Alexander Plaza Case Case Solution And Analysis, HBR Case Study Solution & Analysis of Harvard Case Studies

Alexander Plaza Case Study Solution

Tenant Improvements

Clause: Landlord shall provide $10 per rentable square foot for improvement to proposed space (exclusive of architectural expense)

Tenant’s perspective:

In order to make any improvement in the leased property, landlord would be paying $10 per square foot except all architectural expenses incurred. As a result, less expense would be incurred by Tenant Company.

Landlord perspective:

Why would landlord pay extra $10 per SF for further improvements? As the landlord would not be responsible for any improvements required by the tenant.

Inspection and Repair of the premises

Clause: Since the tenant is online to most part of the world during all of the day and, most of the evening hours, the tenant wants to limit the landlord entering the premises for repairs or inspection to non-office hours or between midnight and 5 am. Tenant has the right to offset rent to do repairs on its own.

Tenant’s perspective:

Due to the work nature and work load of the company, landlord or its representative are allowed to enter office area in the flexible or non-working hours which lie from midnight to 5 a.m. Moreover, if there would be any problem in the rented area, tenant would make it right by himself, but it would be offset in the rent.

Landlord perspective:

Why would landlord change its timing and keep it on odd times? Long working hours is the personal issue of Tenant Company. Moreover, why would landlord be paying for the repair of damages created by the tenant company?

Prompt # 2

Quiet Enjoyment of Premises

Clause: “The tenant requires that over its lease term, other than its own space, the building be used only in a first class office manner, that a part of building be used for alternative uses including retail, medical-office, manufacturing and research and development. Furthermore, the landlord will not lease space to a competing company in any of the three buildings in the complex.

Tenant’s perspective:

As the location of Alexander Plaza is very clear and good, therefore, there should be no competitor rented on this building, so that competitive advantage of the company would be maintained.

Landlord perspective:

Why would landlord compromise its other customers for respective tenant? Like Defentac Company, all of its competitors are the clients of landlord. Therefore, landlord cannot ignore its other upcoming customers for this respective tenant.

Management of the Property:

Clause: “The landlord shall have its representative onsite at all times as the building manager of the property. The tenant has the right to require landlord to remove and replace building manager if the employee is not adequate for the job”

Tenant’s perspective:

As the work hours of company are higher, it requires a building manager or landlord representative at all times to facilitate the tenants. Moreover, if there would be any lack of service facility or disturbance created by building manager or representative, tenants have the right to take any decision.

Landlord perspective:

The building manager would be hired by landlord. Therefore, only landlord holds the right to fire him or take any further decision. Tenants cannot hold the right to fire any of the landlord’s employee..............

This is just a sample partial work. Please place the order on the website to get your own originally done case solution.