The Vancouver Business Thread

[svlt]

Originally Posted by NewfBC

Don't forget.. Lululemon, Aritzia, Herschel, and many others.

Ron.

If we're on the topic of well known Vancouver (rather than Canadian brands), Arc'teryx is too, Chinese owned parent. MEC as well, American owned. I think Reigning Champ is one of the biggest names here that's still entirely locally owned.

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Not any more (if it ever was). It's nearly 90% owned by institutional funds, almost all based in the US. The head office has moved around, but is now in Denver. Now they also own Miller, 70% of sales are in the US, and just 11.6% in Canada.

Good grief. You’re looking at a generic website identifying
who holds a position in the public shares of the company. For their complete and ownership picture, you need to unravel the myriad of subsidiaries and holding companies and to see those, you need to go through documents available through the Securiry Exchange Commission.
Where the majority of the company’s sales are are completely irrelevant to their ownership structure.
Again, unless there’s been a major recent development, Molson is still partially held be Canadian interests

[NewfBC]

Originally Posted by svlt

If we're on the topic of well known Vancouver (rather than Canadian brands), Arc'teryx is too, Chinese owned parent. MEC as well, American owned. I think Reigning Champ is one of the biggest names here that's still entirely locally owned.

Reigning Champ is now owned by Aritiza.

Arc'teryx is Chinese controlled.. but Chip Wilson owns 20% of the parent company.

Ron.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Not any more (if it ever was). It's nearly 90% owned by institutional funds, almost all based in the US. The head office has moved around, but is now in Denver. Now they also own Miller, 70% of sales are in the US, and just 11.6% in Canada.

Being 90% owned by US institutional funds is almost meaningless when the shares are likely held in funds that are sold to other institutions and invidividuals.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

Good grief. You’re looking at a generic website identifying
who holds a position in the public shares of the company. For their complete and ownership picture, you need to unravel the myriad of subsidiaries and holding companies and to see those, you need to go through documents available through the Securiry Exchange Commission.
Where the majority of the company’s sales are are completely irrelevant to their ownership structure.
Again, unless there’s been a major recent development, Molson is still partially held be Canadian interests

The same ownership structure is shown on the Molson Coors website, although obviously there might be Canadian interests owning some of those US institutional funds. Molson Coors undoubtedly have Canadian interests owning a proportion of the shares, but unless you can link to something proving it, not 50%, which is what you claimed initially. Through taking over Miller, US ownership interests were strengthened. Publications suggest various Coors family members still control a little over 10% of the stock. Although there are two members of the Molson family on the board, there's nothing published that suggests the family holdings are as large as those of the Coors family.

The sales volumes show how relatively insignificant the Canadian part of Molson Coors is now, in a much bigger business.

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by Changing City

The same ownership structure is shown on the Molson Coors website, although obviously there might be Canadian interests owning some of those US institutional funds. Molson Coors undoubtedly have Canadian interests owning a proportion of the shares, but unless you can link to something proving it, not 50%, which is what you claimed initially. Through taking over Miller, US ownership interests were strengthened. Publications suggest various Coors family members still control a little over 10% of the stock. Although there are two members of the Molson family on the board, there's nothing published that suggests the family holdings are as large as those of the Coors family.

The sales volumes show how relatively insignificant the Canadian part of Molson Coors is now, in a much bigger business.

When the 2 companies (Coors and Molson) merged, about 15 years ago, the share structure of the new merged companies consisted if 2 types of shares. That will not show up on a company website. Again, the companies structures along with all holding corps holding corps who hold interests in the company. This is noted in registries with the securities exchange commission which it has to by law. That’s where that information is. Not on a company website or “publications” which it would never be. The 50% figure was well reported at the time of the merger. Again, would certainly be open to the idea of those being divested of since, but you’ve produced nothing to suggest that. So until that time, your assertion that Molson os not Canadian; is false. A good indicator of their importance in the company might be thatt a Molson still to this day sits as chairman of the board of the entire enterprise. That wouldn’t happen unless they had a significant stake in the business unless they possessed some special talent the business could not do without, which is not the case here.

