutch society is the
               | 'Winkelsluitingstijden' law.
        
               | the-dude wrote:
               | That link is a wall of text. Could you please quote what
               | is supposedly proving your point? Because I can't find
               | it.
        
             | the-dude wrote:
             | I don't get your POV.
             | 
             | I talked about the 80s and 90s and a healthy work/life
             | balance was still a political talking point at the time.
        
               | Macha wrote:
               | Also single worker households, which meant there was
               | someone to patronise those stores while the breadwinner
               | was themselves working.
               | 
               | (To be clear, I'm not saying everything was great in the
               | days of "all women are house wives" but it would have
               | been nice if the stigma of a house husband went away
               | instead, rather than the actual turn out of "both adults
               | must work").
        
               | crimthrw2022 wrote:
               | > rather than the actual turn out of "both adults must
               | work").
               | 
               | It was almost an inevitably. Especially for the middle
               | class, I would imagine that both sides of the couple
               | working provided a substantial boost in economic
               | mobility. Or at least a perceived one. At that point its
               | just keeping up with the joneses.
        
           | wongarsu wrote:
           | Same thing in Germany. All shops are closed on Sundays and
           | bank holidays, and while opening times on weekdays have been
           | deregulated in most states, some - like Bavaria - still
           | enforce opening times of no more than 6:00 to 20:00 or 6:00
           | to 22:00.
           | 
           | I'm generally a fan of longer opening times, but having a day
           | where everyone but entertainment and hospitality has free
           | time simultaneously seems very healthy for both families and
           | society at large.
        
             | rsynnott wrote:
             | > All shops are closed on Sundays and bank holidays
             | 
             | Unless, of course, they are in a train station. This
             | loophole seems to be _heavily_ exploited.
        
         | Turing_Machine wrote:
         | Some of the New York camera stores are closed on Saturday (the
         | Jewish Sabbath) to this day. I think there's even one or two
         | that actually disable ordering from their web site on that day.
         | 
         | A state I lived in as a child allowed grocery stores,
         | restaurants, and pharmacies to be open on Sunday, but not much
         | else. Restaurants were also allowed to sell alcohol on Sunday,
         | while liquor stores weren't. A local restaurant took advantage
         | of this double loophole and put in a drive-through booze window
         | that they only opened on Sunday.
        
         | jedberg wrote:
         | In the 90s in Manhattan, almost everything was closed on Sunday
         | until the evening. When I asked our hotel receptionist about
         | it, she said, "It's so everyone has enough time to read the New
         | York Times Sunday Edition". I'd like think that's apocryphal
         | but as a teen at the time I believed it.
         | 
         | It stood out to me because in California most everything was
         | open on Sundays. So it seemed to be more of an East Coast
         | thing.
        
         | macintux wrote:
         | When I was young, the only places open on Sundays were grocery
         | stores and gas stations.
        
           | mleo wrote:
           | We had one KMart open on Sundays. If we needed something on
           | Sunday, that was the only place to go.
        
         | nunez wrote:
         | Yup. Can't buy electronics and clothes on Sundays in NJ b/c of
         | Blue Laws. Garden State Plaza, one of the largest malls in NJ,
         | is still closed on Sundays because of this.
        
           | ascagnel_ wrote:
           | When I last lived in the area (pre-pandemic), Garden State
           | Plaza itself would be open on Sundays (the mall has a bunch
           | of restaurants and a movie theater), but most shops would be
           | closed. And it extended beyond electronics and clothing --
           | most consumer goods would be unavailable on Sunday, and there
           | was always a puzzling list of exceptions (for example,
           | cosmetics could be sold, but paper notebooks could not).
        
           | jrockway wrote:
           | Can you get Amazon same-day delivery there, or is that also
           | restricted?
        
         | ricktdotorg wrote:
         | shops in the UK are STILL restricted to six hours of trading on
         | sundays, the law was last changed in 1994[1] and the number of
         | hours that a shop may open on a sunday is determined by the
         | shop's size.
         | 
         | there are some exemptions such as airport shops, petrol or
         | motorway service stations, etc.
         | 
         | the main reason there are still legal restrictions on sunday
         | trading are advocacy groups such as "Lord's Day Observance
         | Society" and the "Keep Sunday Special" campaign.
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunday_Trading_Act_1994
        
         | dljsjr wrote:
         | In the US a lot of places used to have so-called "Blue Laws"
         | that restricted what you were allowed to do on a Sunday. Some
         | places still have reduced versions that apply specifically to
         | vices; e.g. where I live in FL, alcohol sales are restricted on
         | Sundays to certain times.
         | 
         | It used to be heavily regulated in Canada (or at least
         | Manitoba) until very recently as well, like some time in the
         | last 20 years or so. I remember when Wal-Mart first entered
         | Canada, they had a really hard time in some places because
         | labor laws and blue laws prevented them from being open 24/7.
        
           | jeromegv wrote:
           | Formerly very catholic Quebec still has one of those crazy
           | laws.
           | 
           | During certain hours (such as, past 8PM on weekends),
           | groceries are only allowed 4 employees. Which is almost
           | impossible in those very large groceries. For many groceries,
           | they just assume this is part of doing business, they would
           | rather pay the fine than angering customers with long lines.
           | 
           | https://www.economie.gouv.qc.ca/bibliotheques/conformite/ouv.
           | ..
        
             | dljsjr wrote:
             | I know a lot of places in MB still open later and close
             | earlier on Sunday but I don't visit as much as I used to or
             | keep my pulse on the civics anymore so I don't know if
             | that's convention or blue laws.
        
               | fknorangesite wrote:
               | These laws were repealed just a few months ago, actually.
        
           | ascagnel_ wrote:
           | > In the US a lot of places used to have so-called "Blue
           | Laws" that restricted what you were allowed to do on a
           | Sunday. Some places still have reduced versions that apply
           | specifically to vices; e.g. where I live in FL, alcohol sales
           | are restricted on Sundays to certain times.
           | 
           | Blue laws around vices (specifically around the sale of
           | alcohol) are still commonplace in the US.
           | 
           | However, Bergen County, NJ, still has the rare Sunday blue
           | law that applies to everyday consumer goods -- you can
           | purchase food and medicine on Sunday (and even alcohol after
           | noon, per a state-wide vice blue law), but everything else is
           | prohibited. If you visit a big-box store like a Costco or
           | Walmart that sells both food and goods, large swaths of the
           | store will be closed down on Sunday.
           | 
           | https://www.wnyc.org/story/assessing-bergen-countys-blue-
           | law...
        
           | paul_f wrote:
           | In New York, until 2006, liquor stores were closed on
           | Sundays. Was quite common across the US
        
             | tarentel wrote:
             | It's by county in New York. Where I lived liquor stores
             | were open but not until 11 or 12 I can't remember exactly
             | it's been a while since I lived there. Similarly, you
             | couldn't buy beer between 2am and 8am. I am probably
             | misremembering the times a bit because it was a long time
             | ago but that's roughly what it was where I lived in NY.
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | >In the US a lot of places used to have so-called "Blue Laws"
           | 
           | Used to? Hell, in Texas, you cannot buy alcohol until after
           | noon on Sundays. Still. Today, er, yesterday, but you get the
           | point.
        
             | Kirby64 wrote:
             | Not just that, but you can only buy beer and wine on
             | Sundays, and only at places like grocery stores.
             | 
             | Liquor stores (which also sell beer/wine) are not allowed
             | to be open on Sunday, period.
             | 
             | Note this pertains to off-premise (i.e., stores, not bars)
             | only. Bars, you're free to get sloshed to your hearts
             | desire on any type of alcohol and as early as 10AM on
             | Sundays.
        
               | astura wrote:
               | This used to be the case in New York too, but those laws
               | were repealed in 2008. It seems there's been a trend
               | since around then for municipalities to slowly repeal
               | alcohol blue laws as a few other places followed suit
               | over the next few years.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | Unless you're in a state determined to make a real-life
               | Gilead where the laws are getting more restrictive than
               | less. I present to you as an example the same Texas from
               | earlier.
        
