It's insane that the same people who lament BB's demise and its negative impact on the local economy are the same asshole who would never pay full price for the MiUSA wares that BB offers.I found the article interesting, but have to wonder if the LaBontes should have been a bit more prepared for a tenant abandoning them and their stuff. I would think this is not all that uncommon in the world of rented warehouses. I know it happens in the self-storage and residential-apartment industry all the time, so the owners factor abandoned-goods disposal into their costs. When a company goes bankrupt, they always stop paying their bills, and people who have sold them goods or lent them money always end up not getting paid. That's why they often require deposits or collateral or excellent credit beforehand. That's why merchants stopped selling to Barney's, because they were afraid they weren't going to get paid. Shouldn't the LaBontes have required a sizable upfront deposit, or maybe had insurance for tenant abandonments? I don't know how warehouse rentals work, but I can't help feeling that perhaps the LaBontes, being new to the business, thought, "Hey, it's Brooks Brothers, they've been around forever," and didn't take proper precautions. And now they are saying that Brooks Brothers should act differently (more responsibly) than other merchants because of its long history and tradition. Maybe I just don't know enough about the industry, but I feel that if this wasn't Brooks Brothers, it would not be worth a news story