Tuesday, August 11th, 2009
4

MTV v. Landlord v. Media in Times Square

MT WHATEVSIt's hard to tell who's working whom in this tale of MTV and its Times Square lease. (This would be the problem with real estate writing in general and in the specific.) I am pretty sure it is the landlord working on the tenant, however, as the landlord is the one blabbing in the New York Post about how they are going to find a new tenant for MTV's first floor store and its famed second-floor glass-walled studio, which you know as the place where girls from Iowa used to gather to get a look at Carson Daly, and where now no one really sees anything. There's some weird omitted details here, such as how MTV reupped its lease in the building for a million square feet last year (for how long? Ten years?). But that was last year, and prices were different, and now they're either digging in to haggle with the landlord-or they realize it is a huge expense that doesn't really do anything for them, and the landlord is forced to splay itself naked and exposed in the press to find a new tenant by the end of this terrible real estate year.

4 Comments / Post A Comment

HiredGoons (#603)

I really, really miss the days when MTV used to be good. Really.

That means you're as old as me and you've probably buried half your loved ones by now. Don't save any tears for MTV.

Besides, what do they need real estate for when they'll be reduced to cell phone broadcast within 2 years?

SeaBassTian (#281)

Obviously, Viacom is not going to spend $450 a square foot for the studio on misplaced nostalgia for their glory days. If they can no longer afford John Norris' meager salary, they probably will not re-up to preserve their TRL legacy. Who knew I could get misty for 1997?

I was referring to getting misty for oh, 1985.

Post a Comment