[g10r]

Surely they understood this before the initial decision was announced. No way those leases were disappearing.

[tivert]

> Surely they understood this before the initial decision was announced. No way those leases were disappearing.

Given the flip-flopping, I'm unsure how much we can assume they understand.

[coderholic]

I wonder if it was a clever negotiating tactic? Scare the landlords, then walk it back and get a great deal.

Even if it was that, seems risky to want to do it knowing it's going to make you look more broadly.

[gamblor956]

Scare the landlords, then walk it back and get a great deal.

This is how the conversation with the landlord would probably go:

Tesla: We're going to close our store in your mall.

Landlord: Good luck with that. Next month's rent is due in a week.

Tesla: But we're closing our store...

Landlord: You signed a multi-year lease without an early cancellation clause. I don't care if you're closing the store, you still owe me rent for the remainder of the lease. You can pay it as due or buy out your for X% of the aggregate remaining amount. [where X is some obscenely large percentage approaching 100% because the landlord has Tesla over a barrel and doesn't need to offer a discount].

[xkjkls]

Their landlords are a large number of different entities each with their own areas and laws. This is not an effective way to negotiate with 100s of malls around the country.

[g10r]

Tesla occupancy doesn't mean much for most of these malls/shopping centers, to be honest.

Apple/Nike/Target, sure. Tesla, no.

[pretendscholar]

They already signed the terms of the lease.