             | alexilliamson wrote:
             | Fun fact this is also true about Chicago except it's 11am.
        
         | brimble wrote:
         | No. In the distant past of the 1990s and earlier, lots of stuff
         | was closed on Sundays. Get this: many gas stations used to
         | close at night. Lots of grocery stores used to be closed by 9
         | or so on a week night, if they were even open that late, and
         | earlier on the weekend. Even Wal Mart closed fairly early most
         | days (IIRC they started rolling out the 24/7 thing to many
         | stores--though I think still not all, even today--a while after
         | they introduced the "super center")
        
           | bsagdiyev wrote:
           | Not all stores are 24 hours, moved to North Carolina and the
           | Wal-Mart by us closes at 11pm I believe. That's weird to me
           | since it seemed like all of them in California were 24 hours.
        
             | Ancapistani wrote:
             | That's a "since the pandemic" thing. Most all were 24 hours
             | for many years.
        
             | nunez wrote:
             | Plenty of Wally Worlds are still not 24/7.
        
           | actionfromafar wrote:
           | Quel surprise... how could Walmart have known about Canadian
           | laws beforehand. :-D
        
       | seattle_spring wrote:
       | Reminds me of Dell Schanze and Totally Awesome Computers [1] in
       | Utah.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.ksl.com/article/260958/a-look-at-super-dell-
       | scha...
        
       | rdiddly wrote:
       | New York by 1987 seemed to have a jam-packed little hole in the
       | wall electronics store in every block. Suddenly now I wonder if
       | they were jumping on the Crazy Eddie bandwagon.
        
       | subpixel wrote:
       | The Crazy Eddie story is most interesting to me as a window into
       | the highly insular and particularly successful Syrian Jewish
       | diaspora.
        
         | the-dude wrote:
         | Guess who was of Syrian descent as well?
        
           | marklar423 wrote:
           | Who?
        
             | daniel-cussen wrote:
             | He's talking about Steve Jobs.
        
       | mdorazio wrote:
       | What's interesting to me is that he started with a successful
       | business model that really did change the industry for the better
       | in a few ways (better hours, better customer service, etc.). The
       | greed and sociopathy turned that into fraud.
        
       | jhallenworld wrote:
       | It's Christmas in August!
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmF2lCXV8lQ
       | 
       | I remember the bait and switch was big with these stores. The
       | stuff they advertised was not in stock, but they tried to sell
       | you what they did have.
       | 
       | I'm surprised they didn't discover what Sir Alan Sugar had: that
       | you could make more money on house branded stuff made in Hong
       | Kong.
        
         | technofiend wrote:
         | This was also lampooned in Adam Sandler's movie Zohan, with
         | electronic store employees proclaiming everything had "Sony
         | guts!".
        
         | quercusa wrote:
         | The NYC camera stores were famous for this: "That Nikon lens is
         | out of stock but we've got a Zeus lens for the same price and
         | it's actually a better lens".
        
       | meatsauce wrote:
       | My parents bought my first computer (Commodore 128 with printer)
       | from a store in Queens. That singular act got me started down the
       | road of programming and to some degree engineering.
       | 
       | I also believe they purchased an Apple IIe from them far earlier
       | but I can't be certain.
       | 
       | I do remember when the PSU for the C128 failed, they gave us a
       | new one no charge.
       | 
       | Oh the memories: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml6S2yiuSWE
        
       | bitwize wrote:
       | My dad bought me my first computer, a Commodore VIC-20, from
       | Crazy Eddie's when I was 5. When people ask me how I got started
       | programming, I tell them the story of the VIC-20 from Crazy
       | Eddie's, often having to explain what Crazy Eddie's was if the
       | questioner is a millennial or younger. The chain and especially
       | the commercials were part of the cultural landscape especially in
       | the northeast, and were even parodied in television and movies.
        