The acquisition of Miller was just that; an acquisition, not a merger as was the case between Molson $ Coors. The lions share of the business was always in the US; that’s not news. Coors was a much larger brewery than Molson when they merged; yet Molson a much smaller Canadian brewery was able to take a 50% share of the new entity which was quite the accomplishment and out of the norm for these types of transactions

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

When the 2 companies (Coors and Molson) merged, about 15 years ago, the share structure of the new merged companies consisted if 2 types of shares. That will not show up on a company website. Again, the companies structures along with all holding corps holding corps who hold interests in the company. This is noted in registries with the securities exchange commission which it has to by law. That’s where that information is. Not on a company website or “publications” which it would never be. The 50% figure was well reported at the time of the merger. Again, would certainly be open to the idea of those being divested of since, but you’ve produced nothing to suggest that. So until that time, your assertion that Molson os not Canadian; is false. A good indicator of their importance in the company might be thatt a Molson still to this day sits as chairman of the board of the entire enterprise. That wouldn’t happen unless they had a significant stake in the business unless they possessed some special talent the business could not do without, which is not the case here.

The acquisition of Miller was just that; an acquisition, not a merger as was the case between Molson $ Coors. The lions share of the business was always in the US; that’s not news. Coors was a much larger brewery than Molson when they merged; yet Molson a much smaller Canadian brewery was able to take a 50% share of the new entity which was quite the accomplishment and out of the norm for these types of transactions

.

Thanks for the answer. As you say, Molson Coors has a 2-tier share structure, and the company's policy is controlled by the A class shares. It is unusual for a Canadian family to have as much influence on a major US business.

While the majority of the value of the company is owned by B class shareholders (predominantly institutional holdings), 90% of the A class stock is held by family members. So the company is still controlled by Molson and Coors family interests, without being owned by them. The board has 14 members, four family members and nine independent directors and the CEO. Molson family propose three of the independent directs, and the Coors family another three, and three are Class B directors. The chair and vice chair alternate between the Molson and Coors families every second year.

Initially there was a 2008 business merger called MillerCoors, where SABMiller owned 58% of the shares, with a minority owned by Molson Coors (but with a 50-50 voting control). The 2016 acquisition was a result of the 2015 merger of A-B Inbev and SABMiller, which meant the DoJ required the Miller stake to be sold to Molson Coors to create the business that is running today.

Some shareholders of Class B shares were initially opposed to the Miller acquisition, and that's where the ownership was important, as the Board had to get a two thirds majority of shareholders to agree to the deal in 2015.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

A good indicator of their importance in the company might be thatt a Molson still to this day sits as chairman of the board of the entire enterprise. That wouldn’t happen unless they had a significant stake in the business

Molson Coors is a publically traded company on the NYSE and the TSX. I think it would be reasonable to assume that well under 50 percent of the outstanding common shares are held by Canadians, directly or otherwise, simply because of the sheer number of American and international individuals and institutions active in the stock market compared to their Canadian counterparts.

However, holding common shares isn't the only way to have control of a company. Looking through the SEC merger announcement it appears that both Molson and Coors can appoint six board members, with the remaining three members being elected by the common shareholders.

So I guess the question is what makes a company "Canadian"? If two-fifths of a company's decision making power is held by Canadians, does that make it a "Canadian" company even though the shareholders are largely not Canadian? Or does Molson's 250-year history in Canada make it a Canadian institution, regardless of its current structure?

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by Changing City

.

Thanks for the answer. As you say, Molson Coors has a 2-tier share structure, and the company's policy is controlled by the A class shares. It is unusual for a Canadian family to have as much influence on a major US business.

While the majority of the value of the company is owned by B class shareholders (predominantly institutional holdings), 90% of the A class stock is held by family members. So the company is still controlled by Molson and Coors family interests, without being owned by them. The board has 14 members, four family members and nine independent directors and the CEO. Molson family propose three of the independent directs, and the Coors family another three, and three are Class B directors. The chair and vice chair alternate between the Molson and Coors families every second year.

