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: | |
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? |
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: | |
Who backed out? Earnst & Young? |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
i thought visteon was still bound by the lease. i.e. its up to them to sublease their space |
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: | |
Luckily, there are no empty rapid transit trains around there too--built to "save" the city from itself. |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
And Visteon would say, "So? Sue us!" |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
L_B patterson is right. Visteon is still on the hook because of the signed lease agreement. |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
Just to make clear, Visteon itself was never the primary tenant. It was a contract provider of theirs. |
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: | |
How do you know they aren't moving into the building? |
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: | |
I thought it was for IBM employees, who are working contract positions for Visteon. |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
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) |
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: | |
why did they drop out? |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
Maybe Rock Financial will move in? |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
Oh. |
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: | |
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 |
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: | |
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... |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
Jeeziz Livernois - have another cocktail in your bunker. |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
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). |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
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? |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
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. |
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: | |
Visteon had been planning to back out ever since they signed the contract... |