[_9MOTHER9HORSE]

The wider redevelopment has nothing to do with Apple.

The scheme got planning permission in 2011, and construction work has been ongoing since 2012.

It's a mixed-use development, with office space only part of the puzzle, and according to this article, Apple are only taking a lease on 40% of the office space.

I suspect Apple have negotiated hugely preferential rates on said space (as well as structuring the deal so as to pay the bare minimum in taxes, etc.), and the developers have agreed solely because having Apple move in is incredible PR.

[arethuza]

Office developments often have "key tenants" that are big names that take an early lease on office space in a development and get a very good deal - having a big name then attracts other companies.

A bit anchor tenants for malls.

[cylinder]

Actually, enormous deep-pocketed companies with good credit, like Apple, are treated very favorably by landlords. The credit behind the tenant on a leased property determines the yield. So, a building tenanted by Apple on a 20-year lease can sell for a 2% cap rate while the same building tenanted by Joe's Plumbers Inc on a 10-year lease will sell for 6%+. Apple knows that so they can negotiate cheaper price per SQM.