News Release - July 7, 2000 The May issue of Shopping Center Business published Mark Borsuk’s analysis of how online buying changes site selection heuristics. Borsuk challenged location finders to think beyond the automobile as human prosthesis for estimating a new store’s sales potential. He urged practitioners to incorporate technographics into their sales potential algorithms along with marginal sales analysis and Pareto’s Rule. In Borsuk’s view it is the time to move beyond much of the folklore surrounding site selection. Most believe online buying has
minimal impact on retail property. Follow the money: tracking
online purchases. It’s still cheaper
online! Women shift purchases online. MetaSpace(sm) receives cool
reception from retail developers at ULI Spring conference. The Empire Strikes Back –
Mallibu.com. On the roll at the ICSC Las
Vegas conference. Upcoming ICSC conference on
E-Commerce. Dream Team 2001: Amazon buys
WebVan! PDA nightmare -- you read it
here first. Talks & publications. Paris -- taking reservations
for September & Spring 2001. Contact information. Most believe online buying has
minimal impact on retail property. Since March, sentiment
has changed sharply over online buying’s impact on retail property values. The perception of a so-so online Xmas, the dot.com
market implosion and strong sales at malls all helped to ameliorate anxiety about
cyberspace. Traditional retailers were also
seen as rising to the challenge posed by the pure plays. Does this mean the online threat has come and gone? No! The retail real estate community is being lulled into complacency by transitory factors instead of recognizing online buying as a mainstream activity for shoppers and a new sales channel for retailers. The rise of the non-geocentric buying habit made possible by the Internet is the key to understanding the impact on retail space. Pure plays seized the opportunity from 1995-1999. After Christmas 1998, the traditional retailers recognized the channel’s viability and tried to follow their customers online. Many retailers did a mediocre job in 1999 but they are getting better. Today, many shoppers routinely go online to gather information before buying in the store. This is the first phase of the transition to the non-geocentric buying habit. The second phase is switching the transaction venue to cyberspace. The retail real estate community needs to focus on switching rates and the impact on merchandise categories. Online buying is no longer a novelty but an established means to purchase goods and services. Those believing stores will cede few sales to cyberspace are asking for trouble. While many continue to smirk about online buying’s reduced threat, others are looking at developments on the horizon. In April, Moody’s released “CMBS: The Impact of the Internet on Retail Real Estate, Version 2.0,” a report detailing the growing risk to retail properties including malls. The authors reiterated their concerns in a conference call on June 27. The report stressed: 1. The Internet is now mainstream. 2. Online buying is hitting take-off. 3. Sales switching has negative consequences for certain retailers and property types. 4. Online buying creates new retailer winners and losers. 5. Online buying can impact space demand. 6. Shifting space demand widens the chasm between good properties and marginal ones. 7. Online buying creates a new factor in evaluating the credit risk of existing properties. Thus, while many in the retail property community were discounting the online impact, some on Wall Street were raising more red flags. Furthermore, the national consultants are telling their retailer clients to rapidly transition to a multi-channel selling environment and re-evaluate their real estate holdings. At the NRF convention in January, Irwin Cohen of Deloitte & Touche offered senior retail executives a view of how the Internet is going to reshape their business. He said: “We expect the consumers will be buying online as much as 10 to 15% of total GAF sales within the next five to eight years. Internet development will accelerate based on capital market rewards. The Internet will be the only channel that will grow consistently at double-digit rates. The Internet further will slow the pace of new store construction and the creativity for new store formats will be channeled to Internet development. Store formats will change to integrate with multi-channel selling. Shopping centers will be further challenged to not only deal with the slowdown in store growth, but also the financial impact on their rents as consumers switch buying to the Internet.” In the May issue of Chain Store Age, the Ernst & Young Supplement -- Retail News, carried an article by Senior Advisor Walter Levy. Mr. Levy made his point forcefully: online buying impacts store traffic. He went on to state: “In many cases, retailers will need to go beyond reworking the selling floor and actually re-evaluate their real estate portfolio. If store traffic is, in fact, slowing, retailers will want to review their store expansion plans and perhaps close marginal locations.” The tone of these remarks underlines how profound an impact online buying is having on the sales channel matrix. While most retailers except Egghead are unable to change their location strategy overnight, a consensus for change is emerging. Is channel switching