Initially there was a 2008 business merger called MillerCoors, where SABMiller owned 58% of the shares, with a minority owned by Molson Coors (but with a 50-50 voting control). The 2016 acquisition was a result of the 2015 merger of A-B Inbev and SABMiller, which meant the DoJ required the Miller stake to be sold to Molson Coors to create the business that is running today.

Some shareholders of Class B shares were initially opposed to the Miller acquisition, and that's where the ownership was important, as the Board had to get a two thirds majority of shareholders to agree to the deal in 2015.

Yes I remember something along those lines when the merger was announced. Two tiered share structure. As you state, even though not in a majority share position, the families still controlled the company.
Thanks for looking that up.

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

Molson Coors is a publically traded company on the NYSE and the TSX. I think it would be reasonable to assume that well under 50 percent of the outstanding common shares are held by Canadians, directly or otherwise, simply because of the sheer number of American and international individuals and institutions active in the stock market compared to their Canadian counterparts.

However, holding common shares isn't the only way to have control of a company. Looking through the SEC merger announcement it appears that both Molson and Coors can appoint six board members, with the remaining three members being elected by the common shareholders.

So I guess the question is what makes a company "Canadian"? If two-fifths of a company's decision making power is held by Canadians, does that make it a "Canadian" company even though the shareholders are largely not Canadian? Or does Molson's 250-year history in Canada make it a Canadian institution, regardless of its current structure?

The key driver for the company is those class A shares. And Molson, if going by the information presented previously, owns half of those. The chairman of the board is a Molson, which is not an insignificant item. Plus the company still has substantial operations in Canada and operates its own brands in this country. They are also a large part of much larger worldwide company. It’s a much different situation that we have seen in other situations whereby a US (usually) firm takes over a Canadian company, guts it of all identify and just makes it an extension of its US operations with all key decisions being made by American personnel, in American head offices. Sometimes even products are produced 100% in the US. That’s not the case with Molson. Where I stand, that’s a win for the maple leaf as best as can be hoped for in today’s globalized landscape

[jollyburger]

Their current offices are in the office building next to Gilmore Place that will be demolished soon.

Halo Manufacturer SkyBox Labs Opens 3 Studio Offices In Burnaby And Victoria
August 17, 2022 by Vaseline

Continued confidence in British Columbia’s game development talent and an ongoing project pipeline on the horizon has prompted SkyBox Labs to undertake a major expansion of its three-site studio offices.

The BC-based company recently opened a 20,000 square foot space in the Solo District offices at 2025 Willingdon Avenue adjacent to the Brentwood Town Center SkyTrain station in Burnaby. This office was previously located near 4190 Lougheed Highway, which is now slated to be demolished for the Gilmore Place complex.

Another 12,000 square foot location opened in the Sovereign Building at 4501 Kingsway Avenue in Burnaby’s Metrotown neighborhood.

A third office location also opened in Market Square in downtown Victoria.

All of this expansion space combined will allow SkyBox Labs to grow to over 250 employees in 2022, with additional positions for engineers, designers, producers and artists.

SkyBox Labs is perhaps best known for being the co-manufacturer of 2021 Halo infinityalong with a number of titles such as halo 5, Fallout 76, Stella, Project Spark, ufc, Grandia II anniversary editionand different versions of Minecraft and Age of Empires.

“With Halo Infinite, our team was able to demonstrate more than just our technical skills. We were fortunate to contribute to the title’s UX/UI, design, animation, character art, environment art, lighting, technical art, production and QA,” said Shyang Kong, co-founder of SkyBox Labs.

“The new studio space will give us plenty of room to grow as we continue to work on Halo Infinite and more.”

The company notes that it has a number of upcoming unannounced titles, including partner projects and internal intellectual property. Project partners have included global giants such as Wizards of the Coast, Electronic Arts and of course Xbox Game Studios.

With Halo infinityFor example, SkyBox Labs has developed a very close working relationship with 343 Industries, another game development studio. While studios collaborating on a game development project typically follow a compartmentalized organizational and workflow structure, Kong essentially described a working relationship where both companies worked closely together and the two teams instead worked “shoulder to shoulder” as one team.

“As a fast-growing studio, we have a great size to take on big projects, but we also have the flexibility to make sure we’re working on the right projects,” Kong told Daily Hive Venture.

