Penn Square Mall

[Spartan]

Another ad hominem..

[Oil Capital]

What public (taxpayer) investments are being sought by Penn Square Mall?

[Spartan]

Nothing is proposed for Penn Square, but nothing will be done to it without public incentives. Especially with some of the anchor tenants that have been previously mentioned in this thread as being on Simon's radar. For example, Saks is simply not coming to OKC, anywhere in OKC, without a significant public subsidy--the ULI panel helped establish that reality.

[Oil Capital]

Nothing is proposed for Penn Square, but nothing will be done to it without public incentives. Especially with some of the anchor tenants that have been previously mentioned in this thread as being on Simon's radar. For example, Saks is simply not coming to OKC, anywhere in OKC, without a significant public subsidy--the ULI panel helped establish that reality.

Any chance you could provide a link to the ULI panel establishing that reality?

[bombermwc]

The great Spartan has spoken. All should bow. How dare you question.

[betts]

I'm trying to think of the last time I went to a mall in a major city and I'm coming up blank. There's good, if not great, local shopping here, just not downtown. I think Penn Square serves it's purpose. If we get a Saks like Tulsa, why bother? There's better shopping at Off Fifth than the Tulsa Saks, to be honest with you. I think we're blowing this out of proportion. I'd rather spend my energy, and city money, on generating more retail downtown.

[onthestrip]

Any chance you could provide a link to the ULI panel establishing that reality?

I was at this ULI event. It was a few years back but they did say that a large Saks type store would require some public financing. However I think that was for a downtown location. I've never heard anything about Simon looking for public dollars to expand penn square. And we definitely should not give it to them if so.
I am of the opinion that Simon could and should expand penn square, I'd think they'd have no problem leasing it out and making it profitable.

[Oil Capital]

Nothing is proposed for Penn Square, but nothing will be done to it without public incentives. Especially with some of the anchor tenants that have been previously mentioned in this thread as being on Simon's radar. For example, Saks is simply not coming to OKC, anywhere in OKC, without a significant public subsidy--the ULI panel helped establish that reality.

Any chance you could provide a link to the ULI panel establishing that reality?

Since you can't be bothered to provide a link showing this "establish[ed] ... reality", I'm going to go ahead and presume you are referring to this from the ULI FInal Report:

"The Core to Shore Plan calls for aggressive retail de* velopment on the blocks south of Myriad Gardens to the new Boulevard. During the interviews, the panel heard desires for a major new shopping destina*tion with a department store anchor—dreams of a Nordstrom or a Neiman Marcus. The panel cautions that destination retail on this scale is not going to happen. Downtown lacks the density of residents, employees, and visitors to support such a major facility. Furthermore, very few department stores are being built today, and the incentive packages required to attract one to a downtown location start at $40 million or more.


Note that it does not mention Sak's and is talking only about downtown locations.

Stop making stuff up, Spartan.

[Larry OKC]

Isn't Saks in the same category as a Nordstrom or a Neiman Marcus? During the event that was played repeatedly on the City cable channel, the female panelist mentioned that destination retail on that scale was not going to happen...I don't recall if they gave specific store examples like they did in the report you cited. And yes it was in regards to a DT location as part of the Core to Shore/Boulevard ULI presentation a couple of years ago.

[Oil Capital]

Isn't Saks in the same category as a Nordstrom or a Neiman Marcus? During the event that was played repeatedly on the City cable channel, the female panelist mentioned that destination retail on that scale was not going to happen...I don't recall if they gave specific store examples like they did in the report you cited. And yes it was in regards to a DT location as part of the Core to Shore/Boulevard ULI presentation a couple of years ago.

Yes. Saks is in the same category. Obviously, the more important misstatement was with regard to ULI "establishing reality" on anything other than a downtown location for such stores.

[redrunner]

I think we've beat a dead horse already on whether or not Penn Square is a dump or not. However, I went to PSM today and noticed an Oakley store is coming soon, The Yankee Candle store is closed down and a Paciugo Gelato joint is coming soon near the food court.

[ljbab728]

I think we've beat a dead horse already on whether or not Penn Square is a dump or not. However, I went to PSM today and noticed an Oakley store is coming soon, The Yankee Candle store is closed down and a Paciugo Gelato joint is coming soon near the food court.