happening? The above quotes illustrate real estate is no longer a taboo subject when it comes to sales channel reformation. The mantra of “location, location, location” still calls the spirits, but customers are beginning to change their purchasing habits and the retailers will follow. A switch in book buying habits is one example. The number of books sold to adults declined by 2.8% between 1997 (1,067M) and 1998 (1.037M) but rebounded by 3.2% in 1999 (1,071M). However, online buying’s share of total purchases rose from 1.9% in 1998 to 5.4% in 1999 while large chain bookstores share of purchases fell from 25.3% to 24.6%. Comparable data was not available for 1997. Thus, the pie is growing (accretive) but the channel shares are shifting (dilutive). (http://www.bisg.org/pressrelease_june2_2000.html) The phenomenon could be having an impact on mall bookstores. While the focus is on superstore performance, the mall may be the better place to test the hypothesis. Walden Books (Borders) and B. Dalton Books (Barnes and Noble) lease over a thousand stores. Many are in malls. Both chains perform poorly. During the first quarter, conference call questions arose regarding whether online buying was impacting their non-superstore sales. Neither company knew. It is surprising they had not done customer surveys to ascertain whether the mall shoppers were purchasing online or going to the superstore. While the mall operations have structural problems, online buying could exacerbate these problems. Best Buy’s efforts will also help determine whether channel switching is on the rise. The company launched a fully merchandised site in mid-June. Seventy-five percent of Best Buy’s customers are online and are described as technology enthusiasts. Best Buy believes the web site will drive store sales. Holiday sales should help determine whether this is the case. Follow the money: tracking
online purchases. Tracking online buying is getting easier. Weekly and monthly online purchasing data is now available to provide sales momentum and value. The Industry Standard publishes weekly data tracking purchases by number of transactions and value. It is based on a BizRate.com survey of several thousand online merchants. The data for the week ending June 27 is available online. (http://www.thestandard.com/research/metrics/indicators_shopping/) The National Retail Federation and Forrester Research publish a monthly online sales breakdown (http://www.forrester.com/NRF/1,2873,0,00.html) by merchandise and service category. Stripping out travel services, food and beverages and the “other” category, merchandise sales were $8.7Bn through May. Merchandise only Total Jan’00 $1.8Bn $2.7Bn Feb $1.6 $2.3 March $1.7 $3.0 April $1.8 $3.3 May $1.8 $3.4 Total $8.7Bn $14.7Bn Even assuming monthly merchandise purchases of only $2Bn for the rest of the year, online buying can easily hit $23Bn. A sure sign of the network effect. By comparison, last year similar purchases were about $12.5Bn. Furthermore, the concentration of sales in select categories creates the possibility of online buying capturing ten percent or more of holiday sales. Much of it is likely to be at the expense of store sales. One category to watch is consumer electronics. Sales through May were $680M. Substantial sales later in the year may call into question Best Buy and Circuit City’s strategy of driving their core customers into stores. For ease of analysis the NRF/Forrester monthly sales data disaggregates computer hardware, software and consumer electronics sales. Also of note, apparel and footwear sales are growing rapidly. Sales through May reached $980M. Finally, office supply stores represent another merchandising category where channel switching could adversely impact locations. Office Depot reported online sales of $349M in 1999 and expects them to reach $800M in 2000 or about 7% of total sales. In 1999 Staples generated sales of $94M sales and expects them to reach $300M in 2000. The company noted the bulk of its customers are small businesses and active home offices. These customers can readily switch from the store to cyberspace, especially for restocking items and heavily promoted merchandise. It’s still cheaper online!On Wednesday, June 21 the WSJ and on Sunday, June 25 the NYT ran stories about the loss of online bargains due to the need of pure plays to achieve profitability. What the NYT story sought to explain was online prices are marginally increasing but the real story was the online and offline price gap. The NYT piece compared an online quote of $338 for a Sony S550D DVD player to Circuit City’s store price of $449 plus tax. Without considering sales tax and shipping, the difference was a whooping 25% ($111). Adding twenty-five dollars for shipping still results in a 19% ($86) savings over the store price. If no sales tax were applied to the online purchase, the savings would be even greater. Clearly, the NYT editor did not have a calculator handy when reviewing the draft. The continuing price disparity is the real story and has serious implications for location based retailers. The price differential also benefits comparison shopping sites like www.dealtime.com and www.mysimon.com, that continue to exploit this differential for the benefit of their visitors. Office supplies are another example where online competition works for the customer. OfficeDepot.com offers the Xerox toner cartridge for $130 with free shipping. Costco online sells them for $110 plus shipping @ $1.79. Sales tax applies to both. Buying at Costco.com saves 14% ($18.21). Go figure. Women shift purchases online. Women are moving their purchases to cyberspace. Several years ago the retail property community and many merchants did not believe women would embrace the new channel. They have! There are between 35-40M women online. In June, a national poll conducted by the Wall Street Journal/NBC News found half of the women online had bought something. This was up from one-third in December. The poll found about 55% of men had bought online. In addition, seventy percent of the women buyers were between 18 – 49 with college degrees. This demographic and technographic profile is very attractive for many retailers. Women have also become the “supershoppers” of the Net. Supershoppers are defined as those purchasing online more than once a week. PeopleSupport and the NPD Group released their study of 2,198 online users that found 63% of those who shop online more than once a week were women. The survey result should not come as a surprise considering women represent the majority of buyers in the offline world. (http://www.peoplesupport.com/releases/news052500.htm) The Target presentation at the Consumer Electronics Association meeting in May gave another indication of how women are becoming the majority of shoppers online. Target finds seventy-eight percent of its online customers are women, almost the same as in the store. Of the women shopping online, fifty percent have a college education, half have children under 18 and their median household income is $59,000. While not specific, the speaker made it clear Target’s online volume is substantial and growing. There are other important signs women are taking to the non-geocentric buying habit. For example, Michelle Slatalla writes about online shopping in the Circuits Section of the New York Times. Every week she tells readers about shopping for items, the secrets of comparison shopping or discusses new services to make buying easier. The message is clear: women should buy online because it is convenient, secure and at times cheaper. “Confessions of a dot.com customer” is the headline on the editorial page of June 19 issue of DSN Retailing Today, formerly Discount Store News. Senior editor Laura Heller confesses “I’ve decided to come out of the closet and admit to the world that I am a traitor to my industry. I’ve been shopping on line – not just for books and music. I shop for gifts, clothes and everyday necessities that could easily be found at my corner store.” She continues “My groceries come from Peapod.com and arrive at my home at a specified time. Daily necessities are ordered from Drugstore.com or More.com which offer lower prices than the local drug store chain that dominates the market in which I live. As an added bonus, there is no more waiting in long lines for indifferent associates to ring up purchases.” Ms. Heller’s point is that service online is better than in the store for many items. Implicit in her message to readers, the mass merchandisers, is that online works for women. Lisa Napoli’s near classic piece on underwear shopping is another example of how clothing purchases, where fit is critical, once thought impervious to online competition, can migrate online. This has significant implications for mall fashion tenants. The article points out reordering online is of great benefit to women since the retailer can offer a wider selection of style and size than available in the store. She noted online help is available to guide shoppers on the initial purchase. (http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/06/biztech/technology/07napo.html) The Moody’s report also commented on women as online buyers. The report states the gender shift “…could help support the ongoing functionality of Internet retail.” The fact that five of the seven authors were women strongly suggests this viewpoint is not just armchair speculation but a realistic view of how women perceive shopping and buying online. MetaSpace(sm) receives cool reception from retail developers at ULI Spring convention.The ULI invited Borsuk, David McIntosh from the Ernst & Young Center for Business Innovation and Nancye Green of marchFirst to present their views on “The Impact of E-Commerce on Retail Real Estate” during the Spring Convention in Miami on May 10. An invited panel of twenty developers, property owners and allied specialists chaired by Robert Taubman critiqued the presentations for the 100 plus in attendance. Borsuk presented his vision of retail development’s new frontier: The Wired Retail Project (a.k.a. MetaSpace(sm)). He identified three challenges facing developers. First, how to properly align the interests of the customers, merchants and developers in cyberspace. Second, how to make the project a database. Third, how to capture revenue leakage. He began his analysis by pointing out the current misalignment of interest among shoppers, merchants and developers. Alignment of interests is the critical factor for integrating cyberspace with retail space. In his view the only way to align these interests was for the developer to create and host a web site for tenants. Customers seeking to reach the tenants online would first have to pass through the developer’s web site. Nevertheless, passing through the developer’s site would not interfere with the customer-merchant relationship. In MetaSpace(sm) the tenant does not maintain an independent web site. The Wired Retail Project is unique since the tenants are sui generis to the area and the project’s location is in heavily wired cities like San Francisco and New York. Borsuk outlined the five types of tenants for the project. They include the outpost, traditional retailer, manufacturer, lifestyle provider and trade show exhibitor. With one exception, mass retailers were unlikely to find MetaSpace(sm) inviting since merchant uniqueness is the primary draw. He went on to explain how browsers and buyers on the developer’s web site create a database. The database also tracks and calculates transaction revenue from online purchases. Borsuk emphasized MetaSpace(sm) was not a stand along project but one designed to add cachet to office buildings, hotels and existing malls. The panel reacted negatively. One criticism concerned the proposed tenants. The idea of each project having merchants and service providers unique to the locale with no need to expand went against the grain. Another critic asked why would a merchant even want a physical location when they could go directly to the customer from their own web site. Part of the reason is that by landlords providing the technological infrastructure, merchants could concentrate on what they do best. Another concern was the credit worthiness of small tenants. The audience did not place much merit in profitably servicing a worldwide customer base from a single store. However, the Hong Kong tailor is a good example of an offline business operating locally but selling globally. Few thought the new tenants would drive foot traffic to the project. Despite the panel’s cool reception, the ULI issued a press release on June 8 headed “E-Commerce Is Radically Reshaping Retail Real Estate According to Urban Land Experts.” The one group that seemed to enjoy the presentation were the consultants. Perhaps it was just the thrill of seeing Borsuk walk the plank. The Empire Strikes Back --
Mallibu.com. If developers were unhappy with MetaSpace(sm) they were favorably disposed to General Growth’s Mallibu concept presented at the ICSC convention later in the month. In a panel discussion on “The Changing Nature of Shopping Centers” the big mall developers, General Growth and Simon, discussed their online solutions for wedding cyberspace to the mall. The GGP presentation was detailed and forthright. The Mallibu.com model seeks to drive store sales by forcing the retailer to fulfill orders from in-store inventory and expects customer to pick up the order, although there is a delivery option. The first GGP mall online is the RiverTown Crossing in Grandville, Michigan. (http://rivertowncrossings.mallibu.com/shop/default.asp). Mallibu.com does not align itself with the interests of the customers and retailers because it assumes geocentric shopping habits do not change and multi-store retailers will tolerate the inefficiency of in-store fulfillment. In addition, Mallibu.com competes with the tenant’s existing web site. The Mallibu.com model for ordering online and picking up at the mall assumes shoppers visit the mall weekly. But is this pattern sustainable? Merchandise availability online will be a key determinant. If the shopper finds the same retailer or other merchant offering greater convenience like direct shipping, wider selection or better prices, there is less incentive for weekly trips. This converts the slight inconvenience of going to the mall for pick-up into a burden. The model also has implicitly assumed women are not time constrained. Thus, the convenience of online ordering for mall pick-up does not seem to align the interests of developers and shoppers. The in-store order fulfillment requirement also puts retailers at a disadvantage. It directly challenges the multi-location merchant’s goal of driving down supply-chain costs, improving inventory turnover and fully integrating all sales channels. GGP believes retailers do not have the capability to individually ship customer orders from their distribution centers, thus making in-store fulfillment a win-win for the tenant and landlord. This could be true for some retailers without catalog operations but is unlikely for those developing online capability. Even Wal-Mart recognized the need for specialized online order handling and hired Fingerhut to do the fulfillment. Furthermore, the secondary impact of in-store order fulfillment could be to drive retailers to install ordering kiosks in place of inventory and create a showroom needing less space. The result could lead to higher percentage rent but less space rent for the landlord or worse, rent based solely on in-store sales. The Simon presentation also focused on the mall distribution model. On a related matter, the speaker noted that about two million shoppers had joined the mall promotional program since 1995. The program members represent two percent of the 100 million individuals visiting the Simon malls. This group might also be a fair proxy for the number of unique shoppers likely to patronize their web site. The talk provided an example of how fast technology is changing shopping. In some Simon malls customers can use a hand held ordering device called YourSherpa. YourSherpa allows them to order and pay for merchandise without going though checkout for later pick-up. However, web enabled PDAs and cell phones already give customers the ability to comparison shop and purchase items online while shopping, but not necessarily from the store. Rapid technological innovation has largely negated the value of YourSherpa. In-store comparison shopping from cell phones will bedevil retailers next year. See comment below “PDA Nightmare-You read it here first.” Right now, Wall Street is not focusing on how the developers are implementing their cyberspace efforts. Consolidating online commerce has a higher priority. However, this state of grace will not last. Retail analysts are unlikely to sit by while merchants consider agreements to require them to fulfill online orders out of in-store inventory. This is in fundamental conflict with their need to squeeze costs from the supply chain. Wall Street may ultimately decide the model is not merchant friendly. Likewise, retail REIT analysts may also sour on the order online and pick up at the mall model as they examine the earnings potential and fundamental misalignment of interests. On the roll at the ICSC Las
