Winnipeg Retail

[rypinion]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

Those office workers have been present for the entire decline. Are you suggesting those office workers are going to radically change their habits for no apparent reason?

I was suggesting that that's what it's packed to the hilt with whenever I'm there.

[ediger]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

Those office workers have been present for the entire decline. Are you suggesting those office workers are going to radically change their habits for no apparent reason?

If something new if offered, maybe they will. You don't know for sure until you try. In the grand scheme of things, this costs very little money to setup and some good might come from it. Maybe nothing comes of it. If that's the case, we're no further behind as a city than we were before. Worthwhile as far as I'm concerned.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by ediger

If something new if offered, maybe they will. You don't know for sure until you try. In the grand scheme of things, this costs very little money to setup and some good might come from it. Maybe nothing comes of it. If that's the case, we're no further behind as a city than we were before. Worthwhile as far as I'm concerned.

A glass Half Full attitude, nicely put Ediger.

[thebasketballgeek]

I wished they would put a grocery store in that mall. It would bring more tenants and they could think about putting towers on top of Portage Place since they have one of the daily requirements. Portage Place is in a awesome location. It's close to the U of W for education,close to a lot of office buildings which can provide jobs, about one block from the Mts Centre, and so many more things to list. If they could possibly make a grocery store the size of atleast their staples (almost 25k sf) they could possible bring more known tenants, and it would basically be a win win situation.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by thebasketballgeek

I wished they would put a grocery store in that mall. It would bring more tenants and they could think about putting towers on top of Portage Place since they have one of the daily requirements. Portage Place is in a awesome location. It's close to the U of W for education,close to a lot of office buildings which can provide jobs, about one block from the Mts Centre, and so many more things to list. If they could possibly make a grocery store the size of atleast their staples (almost 25k sf) they could possible bring more known tenants, and it would basically be a win win situation.

Actually, if this comment was written in crayon I might have put it on the fridge...

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

Actually, if this comment was written in crayon I might have put it on the fridge...

Is that good or bad because I'm still a child

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by thebasketballgeek

Is that good or bad because I'm still a child

If you're still a child then it's duly noted...

[Riverman]

If there was a business case to put a grocery store in Portage Place there would be one there. But there is no business case so there won't be a grocery store.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

Actually, if this comment was written in crayon I might have put it on the fridge...

Do you really think this comment was necessary ?

[Riverman]

Are you the moderator now?

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Are you the moderator now?

I don't see my username in red or that title under it? Strange question but you were asking.

[cllew]

I work in City Place and maybe once or twice a year I buy something at Portage Place and when I do its at Staples. I use to go more when McNally had the book store there, but now there nothing that attracts me to go more often. Even the Bay is run down to the point its not worth walking through at lunch.

My lunch hour walks take me to the Richardson Building and back in the skywalk. The bland skywalk does not seem as depressing as the 2nd level of Portage Place.

[cllew]

Originally Posted by Riverman

I'm going tomorrow!

So what did you think? I was back there on Sunday to buy a screwdriver and they had stocked up the store a little more than I saw on Friday.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by cllew

So what did you think?

Something came up and I didn't go. Princess has a sale on tomorrow (tile cutter for $14.99!) so I'll check Peavey out then.

[biguc]

Originally Posted by Riverman

If there was a business case to put a grocery store in Portage Place there would be one there.

If this were true it would be impossible to open any business anywhere because every business that may work would already exist.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by Cyro

Do you really think this comment was necessary ?

I do.

If everybody wandered around here posting nonsense it wouldn't take long before the level of discourse was such that there was nothing left worth reading. Comments should provide some reasonable justification for themselves outside of just some airy-fairy optimism that has no basis in reality.

I mean that sincerely. I realize you're trying to foster a sense of inclusion around here and I respect your patience, but the quickest way to denigrate the caliber of debate is to give people the impression that all opinions are of equal merit.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by biguc

If this were true it would be impossible to open any business anywhere because every business that may work would already exist.

That's a very elementary way of looking at this comment. Efficient markets hypothesis says that when the time is right there will be somebody to supply the demand.

And somebody did survey the market in this case. It was so robust they shut down the only thing that looked anything like a grocery store.

