PDA

View Full Version : Possible Melbourne CBD Store



mactalkuser8282
10th August 2009, 04:56 PM
Just saw this on The Age:

"One of Melbourne's finest examples of art deco architecture from the 1930s looks set to be knocked down to make way for an iconic new Apple Store.

Lonsdale House, on Lonsdale Street near Caledonian Lane, will be bulldozed to make way for a new CBD shopping centre as part of the redevelopment of Myer.

The shopping centre, which will be called Emporium Melbourne, has been given the green light by the Victorian State Government.

Darren Steinberg, head of property at developer Colonial Global Asset Management, confirmed that the company was in talks with Apple over the iPhone maker becoming the flagship tenant.

An Apple store appeared as the hero store in the artist's interpretation of the completed project, and Colonial has already leased retail space to Apple in Melbourne's Chadstone and Sydney's Chatswood Chase shopping centres.

"We're in discussions with a number of major international tenants, but at this stage there are no tenants committed to the project because we haven't formally started the leasing campaign yet," Steinberg said.

"We'll be looking for an iconic retailer and Apple would certainly fit that description."

In the artist's impression, the Apple store takes up several floors and faces the street, with passers-by able to see straight into the store and a suspended Apple logo bearing down on pedestrians.

The design looks very similar to Apple's first Australian flagship store, which opened in George Street in Sydney in June last year.

Since then Apple has launched four more stores in shopping centres in Victoria, NSW and Queensland, but these are smaller and resemble traditional shopfronts. The Melbourne store in the Myer development would be the second Australian Apple store to feature a landmark design.

Robin Grow, president of the Art Deco & Modernism Society, vehemently opposes the development, which is scheduled to be completed by Christmas 2012 and will include 240 shops.

Independent Apple retailers would also be shaking in their boots due to the tendency of Apple's flagship stores to vacuum up all of the attention and nearby foot traffic.

The largest chain, NextByte, has had to shut down its shop in Pitt Street after Apple opened its George Street store. NextByte was unavailable to comment today.

Grow said Lonsdale House needed to be saved to preserve Melbourne's cultural heritage. Colonial had told him it had planned to include Apple as its main tenant to make "a hero statement".

"[Lonsdale House] is not heritage listed on the state register but it was listed as grading B by the City of Melbourne on their planning scheme and it was part of the heritage overlay," Grow said.

"Morally they [the council] had an obligation to protect the building ... and they just rolled over and wouldn't protect it."

Grow, and other supporters of the "Save Lonsdale House" campaign, said the only reason Lonsdale House was being knocked down as part of the Myer redevelopment was to make the lane wider for trucks.

The entire debacle is eerily similar to another Apple-related heritage battle that has been waging for eight years over company founder Steve Jobs's plans to knock down a historic 14-bedroom Californian mansion.

His attempts to gain permission to demolish the Spanish Colonial Revival mansion have been continually frustrated by a group of preservationists known as Uphold Our Heritage, who argue that Jobs should either restore the 1600-square-metre building or move it somewhere else.

Last month, Jobs's lawyers and the council announced they had negotiated a deal to save the building, known as Jackling House, by selling it to an angel investor Gordon Smythe.

Under the deal Jobs would pay $US604,800 to disassemble and remove the mansion, while Smythe would cover other costs such as storage, the San Jose Mercury News reported."

Apple store set to gobble up art deco landmark (http://www.theage.com.au/technology/biz-tech/apple-store-set-to-gobble-up-art-deco-landmark-20090810-efbh.html)

Would be awesome!! But is it central for Apple??

iJohn
10th August 2009, 05:20 PM
Looks fanstatic

Lutze
10th August 2009, 05:41 PM
Jebus.

Big developer decides to bulldoze decaying building. Not even a whimper on the wires.

Hey let's use Apple as a "hero" development in the new place and suddenly we can rake up the fact that SJ has a decaying old building he's wanted to scrap for the best part of 10 years, and probably make Apple look bad, again.

Once more The Age publishes a non story that has become an Apple story that paints the company in a less than fantastic light. I'd like to know what they will do next to try to crash the share price? A photo of Steve in the shower with a scar where his liver transplant took place? More Green(giveme)peace moaning on that Apple don't donate enough money to save the pigmy shrew?

I can save you column inches Age journo's - over the next 5 years get all your mates to buy Apple shares at a minimum rate every day. Then on the 5th anniversary sell them all at once and watch the price crash.

Oh wait, you've got no mates? Shame.

ZeMule
10th August 2009, 05:45 PM
Lets hope the artist is pretty close to what will eventually go here. Looks very nice!
http://images.theage.com.au/2009/08/10/673091/applemelbmain-420x0.jpg

richbowen
10th August 2009, 05:48 PM
A rehash of a story from last week that was a rehash of a story from months ago. Only new bit is a property developer who says that Apple would be a great tenant. And then trying to link it to Job's house demo.

What a crap piece of journalism. Shame, Asher, shame.

kevinnugent
10th August 2009, 06:07 PM
Shame this little bit of publicity will just about guarantee Apple won't be the hero tenant.

Remy
10th August 2009, 06:09 PM
A rehash of a story from last week that was a rehash of a story from months ago. Only new bit is a property developer who says that Apple would be a great tenant. And then trying to link it to Job's house demo.

What a crap piece of journalism. Shame, Asher, shame.

I agree totally, but that photo from ZeMule looks lovely! It's a shame there's pretty much no chance it'll be looking like that.

Exocet
10th August 2009, 06:09 PM
A rehash of a story from last week that was a rehash of a story from months ago. Only new bit is a property developer who says that Apple would be a great tenant. And then trying to link it to Job's house demo.

What a crap piece of journalism. Shame, Asher, shame.

I agree - Asher has really dropped the ball on this one. "Artists Impressions" are not a good indicator of what's going to go into a development. Just as Macs tend to crop up in print advertisements, high-quality retail stores tend to crop up in renders of planned developments.

This is nothing but speculation, thrown with a purely attention-grabbing headline.

jesse
10th August 2009, 06:24 PM
The Age seriously hasn't published a good story for about twelve months now. Their online news is starting to feel like a joke. If you read any other news source (BBC, Reuters, New York Time, ABC, SBS) you've got the age covered, without their Safari hating Video player

nettsu
10th August 2009, 06:25 PM
Big developer decides to bulldoze decaying building. Not even a whimper on the wires.


Personally I think it's sad to see Lonsdale House go - but I love Art Deco and I think the redevelopment could be a bit more sympathetic to Lonsdale House but retailing is "all" important. Same as I'd love to see an apple store in the CBD - I can't see them being in a development such as this.

Look at freestanding apple stores. Then tell me they'll be part of a development. I can only think of apple sub-stores (like Chadstone & Doncaster) that are part of retail developments.

Mecha
10th August 2009, 06:29 PM
Yes it's a shit piece of journalism but anyone who knows Melbourne CBD well enough should know that this could be a serious option for Apple.

It's very central (in between Myer and Melbourne Central. And about 10m off Swanston St) plus currently the city is full and there isn't anywhere for them to go, especially in the parts of the city Apple would want to place a flagship store.

I know a lot of people here would love to see it going to the Burke St development but after passing it today it looks like the whole thing is turning into some kind of HUGE JB store and unless Apple plan to move upstairs I doubt its going to happen.

So my point is if Apple really want a place in the next few years this really is the ONLY option thats big enough and available.

whitty
10th August 2009, 07:10 PM
incidentally this is the building in question

lonsdale st, melbourne - Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=lonsdale+st,+melbourne&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=15.163673,31.157227&ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=-37.811683,144.964334&panoid=ViC6Rnezan5oS3rjKgBtWQ&cbp=12,213.33,,0,5&ll=-37.811717,144.964235&spn=0.009883,0.015213&z=16)

I wouldn't call it one of the finest examples of art deco architecture in Melbourne. Any part of the Myer Emporium should be hands off but no reason to keep the soft curves on this art deco piece.

I'm note sure Apple would be happy with a Lonsdale street address.

asher
10th August 2009, 07:33 PM
A rehash of a story from last week that was a rehash of a story from months ago. Only new bit is a property developer who says that Apple would be a great tenant. And then trying to link it to Job's house demo.

What a crap piece of journalism. Shame, Asher, shame.

The new bit is the developer confirming that he is in talks with Apple over the store (i.e. it's not just an artist's imagination).

First we're on Apple's payroll, then we're trying to crash Apple's share price. Make up your minds! :confused:

Exocet
10th August 2009, 09:01 PM
Asher, I still think its a very poor headline. It implies that the store is confirmed, and that it is the Apple store outright which is leading to the demise of Lonsdale House.

Emporium Melbourne is "gobbling up" Lonsdale House, not Apple. I couldn't give two shits that its Apple in the headline, you could've put Gucci or Prada in there and it would be equally poor.

The quotes from the developer are also very non-committal, and hardly confirms Apple as a tenant.

dmw
10th August 2009, 10:23 PM
in fact i think asher is quite slow with this one ... i first posted this on march 18 and we called it unlikely back then ... and thanks for the attribution asher ...

http://forums.mactalk.com.au/19/61181-apple-store-new-myer-complex-lonsdale-st.html

Chesty
10th August 2009, 11:13 PM
I would be very surprised to see Apple move in here, I just don't think the location is the best. Yes, Melbourne Central and Myer are next door, but compared to the southern part of Melbourne, it's fairly quiet up that end.

I believe that Apple would much prefer a location around Collins and Swanston Street, so that they can be in the urban, contemporary hub of Melbourne. Hopefully we will know within the next year or so!

Lutze
10th August 2009, 11:25 PM
The new bit is the developer confirming that he is in talks with Apple over the store (i.e. it's not just an artist's imagination).

First we're on Apple's payroll, then we're trying to crash Apple's share price. Make up your minds! :confused:

As has been posted. Because the developer has come out like this it is extremely unlikely that Apple are going to go ahead now. Apple do not like being used like this. The only thing that might save it is if the developers were allowed to leak this and Apple got the best deal in the world to be the Hero.

Asher, the problem is that instead of posting "news" you post "olds" and rehash them to make them sound like they are actually meaningful. The way you've posted the story, as has been brought up earlier, makes it look like Apple are the cause of this building being redeveloped.

forno
11th August 2009, 08:24 AM
I cant see apple going into that seedy corner of central Melbourne.

More likely into the redev of the Windsor, even then I would say apple will want Collins street at the very least

Interesting piece (http://www.theage.com.au/national/lane-sales-to-make-14m-20090803-e79g.html)

asher
11th August 2009, 02:15 PM
Asher, the problem is that instead of posting "news" you post "olds" and rehash them to make them sound like they are actually meaningful.

Just because the Mac fanatics at MacTalk have discussed this piece of news/rumour before I published a story, doesn't mean the millions of other Australians who read Fairfax sites had any idea an Apple store might be opening up there.


The way you've posted the story, as has been brought up earlier, makes it look like Apple are the cause of this building being redeveloped.

It's called a news angle - it's the same for any other story you read. The first three pars of the story qualifies the headline and explains that Apple isn't directly causing the building to be knocked down.

I don't get on MacTalk much these days but I do make a point of logging in after i've written an Apple-related story to see what you're saying. Of course all feedback is welcome but sometimes the uninformed sledging makes me wonder if I should bother.

mitty
11th August 2009, 02:32 PM
It's called a news angle - it's the same for any other story you read. The first three pars of the story qualifies the headline and explains that Apple isn't directly causing the building to be knocked down.

Yes, but the headline makes it look, at least on the surface, that Apple are coming in to demolish the ugly old thing themselves. When in reality they don't really have anything to do with it, at least not yet. It's just wishful thinking on the part of the developer.

You have to admit that headline is designed to make Apple look bad. Okay, Asher you may not have even come up with that headline, (i have no idea how newspapers work) doesn't some sub editor do it? But that headline isn't just designed to get you to read the rest of the article, it's designed to do it in away that sensationalises what is a far less sensational story.

Anyway, if that building was so great why hasn't someone fixed it up before now... it's been derelict like that for as long as I can recall.

I still don't think that's the place Apple would choose for it's flagship Melbourne store anyway. It might happen, but I guarantee it's not their first choice.

Lutze
11th August 2009, 02:57 PM
I don't get on MacTalk much these days but I do make a point of logging in after i've written an Apple-related story to see what you're saying. Of course all feedback is welcome but sometimes the uninformed sledging makes me wonder if I should bother.

Okay, I won't complain about the old stuff you bring up that puts Apple in a bad light with the "save the xxxxxxx" groups if you don't post stuff that is not related to the actual story you are posting.

As an example, I had not heard that a deal had been struck to remove The Jackling house brick by brick. That was actually something that I was pleased to hear. But I don't think that it's related to the story of some corporation that has been approached to put a store in a building redevelopment. They are brought together as news by what appears to be a desire to tarnish the Apple brand with a negative story.

It could have been just as easily told that a building that's lain empty for x number of years has been acquired by developers who have got the go ahead to redevelop it into a brand new high quality shopping mall, the likes of Melbourne CBD has not seen. Bringing jobs and desirability to a run down part of the city. There are some who feel that the building has historic importance for it's Art Deco design, however calls for it to be protected have proven to be fruitless, so far.

Obviously it's not the 1000 word article that you wanted, but I'm sure that a bit of padding could be added.

Positive journalism is almost gone from the world these days, it's all doom and gloom - even when the sun is shining on the freshly rain swept streets.

Please excuse me as my rose tinted glasses are steaming up from the tears in my eyes :)

drewbles
11th August 2009, 03:00 PM
Yes, but the headline makes it look, at least on the surface, that Apple are coming in to demolish the ugly old thing themselves. When in reality they don't really have anything to do with it, at least not yet. It's just wishful thinking on the part of the developer.

You have to admit that headline is designed to make Apple look bad. Okay, Asher you may not have even come up with that headline, (i have no idea how newspapers work) doesn't some sub editor do it? But that headline isn't just designed to get you to read the rest of the article, it's designed to do it in away that sensationalises what is a far less sensational story.



Not to mention contradictory.

This article did the rounds at my office yesterday and all commented on how 'laughably bad this journalism was'. The article is full of statements, followed by immediate contradictions. The headline (As mitty stated, I have no idea who writes these) makes it that much worse.

An artists impression != anything to do with what's really going there, just like the rumoured store on the corner of Toorak and Chapel Streets in South Yarra.

As also mentioned, re-hashing a story and sensationalising it does not make for quality journalism nor good readin.

You've lose major brownie points in my book (not that you probably care, but I just had to voice my disapproval as well).

Mecha
11th August 2009, 03:03 PM
The first three pars of the story qualifies the headline and explains that Apple isn't directly causing the building to be knocked down.

Your kidding right. This is the first paragraph:

One of Melbourne's finest examples of art deco architecture from the 1930s looks set to be knocked down to make way for an iconic new Apple Store.

You imply straight away that it is because of Apple they are knocking down the building.

nettsu
11th August 2009, 03:07 PM
Just because the Mac fanatics at MacTalk have discussed this piece of news/rumour before I published a story, doesn't mean the millions of other Australians who read Fairfax sites had any idea an Apple store might be opening up there.

funny!
millions?
i'm not going to sledge fairfax beyond the fact that the online sites are becoming more & more tabloid, and are actually losing readership. Oh and let's wait to see what happens with the pay-for-content model....


It's called a news angle - it's the same for any other story you read. The first three pars of the story qualifies the headline and explains that Apple isn't directly causing the building to be knocked down.

Headlines are designed to grab attention. That's why they are called headlines.

Most people don't read beyond the headlines and it's the headlines that have maximum impact and you as a journalist know that.

I know you don't write the headlines - that comes down to the sub-editor.


I don't get on MacTalk much these days but I do make a point of logging in after i've written an Apple-related story to see what you're saying. Of course all feedback is welcome but sometimes the uninformed sledging makes me wonder if I should bother.

Really?
I though fairfax was making a habit of trolling forums & twitter for "news"

mitty
11th August 2009, 03:29 PM
Also you completely forget to mention the rumour that the McGills site is a likely contender for an Apple Store, and probably in a much "nicer" part of the CBD than the Lonsdale St site (even though they're just around the corner from each other).

kevinnugent
11th August 2009, 03:54 PM
Good lord, Asher, take a teaspoon of cement and HARDEN UP! Anyone would think you didn't need/want constructive criticism. There's a reason why you log on here and check the levels with the "Mac fanatics" - you know why you do it - to get instant and untarnished feedback on what you've had published.

Just because this article's feedback doesn't go your way you want to take your bat and ball and go play with the other kids? Fine. We'll still be critical - both pro and con - about your articles and guess what... other articles about things we are interested in. Go figure.

iJordie
15th August 2009, 02:11 AM
From what I've seen, Apple Stores seem to fit in with surrounds well, look @ Regent St and Glasgow for examples of this.

So I have nfi why the art-deco society wants to preserve this. When I did Street-View it looked pretty ugly. And I doubt a retail store will detract from the finer examples in the area.



Just my 2 cents
:cool: