Forum
»
Big retail fleeing liberal utopia San Fran
- Results 1 to 9 of 9
-
Page 1 of 1
06-13-2023, 03:34 PM
-
#1
- moosik85
- Registered User
-
- moosik85
- Registered User
- Join Date: Nov 2011
- Posts: 14,890
- Rep Power: 81638
-
-
Big retail fleeing liberal utopia San Fran
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/cr...ng-558-million
Who would’ve thought a bunch of thieves and childless homos would be bad customers
Downtown San Francisco has been dealt another blow after Westfield and its partner Brookfield Properties made the “difficult decision” to stop payment on a $558 million loan for the metro area’s largest shopping mall after “challenging operating conditions,” the San Francisco Chronicle reported.
“For more than 20 years, Westfield has proudly and successfully operated San Francisco Centre, investing significantly over that time in the vitality of the property. Given the challenging operating conditions in downtown San Francisco, which have led to declines in sales, occupancy and foot traffic, we have made the difficult decision to begin the process to transfer management of the shopping center to our lender to allow them to appoint a receiver to operate the property going forward,” Westfield said.
This comes after Nordstrom, which occupies 312,000 square feet in the mall, isn’t renewing its lease in August after nearly four decades of operations. When Nordstrom closes, the mall will only be 55% leased, well below the average 93% of other Westfield malls across the US.
Bloomberg obtained a letter to employees from Jamie Nordstrom, the retailer’s chief stores officer, who said the closing of Nordstrom is due to a slump in sales because of lower foot traffic, adding “dynamics of the downtown San Francisco market have changed dramatically over the past several years.” We suspect Nordstrom is referring to the out-of-control crime…
Westfield recently blamed “unsafe conditions” and “lack of enforcement against rampant criminal activity” in the downtown area for Nordstrom’s departure. It also said the mall’s poor performance and crime-ridden surrounding area is an anomaly versus its other properties nationwide.
Westfield and Nordstrom’s exodus comes one week after Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. ceased making payments on a $725 million CMBS loan secured by two of its San Francisco hotels.
They can’t outright say it’s black crime…. But it’s black crime“For more than 20 years, Westfield has proudly and successfully operated San Francisco Centre, investing significantly over that time in the vitality of the property. Given the challenging operating conditions in downtown San Francisco, which have led to declines in sales, occupancy and foot traffic, we have made the difficult decision to begin the process to transfer management of the shopping center to our lender to allow them to appoint a receiver to operate the property going forward,” Westfield said.
This comes after Nordstrom, which occupies 312,000 square feet in the mall, isn’t renewing its lease in August after nearly four decades of operations. When Nordstrom closes, the mall will only be 55% leased, well below the average 93% of other Westfield malls across the US.
Bloomberg obtained a letter to employees from Jamie Nordstrom, the retailer’s chief stores officer, who said the closing of Nordstrom is due to a slump in sales because of lower foot traffic, adding “dynamics of the downtown San Francisco market have changed dramatically over the past several years.” We suspect Nordstrom is referring to the out-of-control crime…
Westfield recently blamed “unsafe conditions” and “lack of enforcement against rampant criminal activity” in the downtown area for Nordstrom’s departure. It also said the mall’s poor performance and crime-ridden surrounding area is an anomaly versus its other properties nationwide.
Westfield and Nordstrom’s exodus comes one week after Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. ceased making payments on a $725 million CMBS loan secured by two of its San Francisco hotels.
Who would’ve thought a bunch of thieves and childless homos would be bad customers
Plant the trees in whose shade your grandchildren will play
06-13-2023, 03:47 PM
-
#2
- 8PointBuck
- Registered User
-
- 8PointBuck
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2016
- Posts: 7,544
- Rep Power: 63247
-
-
just another day in liberal paradise
06-13-2023, 03:54 PM
-
#3
06-13-2023, 04:01 PM
-
#4
- N0stradamus
- The Blackpill Prophet
-
- N0stradamus
- The Blackpill Prophet
- Join Date: Oct 2020
- Posts: 24,839
- Rep Power: 96971
-
-
If I were a business man with questionable morals, I'd lease those buildings at deep discounts from the banks who would be desperate just to get them operational to recoup some of their losses....
