Discuss Detroit » Archives - Beginning July 2006 » Built it and they will come? « Previous Next »
Top of pageBottom of page

Ndavies
Member
Username: Ndavies

Post Number: 1939
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 129.9.163.106
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 12:14 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

What is going to happen to the Kennedy Square building now that the primary tenant has backed out of the deal?

Is a brand new class A building with parking and heavy tax incentives capable of luring in business form outside the city. Will it cannibalize tenants from older downtown buildings? Will the build it and they will come philosophy prevail?
Top of pageBottom of page

Quinn
Member
Username: Quinn

Post Number: 763
Registered: 01-2005
Posted From: 64.139.64.80
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 12:15 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Who backed out? Earnst & Young?
Top of pageBottom of page

Ndavies
Member
Username: Ndavies

Post Number: 1940
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 129.9.163.106
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 12:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Visteon IT contractors. Earnst & Young were just supposed to take up some of the extra space. The building was originally built for Visteon IT contractors.
Top of pageBottom of page

L_b_patterson
Member
Username: L_b_patterson

Post Number: 304
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 65.43.221.67
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 12:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

i thought visteon was still bound by the lease. i.e. its up to them to sublease their space
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 907
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 69.242.223.42
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 12:19 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Luckily, there are no empty rapid transit trains around there too--built to "save" the city from itself.
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroitstar
Member
Username: Detroitstar

Post Number: 63
Registered: 01-2006
Posted From: 35.8.144.6
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 12:21 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

How does Visteon just back out? I'm not a legal guy, but something tells me there has got to be some sort of penalty involved here.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 908
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 69.242.223.42
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 12:24 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

And Visteon would say, "So? Sue us!"
Top of pageBottom of page

Gannon
Member
Username: Gannon

Post Number: 5975
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 70.236.198.22
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 12:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Wasn't Visteon famously in bankruptcy court recently?!


Or was that Delphi?


I get all those spin-offs mixed up.


You never know what settlement they came to with the building owner.
Top of pageBottom of page

Merchantgander
Member
Username: Merchantgander

Post Number: 1932
Registered: 01-2005
Posted From: 150.198.150.244
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 12:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

L_B patterson is right. Visteon is still on the hook because of the signed lease agreement.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 909
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 69.242.223.42
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 12:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Visteon is the former R&D arm of Ford that got saddled with all those losing auto-component plants when Ford did to Visteon as GM did to Delphi a year earlier.

Both Ford and GM have assumed the financial responsibiblity for thousands of their erstwhile UAW employees in order to save Visteon/Delphi from extinction.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ndavies
Member
Username: Ndavies

Post Number: 1941
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 129.9.163.233
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

L_B patterson is right. Visteon is still on the hook because of the signed lease agreement.




How do you know this? Do you have a copy of the deal? They've obviously found a way out of the deal. They aren't moving into the building.
Top of pageBottom of page

Itsjeff
Member
Username: Itsjeff

Post Number: 6165
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 208.27.111.125
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:11 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Just to make clear, Visteon itself was never the primary tenant. It was a contract provider of theirs.
Top of pageBottom of page

E_hemingway
Member
Username: E_hemingway

Post Number: 779
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 69.242.215.8
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:13 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

How do you know they aren't moving into the building?
Top of pageBottom of page

Tetsua
Member
Username: Tetsua

Post Number: 671
Registered: 01-2004
Posted From: 68.61.194.237
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:14 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I thought it was for IBM employees, who are working contract positions for Visteon.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw

Post Number: 1784
Registered: 02-2005
Posted From: 70.228.2.13
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:15 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Tear that schitt down.

just kidding...but this is a real mess. Let the musical offices routine downtown continue, although I don't know how you would choose that with the Dime and Penobscot, among others, nearby. The green monster overlooking campus martius park will be a space filler until the economy improves and Michigan lures some new businesses.
Top of pageBottom of page

Merchantgander
Member
Username: Merchantgander

Post Number: 1934
Registered: 01-2005
Posted From: 150.198.150.244
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:15 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

There was a story in Crains (I know Cains can not be trusted), Redico would have never built that building without signed agreements with E&Y and Visteon because they would loss their ass.

The problem is 700 employees won't be in that building. Because the building is only going to be about 35% (this might be a little higher) occupied it will be very hard for Redico to fill their retail space.
Top of pageBottom of page

Merchantgander
Member
Username: Merchantgander

Post Number: 1935
Registered: 01-2005
Posted From: 150.198.150.244
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Also it doesn't matter that they were IBM employees contracted by Visteon because Visteon is responsible for providing them space.

(Message edited by Merchantgander on June 21, 2006)
Top of pageBottom of page

Apbest
Member
Username: Apbest

Post Number: 121
Registered: 03-2006
Posted From: 68.40.65.66
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

why did they drop out?
Top of pageBottom of page

Ndavies
Member
Username: Ndavies

Post Number: 1943
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 129.9.163.106
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:34 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

why did they drop out?




They have a large campus in the suburbs that has plenty of space they've already paid for.


quote:

How do you know they aren't moving into the building?




The same source that told me they were building the building long before it was announced.
Top of pageBottom of page

Spacemonkey
Member
Username: Spacemonkey

Post Number: 42
Registered: 03-2006
Posted From: 63.102.87.27
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:38 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Maybe Rock Financial will move in?
Top of pageBottom of page

Ndavies
Member
Username: Ndavies

Post Number: 1944
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 129.9.163.106
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:40 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

Maybe Rock Financial will move in?



The building's nowhere near big enough. You'll never fit 3000 people in a building only big enough to hold 1000. Rock's building would need to be close to Compuware in size.
Top of pageBottom of page

Spacemonkey
Member
Username: Spacemonkey

Post Number: 44
Registered: 03-2006
Posted From: 63.102.87.27
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:43 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Oh.
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroitkev
Member
Username: Detroitkev

Post Number: 75
Registered: 04-2005
Posted From: 70.91.120.106
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:47 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

You can put some Rock Financial employees in there now until the other building is built. They seem to be running out of space in the burbs
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 910
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 69.242.223.42
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:47 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

What's the advanatage in 2006 for Visteon's having a headquarters downtown in Detroit (or any downtown elsewhere)? Such offices could function satisfactorily just about anywhere on the planet, or perhaps, even in a lunar colony connected with data links.

So expect still more pissing and moaning from the New Urbanists and the "Arts and Croissant" crowd. And, perhaps, the poor, disadvantaged CVS store in the CBT should be government subsidized until the expected hordes of customers arrive via rapid transit so that it can continue to remain open during the daytime...
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroitkev
Member
Username: Detroitkev

Post Number: 76
Registered: 04-2005
Posted From: 70.91.120.106
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:48 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Maybe some Rock Financial employees can go in there now...until the headquarters is built. They seem to be running out of space in the burbs. I guess it all depends on whether they are coming down here at all.
Top of pageBottom of page

Matt_the_deuce
Member
Username: Matt_the_deuce

Post Number: 651
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 69.14.248.252
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:49 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Jeeziz Livernois - have another cocktail in your bunker.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lowell
Board Administrator
Username: Lowell

Post Number: 2727
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 66.167.210.44
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 1:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Lol @ Matt the Duece ^^ and Amen.

That building should have no difficulty finding tenants although Ndavies might be right about the cannabalizing another Downtown business.

Gannon, Visteon is not bankrupt, just teetering on the edge.
Top of pageBottom of page

Merchantgander
Member
Username: Merchantgander

Post Number: 1937
Registered: 01-2005
Posted From: 150.198.150.244
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 2:06 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

One of the reasons a company might want to move into that building is because of the tax breaks you get because it is built in a Renaissance or empowerment zone. There is only one zone left once the Redico building is filled and that is the spot where Hudson used to be. I don’t know of any companies that want tax breaks.

Livernoisyard if you pulled your head out of your ass, you might be able to see there are advantages to moving downtown. Also CVS seems to being doing fine to me. They have plenty of customers when you consider all the folks that work in the area.

Livernoisyard you are one bitter clueless fool.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dougw
Member
Username: Dougw

Post Number: 1189
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 136.2.1.101
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 2:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Livernoisyard, we get it -- you hate urban areas, fine. But there are plenty of healthy urban areas around the country and the world which have high-density buildings, transit, etc, which are not unreasonable concepts for Detroit to try to follow. Please stick to topics on which you are not ignorant (if any).
Top of pageBottom of page

Jsmyers
Member
Username: Jsmyers

Post Number: 1772
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 209.131.7.68
Posted on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 - 5:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

Livernoisyard, we get it



To bad (s)he doesn't. It isn't established cities that are and have been receiving most of the subsidies. It is all of the stuff we've built since 1946 outside of them.

The pitiful subsidies that established cities actually do get appear pretty large when you forget that our public infrastructure and homes outside of them were virtually completely built with subsidy.

Fore example: I bet that they amount of subsidy given to Amtrak (nationwide) in one year is less than the amount that the Detroit Wayne County Airport (and the pro-rated portion of its users) gets.

The sad thing is that it is all really inefficient.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mind_field
Member
Username: Mind_field

Post Number: 581
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 68.21.47.159
Posted on Saturday, June 24, 2006 - 7:57 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

It's probably that horrendous white pipe attached to the front of the building that made them decide not to come downtown. But seriously this is bad news. Hopefully there will be another suburban tenant who can fill the IBM IT workers vacated spot.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan

Post Number: 3912
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 24.11.154.56
Posted on Saturday, June 24, 2006 - 4:53 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I haven't read through this (and hopefully I don't repeat), but isn't Ernest & Young the primary tentant, or is it that they just bought the naming rights? I was under the impression that the building is far from empty, and I don't ever remember it being all pre-leased. Is giving it a bit more time to fill such an unreasonable request?
Top of pageBottom of page

Ndavies
Member
Username: Ndavies

Post Number: 1953
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 70.227.12.109
Posted on Saturday, June 24, 2006 - 4:58 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Earnst and young were not the primary intended tenants. They only bought the sign on the outside of the building. Visteon was supposed oto ocupy at least 60% of the building.

I have been informed that Visteon is on the hook for 5 years of rent. But they still won't be moving in.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 948
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 69.242.223.42
Posted on Saturday, June 24, 2006 - 5:07 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Will Visteon last five years without undergoing reorganization? And that five years worth of potential liability is obviously unsecured. Besides, the owner still has to make an attempt to find other tenants after an anticipated (or actual) breach of contract anyway.

So, Visteon would only get stuck with the difference in leasing revenue, plus any attendant expenses.
Top of pageBottom of page

Motorcitymayor2026
Member
Username: Motorcitymayor2026

Post Number: 945
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 24.231.189.137
Posted on Sunday, June 25, 2006 - 1:16 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Visteon had been planning to back out ever since they signed the contract...

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.