IBJNews

Simon sees improving retail conditions, analyst says

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The nation's largest mall owner is more confident about the U.S. retail environment, an RBC Capital Markets analyst said following a series of meetings with top executives at the company.

In a research note published Tuesday, RBC analyst Rich Moore told investors that Simon Property Group Inc. said that retailers leasing space in its malls have managed to weather the economic downturn and are already eyeing recovery plans for when the economy improves.

"Management indicated that, in general, retailers appear to have identified the bottom to the current economic environment," Moore wrote. "Most have moved to a mode of low-expense growth and are maintaining reasonable levels of inventory to guard against a further deterioration in the economy. Likewise, most express a higher level of confidence to Simon in pursuing further store openings or maintaining existing stores."

At the same time, the number of bankruptcies by retailers has "returned to more typical levels," Moore said, adding that that should help Simon keep bad debt off its books and square footage occupied at its malls.

Still, the trends aren't universal.

Simon said business is faring better at its malls in New England and California. But performance is "generally flat" in Florida, the Midwest, the South and in Boston.

Simon is based in Indianapolis and owns, or has interest in, nearly 400 properties around the world. The company reported improved quarterly earnings last month due to better retail conditions.

The company lost out its bid to buy rival General Growth Properties earlier this year, but analysts say Simon is in a strong position to make other deals.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT