AT&T bldgs.

Downtown construction activity, including hotel projects, major renovations, office projects, streetscape improvements, etc.
First unread post228 posts
^ To expand on your 'tech company' point (without going too far off topic), Enterprise should perhaps consider getting a foot into some aspect of the autonomous vehicle business. They could, for example, move IT/Exec stuff into the ATT buildings and keep some of the suburban campuses as R&D. Or build out somewhere. Just a thought.
^That is precisely what I was aiming at. They have some real assets that will help them that the other players lack. That's where they can do some damage.
Chalupas54 wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 10:43 pm
JAL007 wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 8:31 pm
No joke. Is any of the above unsubstantiated?

-It is widely acknowledged there is a shortage of onside parking at this facility
-Non-residents of the city of St. Louis would become subject to the occupational earnings tax
-It is widely acknowledged that the downtown St. Louis area has more crime than Clayton and is also perceived to be more dangerous (rightfully so)

Sorry if the reality is inconvenient for some here.
These backhanded comments are why no one takes you seriously on here, to be honest.
I disagree. These may be no big deal for the people on this forum (myself included) who have no problem dealing with all three points and see them as a negligible price to pay to work in an urban, walkable environment of a city they love but I would bet all three of these would be concerns for A LOT of Enterprise workers who currently work in their suburban locations.

My opinion is based on growing up in St. Louis County and living in St. Louis City as an adult for a number of years.
JAL007 wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 8:31 pm
No joke. Is any of the above unsubstantiated?

-It is widely acknowledged there is a shortage of onside parking at this facility
-Non-residents of the city of St. Louis would become subject to the occupational earnings tax
-It is widely acknowledged that the downtown St. Louis area has more crime than Clayton and is also perceived to be more dangerous (rightfully so)

Sorry if the reality is inconvenient for some here.
Just to address these issues, speaking as a County resident who works downtown:

1) There doesn't appear to be any shortage of parking downtown. Southwestern Bell/AT&T seemed to manage just fine with it for years, even back when many of the current residential buildings were being used for office space. The building itself may not have much parking, but there should be plenty of spaces nearby.
2) I would prefer not to pay the earnings tax. But then again, it's impact is not terribly noticeable on my bi-weekly paychecks. Still, I wish it weren't necessary, and I do treat it as a legitimate concern. In Detroit, Dan Gilbert raised salaries on the employees he moved downtown from the suburbs to compensate for that city's earnings tax. That may have been partially altruistic on Gilbert's part, but also possible due to cheaper rent downtown.
3) While crime is a concern for downtown and other parts of the metro, downtown is perfectly safe during the day on weekdays. Check out how many crimes take place on Sunday nights, when most workers (and residents, for that matter) are home. And even though downtown is safe during the day, having more office workers would make it even safer.

I love working downtown and prefer it to other places I've worked, including Clayton.
JAL007 wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 8:31 pm
-It is widely acknowledged that the downtown St. Louis area has more crime than Clayton and is also perceived to be more dangerous (rightfully so)
You recognize that "more" is not is not the same as "high," correct?
I am curious to see how they find a way to break up this building. Even if Enterprise put some people in it I can't imagine they would take up all that much of it. They aren't going to leave their Clayton campus so it would be most likely moving people from their other outposts to downtown. It also has been mentioned they are trying to buy the Family Courts building, so likely once they finally do that, they are going to build a new building there to house people. If Enterprise does put people downtown it might make more sense for them to go into a smaller space.

http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... 836db.html

“Enterprise wants that property in the worst way,” said Denny Coleman, who as the former head of the St. Louis Economic Development Partnership is familiar with the county’s long-term plans to sell the property. “That provides them with the opportunity for growth down the line. Clayton would like to see that happen. Enterprise would like to see that happen.”

Enterprise said it has been in communication with the county for more than 20 years about the now-empty family courts building, stretching back to the administration of County Executive George R. “Buzz” Westfall.
^ My back-of-the-envelope math suggests that a commitment of around 2,000 employees (at around 200 sq. ft./person) would begin to make the tower viable based on the suggestion that about 40-50% of the square footage would require an anchor before making sense to pursue additional tenants..