Confirmed here with others.



http://newsok.com/penn-square-mall-a...rticle/3672527

[Spartan]

Since you can't be bothered to provide a link showing this "establish[ed] ... reality", I'm going to go ahead and presume you are referring to this from the ULI FInal Report:

"The Core to Shore Plan calls for aggressive retail de* velopment on the blocks south of Myriad Gardens to the new Boulevard. During the interviews, the panel heard desires for a major new shopping destina*tion with a department store anchor—dreams of a Nordstrom or a Neiman Marcus. The panel cautions that destination retail on this scale is not going to happen. Downtown lacks the density of residents, employees, and visitors to support such a major facility. Furthermore, very few department stores are being built today, and the incentive packages required to attract one to a downtown location start at $40 million or more.


Note that it does not mention Sak's and is talking only about downtown locations.

Stop making stuff up, Spartan.

Are you drunk or something? A friend of mine on here sent me a PM that I should check this thread out. My apologies, I don't click on every thread every single day. In fact I'm a pretty busy guy right now. I am so sorry for not getting back with you immediately, plus I guess I didn't even see your posts because I have you on block - this means I have to go out of my way and click a few buttons in order to even see your posts.

I would invite you to provide proof that a Saks location 4 miles north of downtown would magically require no subsidy whereas the downtown location would. If you can provide indisputable proof that Saks would happily locate in North OKC of their own volition, I will retract my remarks.

By the way, for those of you who think I am making stuff up against indoor shopping malls, here are a few links.
http://deadmalls.com/
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500202_162-4884407.html
http://www.economist.com/node/10278717
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/1..._n_145260.html

Here's a fairly in-depth blog post I did on the topic, and keep in mind this was pre-Whole Foods (in fact it's full of 2-year old busted links). I think it offers a fairly critical, albeit outdated, analysis of the retail recruitment efforts. This post is interesting because it was written at the end of several years of failing to gain traction, and right before the inception of a highly successful period of retail recruitment (the last two years). Truisms are still true, though--the biggest slight on OKC is that we simply don't have available space that's good enough, or else new retailers would be entering the market more often.
http://downtownontherange.blogspot.c...se-in-okc.html

But then again, why do I bother. Some posters are only capable of directing a critical analysis individually rather than at issues. Oil Capital will have to pardon me for considering him/her a waste of my time at this point...

Also as Larry mentioned, I would not characterize the ULI report without watching the entire report. It's only about an hour long, but is extremely informative. These experts explain their own context so that people like Oil Capital can't do it for them.

[Oil Capital]

Are you drunk or something? A friend of mine on here sent me a PM that I should check this thread out. My apologies, I don't click on every thread every single day. In fact I'm a pretty busy guy right now. I am so sorry for not getting back with you immediately, plus I guess I didn't even see your posts because I have you on block - this means I have to go out of my way and click a few buttons in order to even see your posts.

I would invite you to provide proof that a Saks location 4 miles north of downtown would magically require no subsidy whereas the downtown location would. If you can provide indisputable proof that Saks would happily locate in North OKC of their own volition, I will retract my remarks.

By the way, for those of you who think I am making stuff up against indoor shopping malls, here are a few links.
http://deadmalls.com/
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500202_162-4884407.html
http://www.economist.com/node/10278717
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/1..._n_145260.html

Here's a fairly in-depth blog post I did on the topic, and keep in mind this was pre-Whole Foods (in fact it's full of 2-year old busted links). I think it offers a fairly critical, albeit outdated, analysis of the retail recruitment efforts. This post is interesting because it was written at the end of several years of failing to gain traction, and right before the inception of a highly successful period of retail recruitment (the last two years). Truisms are still true, though--the biggest slight on OKC is that we simply don't have available space that's good enough, or else new retailers would be entering the market more often.
http://downtownontherange.blogspot.c...se-in-okc.html

But then again, why do I bother. Some posters are only capable of directing a critical analysis individually rather than at issues. Oil Capital will have to pardon me for considering him/her a waste of my time at this point...

Also as Larry mentioned, I would not characterize the ULI report without watching the entire report. It's only about an hour long, but is extremely informative. These experts explain their own context so that people like Oil Capital can't do it for them.

LOL. It's really very simple Spartan. You told us that the ULI report established a fact that the report did not even address or discuss (non-downtown department stores). None of your whining changes that. Setting up strawmen to knock down does not change that. Reading the entire ULI report (as I have done) establishes the reality. ;-)

Stop making stuff up, Spartan.

[Spartan]

No other report, study, survey, task force, or anything else, has come any closer than the ULI to evaluating the prospect of Saks in OKC. I don't think you understand fallacies if you think that's a strawman.

I am going to go ahead and venture a guess that you can't provide evidence that Saks will come to an expanded Penn Square. I base this guess on the fact that you have already replied, and once again you only had negative comments bordering on personal insults, and again, added absolutely nothing new to the discussion. You have perfected the art of deflecting while accusing others of deflection. I wonder what fallacy that is...

