Eaton Centre (Ongoing Renewal) | ?m | ?s | Cadillac Fairview | Zeidler

zang

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
1,106
It's just a rumour started in the retail section of the board by @MetroMan.
…Who has both a credibility problem (see Rob Ford’s imminent arrest) as well as having sworn that pretty much every large retail vacancy in the Eaton Centre over the past three years was going to be filled by Apple. Just a couple of weeks ago he was claiming 2 Queen was gonna be Apple.
ETA: he seems to relish in being a supplier of information (see the comments section of that Macrumours post), regardless of its dubious—or downright false—provenance.
 
Last edited:

MetroMan

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
7,888
Reaction score
3,890
Location
Toronto
…Who has both a credibility problem (see Rob Ford’s imminent arrest) as well as having sworn that pretty much every large retail vacancy in the Eaton Centre over the past three years was going to be filled by Apple. Just a couple of weeks ago he was claiming 2 Queen was gonna be Apple.
ETA: he seems to relish in being a supplier of information (see the comments section of that Macrumours post), regardless of its dubious—or downright false—provenance.
1. It’s easy to revise history to fit your claims. While things definitely got chaotic near the end and unreliable information made it through, my record of breaking news early in the Rob Ford saga, short of me being psychic, were verified as coming from people inside Ford’s office. When they left, as I cautioned in the thread at the time, reliable information became more difficult to come by and I shared an educated analysis, not claims.

2. I wasn’t claiming anything about 2 Queen West. I was suggesting it was a good idea. And that’s easy to verify. See, this is you revising even recent history. Stop making stuff up about me.

3. MacRumors didn’t publish this story on my word. It had already been in the process of being investigated, it was researched, and verified through their sources. My sources come from Apple retail, 2 people at CF and a commercial real estate insider, all with different pieces of overlapping information that matches.
 
Last edited:

zang

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
1,106
1. There were *months* of “chatter” of his imminent arrest. Who’s revising history here? Why do you think you were all but driven out of that thread?

2. And before, it was the corner of Yonge & Dundas. You’ve gone so far as to make mockups of floorplans with the Apple logo.

3. You use words like “verified”. Nothing has been verified. The article even says CF and Apple have refused to comment. You might want to think before posting. You have a vast tendency to act as though things are sure and set in stone with as much as the loosest of rumours. Whether your info is correct or not doesn’t discount the zeal you have in being the communicator of that info. And that’s the issue here. If you had any of *this* info two weeks ago, you’d not have been posting what you did re: 2 Queen.

In two weeks you’ve talked to a few people and run to tell MacRumors. Any proof, or just word of mouth? Floorplans? Blueprints? Construction contracts? Keep gunning for that Pulitzer, Pedro. I’m sure it’s “imminent”.
 

MetroMan

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
7,888
Reaction score
3,890
Location
Toronto
1. There were *months* of “chatter” of his imminent arrest. Who’s revising history here? Why do you think you were all but driven out of that thread?

2. And before, it was the corner of Yonge & Dundas. You’ve gone so far as to make mockups of floorplans with the Apple logo.

3. You use words like “verified”. Nothing has been verified. The article even says CF and Apple have refused to comment. You might want to think before posting. You have a vast tendency to act as though things are sure and set in stone with as much as the loosest of rumours. Whether your info is correct or not doesn’t discount the zeal you have in being the communicator of that info. And that’s the issue here. If you had any of *this* info two weeks ago, you’d not have been posting what you did re: 2 Queen.

In two weeks you’ve talked to a few people and run to tell MacRumors. Any proof, or just word of mouth? Floorplans? Blueprints? Construction contracts? Keep gunning for that Pulitzer, Pedro. I’m sure it’s “imminent”.
1. You don’t seem to understand the difference between discussing of ideas and speculation on a topic (which is what people do in forums) and reporting on news sources verified by other parties (Retail Insider and MacRumors), then I’m not sure you’re qualified to tie your own shoelaces.

Where the hell do you get the idea that I was “driven out of that thread”? While I moved to Twitter where members of the media were engaging me and where there was a much bigger audience interested in the topic, I continued to post in the thread.

2. Once again, you’re making shit up. I never claimed that an Apple Store was coming to Yonge and Dundas. I never claimed to have any information. The fact that I openly stated that I made a diagram where I thought it might go, dismisses any claims that I got it from a source.

In your previous post, you said I claimed Apple was coming to 2 Queen west, but I provided you with a link to my post that shows nothing of the sort. You’re making it up.

3. Apple and CF will never comment publicly but individuals speak off the record. That’s how news breaks. How is this not obvious to you?

I didn’t say I had been investigating this for weeks. MacRumors was. I got tipped in the last few days and when I found out that someone at MacRumors had their own information, we compared notes and sources and it became reliable enough for them to publish a feature article.

You have a serious problem with reading comprehension and some sort of chip on your shoulder. I need you to stop making things up about me and misrepresenting what I said.
 
Last edited:

MetroMan

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
7,888
Reaction score
3,890
Location
Toronto
I have further information that I’m trying to confirm.

1. Apple negotiated aesthetic rights to the space in front of their new store. This means they’ll have tree planters and benches that they designed in the mall itself. Is there a precedent for that at Eaton Centre or other CF malls?

791133A2-C7FC-4E49-BF30-FC66DAA555F1.jpeg


2. There are hints that Apple may be opening out onto James Street facing Old City Hall as a part of a revitalization of the Eaton Centre’s exterior envelope. I recall hearing about a plan for James Street to be closed to traffic, perhaps as a part of the redevelopment of Old City Hall. I can’t remember where I read it. Anybody have any information to corroborate that?

96A0D268-7F21-4F8D-96EB-2174041005B7.jpeg


The existing Abercrombie space already permits that. It’s just that they use the back of their store for stock rooms.

5109EB63-3378-475D-84E9-3221C39A55AB.jpeg


If true, the Eaton Centre’s West side is going to dramatically shift in both appearance and function, opening the mall onto what’ll essentially be a public square next to the future Museum of Toronto.
 
Last edited:

WislaHD

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
7,950
Reaction score
5,147
Location
Midtown Toronto
opening the mall onto what’ll essentially be a public square next to the future Museum of Toronto.
Well, hold your horses there. Nothing about the Museum of Toronto has been confirmed, as nice of an idea it is.

However, if all the pieces fall into place, lower James Street will be lovely.

I don't really care an iota for Apple, but if they pull off a revitalization of this back street, they will be fully deserving of praise. I cannot see any reason to oppose pedestrianizing James Street between Queen and Albert. All the loading and servicing takes place in between Albert and Trinity Square.
 

MetroMan

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
7,888
Reaction score
3,890
Location
Toronto
Well, hold your horses there. Nothing about the Museum of Toronto has been confirmed, as nice of an idea it is.

However, if all the pieces fall into place, lower James Street will be lovely.

I don't really care an iota for Apple, but if they pull off a revitalization of this back street, they will be fully deserving of praise. I cannot see any reason to oppose pedestrianizing James Street between Queen and Albert. All the loading and servicing takes place in between Albert and Trinity Square.
Whatever Old City Hall becomes, James Street will play a role. The street exists to service the courts. No dead end streets are allowed.

While the street may continue to exist, its purpose will be gone in a few years. Cadillac Fairview has embarked on a revitalization of their building envelope. There’s no reason to believe that they’re going to leave their west side facade untouched and dilapidated.
 

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
22,853
Reaction score
18,429
Location
by the Humber
It's also possible for Apple to move in, in advance of decisions being made for James Street, and have the new store designed in a way to take advantage of a future opening to the street—if Cadillac Fairview wants to wait for decisions to be made at Old City Hall first. (Or they may not want to wait. We shall see!)

42
 

MetroMan

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
7,888
Reaction score
3,890
Location
Toronto
More news: visitors to the Eaton Centre coming in from the Queen Street entrance will be greeted by a flagship Tesla Showroom.

Tesla is replacing both M0851 and Armani Exchange. This will also give Tesla a Yonge Street address.

0A0F5003-6534-400F-B4C1-D081CD3EE0A3.jpeg


Along with the redevelopment of 2 Queen W into an extension of Harry Rosen and a glass showcase for a Tesla car, the Eaton Centre’s Queen Street presence is going to change quite a bit over the next year or two. My hope is that Oakley either moves out or is forced to open up their windows, inexplicably closed up with iron grating.
 
Last edited:

Top