top of page
Search

A Feasibility Study That Can't Say "No" Isn't a Study: Why Feasibility and Concept Are One Loop

Ask ten owners what a feasibility study is and most will describe a document that says yes. That is the problem. A study built to confirm a decision is a formality; a study built to test one is an instrument. And in mall development, the test and the concept cannot be separated — because the numbers change entirely depending on what you decide to build.

Feasibility and concept are one loop, not two steps

A common sequence in our region: commission a feasibility study for "a mall," receive a positive result, then develop the concept afterwards. But a mall is not one thing. A convenience-led neighborhood center, a family destination anchored by entertainment, and a fashion-led regional center have different GLA, different tenant profiles, different construction costs, and completely different revenue curves.

Real work runs in a loop: draft a concept, test it financially, adjust, test again — until the concept that survives is also the one that pays.

What the feasibility model must actually test

  • GLA sizing against demand, not against the plot. Building the maximum permitted area is the most common way to manufacture permanent vacancy.

  • Achievable rents by category and floor, based on what comparable assets actually collect — not asking rents in brochures.

  • Anchor economics: anchors pay less per square meter and generate the traffic everyone else pays for. The model must show that trade honestly.

  • Construction cost at today's tender prices, including the cost implications the concept imposes — extraction for F&B, structure for entertainment, parking ratios.

  • Absorption and phasing: how quickly the market can actually fill this GLA, and whether opening in stages produces a better return than opening at once.

  • Sensitivity: occupancy down, costs up, opening delayed — does the project still stand?

Concept development: the questions that decide the outcome

  • Who is this for? A defined catchment and customer, not "everyone in the city."

  • Why here, and not the competitor? A reason to travel past an existing project — convenience, mix, experience, or price.

  • What holds them? The dwell-time engine: F&B, entertainment, services, events.

  • What can it become? Flexibility to shift the mix as categories rise and fall over the asset's life.

The healthiest outcome is sometimes a smaller project

Some of the most valuable advice a developer receives is to build less: a right-sized center that fills, performs, and expands later, instead of an oversized scheme that spends a decade half-empty. Our region has enough evidence of both outcomes to learn from — and the difference was decided at this stage, on paper, before anything was built.

A note from the field

In the projects we have advised on across the Levant and the Gulf, the concept that owners started with was rarely the concept that proved most profitable — and the gap between them was found in the modelling, not on site. That is the work we do at RETAILBIG: testing concepts against real numbers until one survives both. You can read how we work on our About page.

Planning a mall or commercial center — or re-testing one already on the drawing board? Send us a brief and receive a complimentary 15–30 minute consultation: Contact RETAILBIG

Images: Pexels (free to use) — photos by contributing photographers.

Read also from RETAILBIG

 
 
bottom of page