[arvelomcquaig]

Reducing our disposable income by 10% or more because it's a low brow brand is a fool's game. It smacks of those people that won't go in Tim Horton's because it's below them. Big box like Walmart push independents out of business but we need to treat them all the same. We already have massive chains like Loblaws, Metro, Sobeys, Canadian Tire, Shoppers Drug Mart, and Hudson's Bay downtown. Should we get rid of those too?

At the end of the day, businesses need to compete. We don't all have the luxury of paying more and/or the interest in doing so.

Yes, businesses need to compete; if there’s one corporate goliath that makes infinite amounts of money all over the world dominating everywhere, there’s no competition. We need a lot of smaller companies to spread the wealth and ownership and to compete with each other.

And you’re equating socially-conscious taste with classism, which is absurd. There’s a lot more reasons to boycott Walmart and Tim Horton’s than classism, such as the desire to not support the countless conspicuous societal problems and regressive politics caused/perpetuated by the former, and the more subtle societal problems/corporate irresponsibility of the latter.

At the end of the day, do we want a city of Walmarts and Tim Horton’s, or one of locally-owned small businesses that contribute to a uniquely Torontonian culture?

If one has the luxury to choose where one buys necessities, one should be interested in supporting societally-beneficial/responsible businesses.

 

[khris]

Yes, businesses need to compete; if there’s one corporate goliath that makes infinite amounts of money all over the world dominating everywhere, there’s no competition. We need a lot of smaller companies to spread the wealth and ownership and to compete with each other.

And you’re equating socially-conscious taste with classism, which is absurd. There’s a lot more reasons to boycott Walmart and Tim Horton’s than classism, such as the desire to not support the countless conspicuous societal problems and regressive politics caused/perpetuated by the former, and the more subtle societal problems/corporate irresponsibility of the latter.

At the end of the day, do we want a city of Walmarts and Tim Horton’s, or one of locally-owned small businesses that contribute to a uniquely Torontonian culture?

If one has the luxury to choose where one buys necessities, one should be interested in supporting societally-beneficial/responsible businesses.

The more people that move from the suburbs to downtown, the more corporate big box type of stores we're going to see downtown. People want the same conveniences of the suburbs when they move downtown, and businesses know this.

 

[maestro]

Mega distribution centres. Mega property managers. The little guy can compete along side the corporate giants even in the middle of suburbia if given a chance. I think with Target pulling out on a dime quite of few of these retail property giants will give their risk evaluations on the little guy vs the giant chain store a couple seconds.

Of course the little guy's motive have changed as well. He's no longer interested in one successful store but, dreams of building a chain of stores to wet a mega corporation's appetite.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Reducing our disposable income by 10% or more because it's a low brow brand is a fool's game. It smacks of those people that won't go in Tim Horton's because it's below them. Big box like Walmart push independents out of business but we need to treat them all the same. We already have massive chains like Loblaws, Metro, Sobeys, Canadian Tire, Shoppers Drug Mart, and Hudson's Bay downtown. Should we get rid of those too?

At the end of the day, businesses need to compete. We don't all have the luxury of paying more and/or the interest in doing so.

Who is this "we" we're talking about? At the end of the day, the property manager need to target their demographic, and lest I remind you, that's a business as well.

As to Tim Horton's - this customer wasn't sold on their product now because they have increased prices, decreased quality, and want to charge me extra again to get their "dark" roast (which is par the original product). It's not below me, it's treating customers like they're fools. Just think what happens in a situation where Tim's (or Walmart) is the only game in town.

AoD

 

[Youranthony1]

and want to charge me extra again to get their "dark" roast (which is par the original product).

AoD

No extra charge

 

[drum118]

Jan 17
More up on site

Now Target is not going to open here now, wondering who every going to anchor here now will request the changing of Target colour glass on Harbour St or leave as be.

The escalators folks had a fun day trying to get 8 escalators into the building on Sat as the wall panels were in the way and weren't to be there in the first place. Had to use a block and tackle on the end that was to slide into the building onto the fork lift. Took a lot of work and time to get it into the building. Escalators from the street to the 2nd floor are in place for the north-east corner at York St.

You can see the columns going up for the 2 towers.

 

[Big Daddy]

Would be a great location for a Canadian Tire.

 

[G.L.17]

Thanks for the great photos, drum118. Good to see the rest of the project resuming. As for that Target glass, it almost looks like a rendering

 

[P23]

oh, that's lovely. great attention to detail in this building.

 

[ProjectEnd]

I am an ardent and some might argue indefatigable aA supporter, but that is one 'blank-ass-wall...'

 

[ChesterCopperpot]

Didn't &co did the podium?

 

[arvelomcquaig]

That might be the most offensively perfunctory façade I’ve ever seen, or at least in contemporary architecture.

 

[WiddleBittyKitty]

Whether the podium was &co or aA, either modernist firm is dealing with retail space which wants walls, not windows. For cladding, it looks like they chosen a stone with some sheen to it (so there should be interesting reflections on sunny days), and they've applied it with some striations. The detail is subtle, but it's deliberate and thought out, so by definition it's not perfunctory. That word has become your calling card arvelomcquaig, something you use so often, it would seem you don't post with more than a minimum of effort or reflection. Hmm.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

That might be the most offensively perfunctory façade I’ve ever seen, or at least in contemporary architecture.

Far from it - the Four Seasons Centre south facade is far more devastating from an urbanistic standpoint, and it doesn't have the benefit of being hemmed in by an expressway.

Speaking of this podium - I wonder what the horizontal grooves are for? Signage/ads?

AoD

 

[ProjectEnd]

Whether the podium was &co or aA, either modernist firm is dealing with retail space which wants walls, not windows. For cladding, it looks like they chosen a stone with some sheen to it (so there should be interesting reflections on sunny days), and they've applied it with some striations. The detail is subtle, but it's deliberate and thought out, so by definition it's not perfunctory.

Your point about 'walls not windows' is well taken and the wall is itself, not awful, but there have been so many advances with interesting (and still cost-effective) materials lately that this still falls a little flat for me.

That word has become your calling card arvelomcquaig, something you use so often, it would seem you don't post with more than a minimum of effort or reflection. Hmm.

It would seem so, wouldn't it...