Popular Cincinnati BBQ joint faces sharp fallout after co-owner’s ‘good riddance’ Charlie Kirk post
Lucius Q, a popular Cincinnati barbecue restaurant, faced severe backlash after co-owner Aaron Sharpe posted a “good riddance” comment about Charlie Kirk’s assassination on Sept. 10, 2025, prompting his removal and lost partnerships and widespread online outrage.
Key takeaways
- Aaron Sharpe posted a profanity-laced “good riddance” reply after Charlie Kirk was shot on Sept. 10, 2025; screenshots spread before he deleted his account.
- Lucius Q severed ties with Sharpe, apologized publicly, and pledged to repair community trust.
- Immediate fallout included thousands of critical comments, waves of one-star reviews, full voicemail boxes and lost contracts, including at TQL Stadium.
- Local businesses nationwide — including those in the Inland Empire — should heed the episode as a warning about social-media risk management.
How the incident unfolded
On Sept. 10, 2025, Charlie Kirk was shot at a campus event in Utah. The news generated rapid reactions across social platforms. Screenshots circulated showing co-owner Aaron Sharpe replying to a Facebook post offering prayers for Kirk with the words “good riddance” and a profanity directed at Kirk.
The screenshot distribution continued even after Sharpe deleted the comment and deactivated his account. Within hours, Lucius Q’s social channels were flooded with criticism — reports indicate more than 4,000 critical comments on the restaurant’s X account and many one-star Google reviews.
Coverage and timelines were documented by outlets including Economic Times, Fox News, and Local 12 Cincinnati.
Company response and Sharpe’s removal
Lucius Q acted quickly to distance the business from the remarks. The restaurant issued a public apology to the Cincinnati community and stated that the comments were offensive. Management said it had severed ties with Sharpe and emphasized that Lucius Q “does not condone violence in any shape or form.”
Lucius Q noted that removing a minority owner can be legally complex, but said Sharpe was “no longer involved with Lucius Q in any way, shape or form.”
Sharpe later defended his remarks in follow-up messages, calling some responses “hypocrisy” and pointing to his history of political posts. His public defense drew further attention and mixed reactions online.
Business consequences and partner reactions
The business fallout was swift and visible. TQL Stadium, where Lucius Q provided concessions, terminated its contract and announced the relationship had ended. Stadium and team statements emphasized messages about respect and tolerance in explaining the split.
Other local partners and vendors paused or ended agreements. Lucius Q reported overflowing voicemail boxes, restricted Facebook comments and a surge of negative online reviews that harmed its public image.
Sources documenting the contract and partnership impacts include reporting by Local 12 Cincinnati and the Economic Times.
Ongoing backlash and uncertain recovery
Despite the apology and Sharpe’s removal, calls for boycotts continued. Some patrons vowed never to return; others urged separating the business from one individual owner. The long-term financial damage is uncertain — analysts warn lost contracts and reputation harms can take months or years to repair for independent restaurants reliant on local support.
Legal and governance notes
Lucius Q’s statements referenced the legal complexity of removing a minority owner. Ownership arrangements and minority stakes often require negotiation, buyouts or legal settlement to fully separate a company from a part owner. The restaurant said it had completed the process to remove Sharpe, but specific settlement details were not disclosed.
Implications for the Inland Empire, California
Why should Inland Empire readers care? The episode highlights risks relevant to restaurants and small businesses nationwide:
- Reputation and revenue risk: A single controversial post can end contracts and dent sales. Vendors serving stadiums, festivals or schools should prepare crisis plans.
- Stadium and team partnerships: Venues act quickly to protect their reputations; suppliers to large events must expect swift action if controversy threatens a venue.
- Hiring and staff morale: Boycotts and protests can harm employees who were not involved; managers should communicate, support staff and plan for operational impacts.
- Political and community divisions: The case touches on free speech, accountability and community standards — local leaders may want public social-media guidelines for businesses.
- Vetting vendors: Event planners should review social-media conduct and vet vendors before booking to avoid disruptive controversies.
Practical steps: maintain clear social-media policies, train public-facing staff, separate personal political speech from company accounts, and prepare rapid responses for controversies.
Reporting notes and sources
- Fox News — coverage of the comment, Loucis Q’s response and Sharpe’s statements.
- Local 12 Cincinnati — local reporting on fallout, contract cancellations and community reaction.
- Economic Times — timeline and analysis of business and reputation impacts.
Note: This article preserves the facts, direct quotes and URLs reported by the outlets listed above to document the timeline, responses and potential implications for businesses in other regions.
