IKEA's shopping malls arm plans U.S. entry in major play
reuters.com
reuters.com
It's about buying properties in 45 "inner-city" (high-density) geographical markets worldwide, not just in the US, and transforming those properties into mixed-use spaces.
"We plan to build mixed-use facilities that we call meeting places and that have a wide range of facilities and services," an Ingka representative explains in the OP, adding that "activities could range from healthcare and education to festivals and events, besides retail and food."
I view this as a minor but still welcome development for real estate in high-density areas.
I've never visited the MD location. The VA location is in strip-mall hell.
I have mixed feelings about mixed-use development. In theory, it's great - put shopping, dining, work, and homes in one place. Reduce driving, make walking/cycling possible, etc.
My problem is the way the US approaches mixed-use continues to be at a "larger than human" scale. It's not organic - it ends up being super-blocks developed in one go by a faceless developer. The common spaces tend not to be used - they look good in architecture drawings, but don't work well in meat-space. And parking lots are still built, which creates a Potemkin Village effect (multi-story garage surrounded in fake building facades, etc).
as much as i love mixed-use, this is a fair criticism. because of escalating land values (and regulatory costs/uncertainties) in cities, everyone wants to hit a home-run and plays it safe as a result by building hulking superblock developments. there are ways to make those developments human-scale, but that costs more throughout the development cycle, and developers don't see enough return for it, since the effects are long-term, and their financial horizons are shorter-term.
This still happens on a smaller scale in older urban areas, simply because price per square foot in places like New York make it hard to assemble a full city block unless you have half a billion on hand, and even if you did land parcels don't become available all at once like that.
This type of "missing middle" development still happens where I currently live in Seattle to a limited extent, but I would really like to see regulations limiting horizontal massing of individual buildings to prevent this problem.
If the commercial space had even one store that people wanted, like a Trader Joes, it could have worked.
Real estate prices tend to be high. The mixed use development might have a few fancy restaurants, high-end boutiques, etc - but nothing to fill the daily needs of the residents. The local residents often have to drive to get to a normal grocer or mom & pop retail.
Sometimes it works. But I am more a fan of humaneness solving social problems than technology. [1]
My other issue with the technology-solves-all mentality is that it leads to greater good type arguments. Countries with a passionate social scene seem to be that way because of what I guess we call culture. Great architecture and art, now that is something else...
[1] To be clear, COVID-19 is not a social problem. It does have social side-effects.
I'd say it can, but not in a vacuum.
Great architecture ..., now that is something else...
Agreed. Top-notch architecture is equal parts art and engineering. Not only is it functional (in the most basic sense of "it's a building with a roof and a door"), but it's aesthetically pleasingly, makes a statement about the state of the world, and makes occupants feel good.
In previous times these anchor stores were businesses that got blown out by the Internet so there was no more anchor, and no more reason to visit the mall.
> Big Clothes Store - Go Online
> Big Book Store - Go Online
> Big Cinema Complex - Go Online
But furniture? People still wanna visit the showroom and check out the merchandise before dropping $thousands, and you might as well get a new pair of shoes and a sandwich too while you're there.
In short, don't change the Mall, change the Anchor.
Then when you go over to the UK, an visit a department store like a House of Fraser or John Lewis, their furniture has a much more contemporary look, and there are always people buying, talking to clerks about pieces, etc.
After settling down I wanted to invest more in furniture that wouldn't break or slide around. It definitely costs 3-5x more, looks better, but isn't great quality either. It's not flat-pak, cant be disassembled, wont fit in your car. I don't know if my calibration is off for what decent furniture should cost, or if everything started cheaping out years ago, but it seems like the worst of both worlds. The design is nice, but since it's wood veneer you can't really touch it up or repair it because the fiber board is showing through. I'm not sure where to find decent furniture. I feel like I'd have to pay through the nose for something bespoke.
It looks like they have one location in the US. I grabbed a random item to compare:
Chest of Drawers £299.99 marked down from £379.99 which directly converts to $365/$465 https://www.oakfurnitureland.co.uk/furniture/original-rustic... The US store has it for $649.00 marked down from $799.00 https://www.oakfurnitureland.com/furniture/french-farmhouse-...
Pottery Barn is a nation wide upscale store. Here's a smaller Farmhouse 4-Drawer Nightstand for $599 https://www.potterybarn.com/products/farmhouse-4-drawer-nigh...
"Veneer" and "MDF" (medium density fiberboard) are both mentioned 4 times--often as selling points.
JC Penny is a nation wide department store that would be one of the "anchor stores" in a mall. Home Styles Bermuda 4-Drawer Chest $432 marked down from $480 https://www.jcpenney.com/p/home-styles-bermuda-4-drawer-ches...
Unassembled, put together with glue and screws, and painted.
The furniture is likely manufactured in the EU, thus there import tariffs and shipping to the UK are much smaller than the cost to import and ship to the single US location, likely being the reason the same chest of drawers is almost double in price.
IKEA does carry a few items that are actually made of wood, though most of those are pine. Not great but a step up from particleboard.
Home Depot of all places sells some reasonably nice self-assembly hardwood furniture. Some of them are available pre-painted or stained but a lot of them you have to finish yourself.
The trick is finding better than IKEA quality furniture. You might wind up paying more for something that is still IKEA quality.
Of all the entry-level furniture we've purchased since starting a family, it's always been the stuff from Ikea that's survived being disassembled, moved, and reassembled in a new location. We've heard the same from various moving companies too.
When we self moved last year, I double stacked my short kallax shelves along the front of the box truck, then load them up with moving boxes, then our tall ones in front of that, and load them up with boxes, then the rest of our furniture in front of that. It made the truck a lot more organized, and no boxes were crushed under something heavy.
I spent tens of thousands decorating my new house with furniture bought online. I found the experience to be excellent and will probably never bother buying in person again.
P.S. Kudos to Reuters for a proper tracking opt out UX!
My wife, a Dane with a Masters in English Literature... "that's an appalling headline." The author has smashed in every keyword in an attempt to hook people from the beginning with the IKEA keyword.
Ideally it would be something like "Ingka Centres, IKEA's shopping mall arm, plans U.S. entry in major play"
I expected more from Reuters. The author is Swedish, and it's not even a sentence structure that makes sense in Scandinavia.
Normally I just go straight to the comments on HN for the useful content. And in this case, the better headline is already posted in the comments...
How will they evolve? Doesn’t IKEA also sell food items? Wonder if they’ll expand and go into groceries, and compete with Amazon/Whole Foods and Lidl?
They do have a cafeteria and then a frozen/dried goods area in all of their stores that I've been to. Selling perishables (e.g. fresh veggies) is a whole 'nother beast from selling frozen/dried goods and would be effectively trying to enter into an entirely new market.
A comment above states that IKEA is very much a for-profit operation. I don't quite understand that. Whether an organization is for-profit or non-profit, they are all businesses in the sense that the cash-in must match cash-out. Most American hospitals are non-profits, but look at the way they conduct operations. Some for-profits receive grants from foundations for doing work that would be considered charitable.
The only real difference between non-profits and for-profit corporations is that the former do not have shareholders. Both types of organizations can still issue monstrous bonuses to employees and offer performance-based compensation (commission for donations generated, etc). But it's only with a for-profit company that the owner(s) can sell the company, or pieces of it.
When your income crosses certain threshold, it makes sense to spend hundreds of thousands on consultants for tax planning, optimizing, etc, usually staffed with former tax auditors and lawyers
It's among the most generous charities in the world... generous to the Swedish Kamprad family... so generous they're among the richest on our planet.
In Chicago I think a place like State St. would be perfect for IKEA. It’s the “second” shopping boulevard (with the main one being Mag Mile) where rent is cheaper and the businesses attract more locals as opposed to tourists. It’s also centrally located in the Loop where it will be more equidistant to the various neighborhoods. They would be well advised to sell a greater selection of office furniture being so close to millions of square feet of office space.
However my thoughts were more along the lines of the very near suburbs, where there's a fair amount of vacant properties.
I don't know how well things are going at the Lincolnwood mall, on Touhy and McCormick Ave, just on the border of the city. Carson's just closed, and the Room Place furniture store has moved in. There are a handful of underperforming malls on the outskirts of the city, and it would putting an IKEA would definitely drive of traffic and make it more attractive.
It seems to me like it would be hard to scale an IKEA down-- the showroom side needs to be large because assembled furniture is large, and the warehouse side also needs to be large to stock everything (unless IKEA changes up their business model to do everything by delivery, but then they've lost their big distinction from all the other furniture stores around).
In central Paris, there is one: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ikea-france-store/ikea-op... - I'm guessing it is slightly experimental.
Also, the Ikea In Vélizy (southwest suburb of Paris) only has kitchen & bathroom. It is smaller than a standard Ikea but not city-center small.
bonus points if you figure out what owns what in the wide ikea conglomerate.
It's a bold gamble betting that central city shopping will make sense in a few years from now. I've got to applaud them. I'd hate to see these cities reduced to banking storefronts/tech worker office buildings.
They do have the financial sustainability to attempt this during a 10-15 year trial period or so (compare with the attempt to enter the russian market), even while suffering massive losses every year. Not being a listed company has its perks.
Are there any malls out there run as a co-op between the businesses within, rather than as a separate business that leases space out?
Ikea generates a ton of foot traffic. Using that as the anchor will probably guarantee a lot of traffic to the other stores in the mall (when many malls are losing their long standing anchors).
It seems like a pretty smart idea to me.