PREIT

[doctorwho]

lacy said:

eagledad said:

Someone needs to get the details of this plan into the newspapers. The public should know what's going up there (yes bob it will signicicantly reduce the value of the remainder for BB).

Additionally, the should know that according to the BB motion to disiss, The school district has been coordinating with PREIT all along, yet at this time PREIT is unwilling to take an additional 10-15 acres of frontage along 75th to reduce the district land costs.

If PREIT is not doing everything they can to support our HS, I don't think the community should make it easy for them to build super-mega walmart-mall in the last remaining open land. I'll be watching closely.

I'm just wondering if it's reasonable to assume that a corporation should buy 10-15 acres more than they wanted (that's anywhere from about $5 million to $ 8 million) just because that's what the district wants.

Does that really make them the bad guy? I would assume they run their business just like any other business. Their duty is to their shareholders/owners.

However Wal Mart does not run their business like everybody else - their predatory practices ( some of the nicer things they are engaged in) - are well documented - and I would be surprised that they weren't somewhat counting on 3000 spending teens being in the area 5 days a week ?

They will not want a profit failure here - and although they have faced very protest possible in their corporate life -- bad pub when it comes to a public school - even being remotely associated with it - I am sure would not make the Evil Empire in Bentonville happy.

[lacy]

bob said:

But what is the cost compared to having a 3000 teens 200 yards away for 3/4 of the year plus the attendance for activities.

I wasn't aware that teens had much money to spend - they don't have much income.

I'm sure a Superwalmart there will do a brisk business regardless of what goes near it. The one off Ogden is tucked too far back. This will be eaiser for people to get in and out of.

And does the public really want a school right behind a Super Walmart? The traffic, cars and congestion would concern me. I think better to get away from all the retail in that area.

[doctorwho]

proschool said:

bob said:

I hope BB chokes on that land trying to sell high density zoned housing with a Super Wlamart and a six story parking lot blcoking the view.

I think that's a three story parking lot and a six story apartment building.

No wonder that BB is pushing the school district to buy the land.

Keep going from bad to worse -- first no school there, then a stinkin' WalMart -- the tire factory is starting to sound better and better.

[lacy]

doctorwho said:

lacy said:

I'm just wondering if it's reasonable to assume that a corporation should buy 10-15 acres more than they wanted (that's anywhere from about $5 million to $ 8 million) just because that's what the district wants.

Does that really make them the bad guy? I would assume they run their business just like any other business. Their duty is to their shareholders/owners.

However Wal Mart does not run their business like everybody else - their predatory practices ( some of the nicer things they are engaged in) - are well documented - and I would be surprised that they weren't somewhat counting on 3000 spending teens being in the area 5 days a week ?

They will not want a profit failure here - and although they have faced very protest possible in their corporate life -- bad pub when it comes to a public school - even being remotely associated with it - I am sure would not make the Evil Empire in Bentonville happy.

Anyone who deals with Walmart and travels to Bentonville can tell you that they run things the way they want to. I think they're pretty good at tuning out distractions.

[proschool]

lacy said:

eagledad said:

Someone needs to get the details of this plan into the newspapers. The public should know what's going up there (yes bob it will signicicantly reduce the value of the remainder for BB).

Additionally, the should know that according to the BB motion to disiss, The school district has been coordinating with PREIT all along, yet at this time PREIT is unwilling to take an additional 10-15 acres of frontage along 75th to reduce the district land costs.

If PREIT is not doing everything they can to support our HS, I don't think the community should make it easy for them to build super-mega walmart-mall in the last remaining open land. I'll be watching closely.

I'm just wondering if it's reasonable to assume that a corporation should buy 10-15 acres more than they wanted (that's anywhere from about $5 million to $ 8 million) just because that's what the district wants.

Does that really make them the bad guy? I would assume they run their business just like any other business. Their duty is to their shareholders/owners.

It would give their customers acces to the light at 75th and Commons Drive. That traffic light they allude to on the northwest is only proposed.

I don't think they are going to get a light there.

[bob]

The market for products bought by and for the 25.6-million-member teen market will undergo a slight growth spurt, increasing from $189.7 billion in 2006 to $208.7 billion in 2011, despite an estimated 3% decline in the 12-17-year-old population in that same period, according to “The Teens Market in the US” report from Packaged Facts.

