MIRA INFORM REPORT
|
Report Date : |
12.11.2011 |
IDENTIFICATION DETAILS
|
Name : |
FOREVER 21 |
|
|
|
|
Registered Office : |
189 The Grove Dr, Ste F20, Los Angeles, CA 90036-6225 |
|
|
|
|
Year of Establishment : |
2003 |
|
|
|
|
Legal Form : |
Private Branch Company |
|
|
|
|
Line of Business : |
retail sale of clothing, furnishings, and accessories for men, women,
and children, without specializing in sales for an individual sex or age
group |
RATING & COMMENTS
|
MIRA’s Rating : |
Ba |
|
RATING |
STATUS |
PROPOSED CREDIT LINE |
|
|
41-55 |
Ba |
Overall operation is considered normal. Capable to meet normal
commitments. |
Satisfactory |
|
Maximum Credit Limit : |
$5,000 (USD) |
|
|
|
|
Status : |
Satisfactory |
|
|
|
|
Payment
Behaviour : |
No Complaints |
|
|
|
|
Litigation : |
Clear |
NOTES :
Any query related to this report can be made
on e-mail : infodept@mirainform.com
while quoting report number, name and date.
ECGC Country Risk Classification List – September 30th, 2011
|
Country Name |
Previous Rating (30.06.2011) |
Current Rating (30.09.2011) |
|
United States |
a1 |
a1 |
|
Risk Category |
ECGC
Classification |
|
Insignificant |
A1 |
|
Low |
A2 |
|
Moderate |
B1 |
|
High |
B2 |
|
Very High |
C1 |
|
Restricted |
C2 |
|
Off-credit |
D |
Company name & address
Forever 21
189 The Grove Dr
Ste F20
Los Angeles, CA 90036-6225
United States
Tel: 323-934-0018
Web: www.forever21.com
synthesis
Employees: 60
Company Type: Private Branch
Corporate Family: 422
Companies
Ultimate Parent: Forever 21 Inc
Incorporation Date: 2003
Financials in: USD
(Millions)
Reporting Currency: US
Dollar
Annual Sales: 11.2
Total Assets: NA
Business Description
Establishments primarily engaged in the retail sale of clothing,
furnishings, and accessories for men, women, and children, without specializing
in sales for an individual sex or age group.
Industry
Industry Retail (Apparel)
ANZSIC 2006: 4251 - Clothing
Retailing
NACE 2002: 5242 - Retail sale
of clothing
NAICS 2002: 448140 - Family
Clothing Stores
UK SIC 2003: 5242 - Retail sale
of clothing
US SIC 1987: 5651 - Family
Clothing Stores
Key Executives
Name Title
Jose Hernandez Site Manager
News
|
Title |
Date |
|
BizFilings
is Helping Turn Moms into Mompreneurs - Encouraging Moms to Balance Work and
Family |
1-Nov-2011 |
|
Mix and
match fall fashion trends |
23-Oct-2011 |
|
FRIEZE
FASHION |
14-Oct-2011 |
|
10-Oct-2011 |
|
|
STREET
style |
5-Oct-2011 |
1 - Profit & Loss Item Exchange Rate: USD 1 = USD 1
2 - Balance Sheet Item Exchange Rate: USD 1 = USD 1
Corporate Overview
Location
189 The Grove Dr
Ste F20
Los Angeles, CA, 90036-6225
Los Angeles County
United States
Tel: 323-934-0018
Sales USD(mil): 11.2
Assets USD(mil): NA
Employees: 60
Industry: Retail (Apparel)
Incorporation Date: 2003
Company Type: Private Branch
Quoted Status: Not Quoted
Site Manager: Jose Hernandez
Contents
·
Industry Codes
·
Business Description
·
Financial Data
·
Additional Information
Industry Codes
ANZSIC 2006 Codes:
4251 - Clothing Retailing
NACE 2002 Codes:
5242 - Retail sale of clothing
NAICS 2002 Codes:
448120 - Women's Clothing Stores
448140 - Family Clothing Stores
US SIC 1987:
5651 - Family Clothing Stores
5621 - Women's Clothing Stores
UK SIC 2003:
5242 - Retail sale of clothing
Business
Description
Establishments primarily engaged in the retail sale of clothing,
furnishings, and accessories for men, women, and children, without specializing
in sales for an individual sex or age group.
Financial Data
Additional Information
ABI Number 205704356
Credit
Report as of 08/01/2011
|
Location |
|
|
189 The Grove Dr Ste: F20 |
|
|
|
|
|
County: |
Los Angeles |
|
MSA: |
LA-Long Bch, CA |
|
|
|
|
Phone: |
323-934-0018 |
|
URL: |
|
|
|
|
|
ABI©: |
205704356 |
|
|
|
|
Annual Sales: |
$11,160,000 (USD) |
|
Employees: |
60 |
|
|
|
|
Facility Size(ft2): |
10,000 - 39,999 |
|
|
|
|
Business Type: |
Private |
|
Location Type: |
Branch |
|
Corp. Affiliation: |
|
|
RECOMMENDED CREDIT LIMIT * |
|
|
$5,000 (USD) |
|
|
|
|
|
Primary Line of Business: |
|
|
SIC: |
5651-01 - Clothing-Retail |
|
NAICS: |
448140 - Family Clothing Stores |
|
Secondary Lines of Business: |
|
|
SICs: |
5621-01 - Women's Apparel-Retail |
|
NAICS: |
448120 - Women's Clothing Stores |
Table of Contents
Profile Links
Similar Businesses in the Area
Closest Neighbors
External Links
Similar Businesses in the Area *
Chico's
6301 W 3rd St
Los Angeles, CA 90036-3154
Gap Body
189 The Grove Dr Ste: H80
Los Angeles, CA 90036-6225
Gap
189 The Grove Dr Ste: H80
Los Angeles, CA 90036-6225
GUESS
189 The Grove Dr
Los Angeles, CA 90036-6222
J Crew
6301 W 3rd St
Los Angeles, CA 90036-3154
Abercrombie &
Fitch
6301 W 3rd St Ste: Q4
Los Angeles, CA 90036-3154
Chico's
189 The Grove Dr
Los Angeles, CA 90036-6222
Custo Barcelona
189 The Grove Dr Ste: F90a
Los Angeles, CA 90036-6256
Pac Sun
189 The Grove Dr Ste: H20
Los Angeles, CA 90036-6247
Tommy Bahama
189 The Grove Dr Ste: G30
Los Angeles, CA 90036-6226
* Similar Businesses are defined as the closest businesses
sharing the same six-digit primary SIC code ( 5651-01 - Clothing-Retail)
regardless of size.
Closest Neighbors
American Girl Inc
189 The Grove Dr Ste: F10
Los Angeles, CA 90036-6230
Apple Store
189 The Grove Dr Ste: G70
Los Angeles, CA 90036-6225
All American
Sausage Co
189 The Grove Dr Ste: K4
Los Angeles, CA 90036-6228
Arden B
189 The Grove Dr Ste: K80
Los Angeles, CA 90036-6249
|
Corporate Family |
Corporate Structure News: |
|
|
|
|
Forever
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company Name |
Company
Type |
Location |
Country |
Industry |
Sales |
Employees |
|
|
Parent |
Vernon, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
1,050.0 |
51 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Tukwila, WA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
31.1 |
167 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Pasadena, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
29.8 |
160 |
|
|
|
Branch |
New York, NY |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
24.2 |
130 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Atlanta, GA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
23.3 |
125 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Chicago, IL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
22.3 |
120 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Anchorage, AK |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
18.6 |
100 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Yonkers, NY |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
18.6 |
100 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Milpitas, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
18.6 |
100 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Miami, FL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
16.7 |
90 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Wichita, KS |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
16.7 |
90 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Arlington, TX |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
13.7 |
87 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Paramus, NJ |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
15.8 |
85 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Seattle, WA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
14.9 |
80 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Lombard, IL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
14.9 |
80 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Victorville, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
14.9 |
80 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Ontario, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
14.9 |
80 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Nashville, TN |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
12.6 |
80 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Wellington, FL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
14.0 |
75 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Charleston, SC |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
14.0 |
75 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Cincinnati, OH |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
14.0 |
75 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Schaumburg, IL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
13.0 |
70 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Newark, DE |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
13.0 |
70 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Glendale, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
11.2 |
60 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Omaha, NE |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
11.2 |
60 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Los Angeles, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
11.2 |
60 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Sunrise, FL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
11.2 |
60 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Gilbert, AZ |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
11.2 |
60 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Watertown, MA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
11.2 |
60 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Los Angeles, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
11.2 |
60 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Virginia Beach, VA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.5 |
60 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Mc Lean, VA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
10.2 |
55 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Lafayette, LA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.7 |
52 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Tampa, FL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.5 |
51 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Pittsburgh, PA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Oklahoma City, OK |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Tulsa, OK |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Bloomington, MN |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Houston, TX |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Glendale, WI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Arlington, VA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Newport Beach, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Wayne, NJ |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Raleigh, NC |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Orlando, FL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Orland Park, IL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Spokane Valley, WA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Cincinnati, OH |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
9.3 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Beavercreek, OH |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.9 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Plano, TX |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.9 |
50 |
|
|
|
Branch |
South Miami, FL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
8.6 |
46 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Fort Wayne, IN |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
8.4 |
45 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Sparks, NV |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
8.4 |
45 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Sacramento, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
8.4 |
45 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Providence, RI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.8 |
42 |
|
|
|
Branch |
King Of Prussia, PA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.8 |
42 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Portland, OR |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Salem, NH |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Massapequa, NY |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Daly City, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Norman, OK |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Greensboro, NC |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Pittsburgh, PA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Ventura, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Orem, UT |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Poughkeepsie, NY |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Winston Salem, NC |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Madison, WI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Dublin, OH |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Concord, NC |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Etiwanda, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Grapevine, TX |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Farmington, CT |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
San Antonio, TX |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Pineville, NC |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Mesa, AZ |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Flint, MI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Pearland, TX |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.4 |
40 |
|
|
|
Branch |
College Station, TX |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
7.3 |
39 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Denver, CO |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.5 |
35 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Brea, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.5 |
35 |
|
|
|
Branch |
El Centro, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.5 |
35 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Hattiesburg, MS |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.5 |
35 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Charlotte, NC |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.5 |
35 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Downey, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.5 |
35 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Lynnwood, WA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.5 |
35 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Auburn, MA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.5 |
35 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Appleton, WI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.5 |
35 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Kahului, HI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.5 |
35 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Clinton Twp, MI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.3 |
34 |
|
|
|
Branch |
National City, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.3 |
34 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Geneva, IL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.1 |
33 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Baltimore, MD |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.1 |
33 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Dearborn, MI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.1 |
33 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Wauwatosa, WI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.0 |
32 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Eugene, OR |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
6.0 |
32 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Sterling Heights, MI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.8 |
31 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Springfield, VA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.8 |
31 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Aiea, HI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Lone Tree, CO |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
North Riverside, IL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Nashville, TN |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Manchester, NH |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Arcadia, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Bay Shore, NY |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
White Plains, NY |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Fairview Heights, IL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Fayetteville, AR |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Langhorne, PA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Concord, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Pembroke Pines, FL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Saugus, MA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Burbank, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Pleasanton, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Santa Clara, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Westminster, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Los Angeles, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Lansing, MI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Henderson, NV |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Memphis, TN |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Murfreesboro, TN |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Orange, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Sacramento, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Troy, MI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Manchester, CT |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Norridge, IL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.6 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Hyannis, MA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
30 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Milford, CT |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.4 |
29 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Albuquerque, NM |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.2 |
28 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Fort Worth, TX |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.2 |
28 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Portland, OR |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.0 |
27 |
|
|
|
Branch |
San Jose, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.0 |
27 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Buford, GA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.0 |
27 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Elizabeth, NJ |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.0 |
27 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Taylor, MI |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
5.0 |
27 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Kennesaw, GA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.8 |
26 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Phoenix, AZ |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.8 |
26 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Waldorf, MD |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.8 |
26 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Staten Island, NY |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.8 |
26 |
|
|
|
Branch |
El Paso, TX |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
San Jose, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Owings Mills, MD |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Niles, OH |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Hazelwood, MO |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Moreno Valley, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Indianapolis, IN |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Palm Desert, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
St Paul, MN |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
San Bruno, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Palm Beach Gdns, FL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Jersey City, NJ |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Riverside, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Wilmington, NC |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
San Diego, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Tallahassee, FL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Happy Valley, OR |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Toledo, OH |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Whitehall, PA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Lithonia, GA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
West Des Moines, IA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
El Cajon, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Baltimore, MD |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Redondo Beach, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Fort Worth, TX |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Newark, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.7 |
25 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Plano, TX |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.5 |
24 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Vancouver, WA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.5 |
24 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Newport News, VA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.5 |
24 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Willow Grove, PA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.5 |
24 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Columbia, MD |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.3 |
23 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Gaithersburg, MD |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.3 |
23 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Tampa, FL |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.3 |
23 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Lakewood, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.3 |
23 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Los Angeles, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.3 |
23 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Dayton, OH |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.3 |
23 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Hayward, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.3 |
23 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Panorama City, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.3 |
23 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Friendswood, TX |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.3 |
23 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Baltimore, MD |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.1 |
22 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Toms River, NJ |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.1 |
22 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Tucson, AZ |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.1 |
22 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Irvine, CA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.1 |
22 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Denver, CO |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.1 |
22 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Exton, PA |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.1 |
22 |
|
|
|
Branch |
Bethesda, MD |
United States |
Retail (Apparel) |
4.1 |
22 |
|
Executive report
|
Executives |
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Site Manager |
Operations Executive |
|
Press clippings
Forever 21 to open
in Lakeside
Property Week
08 July 2011
[What follows is
the full text of the article.]
Forever 21 is to open a 35,000 sq ft flagship store at Capital Shopping
Centres' Lakeside as part of an asset management initiative.
Forever 21 livens
up two UK cities: US brand continues expansion with shops in Liverpool and
Cardiff
Property Week
21 April 2011
By Baker, Kat
[What follows is the full text of the article.]
US value fashion
retailer Forever 21 is to open stores in Liverpool and Cardiff as part of its
ambitious UK expansion.
The retailer
(pictured) will take an entire 46,000 sq ft five-floor shop at Royal London Asset
Management's proposed 1-5 Church Street and 12-14 Whitechapel scheme in
Liverpool.
The property is
opposite the north-east corner of Grosvenor's Liverpool One scheme, which
opened in 2008.
The development
has been designed in conjunction with Forever 21's in-house San Francisco-based
architects.
Royal London is
preparing to submit plans for the scheme.
Vacant possession
of the existing building on the site will be secured at the end of the year
once the remaining tenants have left, which will enable it to be demolished in
early 2012. The store will open in 2013.
It is thought the
retailer will sign for the store over Easter. Royal London's Scottish Life Unit
Linked Fund bought the building in 2006 for around [pounds sterling]24.7m.
In Cardiff, Forever
21 is understood to be in advanced talks to take a 50,000 sq ft unit at Capital
Shopping Centres' and Land Securities' St David's Shopping Centre, for its
first store in Wales.
It is thought two
large units are being put together to accommodate the retailer in a three-level
store, which will open next year.
Earlier this
month, Forever 21 confirmed it would open a 25,000 sq ft shop at Bluewater in
the second half of 2012. In March it signed a prelet for a 60,000 sq ft anchor
store at Land Securities' Atlas retail development in Glasgow for its Scotland
debut.
It opened its
first UK store last November at Birmingham's Bullring shopping centre.
Forever 21 is
coveted by landlords, as its affordable fashion draws in large numbers of
younger shoppers.
Jones Lang
LaSalle, Harmer Ray Hoffbrand and Jackson Criss advise Royal London; Lunson
Mitchenall and Cushman & Wakefield are the leasing agents at St David's in
Cardiff; Harper Dennis Hobbs advises Forever 21. All parties declined to
comment.
Forever 21 colours
Atlas
Property Week
25 March 2011
[What follows is the full text of the article.]
Land Securities
will push ahead with its [pounds sterling]70m Atlas retail development in
Glasgow city centre after securing an anchor prelet and updated planning consent.