Vegas conference. The mood at the Las Vegas convention in May was assured. Many participants thought online buying had changed into clicks and bricks that worked to their advantage. However, a different picture emerged in private conversations. One national retailer noted store size is being studied as a result of increasing online sales, along with the future role of distribution centers to handle the greater volume. In another conversation, a consultant related how retailers were asking whether online buying changed site selection analysis. In other words, merchants were beginning to focus on the end game: channel convergence, customer convenience and adding value to transactions. Upcoming ICSC conference on
E-Commerce. The ICSC is holding an “E-Commerce” conference in San Jose on October 26-27. The initial brochure does not list speakers or panel topics but the discussion highlights give an indication of the program’s direction. The comments strongly suggest more agitprop than substance. Some of the bullet points on the brochure included “The coming shakeout in e-tailing”, “Are the IPO and venture capital spigots drying up?”, “Are those extravagant marketing outlays finally peaking? What did they yield?”, “Is there any customer loyalty among those fickle clickers?” and “Will E-Commerce ultimately create more demand for retail space?” A big picture perspective is necessary. From the space demand standpoint, it is not the battle between the pure plays and traditional retailers that is important. E-tailers take very little, if any, retail space. Rather, the issue is how quickly the traditional retailers embrace the online channel and whether they decide to slow new store growth, reduce the number of locations within an existing trade area or convert some stores to showrooms. The tipping point for online buying and sales channel reformation is here. This year sales are going to increase dramatically. We have reached critical mass for buyers and retailers. Best Buy and Circuit City are ready for business online. Wal-Mart, Kmart (www.bluelight.com), J.C. Penney and Target have lots of merchandise online. Toys-R-Us will likely launch a holiday jihad against etoys. There will be fierce competition between Amazon and BN.com for book and CD buyers, and the computer, software and office supply stores are likely to offer special online holiday promotions. Many specialty retailers, upscale gift, bridal registries and department stores are offering more than ever online. Instead of grave dancing, the conference should strive to present a wide spectrum of views on the trend. Among important topics to discuss are: 1. Does online buying alter geocentric buying habits sufficiently to retard space demand? 2. At the margin, does online buying add or subtract from in-store sales? Analyzing book, toy and consumer electronics purchases would be excellent case studies.
2. If online buying retards sales, what are the classes of merchandise and retailers at risk? 4. Can the Simon and GGP models align interests and capture revenue? 5. What trigger events require a change in strategy? 6. What strategies should developers and owners pursue to leverage cyberspace?
Participation by the mass merchandisers, specialty retailers, national polling organizations and Internet commerce consultants is necessary. Otherwise, the discussion will remain far too parochial. Limiting the debate will likely create the belief that the Titanic is unsinkable. Dream Team 2001: Amazon buys
WebVan. Does Amzaon have ambitions to marry its premier software development skills with a new economy logistics company? Far fetched, last mile lunacy, acid flashback? Maybe not. The ability to offer an appealing assortment of competitively priced hard goods, groceries, health and beauty and restocking items with the convenience of home delivery is a very compelling value proposition. “Amazon at your door” would relieve lingering concerns over credit card security and make returns a snap. Integrating next day delivery for merchandise and groceries could transform Amazon into a formidable store-less, national competitor for the category killers and warehouse clubs. Even upscale discounters like Target could feel the heat. In 1998 Borsuk made a presentation to the AMB Property Corporation about how ‘bundle buying” would impact community centers in affluent areas. He coined the term bundle buying to describe the online integration of the supermarket, superdrug and warehouse club with the ability to quickly deliver merchandise at no charge. WebVan’s purchase of HomeGrocer.com, owned 22% by Amazon, on June 26 moves the idea one step closer to reality. For an overview of online logistics see “The duel for the doorstep”, McKinsey Quarterly, 2000 Number 2, pp. 32-41. (http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/electron/dudo00.asp) WebVan could also blunt Peapod (Royal Ahold) and Groceryworks.com (Safeway) efforts to get into the home delivery business by expanding the merchandise assortment and the use of Amazon’s name recognition. Today, the clicks and bricks model is assumed to be the pure play’s destiny. However, by leveraging WebVan’s logistics, Amazon would provide a complete end-to-end customer experience. Offering doorstep service breaks free from the location conundrum. Home delivery coupled with brand name recognition and millions of existing customers is a tasty recipe for a retailing revolution. In short, bundle buying is on the horizon, but few see it coming. PDA nightmare -- you read it
here first. By year-end shoppers will be using their cell phones and PDAs to check features and prices in stores. See “U.S. Service Providers Still Do Mediocre Job of Wireless Net Access”, Thursday, June 22, 2000, WSJ, page B-1 for a description. These services already exist in Europe and Japan. MySimon (www.mysimon.com) is offering a Palm Pilot version. Of course, the downside for retailers is not pleasant. Thus, the following scenario. Joan Yang and William Smith (Stanford, MBA ‘02) were in Best Circuit, the electronics superstore, looking at digital cameras. Finding one, Joan did a feature comparison using her web enabled cell phone. Satisfied, she next checked the price. She was astonished to find 45th Street Better Buys of New York selling the same unit twenty percent cheaper even after shipping and sales tax. As Joan and William discussed the price difference and how to use Best Circuit’s everyday low price guaranty to match the price, a crowd formed around them to marvel at the phone’s ability to do real-time price checking. Soon other customers were asking for price comparisons. The mood grew ugly as they discovered Best Circuit was twenty percent higher than the other recognized retailers selling online. The security guard walked over to the group but misunderstood the conversation. She ordered Joan and William out of the store for disturbing the customers. The shoppers reacted angrily, causing the guard to snatch the phone from Joan’s hand. Joan grabbed it back, a melee ensued and Joan and William found themselves in the back of a squad car charged with trespassing and misdemeanor battery. The next day the wire services picked up the story of the two students being ejected from the store for comparison shopping. As most Americans will tell you, “comparison shopping is a constitutional right.” Best Circuit was roundly criticized for overreacting, the guard fired and the merchandising director let go. However, the PR disaster was just the beginning. A week later the students filed a twenty million dollar false arrest and imprisonment suit against the company. Wall Street pounded the stock the next day. Meeting in emergency session, the Board of Directors fired the CEO. Talks & publications In March, Borsuk presented a paper on MetaSpace(sm) at the annual ARES conference in Santa Barbara. One professor commented the “the idea was ahead of its time.” Another paper titled “E-Tailing and Internet-Related Real Estate Cost Savings: Where’s the Beef?” compared traditional, multi-channel and pure play retailers’ real estate cost efficiencies. The immaturity of the online model and non-standard expense allocations made it difficult to compare real estate efficiencies. However, over time this will become important in company financial analysis. Contact Andy Schlauch (andrew.schlaauch@us.pwcglobal.com) for additional information. Borsuk addressed the NAREIM Research Conference in Phoenix on April 17 and on April 19 spoke to the RREEF retail team in Del Mar. A new publication “Location Strategy Magazine” will feature a Borsuk interview on tenant leasing strategy for a wired world. The magazine’s launch gives site location practitioners a forum to debate the rapidly changing roles of place and cyberspace. The September issue of Shopping Center Business will present Borsuk’s ideas on incorporating web sites into retail developments. On July 13, Borsuk addresses appraisers in Las Vegas at the Valuation 2000 Conference. He will discuss how online buying can impact property values by overstating projected store sales, the impact of sales channel reformation on leases and the need to discount property values for technological obsolescence. Paris -- taking reservations
for September & Spring 2001. The Paris flat is available during September and after March 2001. The sunny condo on the fourth floor (walk-up) of a landmark building was completely renovated in 1999. The unit has three bedrooms and two full baths and is located in the 9th arrondissement. The property is two blocks from the Moulin Rouge (Montmartre) and convenient to all public transportation. View the flat at www.parisflat4u.com. For additional details contact Liliane Travert-Borsuk at markborsuk@aol.com. Contact information. Mark Borsuk (mark@borsuk.com) is Managing Director of The Real Estate Transformation Group, a firm analyzing information technology’s impact on space demand and providing strategies for property owners, developers, retailers and lenders. In addition to consulting, Mark is a retail leasing broker and real property attorney practicing in San Francisco. For further information contact Mark Borsuk at (415) 922-4740. Copyright © 2000. All Rights Reserved. Mark Borsuk. ++++++++++++++ News Releases | Articles | Upcoming Talks | Memorable Quotes Copyright ©1995 - 2001. Mark Borsuk. All rights reserved. Disclaimer notice |
