Hudson's Bay Company

[Northern Light]

I can't see them expanded Marks into higher profile malls.

Marks is a workwear store designed almost as a companion to Crappy tire.

It won't work at Yorkdale, it won't work too well at STC or Square One.

Even at the Eaton Centre it's relegated to a small obscure corner of the mall hidden away.

A reminder than CT now controls the name 'Hudson's Bay Company' and 'The Bay';

Among its existing banners, it obviously has its namesake, the newer stores for which are two storeys and over 130,000ft2; but it also has other small banners, Sport Check and Party City.

Clearly the latter seems ill suited to Yorkdale; but there are plenty of HBC leases in lesser malls that could be of interest for any number of CT banners, or multiple banners were a space demised.

I can see Simons bidding on some of the leases however given the potential discount.

Simons is looking at other former HBC locations..............but is, of course, already present at Yorkdale.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

I can't see them expanded Marks into higher profile malls.

Marks is a workwear store designed almost as a companion to Crappy tire.

So is Carhartt, for what its worth.

 

[Richard White]

So is Carhartt, for what its worth.

Agreed but my point is people don't walk into Yorkdale or Sherway Gardens looking to buy steel toed boots and overalls.

 

[matrix]

I can't see them expanded Marks into higher profile malls.

Marks is a workwear store designed almost as a companion to Crappy tire.

It won't work at Yorkdale, it won't work too well at STC or Square One.

Even at the Eaton Centre it's relegated to a small obscure corner of the mall hidden away.

I disagree. Marks is much more than a workwear store at this point. Yes, they do sell a lot of workwear, but they also just sell a bunch of clothing too that a lot of people eat up, and the sales can be alright. I can see it working in a bigger concept. And I speak as someone who just uses the Oakville Place store as an entrance whenever I'm there. Marks has been expanding pretty well- not just the aforementioned Dufferin Mall, but they're also an anchor at Vaughan Mills now. It seems to have captured a workwear niche while staying relevant to people who want a bit more reserved fashion from Levi's or Silver Jeans.

Now, Yorkdale, I agree, it probably wouldn't work. But STC and Square One have a different vibe. I can definitely see a Mark's at Square One just because of how all-encompassing that mall is and how good of a look it would be to have one there. Maybe it could take the lower level of the HBC lease there.

Simons is looking at other former HBC locations..............but is, of course, already present at Yorkdale.

Expected, but I would not expect Simons to acquire too many leases. They were on the brink of bankruptcy before and they probably don't want to scale up too quick, right?

Would love to have a Simon's at Sherway. Because, what else is going to go in those empty anchor boxes?

 

[nightstreak]

Canadian Tire is testing a (much) larger Mark's store currently in Dufferin mall (Toronto). They took over the former Globo shoe store space next door, all while keeping their current location.
If it doesn't fail, it's fair to say it's (most likely) their new example store. A hint as to how much square footage they might prefer to work with, moving forward. (For current, or future Mark's store locations)

A reminder than CT now controls the name 'Hudson's Bay Company' and 'The Bay';

Marks never appealed to me. I always got the impression that I was going into a hardware store to buy clothes. I’m aware that it’s psychological. I’ve still never purchased a single thing.

If CT converted their Marks concept into Hudson Bay boutique stores with a Marks section, I can see the arrangement being more successful.

In a time where Canadians are looking to buy Made in Canada, a store that every Canadian associates with Canada could sell Canadian fashion brands and home decor and become an instant hit as the go to where they could follow through on that urge and parade around town with bags saying that they’re sticking it to the US.

It doesn’t need 300,000 square feet. 50k to 100k is more than sufficient to revive Hudson’s Bay.

 

[Northern Light]

Marks never appealed to me. I always got the impression that I was going into a hardware store to buy clothes. I’m aware that it’s psychological. I’ve still never purchased a single thing.

See I've bought at Mark's a few times.

Firstly, because I sometimes have site meetings outdoors and they sell appropriate gear.

Remember they started as Mark's Work(wear) Warehouse.

They were aiming to first sell to men (they didn't have a women's offer back in the day) and for work clothes. The pitch was durable, weather proof, and fit big/tall/husky builds.

Then they realized that guys with big/tall/husky builds didn't have great selection in mainstream stores, for non-work clothes. So they added an expanded range of casual wear and a limited range of dresswear for larger waists, and taller heights.

I think they did that really well. Offering sizes as much as 5x, waists as high as 44 routinely and 'Tall' variations of many of their items.

As with many banners though, they wanted more and more growth, so then they expanded into more outdoors wear. (general purpose) then added women's (which was not a good financial move, but I digress.....)

Over time their locations have grown to about 3 x the original footprint.

I don't think they ever should have aimed to be a mainstream fashion brand. Adding limited women's wear focused on the trades/work was justifiable, but the broader stuff...made and makes no sense.

When you lose focus, you lose many of the original customers in your base, without replacing them with new ones, let alone more.

 

[Tormick]

I’m hearing that HBC is planning another round of feelers for interest on the leases. I mean, little interest came out on the first two tries other than Ruby Liu, they’re really trying to wring something out of a dry towel at this point.

If someone could come in with a take it or leave it lowball offer, I’d say it’s Canadian Tire. In their press release detailing the IP acquisition, they said they’d bid on a handful of leases. They didn’t get any (so far). They could probably get a dozen leases for $5-10M at this rate of desperation.

Can they? I thought the leases were sent back to the landlords which would mean HBC (or whatever their new numbered company name is right now since CT bought the brand) - no longer has control. I'm assuming there were multiple bids for the sites. Wouldn't it fall to the next best bid - if it meets the use-case.

 

[nightstreak]

See I've bought at Mark's a few times.

Firstly, because I sometimes have site meetings outdoors and they sell appropriate gear.

Remember they started as Mark's Work(wear) Warehouse.

They were aiming to first sell to men (they didn't have a women's offer back in the day) and for worth clothes. The pitch was durable, weather proof, and fit bit/tall/husky builds.

Then they realized that guys with big/tall/husky builds didn't have great selection in mainstream stores, for non-worth clothes. So they added an expanded range of casual wear and a limited range of dresswear for larger waists, and taller heights.

I think they did that really well. Offering sizes as much as 5x, waits as high as 44 routinely and 'Tall' variations of many of their items.

As with many banners though, they wanted more and more growth, so then they expanded into more outdoors wear. (general purpose) then add women's (which was not a good financial move, but I digress.....

Over time their locations have grown to about 3 x the original footprint.

I don't think they ever should have aimed to be a mainstream fashion brand. Adding limited women's wear focused on the trades/work was justifiable, but the broader stuff...made and makes no sense.

When you lose focus, you lose many of the original customers in your base, without replacing them with new ones, let alone more.

Fair assessment. Perhaps focused brands with their own storefronts with shared warehousing, logistics and loyalty programs make sense. The Eaton Centre stores seem to do this. The Marks and Canadian Tire back onto the same warehouse space — I imagine they share it. Both share Triangle Rewards and I would bet they are integrated into the same logistics system managed by Canadian Tire Corp.

 

[nightstreak]

I was curious and had to go check the floor plan. My hunch was correct. Not only do Canadian Tire and Marks share the same warehouse, they show up as a single unit in CF’s leasing plans (arrow points at the Marks storefront).

In a scenario where CT Corp. acquires a larger space for downtown, it could be broken up into Canadian Tire, Marks and Hudson’s Bay, each with their own brand identity and demo focus but all sharing the same back of house and logistics.

I could see the Queen Street store divvied up like so:

The Richmond Street side is more auto focused and could be an urban Canadian Tire with the PATH catering to grab and go items for pass through traffic — it also has access to Adelaide Centre’s garage below ground for auto services.

Hudson’s Bay would be on Queen Street with a part of the second floor bridge entrance shared with Marks with a smaller footprint on that second floor.

Third floor and up leased as office units and connected directly to the Simpsons tower on Bay Street.

The Bay and Dundas space is far too valuable to CF for high rise redevelopment to be wasted on a low cost lease for a store that has overgrown its footprint. That side of the Eaton Centre is no longer a dead end that nobody visits and instead becomes a traffic feeder into the mall with an office building on Bay Street connected underground to the Eaton Centre.

 

[matrix]

Yeah, sometimes you can even find a Mark's inside a Canadian Tire, but they may be doing away with that. Oakville used to have a Canadian Tire on Kerr Street that had a Mark's inside, but when Bed, Bath and Beyond / Buy Buy Baby went out of business they split the Mark's off (was supposed to be at the BBBeyond a block away but HomeSense got first dibs) to Oakville Place in the former Buy Buy Baby.

CT also moved both Mark's from SmartCentres Etobicoke and Sportchek from Sherway Gardens into its own combined storefront in the SmartCentres. CT seems to be keen on having both stores being as big as they can rather than a small store inside a store, at least for Mark's. Party City they don't really care about, they'll have a "Party City" section in a Canadian Tire but across the street there would be a Party City.

It may have something to do with what you said about stores sharing the same warehouse space when needed. They may be splitting or combining depending on the area, or other statistics. But it does make sense Marks and CT share a space in the Eaton Centre.

 

[TossYourJacket]

I was curious and had to go check the floor plan. My hunch was correct. Not only do Canadian Tire and Marks share the same warehouse, they show up as a single unit in CF’s leasing plans (arrow points at the Marks storefront).
View attachment 692186

In a scenario where CT Corp. acquires a larger space for downtown, it could be broken up into Canadian Tire, Marks and Hudson’s Bay, each with their own brand identity and demo focus but all sharing the same back of house and logistics.

I could see the Queen Street store divvied up like so:

The Richmond Street side is more auto focused and could be an urban Canadian Tire with the PATH catering to grab and go items for pass through traffic — it also has access to Adelaide Centre’s garage below ground for auto services.

Hudson’s Bay would be on Queen Street with a part of the second floor bridge entrance shared with Marks with a smaller footprint on that second floor.

Third floor and up leased as office units and connected directly to the Simpsons tower on Bay Street.

The Bay and Dundas space is far too valuable to CF for high rise redevelopment to be wasted on a low cost lease for a store that has overgrown its footprint. That side of the Eaton Centre is no longer a dead end that nobody visits and instead becomes a traffic feeder into the mall with an office building on Bay Street connected underground to the Eaton Centre.

Given what an utterly miserable experience shopping at the Eaton Centre CT is (I had to buy something from there on Monday and somehow that store gets worse every time I go there) I'm not sure I'd want them in control of the Queen St space. Do we really need floors and floors of cramped, overmerchandised chaos? Now maybe if they got someone better to run the new store but that would require replacing the franchisee so I can't see that happening.

Also doesn't CF have that space back anyway? Given they've been putting up construction hoarding for months and taking Hudson Bay signage down off the outside of the building, it would seem like they do. Isn't it just the leases Ruby was bidding on that are still in play? Yorkdale and some others are a little more complicated because in those cases the you had the HBC-RioCan JV who were acting as the landlord for HBC itself, which means those have defaulted to RioCan in case where no one bid on them (which is why they hold the Yorkdale lease, not Oxford. And I'm pretty sure they couldn't be trying to force Oxford to buy the lease from them if HBC still has the ability to sell it.), but that wasn't the case for Queen St. CF was the direct landlord there.

 

[Northern Light]

I was curious and had to go check the floor plan. My hunch was correct. Not only do Canadian Tire and Marks share the same warehouse, they show up as a single unit in CF’s leasing plans (arrow points at the Marks storefront).
View attachment 692186

While you're snooping is good, LOL......... I will point out a few things...

In a scenario where CT Corp. acquires a larger space for downtown, it could be broken up into Canadian Tire, Marks and Hudson’s Bay, each with their own brand identity and demo focus but all sharing the same back of house and logistics.

Sure, but the Bay Queen St. is unlikely to be that.

Its certainly not impossible.....but ...there's only one elevator core, and only 2 sets of escalators........demising the space across multiple levels would be complex and costly. Its also a heritage building.

I could see the Queen Street store divvied up like so:

The Richmond Street side is more auto focused and could be an urban Canadian Tire with the PATH catering to grab and go items for pass through traffic — it also has access to Adelaide Centre’s garage below ground for auto services.

I don't have the original terms hand, but I do no believe the rights to the parking garage allow for auto service. There are a host of issues to allow for auto service, from ventilation and other fire safety measures, to noise mitigation, to protecting any cars in public parking (or passersby to adequate height to lift the vehicles for work underneath........

Hudson’s Bay would be on Queen Street with a part of the second floor bridge entrance shared with Marks with a smaller footprint on that second floor.

Third floor and up leased as office units and connected directly to the Simpsons tower on Bay Street.

You want retail on two floors only? Even a severely cut down 'Bay'.....getting under 200,000ft2 for its flagship seems questionable. And How do you service the office space (elevators, dedicated lobby, etc etc.)

The Bay and Dundas space is far too valuable to CF for high rise redevelopment to be wasted on a low cost lease for a store that has overgrown its footprint. That side of the Eaton Centre is no longer a dead end that nobody visits and instead becomes a traffic feeder into the mall with an office building on Bay Street connected underground to the Eaton Centre.

The Bay/Dundas site cannot go hirise, City Hall view corridors limit that possibility. It could go higher than it is at present and waste less space on parking, though many tenants (both retail and office) have covenants indicating minimum parking levels to my understanding.

 

[nightstreak]

Its certainly not impossible.....but ...there's only one elevator core, and only 2 sets of escalators........demising the space across multiple levels would be complex and costly.

It was already demised into 2 stores belonging to one parent company: The Bay and Saks 5th Avenue split the original Bay into two.

Its also a heritage building.

I'm not suggesting they take a chainsaw and cut the building in half. The interiors have been modified and modernized many many times over the decades, including dividing up spaces with drywall. What they did when dividing Saks was particularly poorly done.

Before:

After:

Canadian Tire gets the west end of the building for its street level entrance with the bulk of the store in the concourse. There's a central escalator to move between the floors. This floor space is already 200% larger than the Canadian Tire at Bay/Dundas.

A reinvented Hudson's Bay boutique store keeps its main Queen Street entrance across from the Eaton Centre's Queen Street doors. it has its central escalator that leads up to the second floor which has a bridge connection to the Eaton Centre.

Marks gets a space on that second floor with a sign above the bridge and a landing between HBC and Marks like there was for Saks. I've been generous with Mark's store size. It could be half of that and still be larger than the one they have now.

I added 2 restaurant spaces on Yonge Street. Leña did particularly well before The Bay's maintenance neglect resulted in a flood and they never reopened.

I don't have the original terms hand, but I do no believe the rights to the parking garage allow for auto service. There are a host of issues to allow for auto service, from ventilation and other fire safety measures, to noise mitigation, to protecting any cars in public parking (or passersby to adequate height to lift the vehicles for work underneath........

I mean, I'm not getting technical here but I guess if that's not possible, it's not possible. The Bay/Dundas store doesn't have a garage connection either, though I'm sure if they wanted it, they could make it happen.

You want retail on two floors only? Even a severely cut down 'Bay'.....getting under 200,000ft2 for its flagship seems questionable.

I don't think Canadian Tire is interested in getting into large department stores, otherwise they would have bought out HBC's operations. I'm seeing a boutique store catering to Canadiana. Touristy merch on the first floor — striped blankets and the works — fashion on the second. Housewares are left to Canadian Tire downstairs. I guess if you wanted to get into a more expansive collection, a third floor could be added to separate men's and women's fashion.

And How do you service the office space (elevators, dedicated lobby, etc etc.)

Simpson's tower is well supplied with elevator banks. Note that the first several floors of the tower are connected to the heritage building directly. You could go up to the Arcadian Court from Simpsons Tower's elevators, then walk across The Bay's sales floor. But like I said, this is a thought experiment, I'm not getting too technical though I'd argue that none of this is a wild idea.

 

[RGB_11]

I can't see them expanded Marks into higher profile malls.

Marks is a workwear store designed almost as a companion to Crappy tire.

It won't work at Yorkdale, it won't work too well at STC or Square One.

Even at the Eaton Centre it's relegated to a small obscure corner of the mall hidden away.

I can see Simons bidding on some of the leases however given the potential discount.

I like the Denver Hayes brand of pants & other clothing, including sweaters and sweatshirts, etc.
I don't think of them as a work wear house store. (as much)
They seem to be eager to display casual clothing by the entrance more in 2025 than to have work wear as something for the eye to see first.
Plus also, at least Mark's dropped "Work Wearhouse" from their name quite a few years ago.

 

[Johnny Au]

Here's a video from General Knowledge about HBC: