Following the revelation that the new enlarged company will assume the intu brand, queries have been raised as to what this means for Hammerson and Westfield’s joint venture in Croydon and the name of the development, which is yet to be decided.
Last month, Croydon council agreed outline planning consent for Westfield and Hammerson’s upgraded plans for the £1.4bn redevelopment of the Whitgift Centre in the south London borough.
The consent signalled a significant step forward for the joint venture, known as the Croydon Partnership, of which now intu will become a part of.
Speaking to EG , Westfield development director John Burton said the decision-making process on the name was still active, despite most people already labelling the project “Westfield Croydon”.
Burton said: “I don’t think anyone disagrees that it will have the word Croydon in it. We are going to work out the most appropriate name and branding for it.”
Now that intu is involved and the new Hammerson has said it will use the intu branding, is there is a possibility that “intu Croydon” could enter the draw?
“That will cause a fight,” said one source. “The Westfield name is so much stronger, but now there is a situation where they can use the intu name. Intu and Westfield will both want the name, but my gut feeling is Westfield will win as Westfield London and Westfield Stratford are so successful.”
Another said: “I can’t see Westfield agreeing to that in Croydon.”
Hammerson said it was “business as usual” for Croydon, and that the merger would not have any impact on the development. It would not comment on the name of the centre.
Intu similarly declined to comment on its branding and whether it could be used in the Croydon scheme.
A spokesman for the council said: “We have no information to suggest that the takeover will have any impact on the development planned for Croydon.
“The name for the new centre will be jointly decided by the developers.”
intu Brent Cross?
Hammerson’s other greater London mega development – Brent Cross, NW4, should not suffer a similar potential brand clash as Hammerson jointly owns it with Standard Life, which does not operate its assets under a brand.
Standard Life owns a larger stake than Hammerson, at 59%, but Hammerson has the asset management rights to the centre.
Could there still be a question further down the line about the naming of the centre? Would Standard Life be happy to have an asset they part-own branded as intu?
Countrywide intu
And what about the brand itself? In 2013, intu, formerly Capital Shopping Centres, spent £25m investing in the rebrand and a new online platform.
It installed fibre-optic broadband in all of its shopping centres and renamed all its properties as intu in a bid to establish a consumer-facing brand. It also invested £10m into its multi-channel offer and launched ecommerce site intu.co.uk.
But some question how successful the intu brand has been to the portfolio’s overall performance.
A source said: “I am not convinced about the brand intu. I don’t think its results show that it has driven out-performance on rent through its brand.
“The intu brand has been in place for three years and has it achieved what it wanted to?”
Others have questioned whether the intu brand is the right fit for the existing assets in Hammerson’s portfolio.
“I think it is naff and has a childish down-market ring to it,” one source said. “Hammerson has a more upmarket brand and surely must play to that.”
Some suggest that having such a large brand on a wide scale may not be advantageous.
“Is going big going to drive premium rents?” asked a source. “I don’t think that anyone has proved that. You need to make each individual place work. You need some scale, but do you need that much?”
To send feedback, e-mail amber.rolt@egi.co.uk or tweet @AmberRoltEG or @estatesgazette
