Glad to see the end of that massive display "window" from the old Eaton's, which Sears used almost exclusively to promote Global TV programming.
 
Skeezix said:
Glad to see the end of that massive display "window" from the old Eaton's, which Sears used almost exclusively to promote Global TV programming.
Click to expand...

Was that ever a real window into Eatons back when the mall first opened or has it always been ad space?
 
Bit confused over these latest comments. Nordstrom only holds the lower part of the building, therefore ending the cladding makes sense. Why "brand" the space above where the store does not hold the lease?
 
Geekaroo said:
Bit confused over these latest comments. Nordstrom only holds the lower part of the building, therefore ending the cladding makes sense. Why "brand" the space above where the store does not hold the lease?
Click to expand...

Because the overall effect on the mall is one that look half-assed and messy. The whole thing just look like a pile now.

AoD
 
Geekaroo said:
Bit confused over these latest comments. Nordstrom only holds the lower part of the building, therefore ending the cladding makes sense. Why "brand" the space above where the store does not hold the lease?
Click to expand...

Cadillac Fairview owns the space. The walls do not suddenly become Sears' property halfway up the wall because their offices are behind those walls.

I'm not sure what the benefit is of leaving some of the old cladding above the Nordstrom store, unless Cadillac Fairview wants to be passive and let the Eaton Centre become a victim of "branding", and replacing architecture with branding alone.
 
modernizt said:
Cadillac Fairview owns the space. The walls do not suddenly become Sears' property halfway up the wall because their offices are behind those walls.

I'm not sure what the benefit is of leaving some of the old cladding above the Nordstrom store, unless Cadillac Fairview wants to be passive and let the Eaton Centre become a victim of "branding", and replacing architecture with branding alone.
Click to expand...

Though to be honest I've always find the wall awkward - it would have been better if they could simply open it up have give it a terraced look that engages the activity in the rest of the complex.

As to CF being passive and let branding replacing architecture - well, they've already done that to the exterior and elsewhere at other properties (think the whole Mies signage issue at TD). Their priorities have always been clear.

AoD
 
Skeezix said:
And the interior too. They've stripped just about everything out of the mall that interfered with the branding of each retail unit. Nothing to block views or distract.
Click to expand...

Indeed - it's truly regrettable to go from the Hanging Garden of Babylon (Nineveh) look and feel to corporate bland - foliage, gone; water features, mostly gone; colour, mostly gone.

AoD
 
mgl said:
Was that ever a real window into Eatons back when the mall first opened or has it always been ad space?
Click to expand...
Eatons had a display of flags up there. You can see it in the mural in Queen Station. I don';t remember Eatons every having anything else there, at least not before the first bankruptcy.
 
Yeah, it was never a window into the store. Eaton's often had flags there (sometimes of all the provinces, sometimes all maple leaf flags), but I also recall Christmas decorations. A large nutcracker one year comes to mind, but can't recall the timing of it vis-a-vis the various bankruptcies. I'm sure it was an awkward window to "dress", given its size and shape, which is why Eaton's so often relied on flag displays.

I always thought opening it up, with the floors of the department store overlooking the galleria of the mall, would have been cool (obviously AoD thought the same, given his comment above). But Sears keeping the upper floors made anything but a wall here impractical.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top