ville-marie MAA Condominiums - 33 étages

[MDCM]

1 hour ago, _mtler_ said:

The owner has money problems, it's well documented, which means he's in survival mode, which means his credit is likely poor. Now, a good opportunity for him came along, with a commitment from a developer to retain some of the building's heritage. Do you prefer that the MAA closes down altogether and the building becomes vacant? Good for him, he cannot be faulted for this decision.

Were you ever in business? Did you ever put money on the line? And I'm asking with all due respect. I bet if you were in the owner's shoes and someone (developer) would throw you a lifejacket, the last thing you'd say were "there are so many other vacant lots, go build elsewhere". 

This is real life, real money, real decisions. This is not theory.

Money opportunities and businesses come and go - in real life, with real money, and real decisions. Precious architectural heritage of this importance doesn't, once it's gone, it's real gone, and this is no theory. 

I think it makes perfect sense to ask questions, and while I would LOVE to see another tower, I am far from convinced that this is the perfect spot for such a tower. This building could be repurposed if the MAA closes. There are other businesses inside that building as well, there are medical offices for example, totally unrelated to the MAA.

[acpnc]

Il y a 2 heures, _mtler_ a dit :

The owner has money problems, it's well documented, which means he's in survival mode, which means his credit is likely poor. Now, a good opportunity for him came along, with a commitment from a developer to retain some of the building's heritage. Do you prefer that the MAA closes down altogether and the building becomes vacant? Good for him, he cannot be faulted for this decision.

Were you ever in business? Did you ever put money on the line? And I'm asking with all due respect. I bet if you were in the owner's shoes and someone (developer) would throw you a lifejacket, the last thing you'd say were "there are so many other vacant lots, go build elsewhere". 

This is real life, real money, real decisions. This is not theory.

Ces gros promoteurs (comme souvent les petits) dépendent d'une croissance permanente pour rester à flot. D'ailleurs on ne compte plus les entreprises de constructions qui ont fait faillite à Montréal et au Québec. Si elles le font c'est qu'elles prennent des risques qui dépassent parfois leur capacité de crédit ou parce qu'un partenaire décide d'être plus prudent en quittant le bateau.

Quand on dépend d'un ultime projet pour survivre, c'est qu'on est déjà à la limite. Facile alors de sombrer face à un coup de malchance ou même à la prochaine récession.

[AP241]

L'extérieur est magnifique et doit être préservé, mais je me demande s'il y a réellement quelque chose à préserver à l'intérieur... après une recherche rapide sur google image.

 

 

Modifié 28 octobre 2018 par AP241
images

[FrancSoisD]

Le 2018-10-28 à 15:43, _mtler_ a dit :

The owner has money problems, it's well documented, which means he's in survival mode, which means his credit is likely poor. Now, a good opportunity for him came along, with a commitment from a developer to retain some of the building's heritage. Do you prefer that the MAA closes down altogether and the building becomes vacant? Good for him, he cannot be faulted for this decision.

Were you ever in business? Did you ever put money on the line? And I'm asking with all due respect. I bet if you were in the owner's shoes and someone (developer) would throw you a lifejacket, the last thing you'd say were "there are so many other vacant lots, go build elsewhere". 

This is real life, real money, real decisions. This is not theory.

It doesn't have to be "all or nothing"! MAA could have negociated a few conditions with Devimco. Have they? I'm under the impression they didn't... but i'm begging to be proven wrong!

[_mtler_]

14 hours ago, FrancSoisD said:

It doesn't have to be "all or nothing"! MAA could have negociated a few conditions with Devimco. Have they? I'm under the impression they didn't... but i'm begging to be proven wrong!

When you are desperate for financing, you are not in a position to negotiate terms. 

[qwerty]

Le ‎2018‎-‎10‎-‎28 à 15:43, _mtler_ a dit :

The owner has money problems, it's well documented, which means he's in survival mode, which means his credit is likely poor. Now, a good opportunity for him came along, with a commitment from a developer to retain some of the building's heritage. Do you prefer that the MAA closes down altogether and the building becomes vacant? Good for him, he cannot be faulted for this decision.

Were you ever in business? Did you ever put money on the line? And I'm asking with all due respect. I bet if you were in the owner's shoes and someone (developer) would throw you a lifejacket, the last thing you'd say were "there are so many other vacant lots, go build elsewhere". 

This is real life, real money, real decisions. This is not theory.

Seems like the only good option on the table...

[IluvMTL]

il y a 52 minutes, _mtler_ a dit :

When you are desperate for financing, you are not in a position to negotiate terms. 

Not sure the prospective buyers had an 'upper hand'.

MAA called for tenders and thus were able to negotiate and accept or refuse the offers. The property and potential development were great incentives. I'm pretty confident that MAA received more than enough to do what they wanted /needed. 

[UrbMtl]

https://devimcomaa.com/

[Rocco]

33 étages.. à peu près la hauteur de la tour Le Cartier à côté.

[MtlMan]

"intégrant la revitalisation" du MAA. Je demande à voir la façon de faire.