Simon owns Roosevelt Field. Roosevelt Field is doing exceptionally well. Simon also owns Mall at The Source. They have defaulted on mortgage payments, the mall is up for sale for over 100 million dollars (the debt owed) but probably wont sell for more than 20 million.
So comme ci comme ça.
The case of Sports Authority mentioned by the OP is a bit different from the case of malls in general.
None of the Sports Authority stores around here are in standard malls. Just another store in an basic outdoor mall, at most. (I’d call it a strip mall but that denotes a lesser complex to some people.) The nearest one is just one store in a two store building.
These kind of outdoor malls are doing great: if the anchor store is doing well. E.g., if it’s centered around a Walmart.
While online shopping hurt Sports Authority, what was really killing them was bad management which couldn’t keep up with places like Dick’s and Bass Pro Shop. Our local SA was huge but with poor selection. And very few shoppers. When you have a store that big and five cars in the parking lot, you have problems.
Like all categories of stores, it’s competitive. If you don’t do as well as your competitors, you lose. With consolidation and focus on national chains, losing is much more visible.
As to indoor malls, one thing going forward that’s going to hurt them is the lack of mallrats. Teens don’t hang out at the mall anymore. When they get older, get real jobs, have kids, etc., they won’t understand the appeal of going to malls.
And bye-bye food courts.
It doesn’t seem like malls are over where I live, but it does seem like the era of bad malls is. People are willing to go to a mall as well as it is worth the drive and parking hassle. Indoor malls seem to be suffering more than town center-type malls.
One pattern I’ve noticed long-term is how one mall will become the place to go, if you are going to shop in meatspace. Older ones will then suffer and close (or be converted to something else). I’ve seen this domino effect happen with 4 of them now, going back 30+ years; the new kid on the block is a vast open air assemblage which must be dozens of acres in size.
Maybe, but I see malls dying in places where there’s not another one for 90 miles or more.
The traditional model, for shopping and for “lifestyle,” is called a “town.” I’m pleased to have seen interest and business return to some towns I know in recent years.
I’m guessing the style of store which lives and dies will be determined by the weather and the private car.
The CA central valley does not get cold, so the value of being able to do all your shopping in a warm, well-lit mall is not an issue.
I live 1.5 urban miles from a massive 1950’s - 1960’s mall.
The big anchor was Macy’s. JC Penny folded a few years ago, and this Macy’s is on the current hit list.
Across the street is a 1990’s Super Wal-Mart and a few smaller storefronts in a strip mall.
The
Wal-Mart is going quite well; the Linen and drapes store next to it folded.
I think there is still an upscale candy store (See’s, a CA thing).
Within a mile there are two more 90’s strip malls. They are dying.
I missed a tun and, in order to get turned around, discovered a strip mall set back from the (major through-way) street. Empty. It had a twin across the street. also empty.
Those two empty malls tell the story locally.
Does Gateway have a section that qualifies as an indoor mall, though? I know Roosevelt field and Green Acres do, but I haven’t seen a section like that at Gateway- it seems to be all individual stores with separate entrances from the parking lot. And that sort of mall seems to be doing better in general than the indoor mall where you can go to 200+ stores without ever stepping outside.
I think the issue with Malls is they are suffering from the Middle Class disappearing worse then other shopping outlets. It is the the same reason Family Restaurants like Red Lobster and Applebees are feeling the pinch worse then fine dining restaurants and fast food places.
The closest Sports Authority to me is in a mall. The Maine Mall, to be precise.
After the wave of closures a month or so ago, this is their only store in the state.
Western Europe is roughly as rich as the United State. Yet it only has a fraction (1/3?) or so of the retail space/capita of the U.S. The U.S. is simply over-stored.
Around me the downscale indoor malls are hurting while the upscale ones seem to be doing quite well, with big expansions. Because our weather is good we have outside malls also, with a new one still expanding and stealing stores like Target from some indoor malls.
It didn’t help when the big regional department stores started going under. Back when I was a kid (and for long before that) New York had Macy’s, Detroit had Hudson’s, Chicago had Marshall Field’s, MSP had Dayton’s, etc. I remember when Hudson’s hit the skids (after merging with Dayton,) my parent’s and grandparents were none too happy when Hudson’s stores were re-branded Marshall Field’s. Hudson’s was a Detroit thing, we didn’t want that Chicago bullshit! Once Macy’s was everywhere, I think a lot of customer loyalty evaporated. And now in the age of Amazon, I don’t see anything like that ever coming back.
No, I’ve only been to Collin Creek a few years ago, but the one Frisco (is that Stonebriar?) and Town East in Mesquite are booming. And both of
Northpark and The Galleria, like you said, are having no problems at all. Further, the mall in Tyler never lacks for throngs of people and even the dying mall in Greenville has now gotten some new stores that could easily revitalize it. So, I dunno. Most I know seem to be doing great and the only ones I know that have truly crashed and burned completely were Big Town and whatever that was in Garland.
Speaking of Dayton and Hudson:
The owner was named Dayton-Hudson.
It owned a soon-dead softgoods store Mervyn’s of California and a discount operation called Target.
In a none-too-subtle note to Mervyn’s, they changed their name to ‘Target’. Mervyn’s was shuttered a couple of years later.
Two different families. Daytons was owned by the Dayton family - one of the great grandkids is the current Governor of Minnesota. Hudsons was out of Michigan. Daytons bought Hudsons. Daytons opened a discount brand in the 60s called Target. Target bought Mervyn’s and turned those stores into Targets. The Dayton Hudson Corporation changed its name to the Target Corporation and sold off the Daytons brand to Marshall Fields - a Chicago Based company - which then was bought by Macy’s.
(From memory so I could be wrong on some of the order of things)
That’s what I meant above by saying “developers were creating more malls than was sustainable.”
Sure, but that’s the same reason, in the end.
For a long time developers were creating malls without regard to commercial market demand, or any (sub)urban development patterns. Instead, they just saw malls as quick, easy ways to make a fast buck, and assumed (or maybe hoped) that there would always be more people wanting to go to ever more malls.
Malls were originally meant to be more than just a collection of stores—they were meant to be like little downtowns, with nearby residences, and other aspects of urban living. But developers didn’t care about that. They just wanted to slap up the buildings, pave a big parking lot, and start collecting rent.
One mall in a 90 or even 40-50 mile radius hardly constitutes “more malls than was sustainable”. Especially when you consider that they thrived for 30 years or more and the population has increased. It seems to me more likely that people now find it more convenient to go to stand-alone stores. The decline in the mall’s traffic seems to have coincided with growth in the downtown shops.
If it’s the only mall in such a wide area, and once was thriving, but now is not, then, yes, that would be a for a different reason. I don’t know of any situations like that myself. Everywhere I’ve been, there are always some malls that are busy, and others that are kind of dying. The busy ones tend to be newer, and closer to other things, like offices, etc. In other words, if there is a choice, people choose a certain kind of mall. (If they were to put a mall in that downtown area, who knows, it could be very successful.) The point is that there is nothing about malls per se to say that they are “over,” from what I can tell.
I remember when the anchor stores moving to malls was blamed for the death of downtowns. In Colorado there was May-D&F(which had been just Daniels and Fischer before my day) and The Denver and Joslins. Then they started moving to fancy new malls, which at least according to the fogeys, killed the downtowns.
By the late 80’s they were all merged into the three or four big national corps anyway.
And Detroit did of course lose Hudson’s as mentioned above, but there were obviously lots of different dynamics going on then. But the Detroit suburbs were on the leading edge of Mallification, causing a the current gnashing of teeth over the loss of the historic and culturally significant malls. Which ultimately feels a little wierd.