I have no idea of Enterprise plans, but keep in mind that at the end of the day whomever comes in is likely to get some neat Class A space right in the heart of downtown at a sweetheart rate; Bob Clark reportedly is buying this at a cut-rate price and I suspect the city will offer substantial subsidies for redevelopment, perhaps including a full or partial rebate of earning's taxes like what Koman got for the rehab for the new Spire hq.. I can;t imagine anyone wanting to lease 400,000+ sq. ft.office in a new downtown or Clayton office tower could snag a rate similar to what likely would be had at a renovated One Center.
STLrainbow wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 2:26 pm
^ My back-of-the-envelope math suggests that a commitment of around 2,000 employees (at around 200 sq. ft./person) would begin to make the tower viable based on the suggestion that about 40-50% of the square footage would require an anchor before making sense to pursue additional tenants..

I have no idea of Enterprise plans, but keep in mind that at the end of the day whomever comes in is likely to get some neat Class A space right in the heart of downtown at a sweetheart rate; Bob Clark reportedly is buying this at a cut-rate price and I suspect the city will offer substantial subsidies for redevelopment, perhaps including a full or partial rebate of earning's taxes like what Koman got for the rehab for the new Spire hq.. I can;t imagine anyone wanting to lease 400,000+ sq. ft.office in a new downtown or Clayton office tower could snag a rate similar to what likely would be had at a renovated One Center.
Thanks for throwing an employee number out. That gives me a better idea of what would be needed. Does anyone have any idea how many employees they have in the other satellite office buildings?
3 very long years ago Enterprise was considering locating their IT Staff in BPV Phase II. I was an intern with one of the stakeholders involved in those discussions. At that time, I believe the IT staff was spread out among satellite buildings. Not sure if that’s true.

The deal obviously fell through.
symphonicpoet wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 12:02 am
^Pure speculation on my part, but I feel that Enterprise needs to become a bit more of a tech company and quickly. And they know this. Their competition is not necessarily who the average Joe would guess it is. From where I'm sitting I'd guess their biggest competition right now is in Silicon Valley. And if they work right they're sitting pretty to do really really great things. But to do so they'll need even more tech talent than they have now and they'll need it fast. Millennials. Immigrants. Folks that maybe, statistically, don't want an enclave in the burbs anymore. And as others have said, there's just a lot more to do downtown that Clayton right now. That's changing, and quickly, but for the moment it's still true. And it will remain true relative to their more Brentwoody chunk of Clayton for a while to come. At least until they really work on building it into something better.
EHI is widely recognized to be the premier of the big three rental agency parents (EHI, Hertz Global, and Avis-Budget Group). EHI is twice the size and, based upon the limited financial information they release (mostly for bondholders and rating agencies to review) they earn nearly double the margins of their publicly traded peers. By most accounts ride-sharing hasn't significantly eaten away at their customer base as most customers who rent cars in the first place tend to drive many miles over the course of the rental and need the flexibility to reach remote rural and suburban locations where ride-sharing isn't practical for their particular use case.

Not sure what this technology tangent has to do with EHI potentially filling some of this gigantic vacant building, but their leadership is solid, costs are much lower than publicly traded counterparts (who blow lots of money on consultants and don't follow through on execution very well).
matguy70 wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 11:05 pm
Its 11:01 PM and just got home from Hamilton (the musical) and just got done walking the dog in Downtown STL.

JAL this is exactly why your comments on these boards are so jacked up and ridiculous. You don't even live in STL (as you have told us) or experience this city on a regular basis and you post such flagrant and flippant comments that your posts are superfluous.
Don't live in the city but have ties to the area. Maybe I should just stick to the airport topic...
Well here's some hope for County corporate folks to see the light.... Centene is taking up the 60,000 sq. ft. of HIghlands space vacated by AECOM for it's move downtown. C'mon, Enterprise you can do it!
How 'bout them Cards!

Let's refocus on the AT&T/Enterprise building stuff.

Thank you!
Why do you guys think it’s Enterprise that’s interested?
^ Still waiting on reply back from whither as per
dredger wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:59 pm
whitherSTL wrote: So Bob Clark is going to buy this tower for $21MM?

He's going to make a few changes to it to prepare for a major tenant (hello Enterprise). Could be huuuuuuuuge for downtown.
Could be huge is correct, but is (hello Enterprise) a speculation on your part or something behind that comment?
^ dredger, what I want to know is what does kbshapiro know. .
I just want to see something happen to this building regardless of Enterprise or any other company moves into it. It will be a burden relieved from the City’s back, and with Clayco (Bob Clark) doing this project, it is safe to say that there will be movement on this. Hopefully we hear more soon rather than speculating on what will potentially happen. It’s fun to dream!
Can we please move all of the city vs. county discussion over to the Better Together or Not thread (or similar) and return to focusing on the AT&T Building in this thread?

Thanks in advance.
Moved many of the earnings tax focused posts to

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8555&p=295315#p295315

Sorry it makes the convo disjointed.
Back to topic... with the news that Centene is leasing space at the Highlands, we know that they are not afraid of the City after the BPV debacle. Are we missing the obvious anchor tenant with Clayco and Centene already having a close partnership? Centene is certainly in growth mode, and if they are thinking they will need more space than is currently planned for Clayton maybe they are thinking bigger. It would certainly be a departure from what they have been planning, and I have no idea of anything. Just a thought.

It's also possible Clayco/CRG doesn't have a tenant in the works yet, just that they think something will come along to make it work. Maybe not even a tenant with an existing local presence.
MattnSTL wrote:
Wed Apr 11, 2018 10:46 am

It's also possible Clayco/CRG doesn't have a tenant in the works yet, just that they think something will come along to make it work. Maybe not even a tenant with an existing local presence.
Great point,

For the thread, would it be fair to say that the ATT building bought at a discount could possibly the cheapest and quickest way to bring speculative Class A office space onto the St. Louis market?

I'm still amazed how the large commercial space market works or why it should work when you look at the fact that ATT sold this building for plus +200 million if not mistaken, bought by a national commercial real estate holder on a sweat heart but short term deal under a separate business entity, lease ends, business entity goes into receivership and now it looks like Clayco/CRG can buy the same space at 10 cent on the dollar. Someone takes a bath on the us, someone has to lose money in some of these commercial deals that seem insane to me. .
MattnSTL wrote:
Wed Apr 11, 2018 10:46 am
Back to topic... with the news that Centene is leasing space at the Highlands, we know that they are not afraid of the City after the BPV debacle. Are we missing the obvious anchor tenant with Clayco and Centene already having a close partnership? Centene is certainly in growth mode, and if they are thinking they will need more space than is currently planned for Clayton maybe they are thinking bigger. It would certainly be a departure from what they have been planning, and I have no idea of anything. Just a thought.

It's also possible Clayco/CRG doesn't have a tenant in the works yet, just that they think something will come along to make it work. Maybe not even a tenant with an existing local presence.
Mentioned it earlier but the article said they had to have a tenant in place to lease at least 50% of it for the deal to work out.
^I didn't go back to the article, but I believe it was non-Clayco people that speculated they need 50% pre-leased. And it does make sense since anyone financing an acquisition and commensurate renovations will want to know that there is a revenue stream to pay back the loan. I do think they already have a tenant lined up, but until we know anything in writing we're just making a game of guessing. Not that it's a bad thing to finally have something to speculate about.
ImprovSTL wrote:
Mentioned it earlier but the article said they had to have a tenant in place to lease at least 50% of it for the deal to work out.
Tenant or tenants.
Pure speculation on my part, but can't help to think that the ATT building would be an ideal for Twitter's bird to fly and build its customer service support. Building already in place with great utilities/downtown high speed fiber and rent rates far below anything in the bay area, open floor footprint and built to spec for single client so ideally suited for placing a good number of customer support employees. St Louis ideal for middle income jobs and just all around a solid business decision over the bay area.

Thought came to mind in part to PD article on Square expansion (Jack Dorsey connection) as well a SF gate Sunday article breaking down California/Bay area unique population/housing movement. Essentially, Bay area is still gaining in high end paying IT jobs, immigration, etc. but starting to see a significant domestic out migration to other states around middle income jobs. In essence, a 50-60 or even 70k tech support job in St Louis is a decent living where as Twitter has to pay six figure for the same person to even have a chance of living/housing in the Bay Area. That $30-40k difference on 2,000 jobs is a $70 million dollar swing on Twitter payroll