Seems like a simple case of Eminent Domain. City owns land they should be able to get rid of Kmart if they pay. Probably won't have to wait long anyway if they don't.
9 replies (most recent on top)
I was wondering about this. There's a KMart in Minneapolis, MN where the city owns the land, but KMart has a really long lease that won't run out for like 15 or 20 years. The city was trying to get them to leave because they want to extend a road right thru that property, but I guess it's a profitable location so KMart wouldn't leave.
I was wondering if the city of Minneapolis could cite Sears Holdings' bankruptcy as justification for breaking the lease and evicting KMart.
Actually the company ESL used to buy the assets is a new company: Transform HoldCo.
The old "Sears Holdings" is in bankruptcy; and will remain in bankruptcy for many months before the shares (SHLDQ) are dissolved. That could happen as early as April. ESL is simply buying assets from the old company. Assets that may happen to include the "Sears" brand; but not "Sears Holdings"; the company; having a ticker: SHLDQ.
IF the stores bought by ESL remain open they could operate under any name; but being cheap; that would likely be as "Sears" and/or "KMART" stores; provided his purchase came with the brands.
@abu Stop posting this misinformation all over the place. "Transform Holdco" is a new legal entity that will take ownership of most of the assets formerly owned by "Sears Holdings". That's the way it works legally, even if it's run by the same people, whether you like it or not.
The malls that want them out are good malls. Seritage owns the stores in good malls which is partly why Eddie wanted to win. Bankruptcy is partly so Sears could shed leases, not so they could be kicked out of ones they want, that’s not how the process works.
Sears is NOT a "new company".
Its Ed Lamoert. If he wanted out of the lease he would be out. If he wants to keep the lease at better terms, I am sure it will convey. Its easy to see who isbetter connected with the better legal team
I would think the mall would have the same rights to terminate lease they might have had before. Bankruptcy is to allow the company to terminate any leases it wants with no penalty.
Is this possible since agreements was with the old company?