<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Federated Drops Stores: What We Think Will Happen</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.labelscar.com/retail-news/federated-drops-stores/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.labelscar.com/retail-news/federated-drops-stores</link>
	<description>News and Views of Malls, Shopping Centers, and Retail Chains Past and Present</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 03:02:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.labelscar.com/retail-news/federated-drops-stores#comment-47210</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Dec 2007 01:44:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.labelscar.com/retail-news/federated-drops-stores#comment-47210</guid>
		<description>Wal-mart have a number of multi-storied regional mall stores in Canada that not only prosper but bring a new traffic demographic to many malls. Internationally Wal-mart also have multi-level stores. Moving into Federated properties that have been vacated could be an excellent strategy for Wal-mart to enter previously underserviced markets like Boston.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wal-mart have a number of multi-storied regional mall stores in Canada that not only prosper but bring a new traffic demographic to many malls. Internationally Wal-mart also have multi-level stores. Moving into Federated properties that have been vacated could be an excellent strategy for Wal-mart to enter previously underserviced markets like Boston.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Caldor</title>
		<link>http://www.labelscar.com/retail-news/federated-drops-stores#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Caldor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jun 2006 19:11:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.labelscar.com/retail-news/federated-drops-stores#comment-9</guid>
		<description>Thanks for contributing! From the sounds of it, it seems like California is facing a lot of the same issues as Massachusetts (a large number of stores going dark due to a heavy overlap between chains, and a rarity of space in which to build new structures).

Thanks for the link, too--it&#039;s interesting to see in detail how this is affecting other markets! As far as Boston goes, I know four malls have already announced they will add a Nordstrom&#039;s store to replace the departed anchor. The remainder have been quiet. I expect that JCPenney (who has a very weak immediate Boston area presence with only a couple of stores) will take a store or two, but beyond that the possibilities are wide open.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for contributing! From the sounds of it, it seems like California is facing a lot of the same issues as Massachusetts (a large number of stores going dark due to a heavy overlap between chains, and a rarity of space in which to build new structures).</p>
<p>Thanks for the link, too&#8211;it&#8217;s interesting to see in detail how this is affecting other markets! As far as Boston goes, I know four malls have already announced they will add a Nordstrom&#8217;s store to replace the departed anchor. The remainder have been quiet. I expect that JCPenney (who has a very weak immediate Boston area presence with only a couple of stores) will take a store or two, but beyond that the possibilities are wide open.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mitch Glaser</title>
		<link>http://www.labelscar.com/retail-news/federated-drops-stores#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Mitch Glaser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jun 2006 02:43:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.labelscar.com/retail-news/federated-drops-stores#comment-7</guid>
		<description>This is an excellent post.  The analysis reflects an intimate understanding of the current trends in retailing and commercial real estate.

Retail history enthusiasts should recognize that this is a pivotal time for the American shopping mall.  In a sense, the Federated-May merger is the end of the &quot;traditional department store&quot; that has sustained the mall for half a century, leaving the future of that format in doubt.  And yet, property owners are poised to remake this end into a new beginning.  The malls of tomorrow will be far different from the malls of today, meshing traditional stores, big-box outlets, &quot;destination&quot; retail, and housing in an exciting new paradigm of development.

I&#039;ve been very anxious to see the results of the Federated-May merger here in Southern California, as it is the largest market affected by this combination.  Little more than a decade ago, the region had four major &quot;traditional department store&quot; players -- Bullock&#039;s, May Company, Robinson&#039;s, and The Broadway -- now it has one, Macy&#039;s.  Nearly two dozen stores will eventually be shuttered, posing a challenge to nearly all the region&#039;s malls.

Last September, I explored the implications of this merger in Southern California in a post I&#039;d like to share with you and your readers:
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mitchglaser.com/journal/2005/09/big-changes-in-store-for-southern.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Big Changes in Store for Southern California&#039;s Malls&lt;/a&gt;

While I saw an opportunity for Dillard&#039;s to enter the market and for Gottschalks to expand its Inland Empire presence, those possibilities seem less likely now that the bulk of the shuttered stores have been sold to mall owners (Westfield and Macerich).  I see the mall owners favoring one or more of the four strategies you described above, as many retailers and restaurants can bring in more sales per square foot than a typical department store.  Nordstrom will pick up a few units, as may JCPenney, but I think Macy&#039;s is so dominant that a push by Dillard&#039;s or Gottschalks is doomed to fail.

Southern California is a market where a lack of land and strict zoning regulations have kept big-boxes from dominating, so I expect to see Target and Wal-Mart at more malls.  Target is favored at more &quot;upscale&quot; properties; Westfield is adding a brand-new Target to Topanga Plaza, where it will be joined by Nordstrom and Neiman Marcus.  Wal-Mart may be welcomed at more &quot;common&quot; malls, such as Westfield Parkway in San Diego, where it recently opened in a brand-new building.  Target and Wal-Mart have both opened at several malls in greater Los Angeles and San Diego and have proven very receptive to multi-story designs.

I&#039;m sure we&#039;ll all follow this story, with big changes at malls in Boston, Los Angeles, and elsewhere.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is an excellent post.  The analysis reflects an intimate understanding of the current trends in retailing and commercial real estate.</p>
<p>Retail history enthusiasts should recognize that this is a pivotal time for the American shopping mall.  In a sense, the Federated-May merger is the end of the &#8220;traditional department store&#8221; that has sustained the mall for half a century, leaving the future of that format in doubt.  And yet, property owners are poised to remake this end into a new beginning.  The malls of tomorrow will be far different from the malls of today, meshing traditional stores, big-box outlets, &#8220;destination&#8221; retail, and housing in an exciting new paradigm of development.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve been very anxious to see the results of the Federated-May merger here in Southern California, as it is the largest market affected by this combination.  Little more than a decade ago, the region had four major &#8220;traditional department store&#8221; players &#8212; Bullock&#8217;s, May Company, Robinson&#8217;s, and The Broadway &#8212; now it has one, Macy&#8217;s.  Nearly two dozen stores will eventually be shuttered, posing a challenge to nearly all the region&#8217;s malls.</p>
<p>Last September, I explored the implications of this merger in Southern California in a post I&#8217;d like to share with you and your readers:<br />
<a href="http://www.mitchglaser.com/journal/2005/09/big-changes-in-store-for-southern.html" rel="nofollow">Big Changes in Store for Southern California&#8217;s Malls</a></p>
<p>While I saw an opportunity for Dillard&#8217;s to enter the market and for Gottschalks to expand its Inland Empire presence, those possibilities seem less likely now that the bulk of the shuttered stores have been sold to mall owners (Westfield and Macerich).  I see the mall owners favoring one or more of the four strategies you described above, as many retailers and restaurants can bring in more sales per square foot than a typical department store.  Nordstrom will pick up a few units, as may JCPenney, but I think Macy&#8217;s is so dominant that a push by Dillard&#8217;s or Gottschalks is doomed to fail.</p>
<p>Southern California is a market where a lack of land and strict zoning regulations have kept big-boxes from dominating, so I expect to see Target and Wal-Mart at more malls.  Target is favored at more &#8220;upscale&#8221; properties; Westfield is adding a brand-new Target to Topanga Plaza, where it will be joined by Nordstrom and Neiman Marcus.  Wal-Mart may be welcomed at more &#8220;common&#8221; malls, such as Westfield Parkway in San Diego, where it recently opened in a brand-new building.  Target and Wal-Mart have both opened at several malls in greater Los Angeles and San Diego and have proven very receptive to multi-story designs.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure we&#8217;ll all follow this story, with big changes at malls in Boston, Los Angeles, and elsewhere.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