The redevelopment of the 155,000 sq ft scheme (pictured) comes after US fashion
retailer Forever 21 signed a prelet for a 60,000 sq ft anchor store, as tipped
by Property Week (PropertyWeek.com, 07.03.11). The store will be the retailer's
first in Scotland. The development at 185-221 Buchanan Street will include a
further two large stores, eight shop and restaurant units, and 49 flats.
Construction starts this month and will completed by March 2013. Land
Securities bought the site out o administration in December 2009.
Forever 21
Chain Store Age
01 February 2011
[What follows is
the full text of the article.]
Forever 21 has
brought its version of fast-fashion to Manhattan's Fifth Avenue, opening a
six-floor, 45,000-sq.-ft. store in the building that once housed the very
upscale Takashimaya emporium. The new Forever 21 has a contemporary, slightly
sophisticated feet, and boasts a large greenhouse with snow fatting inside it.
The retailer has a six-month tease for the space.
Forever 21 in Brum
Property Week
26 November 2010
[What follows is
the full text of the article.]
Forever 21 opened its first UK store at Birmingham's Bullring shopping
centre on 13 November and Ian Purvis has uploaded pictures from the day to the
Property Network.
Forever 21's cash
gets HMV to shift
The Evening Standard (London, England)
29 July 2011
[What follows is the full text of the article.]
THERE is clearly
big money in cheap frocks. US retailer fashion retailer Forever 21, which
opened this week on Oxford Street, was deeply keen to oust HMV from its pitch
opposite Bond Street Tube.
"They kept
offering more and more money to buy the lease," says Anthony Selwyn of
Savills. "In the end, HMV had an offer they simply could not refuse."
No, not that sort
of offer. A cheque for [pounds sterling]14 million did the trick. That's
roughly the price of 750,000 frocks at a chain that does New Look dresses at
Primark prices...
?FOREVER 21 is
just one of half a dozen desperate retailers that have paid almost [pounds
sterling]50 million to shift other shopkeepers out of prime spots in the West
End. Chanel is paying Nicole Farhi [pounds sterling]6 million to leave Bond
Street. Habitat will remove itself from Regent Street towards the end of the
year, pocketing a [pounds sterling]5 million cheque from Burberry. The hardy
folk at National Geographic are being bundled out of Regent Street, fortified
by a [pounds sterling]9 million wedge from Hollister, a US fashion chain which
sells jeans for "Dudes and Bettys". Older dudes will not be best
pleased to learn that Austin Reed is to cross Regent Street early next year.
Superdry, which sells scuffed jeans, check shirts and hoodies, will be
replacing the gentleman's outfitters.
Forever 21 livens up two UK cities: US brand
continues expansion with shops in Liverpool and Cardiff
Property Week
21 April 2011
By Baker, Kat
[What follows is the full text of the article.]
US value fashion
retailer Forever 21 is to open stores in Liverpool and Cardiff as part of its
ambitious UK expansion.
The retailer
(pictured) will take an entire 46,000 sq ft five-floor shop at Royal London
Asset Management's proposed 1-5 Church Street and 12-14 Whitechapel scheme in
Liverpool.
The property is
opposite the north-east corner of Grosvenor's Liverpool One scheme, which
opened in 2008.
The development
has been designed in conjunction with Forever 21's in-house San Francisco-based
architects.
Royal London is
preparing to submit plans for the scheme.
Vacant possession
of the existing building on the site will be secured at the end of the year
once the remaining tenants have left, which will enable it to be demolished in
early 2012. The store will open in 2013.
It is thought the
retailer will sign for the store over Easter. Royal London's Scottish Life Unit
Linked Fund bought the building in 2006 for around [pounds sterling]24.7m.
In Cardiff,
Forever 21 is understood to be in advanced talks to take a 50,000 sq ft unit at
Capital Shopping Centres' and Land Securities' St David's Shopping Centre, for
its first store in Wales.
It is thought two
large units are being put together to accommodate the retailer in a three-level
store, which will open next year.
