Sad thoughts

Belongs in the Brag on your kids thread


Red Lobster Preparing to File for Bankruptcy Protection This Month

Casual-dining chain aiming to restructure agreements with landlords and creditors to trim debt

text & pics

Red Lobster closes dozens of locations across the US just months after ‘endless shrimp’ losses

Dozens of Red Lobster locations across the U.S. are on the chopping block.


May 14, 2024 — 2:11pm

Analysts worry about a looming $355 million loan Red Lobster has due next summer. (Dreamstime/TNS) ORG XMIT: 1742395


Analysts worry about a looming $355 million loan Red Lobster has due next summer. (Dreamstime/TNS) ORG XMIT: 1742395


Text size


NEW YORK — Dozens of Red Lobster locations across the U.S. are on the chopping block.

Restaurant liquidator TAGeX Brands announced this week that it would be auctioning off the equipment of over 50 Red Lobster locations that were recently closed as part of the seafood chain’s “footprint rationalization.” The locations span across more than 20 states — cutting back on Red Lobster’s presence in cities like Denver, San Antonio, Indianapolis and Sacramento, California.

It’s unclear if Red Lobster plans to shutter any additional restaurants in the near future. The Orlando, Florida-based company did not immediately respond to The Associated Press’ requests for comment.

On Red Lobster’s website, a handful of impacted locations were listed as “temporarily closed” or “unavailable” Tuesday morning.

Red Lobster has been struggling for some time. With lease and labor costs piling up in recent years, the chain is now reportedly considering filing for bankruptcy protection. A potential Chapter 11 filing could help Red Lobster exit from some long-term contracts and renegotiate many of its leases, unnamed sources familiar with the matter told Bloomberg News last month.

Maintaining stable management has also proven difficult, with the company seeing multiple ownership changes over its 56-year history. Earlier this year, Red Lobster co-owner Thai Union Group, one of the world’s largest seafood suppliers, announced its intention to exit its minority investment in the dining chain.

Thai Union first invested in Red Lobster in 2016 and upped its stake in 2020. At the time of the January announcement on its plans to divest, CEO Thiraphong Chansiri said the COVID-19 pandemic, industry headwinds and rising operating costs had impacted Red Lobster and resulted in “prolonged negative financial contributions to Thai Union and its shareholders.”

For the first nine months of 2023, the Thailand company reported a $19 million share of loss from Red Lobster.

And then there’s been the problem of endless shrimp. Last year, Red Lobster significantly expanded its iconic all-you-can-eat shrimp deal. But customer demand overwhelmed what the chain could afford, which also reportedly contributed to the millions in losses.

TAGeX Brands’ auctions for the more than 50 closing Red Lobster locations it’s handling liquidation for began Monday and will run through Thursday. The sales are “winner takes all” — meaning that one winner will receive the entirety of contents for each location. Images on TAGeX Brands’ website indicate that includes ovens, refrigerators, bar setups, dining furniture and more.

TAGeX Brands called the liquidation “the largest restaurant equipment auction event ever.” In a statement, founder and CEO Neal Sherman said that the goal of such online auctions was to “prevent high-quality items from being discarded in landfills” and instead promote sustainable reuse.

As of Tuesday morning, auctions for 48 locations were still live after another four sales closed Monday, TAGeX Brands said via email.

Red Lobster’s roots date back to 1968, when the first restaurant opened in Lakeland, Florida. In the decades following, the chain expanded rapidly. Red Lobster currently touts more than 700 locations worldwide.

Our son is moving out tomorrow. Happy for him, he’s got an apartment in a house on a farm, shared with his best friend so it’ll be awesome for him. buying stuff for the place is fun. Plus we are already making plans to move the home gym over to his bedroom this weekend. So exciting and positive.

The sad part is, we are now empty nesters and that’s not looking like that’ll change. Both kids live locally and I expect they’ll both be by the house a couple of times a week, but still, the house will be empty. Clean, but empty.


SC has a pitch count rule: If a pitcher pitches 2 consecutive days, no more than 75 pitches on day 2.

Kid threw only 2 pitches day 1, then 83 on day 2. Team won, losers protested, changed to forfeit. Team eliminated from playoffs.

Seems like a well-intentioned rule, and I don’t even object to it being followed, but I do feel sad for the team that lost that way.

A well-intentioned but stupidly drafted rule.

Pitch count should apply to the two-day total, not day 2 in isolation.

I mean something like “no more than 90 pitches in a single day or 150 pitches over a 2 day period” would be significantly more logical.

We could certainly quibble about whether 90 and 150 are the right numbers but something where the two-day total is meaningfully less than double the one-day total.

1 Like

I think it’s clear, but those are both maximums.

If you throw 83 pitches on Day 1, then your Day 2 max is 67.

If you throw 2 pitches on Day 1, then your Day 2 max is 90.

Again, I’m not certain that 90 & 150 are optimal, but something along those lines.

the rules are super clear to me ( and the coach of a varsity HS baseball team knows them and tracks the count and the penalty is known and obvious.

and the players usually know the rules too.

so somehow coach and player and everyone else related to this forgot the player threw 2 pitches the day before?

i feel sad that the players have a moron as a coach.

1 Like

I wasn’t arguing that the existing rules aren’t clear. I was arguing that they are dumb.

And then proposed alternative more logical rules and wasn’t positive that my proposal was crystal clear.

And that the rules are so dumb and illogical as to require that level of familiarity in the first place.

not sure your level of familiarity with the events.

the pitcher usually prepares to pitch in the game. that takes, for most, a LOT of intense throwing. and those throws don’t go into the counts.

the prior day could be 2 pitches bc it ended an inning or at bat or the game or the pitcher said something didn’t feel right. not considered by the rules bc the rule book has to be finite in length.

how does your threshold factor in such other sources of stress? have you considered the opinions of the experts who fix all the broken arms (like here:

they have to pick something. they have to pick something clear and easy. they have to pick numbers that at the extremes aren’t off-putting bc asshole coaches everywhere will pitch to the limit. the stated “dumb” rules lean that way.

and the coach is a total moron and 1000% at fault.

1 Like

so w your new rules that are better bc they are logical - are participants freed from having to have a familiarity with them? is anyone required to have familiarity with them or is that part of the feature that makes them better?

By making the two day total materially less than double the one day total?

Maybe 90 and 150 aren’t the right numbers. Maybe it should be 95 and 140 or 100 and 130. Not sure.

But I don’t think it makes sense to cap Day 2 at 75 pitches with absolutely no consideration of whether Day 1 was 1 pitch or 120.

the one day total allowed is 110.

if they throw 31 or more on day one then they are required to have at least one day of rest by the rule. (required rest increases with more thrown, per the chart)

the back to back max is 30 + 75 = 105. (ignores a few more if the pitcher finishes the batter and goes over on that batter, which is allowed mainly for flow of game reasons)

I couldn’t figure out how to copy & paste the table with the recommended pitching limits, but those seem extremely logical. I would absolutely defer to the expertise of the folks who put that table together. That’s almost certainly better than what I came up with.

The recommendation seems to not be what was implemented though as 83 would only be allowed for 15-18 year olds and 2+83 would not fall afoul of the recommended limit for 15-18 year-olds.

Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is the point of this?

In Canada, you could pitch back to back baseball games in the 90s at HS level and nobody cared.

Seems a really weird “rule”.

1 Like

The point is to prevent injuries. More and more players are requiring Tommy John’s surgery at ever younger ages.

It’s a laudable goal but I don’t think these particular rules are the best way to go about it.

The recommendation in the link tommie provided in post 370 make a lot more sense.

Did you look at the rule @tommie.frazier linked?

While it is confusing at first, it becomes clearer once you read it. First, to be able to pitch consecutive days, you cannot have pitched more than 30 pitches on the first day.

I expect that these rules were not just picked out of thin air and as tf said were designed by experts.

And again, all coaches know these rules like the back of their hand, especially when you look at what the penalties are. And most pitchers learn these as well. Most teams will have their own scorekeeper who is usually also familiar with all of these rules and is there to ensure the coach is aware of what is going on. this had to be a breakdown on so many levels.

Naw, the “recommended by experts” rules are not the same as the actual rules.

The “recommended by experts” rules make a lot more sense than the actual rules IMO.

2 + 83 would be allowed under the expert-proposed rules for 15-18 year old players.

83 would not be allowed irrespective of prior day pitching for age 14 & under.

I can get behind that.