Typical Oil Capital.

[Oil Capital]

No other report, study, survey, task force, or anything else, has come any closer than the ULI to evaluating the prospect of Saks in OKC. I don't think you understand fallacies if you think that's a strawman.

I am going to go ahead and venture a guess that you can't provide evidence that Saks will come to an expanded Penn Square. I base this guess on the fact that you have already replied, and once again you only had negative comments bordering on personal insults, and again, added absolutely nothing new to the discussion. You have perfected the art of deflecting while accusing others of deflection. I wonder what fallacy that is...

Typical Oil Capital.

... and the cited report does not come close to evaluating the prospects of a Saks in a non-downtown shopping mall. So, we have now established the reality that when Spartan earlier claimed otherwise, he was lying.

I never made the claim that Saks will locate a store at Penn Square Mall. I merely asked you for a link to the ULI study that established the reality that Saks would never put a store anywhere in OKC without a taxpayer subsidy. I look forward to seeing that study. (Of course we all know no such study exists.)

Earlier in the thread you were complaining that nobody on this board was interested in discussing facts and supporting their claims. A few pages back you made the claim that Omaha has several malls that probably best Penn Square. Patrick asked you which Omaha malls you had in mind. No answer. I asked for a link to a study. No answer. In the spirit of your stated desire to have a discussion of facts and argument about those facts, I think challenging a so-called "established reality" and indeed proving that "established reality" to be false, does add to the discussion.

Good grief, this whole discussion was kicked off with Spartan attacking a strawman he set up (nobody had previously suggested that Penn Square was a national-level premier shopping center. If that was actually a widely-held opinion, we wouldn't be routinely having discussions about how/when PS can expand to add better stores).

Later in the thread we are introduced to another strawman: that indoor malls are dying. Nobody suggested otherwise or argued with the idea when Spartan threw it out there. Yet he continues to post as if someone is arguing the point, and even posted links to studies establishing THAT reality (or sort of, at least). (Odd, isn't it, that he answers arguments that are not being made, but doesn't answer questions that are asked)

Stop making stuff up, Spartan.

P.S. Spartan, I am quite happy when you pretend to have me on ignore. But rest assured I will continue to challenge your made-up "facts".

[lasomeday]

Nothing is proposed for Penn Square, but nothing will be done to it without public incentives. Especially with some of the anchor tenants that have been previously mentioned in this thread as being on Simon's radar. For example, Saks is simply not coming to OKC, anywhere in OKC, without a significant public subsidy--the ULI panel helped establish that reality.

So, does Saks Off Fifth Avenue in the Outlet Mall count?

[bombermwc]

I am going to go ahead and venture a guess that you can't provide evidence that Saks will come to an expanded Penn Square. I base this guess on the fact that you have already replied, and once again you only had negative comments bordering on personal insults, and again, added absolutely nothing new to the discussion. You have perfected the art of deflecting while accusing others of deflection. I wonder what fallacy that is...

Typical Oil Capital.

OK, so by that logic i can say that if you can't provide me evidence that there aren't plans anywhere, then it will happen. And i know you can't do that because you can't read the minds of investors. I could also say that unless you can provide evidence to say that there isn't air, then it exists. It's a silly basis for an arguement.

But i forgot, Spartan has spoken, and we're not supposed to disagree.

[progressiveboy]

I think we've beat a dead horse already on whether or not Penn Square is a dump or not. However, I went to PSM today and noticed an Oakley store is coming soon, The Yankee Candle store is closed down and a Paciugo Gelato joint is coming soon near the food court.

Actually, the Yankee Candle Shop moved on the upper west side of the mall, however it is still in business at PS.

[Debzkidz]

I was told yesterday that the Origins store in Penn Square is closing. I'm surprised it lasted as long as it did.

[Pete]

A building permit for $5,300,000 to renovate the common areas of the mall was just issued.

Not sure of the plans, but that's a pretty bit chunk of money, so substantial updates must be in the offing.

[Snowman]

Could it be common areas on the exterior of the mall? They have been doing a few stages of rehabbing the exterior and parking lots recently and the interior was redone not that many years ago.

[Pete]

The permit just says "remodel of the mall area".

[king183]

Last week they were tearing the fascade off the west side of the mall. I'm not sure what they were planning. It could be a new exterior or it could be just to build a direct entrance to the store that's located behind the wall. Or both.

[OKCTalker]

Can they get $5.3 million spent by Halloween, the new official start of the Christmas shopping season?