Earlier this
month, Forever 21 confirmed it would open a 25,000 sq ft shop at Bluewater in
the second half of 2012. In March it signed a prelet for a 60,000 sq ft anchor
store at Land Securities' Atlas retail development in Glasgow for its Scotland
debut.
It opened its
first UK store last November at Birmingham's Bullring shopping centre.
Forever 21 is coveted
by landlords, as its affordable fashion draws in large numbers of younger
shoppers.
Jones Lang
LaSalle, Harmer Ray Hoffbrand and Jackson Criss advise Royal London; Lunson
Mitchenall and Cushman & Wakefield are the leasing agents at St David's in
Cardiff; Harper Dennis Hobbs advises Forever 21. All parties declined to
comment.
Standard
& Poor’s
|
United
States of America Long-Term Rating Lowered To 'AA+' Due To Political Risks,
Rising Debt Burden; Outlook Negative |
|
Publication
date: 05-Aug-2011 20:13:14 EST |
·
We have lowered our long-term
sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and
affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
·
We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings
from CreditWatch negative.
·
The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal
consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to
falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the
government's medium-term debt dynamics.
·
More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the
effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and
political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic
challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook
to the rating on April 18, 2011.
·
Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in
bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes
us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able
to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan
that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
·
The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could
lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that
less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal
pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt
trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
TORONTO (Standard &
Poor's) Aug. 5, 2011--Standard & Poor's Ratings Services said today that it
lowered its long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America
to 'AA+' from 'AAA'. Standard & Poor's also said that the outlook on the
long-term rating is negative. At the same time, Standard & Poor's affirmed
its 'A-1+' short-term rating on the U.S. In addition, Standard & Poor's
removed both ratings from CreditWatch, where they were placed on July 14, 2011,
with negative implications.
The transfer and
convertibility (T&C) assessment of the U.S.--our assessment of the
likelihood of official interference in the ability of U.S.-based public- and
private-sector issuers to secure foreign exchange for
debt service--remains
'AAA'.
We lowered our long-term
rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over
raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate
indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public
spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising
revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a
contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal consolidation
plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of
the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government
debt burden by the middle of the decade.
Our lowering of the
rating was prompted by our view on the rising public debt burden and our
perception of greater policymaking uncertainty, consistent with our criteria
(see "Sovereign Government Rating
Methodology and Assumptions ," June 30, 2011,
especially Paragraphs 36-41). Nevertheless, we view the U.S. federal government's
other economic, external, and monetary credit attributes, which form the basis
for the sovereign rating, as broadly unchanged.
We have taken the ratings
off CreditWatch because the Aug. 2 passage of the Budget Control Act Amendment
of 2011 has removed any perceived immediate threat of payment default posed by
delays to raising the government's debt ceiling. In addition, we believe that
the act provides sufficient clarity to allow us to evaluate the likely course
of U.S. fiscal policy for the next few years.
The political
brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance
and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable
than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of
default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal
policy. Despite this year's wide-ranging debate, in our view, the differences
between political parties have proven to be extraordinarily difficult to
bridge, and, as we see it, the resulting agreement fell well short of the
comprehensive fiscal consolidation program that some proponents had envisaged
until quite recently. Republicans and Democrats have only been able to agree to
relatively modest savings on discretionary spending while delegating to the
Select Committee decisions on more comprehensive measures. It appears that for
now, new revenues have dropped down on the menu of policy options. In addition,
the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in
other entitlements,
the containment of which
we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal
sustainability.
Our opinion is that
elected officials remain wary of tackling the structural issues required to
effectively address the rising U.S. public debt burden in a manner consistent
with a 'AAA' rating and with 'AAA' rated sovereign peers (see Sovereign Government Rating
Methodology and Assumptions," June 30, 2011,
especially Paragraphs 36-41). In our view, the difficulty in framing a
consensus on fiscal policy weakens the government's ability to manage public
finances and diverts attention from the debate over how to achieve more balanced
and dynamic economic growth in an era of fiscal stringency and private-sector
deleveraging (ibid). A new political consensus might (or might not) emerge
after the 2012 elections, but we believe that by then, the government debt
burden will likely be higher, the needed medium-term fiscal adjustment
potentially greater, and the inflection point on the U.S. population's
demographics and other age-related spending drivers closer at hand (see "Global Aging 2011: In The
U.S., Going Gray Will Likely Cost Even More Green, Now,"
June 21, 2011).
Standard & Poor's
takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue measures that Congress and
the Administration might conclude is appropriate for putting the U.S.'s
finances on a sustainable footing.
The act calls for as much
as $2.4 trillion of reductions in expenditure growth over the 10 years through
2021. These cuts will be implemented in two steps: the $917 billion agreed to
initially, followed by an additional $1.5 trillion that the newly formed
Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction is supposed to
recommend by November 2011. The act contains no measures to raise taxes or
otherwise enhance revenues, though the committee could recommend them.
The act further provides
that if Congress does not enact the committee's recommendations, cuts of $1.2
trillion will be implemented over the same time period. The reductions would
mainly affect outlays for civilian discretionary spending, defense, and
Medicare. We understand that this fall-back mechanism is designed to encourage
Congress to embrace a more balanced mix of expenditure savings, as the
committee might recommend.
We note that in a letter
to Congress on Aug. 1, 2011, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated
total budgetary savings under the act to be at least $2.1 trillion over the
next 10 years relative to its baseline assumptions. In updating our own fiscal
projections, with certain modifications outlined below, we have relied on the
CBO's latest "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" of June 2011, updated to
include the CBO assumptions contained in its Aug. 1 letter to Congress. In
general, the CBO's "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" assumes a continuation
of recent Congressional action overriding existing law.
We view the act's
measures as a step toward fiscal consolidation. However, this is within the
framework of a legislative mechanism that leaves open the details of what is
finally agreed to until the end of 2011, and Congress and the Administration
could modify any agreement in the future. Even assuming that at least $2.1
trillion of the spending reductions the act envisages are implemented, we
maintain our view that the U.S. net general government debt burden (all levels
of government combined, excluding liquid financial assets) will likely continue
to grow. Under our revised base case fiscal scenario--which we consider to be
consistent with a 'AA+' long-term rating and a negative outlook--we now project
that net general government debt would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the
end of 2011 to 79% in 2015 and 85% by 2021. Even the projected 2015 ratio of
sovereign indebtedness is high in relation to those of peer credits and, as
noted, would continue to rise under the act's revised policy settings.
Compared with previous
projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003
tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed
our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue
to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress
reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case
scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near
2% annually over the decade.
Our revised upside
scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as consistent with the
outlook on the 'AA+' long-term rating being revised to stable--retains these
same macroeconomic assumptions. In addition, it incorporates $950 billion of
new revenues on the assumption that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners
lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating. In this scenario,
we project that the net general government debt would rise from an estimated
74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 77% in 2015 and to 78% by 2021.
Our revised downside
scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as being consistent with a
possible further downgrade to a 'AA' long-term rating--features less-favorable
macroeconomic assumptions, as outlined below and also assumes that the second
round of spending cuts (at least $1.2 trillion) that the act calls for does not
occur. This scenario also assumes somewhat higher nominal interest rates for U.S.
Treasuries. We still believe that the role of the U.S. dollar as the key
reserve currency confers a government funding advantage, one that could change
only slowly over time, and that Fed policy might lean toward continued loose
monetary policy at a time of fiscal tightening. Nonetheless, it is possible
that interest rates could rise if investors re-price relative risks. As a
result, our alternate scenario factors in a 50 basis point (bp)-75 bp rise in
10-year bond yields relative to the base and upside cases from 2013 onwards. In
this scenario, we project the net public debt burden would rise from 74% of GDP
in 2011 to 90% in 2015 and to 101% by 2021.
Our revised scenarios
also take into account the significant negative revisions to historical GDP
data that the Bureau of Economic Analysis announced on July 29. From our
perspective, the effect of these revisions underscores two related points when
evaluating the likely debt trajectory of the U.S. government. First, the
revisions show that the recent recession was deeper than previously assumed, so
the GDP this year is lower than previously thought in both nominal and real
terms. Consequently, the debt burden is slightly higher. Second, the revised
data highlight the sub-par path of the current economic recovery when compared
with rebounds following previous post-war recessions. We believe the sluggish
pace of the current economic recovery could be consistent with the experiences
of countries that have had financial crises in which the slow process of debt deleveraging
in the private sector leads to a persistent drag on demand. As a result, our
downside case scenario assumes relatively modest real trend GDP growth of 2.5%
and inflation of near 1.5% annually going forward.
When comparing the U.S.
to sovereigns with 'AAA' long-term ratings that we view as relevant
peers--Canada, France, Germany, and the U.K.--we also observe, based on our
base case scenarios for each, that the trajectory of the U.S.'s net public debt
is diverging from the others. Including the U.S., we estimate that these five
sovereigns will have net general government debt to GDP ratios this year
ranging from 34% (Canada) to 80% (the U.K.), with the U.S. debt burden at 74%.
By 2015, we project that their net public debt to GDP ratios will range between
30% (lowest, Canada) and 83% (highest, France), with the U.S. debt burden at
79%. However, in contrast with the U.S., we project that the net public debt
burdens of these other sovereigns will begin to decline, either before or by
2015.
Standard & Poor's
transfer T&C assessment of the U.S. remains 'AAA'. Our T&C assessment
reflects our view of the likelihood of the sovereign restricting other public
and private issuers' access to foreign exchange needed to meet debt service.
Although in our view the credit standing of the U.S. government has
deteriorated modestly, we see little indication that official interference of
this kind is entering onto the policy agenda of either Congress or the
Administration. Consequently, we continue to view this risk as being highly
remote.
The outlook on the
long-term rating is negative. As our downside alternate fiscal scenario
illustrates, a higher public debt trajectory than we currently assume could
lead us to lower the long-term rating again. On the other hand, as our upside
scenario highlights, if the recommendations of the Congressional Joint Select
Committee on Deficit Reduction--independently or coupled with other
initiatives, such as the lapsing of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high
earners--lead to fiscal consolidation measures beyond the minimum mandated, and
we believe they are likely to slow the deterioration of the government's debt
dynamics, the long-term rating could stabilize at 'AA+'.
On Monday, we will
issue separate releases concerning affected ratings in the funds,
government-related entities, financial institutions, insurance, public finance,
and structured finance sectors.
FOREIGN EXCHANGE RATES
|
Currency |
Unit
|
Indian Rupees |
|
US Dollar |
1 |
Rs.50.28 |
|
UK Pound |
1 |
Rs.80.08 |
|
Euro |
1 |
Rs.68.45 |
RATING EXPLANATIONS
|
RATING |
STATUS |
PROPOSED CREDIT LINE |
|
|
>86 |
Aaa |
Possesses an extremely sound financial base with the strongest
capability for timely payment of interest and principal sums |
Unlimited |
|
71-85 |
Aa |
Possesses adequate working capital. No caution needed for credit
transaction. It has above average (strong) capability for payment of interest
and principal sums |
Large |
|
56-70 |
A |
Financial & operational base are regarded healthy. General
unfavourable factors will not cause fatal effect. Satisfactory capability for
payment of interest and principal sums |
Fairly Large |
|
41-55 |
Ba |
Overall operation is considered normal. Capable to meet normal
commitments. |
Satisfactory |
|
26-40 |
B |
Capability to overcome financial difficulties seems comparatively
below average. |
Small |
|
11-25 |
Ca |
Adverse factors are apparent. Repayment of interest and principal sums
in default or expected to be in default upon maturity |
Limited with
full security |
|
<10 |
C |
Absolute credit risk exists. Caution needed to be exercised |
Credit not
recommended |
|
---- |
NB |
New Business |
---- |
This score serves as a reference to assess SC’s credit risk
and to set the amount of credit to be extended. It is calculated from a
composite of weighted scores obtained from each of the major sections of this
report. The assessed factors and their relative weights (as indicated through
%) are as follows:
Financial
condition (40%) Ownership
background (20%) Payment
record (10%)
Credit history
(10%) Market trend
(10%) Operational
size (10%)
This report is issued at your request without any
risk and responsibility on the part of MIRA INFORM PRIVATE LIMITED (MIPL)
or its officials.