       | CPLX wrote:
       | The decision to do an IPO for a company that was literally not
       | paying payroll taxes and keeping profits in suitcases just has to
       | go down as one of the worst criminal decisions in recorded
       | history.
       | 
       | Like without the IPO I would suspect they could have gone on for
       | many many years basically skimming and scamming the government,
       | maybe with some eventual consequences and fines but most likely
       | being able to pay their way out of it.
        
       | mwexler wrote:
       | It's fun to see this story get rediscovered every 3-5 years.
       | Electronics stores, like car dealerships, appeared to need
       | showboating to stand out, and that appears to be the starter-drug
       | for fraud in a surprising number of cases.
       | 
       | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
        
         | marginalia_nu wrote:
         | It's weird how this pattern repeats itself. Madman Muntz[1],
         | who Crazy Eddie emulated, is an endlessly fascinating character
         | as well. Less of a criminal, but still...
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_Muntz
        
           | pmoriarty wrote:
           | Also see this documentary on Muntz:
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deFlB2G0mH8
        
           | Inhibit wrote:
           | Although I'd argue Muntz, becoming a verb, probably achieved
           | what Crazy Eddie claimed to have done.
        
             | marginalia_nu wrote:
             | Oh yeah, the impact of Muntz is huge. Both engineering-wise
             | and culturally.
        
         | mbg721 wrote:
         | Who could possibly have guessed that a guy named "Crazy Eddie"
         | might not be entirely honest??
        
           | jstarfish wrote:
           | I can appreciate self-disclosure. With him identifying as
           | such, you're either going to get an insane deal or shanked,
           | and should not be surprised by either outcome.
           | 
           | "Honest Eddie," on the other hand-- stay away from that guy.
        
           | skeeter2020 wrote:
           | surprised he didn't claim insanity; seems like a slam dunk.
        
         | RicoElectrico wrote:
         | Talk about showboating... there's one Polish electronics outlet
         | that always aims for the most annoying advertisements and so is
         | widely hated for that.
         | 
         | https://bezprawnik.pl/czy-media-expert-celowo-denerowal-ewel...
        
         | dehrmann wrote:
         | > Electronics stores, like car dealerships, appeared to need
         | showboating to stand out
         | 
         | Reminds me of the themed Fry's Electronics stores.
        
           | irowe wrote:
           | The space-station themed Fry's store near Houston, TX
           | recently closed. I only ever visited it in the twilight years
           | where there was so little inventory in such a large footprint
           | that it seemed like a front for something. The architecture
           | and decor was definitely imaginative.
        
       | lqet wrote:
       | > Strangely, Crazy Eddie's fraudulent history gave it an
       | advantage. To provide the illusion of quickly increasing profits
       | ahead of the IPO, the Antars simply reduced the amount of cash
       | they were skimming.
        
         | WrtCdEvrydy wrote:
         | There was someone like this as well... a man who had a
         | bookstore and invested all of their profit into expansion so
         | when expansion was scaled back, they could easily report
         | massive profits.
        
           | alephnan wrote:
           | Are you suggesting it is the Prime customers or the investors
           | who are being scammed ?
           | 
           | I don't think it's fair to compare a growth company to this:
           | 
           | > There was just one major problem... Crazy Eddie had been
           | lying about its numbers since its inception
        
           | kube-system wrote:
           | With the _slight_ difference that "investment activities" is
           | a line on a cash flow statement, and "embezzlement
           | activities" usually is not.
        
           | sleepdreamy wrote:
           | Amazon is notorious for aggressively re-investing their
           | profits which is why they're as massive as they are. They are
           | constantly trying 30 different things at once.
           | 
           | "You must spend money to make it", this adage is true since
           | the very inception of monetary value.
           | 
           | Not sure this is a great comparison.
        
           | gmiller123456 wrote:
           | That's not really at all like the scam Crazy Eddie was doing.
           | Reinvesting is perfectly legal, and so common any investor
           | knows to look at revenue (and many other things), not just
           | profits. In fact, I'd bet most investors would prefer profits
           | be reinvested rather than paid out to investors, as the
           | increase in the share price usually dwarfs the payout.
        
