Times Mirror Square for Sale, But Who Would Want It?
Eric Richardson
[Flickr]
Downtown's Times Mirror Square, seen here in a file photo from September, 2007.
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — The news this morning is that new Tribune boss Sam Zell is putting out RFPs for the sale of Tribune Tower in Chicago and Times Mirror Square here. LA Observed has the full Zell memo.
The real question, though, is just who might be interested in buying Times Mirror Square given its location and restrictions.
The memo reads:
...We are in the process of asking a number of real estate firms to give us their best thinking on how we can generate more value from Tribune Tower in Chicago, and the Times Mirror Square complex in Los Angeles.
We’ll be considering numerous options to maximize the value of these properties. While a near-term transaction is possible, we’ll be focusing on opportunities that allow for some level of ongoing occupancy in both buildings for the mid-term (defined as five years), for farther out (15 years), and beyond.
Most importantly, we are not rushing this process, and I can assure you we will not accept anything but full market value for these assets. As we made clear on our first quarter earnings call, Tribune has sufficient liquidity to satisfy our principal amortization requirements through 2008, due to the proceeds we will realize from the Newsday transaction, and from our plans to create an asset-backed commercial paper program.
Our request for proposals, which is being issued today, is likely to generate media attention and debate about what we should or should not do with the properties. Both Tribune Tower and Times Mirror Square are iconic structures, deeply intertwined with the history of this company. But, they are also both under-utilized, and as employee-owners, it’s in our best interests to maximize the value of all our assets.
The Times has thought about moving out of its historic headquarters before. This 1994 Los Angeles Business Journal piece talks of a decided-against move, but gives no ink to what might become of the Times' complex. A 1993 story in the New York Times gave similar mention to sale and move, but again no talk of interest in the property.
Though Downtown's Civic Center has several hundred thousand government employees, but the amount of open or under-utilized land nearby would lead one to believe that there is no clamor for adjacent office space. Law firms would be the most likely candidates, given the location of the courts, but most are quite happy in Downtown's more premier buildings. To attract such firms to the Times Mirror complex would inevitably require serious upgrades and the building to find a certain cachet for its tenants.
ALSO:
- Mark Lacter at LA Biz Observed similarly asks who would buy, and includes a link to blogdowntown.
- Cara DiMassa spoke to Tom Gilmore, who called the property "virtually worthless as a piece of real estate".
Tim Quinn on June 25, 2008, at 02:07PM – #1
How about David Geffen? He could run a local newspaper from there. That would be an excellent use of that under-utilized building.
djm on June 25, 2008, at 02:17PM – #2
Why would he want to write a rival newspaper in a building with "The Times" written boldly on top?
Good Riddance on June 25, 2008, at 02:46PM – #3
The number of government employees working the the Civic Center area is more in the neighborhood of tens of thousands -- definitely NOT "several hundred thousand"!
There's a need for more courtrooms. What is the landmark status of the older part of this structure? In other words, can the whole block be leveled for a new building?
Tim Quinn on June 25, 2008, at 02:46PM – #4
He could add "F**k" to the beginning.
tornadoes28 on June 25, 2008, at 04:12PM – #5
Yeah, several hundred thousand government workers? Little bit high, don't you think?
Maybe something could be done with that terrible addition that was attached to the historic part of the building, like tearing it down and building somethin else that is not attached or better appreciates the historic part of the building.
Eric Richardson (@blogdowntown) on June 25, 2008, at 04:17PM – #6
Good Riddance: Somewhere in my mind I had it that the job makeup in Downtown LA was near 50/50 public and private sector (with the overall job number around 420,000). I can't seem to find a stat to say right now, though.
Pasta Man on June 25, 2008, at 05:18PM – #7
Not too far in the future, the Times will become a free daily. Home delivery will cease. For a hard copy, one will have to find it where the L.A. Weekly can now be had.
No more sticking quarters in the news rack and the news rack doesn't open.
Would the Times even remain in Downtown if the building were sold? Zell would prolly build a minimum amount of office space on the same lot as the downtown printing plant and transfer whoever is left. After five plus more years of musical chairs, who knows..
milquetoast on June 26, 2008, at 01:46AM – #8
I've seen pictures of it. RAZE IT! And put up a thousand foot tower like the New York paper did. They're both as successful as the other, ... so...
Dunne's Ghost on June 26, 2008, at 02:04PM – #9
There simply is no favorable comparison between the LAT and the NYT. Economically, the LAT is far past it's prime days of the Seventies, when it's Sunday edition was a highly sought after piece of merchandise in cities up and down the west coast.
To compare the two in terms of quality is absurd. The extended decline of the LAT is one if not the most negative aspects of life in L.A. for this native Angeleno.