Mango at financialinsights February 20, 2011 at 1:44 am- “Lululemon just paid $65M for a building in Kits. That is 25% of the cash they have on their balance sheet. That [building] would have cost them less than $3 million a year to rent. They have massive growth in earnings per share (EPS), so common sense [should have told them to rather use the money to invest further in their business]. Instead, they bought the building? So even at the corporate level, locals have a desire to “overpay” for RE assets and make strange choices when it comes to parting with cash for RE.”
Most Recent Comments:
- lithium technologies on The Froogle Scott Chronicles: Mortgaging Our Souls In Paradise – Part 6: Renovation Nervosa
- J-F on The Stigma Of Renting In Vancouver – “Oh no, we would never rent”
- Real Estate Tsunami on Chat Thread
- Nemesis on Chat Thread
- Real Estate Tsunami on Chat Thread
- rod_jonsson on Chat Thread
- Nemesis on Chat Thread
- rod_jonsson on Chat Thread
- Nemesis on Chat Thread
- rp1 on Chat Thread
- Farmer on Chat Thread
- Nemesis on Chat Thread
Type of Anecdote
- 01. He Said, She Said (247)
- 02. Profiting from the Boom (441)
- 03. Changed my Life (103)
- 04. Changed my Career (38)
- 05. Where do Buyers get the money? (958)
- 06. Held my Nose and Leapt (96)
- 07. Avoiding Vancouver (375)
- 08. Overextended Buyers (1182)
- 09. Delaying Buying (315)
- 10. Demoralized Renters? (362)
- 11. Regrets about Investing in RE (417)
- 12. Effects of Development (274)
- 13. 2010 Olympics Related (74)
- 14. Social Effects of the Boom (1255)
- 15. Misallocation of Resources (958)
- 16. Missed The Boat? (236)
- 17. The Froogle Scott Chronicles (27)
- 18. Spot The Speculator (171)
- 19. BlastRadiusPostCards (17)
- 20. The Limitless Demand Argument For Ongoing Market Strength (70)
- 21. Vancouver RE-Verse [Found Poems] (8)
- 22. RE References In Popular Culture (41)
- 23. Jumping The Shark (1)
- 24. Policies On Housing (10)
- 25. Epigrams For The Bubble (1)
- 26. Premature Calls Of "Bottom" (3)
- 27. Seller Panic (3)
- 28. Erroneous Causation Theories For Falling Prices (7)
- 29. Bubblespeak (1)
- Uncategorized (176)
Blogroll
- 01 Vancouver Condo Info
- 02 AmericaCanada [retired, no archive]
- 03 Housing Analysis
- 04 RealEstateTalks BC
- 05 Vancouver RE and then some
- 06 Whispers from the Village on the Edge of the Rainforest
- 07 Greater Fool
- 08 Canada Bubble
- 09 Rob Chipman's blog
- 10 YatterMatters
- 11 condohype [retired; archives available]
- 12 vancouver (un)real estate
- 13 Agent Will's Stats [retired]
- 14 Landlord Rescue
- 15 The Economic Analyst
- 16 Canadian Housing Price Charts
- 17 Hoodsurf [retired Jun 2011]
- 18 World Housing Bubble
- 19 Vancouver Price Drop
- 20 North American Economics



Follow vreaa on twitter
- Chat Thread wp.me/pcq1o-5vD 3 weeks ago

VREAArchives
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- October 2008
- September 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
Tags
Anecdotes Banks Bears blogs British Columbia Bubble Bulls buyers Canada Capitulation China CMHC Construction Debt Economy Employment Fear Foreign buyers Fundamentals Government Housing Interest Rates Landlords Life Media Mortgage brokers Okanagan Olympics Ownership Prediction Real Estate Realtors Relationships Rent Retirement RE_ATM sellers Sentiment Speculators Toronto US Vancouver Victoria Visual Anecdote Whistler





























The founder is a devout member of the “Landmark Forum” cult, so his decisions probably aren’t that rational even for Vancouver.
Bruce I don’t think you can make the argument that the “Landmark Forum” has anything to do with Lulu Lemon buying the building unless of course you are inside information on why they bought the building. On what basis do you make your claim that the two are linked?
Because the founder really is right off the deep end in the landmark cult (forces all managers to join), so it’s likely most decisions he make can be linked, and this decision…just has that smell about it. In fact, so does much of the Vancouver RE obsession. There’s a common ideological stench. The crash can’t come too soon.
Lululemon are a bunch of ‘tards. They think it’s perfectly normal women would pay $100 dollars for stretchy pants with a luminous logo… Even though the majority of women now buying their pants insist on stuffing their cellulite- pocked hog shanks in them. Think about it…
Why wouldn’t these delusion-peddling morons pay $65 million for a building?
While I agree with your argument, it’s expression is a just *bit* misogynist.
Peter Pans are usually misogynists.
Being a man i have no idea why Lulu lemon products are so popular, I would think their sales would be hurt in a recessions because their products are pretty pricey.
I would assume that they must have a CFO who should have crunched the numbers on a purchase like this i have no idea how they justified such an ROI.
But maybe they just really wanted a building in Kits more than they wanted 65 million in their bank account.
My understanding is that they wanted the location after the COV took over a spot on Broadway and Cambie that LULU were going to move into. From some of the comments I wonder if we (locally) have a bit of that tall poppy syndrome.
Bruce, how many men do you see sporting Lululemming wear?
I don’t wear muscle shirts for the reason why most women shouldn’t wear Lululemming… It’s called reality vs. delusion. Nothing misogynistic about my argument.
Lemon is just like Mercedes and the 4000 foot Mc Mansion…. “look at me crowd” It makes no difference if your shorts cost 10 bucks or 200, as long as you don’t get caught wearing the 10 dollar ones. Renting is usually not in the vocab of “look at me” no matter how economical the decision, we are LuLuLemons, you can’t expect us to rent/lease…. This will be over soon and the last one to leave Vancouver please turn off the lights.
Wow, what a great businessman lol. Buying right at the frothy peak of the Bubble. Who needs a Microsoft, Google, Coca Cola or Dell in Vancouver. We’ve got Lululemon to anchor our fabulous ecomony.
I don’t understand the Lululemon craze either. Though really, I should have invested in this company years ago! However, as we can see, consumers have been buying on credit for the past few years (note household debt in Canada), and I highly doubt that this company will continue to prosper. When the credit dries up, people are going to be more concerned about paying for milk and gas than running out and buying some pants for $100.
They got the Oprah bump. Or else it would just be a local fad.
But you know they have hit critical mass when you see 40 year old moms on the bus wearing 100 dollar hoodies. How long this can last? We will see.
Never thought I’d be defending Lululemon, and not withstanding this real estate purchase, I’d say they are pretty smart considering the wild success of their business model. Not sure how long it’ll last, but they’ve done well so far.
When I first saw their sign on the building, I thought it was perfect. Below is the “Welcome to Kitsilano” sign and there above glows the lululemon logo. Kits really was the birthplace of the yoga fashion trend, and I’ve seen enough nice bodies wrapped in it to thank Lululemon for starting it.
Also, their clothes are expensive but pretty high quality. For example, I bought a fleece sweater from Superstore the other day and it shed little blue bits for the first couple weeks and pilled up immediately. In contrast, my wife had a lululemon hoody for five years, with almost daily wear, and only the zipper pull has broken (and lululemon fixed it for free, five years after it was bought). Even though her hoody was 10x the price of my sweater, I think she got a better deal.