I think the only somewhat urban part of lower bricktown is the east side of the Centennial on the Canal.
Lower Bricktown failed as an urban development from day 1. They didn't maintain the brick wall and let it open up. Is it a failed project, I would say no. But it's not urban by any means.
BUT - you find me a true urban area outside of the actual highrise CBD. Bricktown fits more with it's Deep Deuce neighbors than with the highrises. Even the upper area falls from urbanity about 2 blocks out. But that doesn't mean it all failed. We're not NYC or Chicago...nor should we try to be. We're not going to get a bunch of 6 story buildings (which most of those floors above street-level in bricktown are empty by the way) making a tunnel of brick here. There's not enough demand for it. If there were, you would have seen developments come into the current open space in the historic buildings in Bricktown rather than the Centennial's stucco crap being built.
It is interesting to contrast that density to something like Automobile Alley, which has a much higher occupancy rate on the non-streel-level floors. I'm betting the question here is, who wants to pay to live in the entertainment district and have a pain in the rear parking issue every day on the way home? Same goes for commercial non-entertainment business. The last ad agency I knew of down there moved out because of the higher rent and parking problems.
We are too small of a market for them, we are about 500,000 people shy of being on their radar...this is from the mouths of IKEA reps at an ULI lunch last year. While we are at it, we can forget about a Nieman Marcus or Saks as well. That was the message relayed at this same luncheon.
While that is almost crazy talk, if they are using a demographic as generic as '2,000,000 metro population' then clearly IKEA either don't know who their target market is or it is hard to track their market target, thus a huge net of 2,000,000 will capture the fish they are looking for.
It is also possible that their target market is purely trend driven so there is no point trying to track them because IKEA plans to change with the trends. Their customers are also transient both geographically and socio-economically. They need a constant new source of customers to replace customer than leave the trendy or price conscience ranks. They have probably determined that a base population of 2 million provides that group on a steady basis.
Population is only one thing that a "destination retailer" like IKEA would consider. There are cities way bigger than OKC like St. Louis and Denver that do not have them. There are cities that are only slightly bigger than OKC (Austin and Charlotte come to mind) where they are. Its all about demographics and what type of people live in a place and what kind of products they demand. There are a lot of college kids in places like Austin and Pittsburgh, and there's quite a few east-coasters working at all of the banks in Charlotte that may like edgy contemporary furniture.
Bomber, actually a lot of the upper floors have been filled by ad agencies, lawyers and other professionals, however, yes there are some empty upper floors in b town
Transients don't usually have money and are mostly homeless. They hitch rides on the road, so why would they shop at IKEA?
I didn't mean transient as in homeless. I meant in the sense that an individual person is only passing through IKEA's target market as the person grows older throughout their life. Here is an example.
Clair's Boutique caters to 14 to 16 year old girls. An individual girl only exists in the target market for two years. That means Clair’s has to attract a new group of customers every two years and extract as much money from them in those two years as they can. Ford on the other hand builds brand loyalty that sticks with a person for life - from their first car to their last cast. The only thing that changes is which model Ford tries to market to you.
Austin (Round Rock) store also has San Antonio to draw from, it is either Round Rock or Houston as a choice for people in San Antonio. Once of the ideas for locating on the far north end of the Austin metro (other than the Round Rock/Williamson County incentives) was the idea that San Antonio would eventually get their own store. Ikea had embarked on a pretty aggressive growth path but the economy slowed that growth some. I think once they are placed in more major markets, they will start hitting the next tier. That is when I would expect to see a San Antonio or OKC store but that is still quite a few years away.
Transient in this sense could also mean people moving from city to city every few years based upon their career, and usually they are geared towards the urban lifestyle, including style of furniture, such as IKEA.
Crazy idea but here you go: turn the old Tanger Outlet Mall next to the turnpike in Stroud (now a giant concrete slab) into an IKEA that serves both the OKC and Tulsa metros with a combined population of 2.3 million and nearly 3 million within a 100 mile drive. DT Tulsa to Stroud: 51 miles. DT OKC to Stroud: 58 miles. I can't think of any other retail format that would work at that location and be a huge draw from both metros.
Bad idea
Exactly. If population is such a hang up build in between OKC and Tulsa and suddenly the 2 million threshold is met at an equal distance between the two cities. There is also already a cleared site with plenty of parking available where Tanger was before the '99 tornado with excellent visibility on a busy interstate. The Round Rock IKEA, which serves Austin/San Antonio, is already 23 miles from DT Austin and 98 miles from DT San Antonio. IKEA would be within a 45 min. drive from Edmond/north OKC and just over an hour from south OKC/Norman. It's not like a grocery store where you go every week; you might go to IKEA only a few times a year so an hour drive is not a big deal while a 3 hour jaunt to Frisco is much worse...
But....one can justify the trip to IKEA in Frisco because there's other things to do once you get there.
If the idea of building in between population centers had any merit at all, then why don't we see things built in the middle of nowhere (but between two population centers)? Because it doesn't work.
Building at he old tanger outlet mall is a terrible idea. Ikea isnt going to depend on thousands of people to make the hour drive from Tulsa or okc. If it's such a good spot why didnt they rebuild the outlet mall? A huge big box retailer that depends on large volumes of shoppers doesn't build in the middle of nowhere. As I've said, all this talk is pointless. We will not be seeing an ikea within the next decade.
IKEA can move into Crossroads Mall and revive that place very easily. They just need to do it. A business doesn't succeed without taking risks. Furthermore, taking risks generally reap major positive benefits. They can do it and OKC can support them.
All of this talk is just wishful thinking. I'm pretty confident OKC is not on IKEA's radar. Can we at least get a mod to change the title of the thread? It's pretty misleading.
How about "What would it take to bring IKEA to OKC?"
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Bookmarks