           | Mikeb85 wrote:
           | Except expanding the business itself is a perfectly valid way
           | to use the business' profits. Amazon used 100% legal
           | accounting measures.
        
           | throwawaycities wrote:
           | I heard about this, apparently the owner also devised a
           | scheme that paid his employees so poorly he was able to get
           | the federal government to subsidize his workers food using
           | programs originally designed for the unemployed and disabled
           | persons. To perfect his fraud he expanded his book store to
           | include groceries so that he could profit on the government
           | subsidies directly by having his employees buy their food
           | from him.
        
             | mturmon wrote:
             | This same owner encouraged customers to avoid paying state
             | sales tax on their purchases -- and then, when the state of
             | California wanted to collect the tax, threatened to divest
             | his company of all California workers. And then dragged his
             | feet for years with threats and obfuscation to delay
             | implementation.
        
             | datavirtue wrote:
             | Genius! Innovation to be lauded and copied! Whoever thought
             | of this should be rewarded with more property and increased
             | control over their employees and regulators.
        
             | sokoloff wrote:
             | The overlap between people on government food assistance
             | and buying a significant fraction of their groceries at
             | Whole Foods is probably not very high...
        
               | ev1 wrote:
               | Fresh/Go, not WF
        
       | toss1 wrote:
       | >>But Zinn immediately discovered $45m of listed inventory was
       | missing.
       | 
       | Living in Manhattan in 1983, when the cable installers came to
       | hookup service, they offered us brand new TVs at about half the
       | price of Crazy Eddie's stores - from what little I could find
       | out, it seems they'd been recruited by Eddie's warehouse workers
       | to push fell-off-the-truck / out-the-backdoor sales of Eddie's
       | inventory.
       | 
       | I'd bet that there were a lot of the appointments that bit on
       | that offer. I was not surprised to see Eddie's rapidly declining
       | in the following year. You just can't survive with truckloads of
       | your inventory going missing every day...
       | 
       | And reading about how he paid employees 'off the books', no
       | surprise they were also freelancing off the poorly controlled
       | inventory flow.
        
       | JohnTHaller wrote:
       | If you just want to know, it's Crazy Eddie.
        
       | CSactuary wrote:
       | Posted on slashdot 13 hours before this...
        
         | TomVDB wrote:
         | Slashdot still exists?
        
           | nunez wrote:
           | lol sure does, though they're usually a few days behind
        
         | mechanical_bear wrote:
         | Is there a point to that comment? Many of us don't follow
         | slashdot.
        
         | seattle_spring wrote:
         | Good thing it was posted here then, otherwise I never would
         | have seen it.
         | 
         | I've never, ever understood people pointing out "reposts" like
         | it's some kind of shameful dirty act.
        
           | ipaddr wrote:
           | Shameful? No, informative. I haven't checked out slashdot for
           | awhile it is good to know I'm not missing anything.
        
       | bhartzer wrote:
       | I remember Crazy Eddie's very well. I was a teenager in the
       | 1980s, and I still have the portable Sony Discman I got there for
       | $100. I mowed a lot of lawns in order to save up for that Sony
       | Discman from Crazy Eddie's.
        
       | carrja99 wrote:
       | Not gonna lie... thought this was going to be about Radio Shack's
       | rebranding as a crypto scheme.
       | 
       | Guess that will be an article for next year.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | janandonly wrote:
       | I never knew that the role of "Crazy Eddie" in the series The
       | First Wave [1] was in fact based on a electronics chainstore...
       | 
       | [1]. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0160277/
        
         | marginalia_nu wrote:
         | Oh man, I loved that show. Late 1990s Canadian sci-fi is just
         | the perfect blend of cheesy and interesting.
        
         | erichurkman wrote:
         | So was Crazy Earnie's Emporium [0] from Brave Little Toaster!
         | 
         | [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1glJgOtyM8k
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-03-28 23:01 UTC)