“For us, this means not only selecting meaningful work that we know will impact the growth of our team members, but also projects from studios we enjoy working with, to franchises we enjoy playing.”

Kong adds that SkyBox Labs is confident in the long-term local post-secondary institutions’ ability to provide the needed steady supply of skilled talent in all aspects of game development.

Kong also emphasizes that his company strives to take proactive measures that prevent its employees from falling into the grueling “crunch” — mandatory overtime hours to complete the game development process.

“A healthy work-life balance is critical to the success of our studio. We offer flexible working hours to balance family time and encourage exercise and self-care. To avoid bottlenecks, we work closely with our partners and focus on project planning,” Kong said.

“Through planning, we’re able to eliminate a lot of the confusion that can arise when creating a game and place our team members in roles where they will thrive. The psychological safety of our team members is very important to us. We believe that a reasonable workload and achievable deadlines are motivating and productive.”

https://paperwriter.ca/halo-manufacturer-skybox-labs-opens-3-studio-offices-in-burnaby-and-victoria

[whatnext]

Hot on the heels of the job action at YVR is this story, again ruining tourists experiences of Vancouver. However, I'm a little bit surprised that a modern cruise ship couldn't execute a departure without the assistance of tugs. Ocean liners in NYC had to do it in the Fifties without the aid of bow thrusters etc:

Tug workers' strike strands cruise ship passengers in Vancouver harbour
Megan Devlin|
Aug 29 2022

Cruise ship passengers aboard the Celebrity Eclipse were supposed to be en route to Alaska by now, but instead, they spent the last day stranded in the Vancouver harbour, with no indication of when or if they’ll leave.

The boat was supposed to depart Sunday at 4:30 pm but was still in the harbour as of 9:30 am Monday — all because of job action by tug boat workers.

“Without the support of tug boats, the ship is unable to depart the port,” Celebrity said on Twitter. “We’re working with local authorities to resolve the situation so that the ship can depart.”...

...Tug workers began their strike on August 25, after union negotiations with Seaspan reached an impasse. Union members across British Columbia have been told to decline all employment opportunities until the employer delivers an improved offer.

Passengers aboard the shift have shared their frustrations on social media and have criticized the cruise line operator for its lack of communication. According to passengers on Twitter, the captain updated passengers at 6 pm Sunday and again at 7 am Monday — but there’s still no clear solution....

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/cruise-ship-stuck-tug-strike


Queen Elizabeth docks without tugs 1967:

• Video Link

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Hot on the heels of the job action at YVR is this story, again ruining tourists experiences of Vancouver. However, I'm a little bit surprised that a modern cruise ship couldn't execute a departure without the assistance of tugs. Ocean liners in NYC had to do it in the Fifties without the aid of bow thrusters etc:

Tugs are probably just required in case they lose engine control and start headed into the Lions Gate Bridge supports or another ship. They don't use tugs to dock except maybe to bring fuel by barge.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Tugs are probably just required in case they lose engine control and start headed into the Lions Gate Bridge supports or another ship. They don't use tugs to dock except maybe to bring fuel by barge.

The tug isn't needed to assist the cruise ship. They need a tug to remove the barge that's moored to the side of the ship.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Tugs are probably just required in case they lose engine control and start headed into the Lions Gate Bridge supports or another ship. They don't use tugs to dock except maybe to bring fuel by barge.

But I wonder if it is a government regulation or just what they feel comfortable with. If they could risk taking out a NYC pier with the Queen Elizabeth they should be able to roll the dice on this one.

[Migrant_Coconut]

QE didn't hit the pier, but she did hit a freighter in the same harbour eight years earlier. Titanic herself suffered a near miss while leaving Southampton; her sister Olympic IIRC holds the record of five collisions. A cruise liner took out a pier in Venice just this summer.

Generally, big ships and busy harbours don't mix... and modern cruise liners are often heavier than ocean liners. Hence tugs.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by whatnext

But I wonder if it is a government regulation or just what they feel comfortable with. If they could risk taking out a NYC pier with the Queen Elizabeth they should be able to roll the dice on this one.

Seems like it's government/industry based. There's transit zones for First Narrows, Second Narrows etc.

https://docs2.cer-rec.gc.ca/ll-eng/llisa...IG_-_A6L3X9.pdf?nodeid=3716496&vernum=-2

[officedweller]

Dispute at The Carlyle between the Commercial Owner and the Strata over special levy for repair of the tower cladding.

Thurlow & Alberni Project Ltd. v. The Owners, Strata Plan VR 2213,
2022 BCCA 257
https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/ca/22/02/2022BCCA0257.htm

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Dispute at The Carlyle between the Commercial Owner and the Strata over special levy for repair of the tower cladding.

Thurlow & Alberni Project Ltd. v. The Owners, Strata Plan VR 2213,
2022 BCCA 257
https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/ca/22/02/2022BCCA0257.htm

Mixing different types of strata units in one development is always a recipe for disagreements.

[jollyburger]

Polaris Realty is announcing today that the City of Vancouver has approved a development permit that will launch the creation of a new state-of-the-art connectivity hub in the Spencer Building Carrier Hotel, part of the iconic Harbour Centre.

This project’s aim is to provide cloud and connectivity services to companies looking to connect to Vancouver’s communication networks and internet service providers. Now that the City has approved the permit, the development of the data centre will allow enterprises to be closer to their western Canadian customers, expand existing infrastructure and connectivity in the region, as well as preserve a historic building.

Chris Jones, director of data center infrastructure and operations for the Spencer Building Carrier Hotel, says that the Harbour Centre is a western Canada communications hub and has always been a centerpiece of Vancouver.

“There was limited capacity in the Vancouver market for some of the technical spaces needed, and [Polaris Realty] decided, ‘I think it's time for us to invest into the market and into Vancouver to bring some space to the needs of the West Coast’,” Jones said.

According to a media release, the new permit is a milestone in what is to be a multi-year and multi-million dollar rehabilitation project for the building.

This new chapter for the building, originally built in 1907, will also offer the opportunity to further heritage preservation of one of Vancouver’s most iconic sites. The building has served as a Spencer, Eaton’s, and Sears department store and is currently home to the downtown campus of Simon Fraser University.

Antonio Dal Sasso, Harbour Centre’s director of operations, says that it is a good building with good bones.

He referenced a 2016 special heritage conservation plan whose goal was to preserve the building’s gothic revival and art deco exterior. Part of the permitting process for the new data centre involved approval from the Vancouver Heritage Commission.

The data centre will house 20,000 feet of connected fibers on multiple floors of the Spencer Building Carrier Hotel and will be an expansion of the 60,000 square feet of data centres already being housed at the location.

In addition, the permit gives the project a green light to install outdoor equipment on the roof of the historic building. This comes soon after the project received a first-of-its-kind approval to install its own set of private manholes leading directly into the building.

Jones says that this is the first time the City of Vancouver has granted a private owner this kind of permit for public street access.

“It provides us with control and security around all of those very critical connectivity fibers and cables coming into the building,” he said.

“[The permit] is really something that we're very proud of, and it's going to be really great for the Spencer Building Carrier Hotel as it moves forward and brings in these enterprise clients.”

According to Jones, there is currently a private project underway that is going to bring a large quantity of dedicated fibers from the Vancouver to the Seattle market.

He says that the private company that is working on this project alongside Spencer Building has “gone through all the right channels” for permitting as well as having the U.S. government sign off.

“There's existing cables that go from Vancouver down to Seattle, but they're old. And so they're starting to fail, they're starting to get damaged, kind of wear out if you will. So, this new conductivity that will go from Vancouver to Seattle, I think, is another important piece of the puzzle,” Jones said.

The new secure fibers will connect to the Westin Building in Seattle, which Jones says is a critical communication hub for the west coast as well as the U.S.

“We're just evolving into this really cool complex that can house anything you need, in terms of facilitating anything you want from the data center world,” said Dal Sasso.

https://biv.com/article/2022/09/new-connectivity-hub-announced-harbour-centre

Back in June



https://spencerbuilding.com/

I wonder who owns Harbour Centre.