THE COFFEE EMPORIUM · QUEENSLAND EXPANSION · SITE PROFILE
Prepared by · · Feasibility model attached separately
What is known about this tenancy, what has been assumed, and what is still unknown — with the questions the group has to answer at the front rather than a conclusion at the end.
Not a summary of the analysis — the questions the analysis cannot answer on its own. The pack goes out with the last three columns empty and comes back with them filled.
What is being asked of the group
| The question | The options, and what each one costs | Decided | Who | By when |
|---|
If we decide nothing today
Centre and owner
Tenancy
Classification
Where it sits in the centre
The trading history of this tenancy. This section decides whether the rest of the document is worth reading, so it goes near the front and it does not get softened.
| Operator | Traded | Last known turnover | How it ended |
|---|---|---|---|
The reason a third attempt is different from the two that failed. If nothing has changed, this section says so and the recommendation follows from that.
Centre visits a year
Share on this arm
From the feasibility model attached. The gate reads year three, because year one is flattered by every concession a landlord finds easy to give.
| Measure | Modelled | Test |
|---|
If the history repeats
| Turnover | Owner takes | Occupancy | Survives a miss of | Verdict |
|---|
Emporium takes the head lease and subleases to the operator, so the obligation does not end when the operator does. Development cost and lease exposure are different things.
Every profile carries this section. A site analysis without one is a sales document.