[biguc]

It is elementary, which is the whole point.



Edit:

This is bugging me because my objection to Riverman's post is based on simple logic. I want you to take a look at what he wrote:

"If there was a business case to put a grocery store in Portage Place there would be one there. But there is no business case so there won't be a grocery store."



That's a fallacy. This is akin to saying "if it's raining, then it's cloudy. But it's not raining, so it must be sunny".

The specifics you've gotten into are fine. But you wouldn't catch me making hard and fast claims about what the market will or won't deliver because--I'm sure you'll agree--the market here is distorted. If we didn't live in a place where governments had pumped massive subsidies into suburban development for decades, only to try to counteract them with more subsidies, we could start to talk about what the market should be doing. As it is, we're arguing about how Salvador Dali elephants can possibly carry golden castles on those skinny legs.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by biguc

It is elementary, which is the whole point.



Edit:

This is bugging me because my objection to Riverman's post is based on simple logic. I want you to take a look at what he wrote:

"If there was a business case to put a grocery store in Portage Place there would be one there. But there is no business case so there won't be a grocery store."



That's a fallacy. This is akin to saying "if it's raining, then it's cloudy. But it's not raining, so it must be sunny".

The specifics you've gotten into are fine. But you wouldn't catch me making hard and fast claims about what the market will or won't deliver because--I'm sure you'll agree--the market here is distorted. If we didn't live in a place where governments had pumped massive subsidies into suburban development for decades, only to try to counteract them with more subsidies, we could start to talk about what the market should be doing. As it is, we're arguing about how Salvador Dali elephants can possibly carry golden castles on those skinny legs.

You're thinking too hard about this. It's as simple as the fact that there's no demand and there's no will. A grocer isn't going to go out on a limb so the few people that care about downtown development in this city can have a test case. They'll respond when the metrics tell them it's wise. Corporations aren't in the business of cutting off their nose to spite their face; if there was money to be made, rest assured they'd be positioning themselves to make it. This is all totally apart from subsidy. The subsidy exists because the government exists to satisfy their constituents in a horse-trade for votes. If the city demanded people live downtown, those individuals would just take up in bedroom communities outside the city limits as a response. And it isn't like people in 2014 have suddenly changed their demands - there's still next to no demand to live downtown even as everybody knows it's ultimately for the good of the city. If the city all of sudden started pulling latent subsidies that exist for those who prefer to live in the suburbs and the costs increased, you wouldn't get those individuals to choose downtown living as if it were a totally binary relationship. They would just move to places like West. St. Paul and LaSalle and tack on a few minutes to their commutes while watching their property taxes decline.

It's worth noting that the city has tried to engineer demand in the Exchange and has so far failed...

[Winnipeg Architect]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

You're thinking too hard about this. It's as simple as the fact that there's no demand and there's no will. A grocer isn't going to go out on a limb so the few people that care about downtown development in this city can have a test case. They'll respond when the metrics tell them it's wise. Corporations aren't in the business of cutting off their nose to spite their face; if there was money to be made, rest assured they'd be positioning themselves to make it. This is all totally apart from subsidy. The subsidy exists because the government exists to satisfy their constituents in a horse-trade for votes. If the city demanded people live downtown, those individuals would just take up in bedroom communities outside the city limits as a response. And it isn't like people in 2014 have suddenly changed their demands - there's still next to no demand to live downtown even as everybody knows it's ultimately for the good of the city. If the city all of sudden started pulling latent subsidies that exist for those who prefer to live in the suburbs and the costs increased, you wouldn't get those individuals to choose downtown living as if it were a totally binary relationship. They would just move to places like West. St. Paul and LaSalle and tack on a few minutes to their commutes while watching their property taxes decline.

It's worth noting that the city has tried to engineer demand in the Exchange and has so far failed...

In 1999 Centre Venture had full control of the new Waterfront Drive district. They could have made a functional community but just piecemealed the area. The developers took a leap of faith when they invested millions of dollars on the condos. CV jumped to Portage Avenue after the Jets came back and abandoned the Waterfront and The Exchange. Now they have millions to spend to make the area "better." They better not screw this up.