According to the teens report:

Teen spending money, accumulated through paying jobs, allowances from parents, “as needed” money from parents, and monetary gifts, will increase an estimated 3.5% annually, raising the aggregate teen income 14.4%, from $79.7 billion in 2006 to $91.1 billion in 2011.
Packaged Facts estimates that 12-14-year-olds have an average annual income of $2,167; teens in the 15-17-year-old age group generate an average annual income of $4,023.
The amount of money families spend on teens for food, apparel, personal-care items, and entertainment is expected to grow approximately 7%, from $110 billion in 2006 to $117.6 billion in 2011.
Though non-Hispanic Whites account for 82% of those age 65 and over, they comprise only 61% of those in the 14-17-year-old age group. Multicultural kids in the 12-17-year-old age group now account for around 40% of the teen population.
Nearly two out of three (64.9%) teens live in two-parent families.
A substantial minority (35.1%) live with only one parent (29.1%) or with neither parent (6.0%).
Around 40% of teens live in a household with an income of less than $50,000.
Another 40% of teens live in households with an income of $75,000 or more.
Only 26% of all teens surveyed placed an online order in the previous three months, based on an analysis of Simmons Market Research Bureau data.
But more than half (51.6%) of the teens surveyed said the internet has changed the way they spend their free time.
Nearly one out of three view the internet as their primary source of entertainment.
More than 90% use a computer either at home or at school.
“Teens living in 2007 have never known a world without personal computers and the Internet,” said Don Montuori, publisher of Packaged Facts.

“Teens are in the vanguard of the digital revolution in the media and marketing worlds, and they’re helping to change the way media, marketing, and advertising executives approach the American consumer.”

[doctorwho]

lacy said:

bob said:

But what is the cost compared to having a 3000 teens 200 yards away for 3/4 of the year plus the attendance for activities.

I wasn't aware that teens had much money to spend - they don't have much income.

I'm sure a Superwalmart there will do a brisk business regardless of what goes near it. The one off Ogden is tucked too far back. This will be eaiser for people to get in and out of.

And does the public really want a school right behind a Super Walmart? The traffic, cars and congestion would concern me. I think better to get away from all the retail in that area.

That's who is spending a good portion of the avg annual household income Preitt is so fond of putting on page 1. Walk thru downtown Naperville ( or soon the area near you on 95th street) and look at who's spending on all those shops. Go to the mall ans look at the age ofall the kids carrying bags out of Abercombie and Hollister --
Most have cell phones, ipods etc - It is a huge target audience for advertisers - one need only watch commercials and they are either aimed at health care for peoplelike me , or for that demographic.

So would we prefer the location where we have nothing but one trucking loading dock after another located next to the site ? ( once you actually get there )

[proschool]

... plus thier parents spend money and they will be near the high school all the time. they could go shopping and meet their kids in the shop rather than waiting in the pickup line.

[wvhsparent]

proschool said:

lacy said:

I'm just wondering if it's reasonable to assume that a corporation should buy 10-15 acres more than they wanted (that's anywhere from about $5 million to $ 8 million) just because that's what the district wants.

Does that really make them the bad guy? I would assume they run their business just like any other business. Their duty is to their shareholders/owners.

It would give their customers acces to the light at 75th and Commons Drive. That traffic light they allude to on the northwest is only proposed.

I don't think they are going to get a light there.

They would if they paid for it themselves. Those go though the process pretty quickly.

[lacy]

bob said:

The market for products bought by and for the 25.6-million-member teen market will undergo a slight growth spurt, increasing from $189.7 billion in 2006 to $208.7 billion in 2011, despite an estimated 3% decline in the 12-17-year-old population in that same period, according to “The Teens Market in the US” report from Packaged Facts.

According to the teens report:

Teen spending money, accumulated through paying jobs, allowances from parents, “as needed” money from parents, and monetary gifts, will increase an estimated 3.5% annually, raising the aggregate teen income 14.4%, from $79.7 billion in 2006 to $91.1 billion in 2011.
Packaged Facts estimates that 12-14-year-olds have an average annual income of $2,167; teens in the 15-17-year-old age group generate an average annual income of $4,023.
The amount of money families spend on teens for food, apparel, personal-care items, and entertainment is expected to grow approximately 7%, from $110 billion in 2006 to $117.6 billion in 2011.
Though non-Hispanic Whites account for 82% of those age 65 and over, they comprise only 61% of those in the 14-17-year-old age group. Multicultural kids in the 12-17-year-old age group now account for around 40% of the teen population.
Nearly two out of three (64.9%) teens live in two-parent families.
A substantial minority (35.1%) live with only one parent (29.1%) or with neither parent (6.0%).
Around 40% of teens live in a household with an income of less than $50,000.
Another 40% of teens live in households with an income of $75,000 or more.
Only 26% of all teens surveyed placed an online order in the previous three months, based on an analysis of Simmons Market Research Bureau data.
But more than half (51.6%) of the teens surveyed said the internet has changed the way they spend their free time.
Nearly one out of three view the internet as their primary source of entertainment.
More than 90% use a computer either at home or at school.
“Teens living in 2007 have never known a world without personal computers and the Internet,” said Don Montuori, publisher of Packaged Facts.

“Teens are in the vanguard of the digital revolution in the media and marketing worlds, and they’re helping to change the way media, marketing, and advertising executives approach the American consumer.”

I know you're pushing for BB anyway you can get it, but this is a real stretch.

I can't imagine that kids around here are clamoring for clothes from WalMart.

I doubt very seriously that having or not having a school there will have any impact on Walmart's sales. If that was the case, they would try to build near schools as much as they can. And I can't seem to recall any Walmarts (or any large retailers for that matter) near many high schools.

In fact, I think parents would be very concerned about increased traffic/safety issues in such a scenario.

Good thing they have moved on from this site - just too many problems.

[gatormom]

They really haven't walked away from BB lacy. The district's position is that it cannot be purchased at the current price.

If the price were to become afforadable, I would lay bets the district would jump on it.

[bob]

Here was your quote

lacy said:

I wasn't aware that teens had much money to spend - they don't have much income.

This has nothing to do with BB so I don't know why you are saying I want BB at all costs when I certainly haven't.

If you don't think teens had much money to spend how about these articles:

www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/02/20/MN187355.DTL&nl=fix

From 2002

The average American teen spent more than $104 a week in 2001, according to the marketing research firm Teenage Research Unlimited -- up from $78 just four years ago. About two-thirds of that is money they can spend however they wish; the rest is for specific items, such as groceries

www.merchandisegroup.com/merchandise/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001772548

Teens will spend $159 billion this year according to The TRU Study, the nation's premier teen marketing and lifestyle survey published by Teenage Research Unlimited (TRU).

www.marketresearchworld.net/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=615&Itemid=

Chicago, IL, November 12, 2004 -- According to a new report from Mintel on teen consumers, teen spending was valued at $175 billion in 2003 and is on the rise. The estimated spending power of teens, those age 12 to 17, is expected to top $190 billion by 2006, a figure that surpasses the gross domestic product of many
countries in the world. In addition, families with teens spent $100 billion on them with projected spending for 12 to 17 year olds as $128.5 billion in 2006.

Teens represent the first significant demographic change in the past decade. Not since the Baby Boom's teenage years has this age group been so large.
Twenty-five million strong in 2004, teens constitute 8.5% of the total US population in 2004. By 2010, teens are projected to comprise 10% of the US population.

Today's teens are the most affluent generation of young people to date. Over one-third receive some kind of allowance from their parents, and nearly three-quarters work around the house to earn it. Almost one third of teens work while going to school and participating in other teen activities. Marketers should recognize that a considerable amount of teens work and treat them accordingly when encouraging them to spend money on their products and services.

Teen girls have generally been regarded as the primary spenders. This has now shifted. For example, teen boys are the new darling of the health and beauty industry spending an estimated $2.1 billion on personal care in 2003. Teen boys buy shampoo and hair gels, often spending on hair coloring, too. They also purchase their own soaps, deodorants, shaving products and moisturizers. This new target market represents an entirely new opportunity for marketers of many
products.

Teens' dollars are primarily spent on themselves. This increase in their spending power will be fueled by higher earnings from jobs held by teens, increased teen savings and expansion of family expenditures on teens. Parents will always have a difficult time saying "no" to their children and teens will continue to receive hand outs from parents, grandparents and relatives. Their spending clout will wield tremendous economic power and drive overall consumer trends through their purchases.

[lacy]

gatormom said:

They really haven't walked away from BB lacy. The district's position is that it cannot be purchased at the current price.

If the price were to become afforadable, I would lay bets the district would jump on it.

Well, there certainly does appear to be alot of posturing. And I would find it hard to believe that after not pursuing any other land but this for years, that they have really given up.

So I think more and more that the north site is a rumor meant to stir up the public. Maybe they will even announce something about a northern site just to get people riled up. Then maybe they can "convince" the public that they should overspend for BB - or scale back the school. Having people float rumors that a northern site would doom the 09 referendum also is part of the scare tactic IMO. After all, these are the same people who tried to scare the public with split shifts, etc.

The thing is, I wonder how the public will feel about being "played" if this is what they're doing?

I also wonder how the public will feel if it later comes out that other land was available for a very good price but the district wasn't interested.

I hope they really are taking a good hard look at any other workable solution and not just playing some mind game with us so they can get what they wanted all along.

[bob]

Then what about all the Macom rumors.

BB is almost dead.

Having people float rumors that a northern site would doom the 09 referendum also is part of the scare tactic IMO

Nope no one told me to say that. It was it called poltical speculation. Make about 40% of the yes voters mad plus the always No voters and you get a No on the referendum.

[wvhsparent]

Not trying to come to Wal-Mart's defense, but, I have been in several of the newer WalMarts built recently like the one at Fabyan Pkway and Orchard (Super WalMart) and it's been really nice in there. They are finishing up the one near me at Butterfield Rd and Farnsworth/Kirk, Probable opening sometime early 2008. I do like the exterior of the one on Orchard a bit better.
The current WalMart on Rt 59 is the old format, and not as nice.
Barring your distaste for WalMart, it would fit in with what is already built in the area (Lowes/Staples/Costco)