Then I'd turn around and strike a deal with the liberal California government to convert those buildings to homeless shelters (subsidized by the taxpayer of course). I'd charge $1,000 per head per night to the government while only providing about $50 worth of living expenses to the homelss (canned soup dinners, cheap blankets and pillows, cheap soap and shampoo, limit 1 shower per day at 2 mins per shower)....
Let's say I house 100 homeless:
100 homeless x $1,000 per head = $100,000 revenue per day. Less 100 x $50 operational expense per head = $5,000 cost per day. So I'm making $95,000 profit per day.
If my name were -stein or -berg I'd definitely do this....
Then I'd turn around and strike a deal with the liberal California government to convert those buildings to homeless shelters (subsidized by the taxpayer of course). I'd charge $1,000 per head per night to the government while only providing about $50 worth of living expenses to the homelss (canned soup dinners, cheap blankets and pillows, cheap soap and shampoo, limit 1 shower per day at 2 mins per shower)....
Let's say I house 100 homeless:
100 homeless x $1,000 per head = $100,000 revenue per day. Less 100 x $50 operational expense per head = $5,000 cost per day. So I'm making $95,000 profit per day.
If my name were -stein or -berg I'd definitely do this....
Everything I post is satire.
Tricknology Grand Master.
06-13-2023, 04:02 PM
-
#5
06-13-2023, 04:08 PM
-
#6
- gbullock32
- Common sense/moderation.
-
- gbullock32
- Common sense/moderation.
- Join Date: May 2011
- Location: Coalinga, California, United States
- Age: 35
- Posts: 53,935
- Rep Power: 461871
-
-
If you need to hire people to hose human sht off the sidewalk... that ain't it.
Short cuts to success are often paved with lies.
1/13/16: Massive hernia.
5/10/16: Finally back to lifting, light but improving.
Why Teens shouldn't cut/Lack of progress thread- http://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=169272763&p=1397509823#post1397509823
06-13-2023, 04:22 PM
-
#7
06-13-2023, 04:24 PM
-
#8
- gbullock32
- Common sense/moderation.
-
- gbullock32
- Common sense/moderation.
- Join Date: May 2011
- Location: Coalinga, California, United States
- Age: 35
- Posts: 53,935
- Rep Power: 461871
-
-
Originally Posted By 129iq⏩
You lookin' at CA, because we ain't.So,why are blue states better financially
Short cuts to success are often paved with lies.
1/13/16: Massive hernia.
5/10/16: Finally back to lifting, light but improving.
Why Teens shouldn't cut/Lack of progress thread- http://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=169272763&p=1397509823#post1397509823
06-13-2023, 04:29 PM
-
#9
- SteadySmokin
- Banned
-
- SteadySmokin
- Banned
- Join Date: May 2023
- Posts: 6,413
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By N0stradamus⏩
If I were a business man with questionable morals, I'd lease those buildings at deep discounts from the banks who would be desperate just to get them operational to recoup some of their losses....
Then I'd turn around and strike a deal with the liberal California government to convert those buildings to homeless shelters (subsidized by the taxpayer of course). I'd charge $1,000 per head per night to the government while only providing about $50 worth of living expenses to the homelss (canned soup dinners, cheap blankets and pillows, cheap soap and shampoo, limit 1 shower per day at 2 mins per shower)....
Let's say I house 100 homeless:
100 homeless x $1,000 per head = $100,000 revenue per day. Less 100 x $50 operational expense per head = $5,000 cost per day. So I'm making $95,000 profit per day.
Then I'd turn around and strike a deal with the liberal California government to convert those buildings to homeless shelters (subsidized by the taxpayer of course). I'd charge $1,000 per head per night to the government while only providing about $50 worth of living expenses to the homelss (canned soup dinners, cheap blankets and pillows, cheap soap and shampoo, limit 1 shower per day at 2 mins per shower)....
Let's say I house 100 homeless:
100 homeless x $1,000 per head = $100,000 revenue per day. Less 100 x $50 operational expense per head = $5,000 cost per day. So I'm making $95,000 profit per day.

Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-

- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts