The Arc is up for sale! Good thing, bad thing...I don't know. Maybe it will bring the rents down if it's under new ownership. Probably the death of the 'link' though.

Strange time to sell such a "successful" asset - especially at the bottom end of the recession.

Do you think RBS would lend me the money to buy it? Imight have to rename it though - how about "The Cattle Market"?

Controversial name The fact that the recession struck mid build probably means they're not projecting a profit for a very long time which makes a £30million loss a more attractive option. It's nearly full which means it could make someone a lot of money as long as they're not buying a committment to knock down Lawsons building etc.

If I buy it can I paint it another colour? It's just so dreary

I like the idea of a new owner taking it over and re naming it the cattle market, that sounds like fair justice.

Who is going to buy it in a fire sale, the main occupier with 7 years free rent, some units empty, others just waiting to get out, No money left to help on the APEX over spend, flats they cant give away, and a committment to the link, they keep trying to avoid, Road surface that needs replacing and trade a little slow. Even the coucil only care about their £194k pa rent. No let them suffer and lose more money on the deal. one could say its the curse of St Edmund

All of a sudden it looks as if the council did a good deal, and that must be more luck than judgement

Buryboy wrote:some units empty, others just waiting to get out

Last time I heard it had the highest take up of any new development in the UK, from walking round there I've only seen two units that are not under off (4 vacant, 2 under offer). Apparently most of the retailers there are doing ok - the HMV is meant to be one of their best.

Buryboy wrote:No money left to help on the APEX over spend

That's the council, they've no reason to even get involved with the overspend unless they just wanted to lose money. Kind of an empty point?

Buryboy wrote:flats they cant give away

5 left unsold out of 62.

Buryboy wrote:a committment to the link, they keep trying to avoid

Your first and only valid point.

Buryboy wrote:Road surface that needs replacing and trade a little slowt

The council again, it's a public highway.

Buryboy wrote:one could say its the curse of St Edmund

Not unless the curse of St Edmunds was behind a global recession.

Come on Buryboy, the council has made some truly shocking decisions including as you point out handing over the naming rights (even though we disagree on whether it should or shouldn't have been called the Cattle Market) and choosing architects that are close to impossible to work with. But some of your statements are just so far from the truth it's hard to take you seriously. The main reason I think Centros want to get out of there is that they want to cut their losses and cash in while they can (if you can call a £30million loss cashing in) at the same time as getting themselves out of the link. It's been picked up in the press as one of the best and most successful new developments but unfortunately for Centros the recession came at the worst possible moment.

Squirrel we have different opinions on this project, I could counter most of your points, and conceed just a few, How ever I stand by most of my opinion on this matter, please dont beleive the hype and PR put out by CM, it does not and never did have the higest take up of a UK small centre development, under offer boards mean nothing, and new flats at less than £135k still can not be given away. It is smoke and mirrors ( nothing unusual about that, it is called marketing). This development is really nothing special, if it was either profitable, or even exceptional it would not be part of a CM first stage fire sale, and make no bones about it CM and its parent company are in trouble, they need to off load this white elephant quickly. That does not bode well for bury st edmunds.

Economic conditions are such that a main line property developor is unliky to take this project even at £70M , because the numbers DONT stackup, even if capital was available. Time will tell.

I need to check back on the curse of St Edmund, but from memory it was against CM, and it is CM who are suffering.

Not totally related I know but I've heard that British Home Stores are looking to take over the whole of the Cornhill Walk shopping complex.

Buryboy wrote:please dont beleive the hype and PR put out by CM

Let's have a reasoned debate Buryboy. I'm sure some of what we hear is propaganda pushed out by Centros but I'm equally sure that half of what I hear wandering around Bury St Edmunds was dreamed up between the dusty ears of elderly elitists who think everything built in Bury St Edmunds after the dissolution of the monasteries ruins the town. There is balance to everything and you seem to be going to the opposite extreme

Buryboy wrote:under offer boards mean nothing

Well, other than it's under offer . There are two under offer signs up and the companies' names have appeared in the paper, one of them was a milkshake bar (shake away?). 4 vacant units still isn't bad - the grand arcade was in a far worse position at the same point.

Buryboy wrote:new flats at less than £135k still can not be given away

This is the most bizarre and unsubstantiated of your comments. In fact it borders on the offensive. There are young people across Suffolk who would sweat blood just to get on the housing ladder and I'm sure they'd bite off your hand if they just had the funds to buy one of these flats. There are just 5 left out of 62 - I looked at all the vacant units with a view to getting one on a buy to let basis having been impressed with my friend's brother's flat in Walpole House. Just so that you don't doubt me, the remaining flats are: numbers 5,6,11,15 and 16 (all Walpole House) - I still have the information packs here. Your comments are also pretty insulting to the 57 people who have purchased a flat, many of these people will have struggled to get the money together - I know 2 of them and for them this was a very serious financial commitment and their only real opportunity to buy property in central Bury. Please don't belittle them and their new homes just for the sake of making a cheap and completely inaccurate point.

Buryboy wrote:This development is really nothing special, if it was either profitable, or even exceptional it would not be part of a CM first stage fire sale, and make no bones about it CM and its parent company are in trouble, they need to off load this white elephant quickly. That does not bode well for bury st edmunds.

Economic conditions are such that a main line property developor is unliky to take this project even at £70M , because the numbers DONT stackup, even if capital was available.

Much like selling a house I am sure Centros will have assessed the market before putting the development up for sale. Nobody will pay £70million for a white elephant, if they're going to make that kind of outlay it will be because they can make a success of it. Centros would not be spending money advertising the scheme for sale and opening themselves up to criticism if they didn't think a sale was viable. Are they asking more than they will get, most probably but doesn’t everyone when they sell something?

Lots of projects became unviable due to the recession, that does not mean they are unviable to everyone, simply those that made the initial heavy investment. On a much smaller scale look at Stone Angel/Groucho/Saints, nobody is saying it's a white elephant but it went through a very expensive refit at the height of the recession and it was better for the original owners to cut their losses. That is not to say that the new owners can't go in and take what they've done and make a success of it because, unlike the original owners, they didn't take a huge hit.

I think buryboy means that they had to sell most of the flats at a lot less than the 130 - 150k they were suppose to be, implying they didn't make as much profit, (or any) as they would have liked on them.