New York and a handful of other major U.S. cities are down, but will never be out as far as their commercial real estate goes, a leading New York real estate private equity investor said Monday at the Reuters Global Real Estate Summit.

“New York’s not going away- it’s THE global city.”

Second tier cities are another matter entirely, said Thomas Shapiro, president of GoldenTree InSite Partners. “We are a big believer in the big city theory which is that the bigger cities will continue do better, to the detriment of secondary cities.”

Companies always go to where the best talent is, he explained, meaning cities such as his big five– New York, LA, San Francisco, Boston and Chicago– remain magnets, their status self-perpetuating

“Goldman Sachs is not moving to Miami because the intellectual capital is in New York- ditto Boston, ditto San Francisco, ditto LA.”

Here’s Shapiro’s prognosis for how some other U.S. cities will fare as the real estate market recovers:

San Francisco: one of the top markets, Shapiro said, because “San Francisco has a diversified economy.”
Chicago: “It’s a boom and bust town, but it is an important center.”

But other, lower cost cities are cheap for a reason, Shapiro said:
Detroit: “It’s cheap but I will never be convinced it’s cheap enough- we have so many issues in the auto sector.”
New Orleans: “People always pitch New Orleans, ‘gee you can buy a fantastic building for $60 per square-foot, but $60 can still go to $30.”

(Reuters photo)

If you had paid $3.5 billion for a skyscraper named after bankrupt automaker General Motors, wouldn’t you want a tenant to come in and pay you another few million to rename the building, with the added bonus of giving it a name not associated with a failed recipient of government largesse?

Boston Properties, which bought the building last year, located at the southeast corner of Central Park in Manhattan, is not known to be shopping around the naming rights to the building, but a top real estate broker in Manhattan, known as the “Queen of the Skyscraper” has one suggestion if ever it is : Apple.

The GM Building is home to Apple’s sleek flagship store, well known to the hordes of tourists and New Yorkers alike, and the maker of the iPhone enjoys top brand name recognition and public affection that Apple is a logical choice.

“If I were Steve Jobs I would be negotiating now,” said Darcy Stacom, the CB Richard Ellis broker who handled the transaction. (She hastened to add she has no knowledge of whether Apple is or might be interested.)

What’s more, she said, the building is home to CBS News’ national daily broadcast, so a massive audience hearing, “Live from the Apple building in New York…” every day would be a major coup for the retailer.

The naming rights to such a marquee building can be cost millions (they are not typically sold outright, but built into rents.) Then again, few companies, Apple among them, can afford that luxury in this market. And even if, as Stacom says, it takes a while for New York to get used to a new name, they may be eager to forget GM.

(Reuters photos)

Tiffany & Co has no intention of selling garden furniture and risking brand dilution, steering clear of the product mix of bankrupt rival jeweler Fortunoff , CEO Michael Kowalski hinted this week at the Reuters Global Luxury Summit in New York.

Fortunoff filed for bankruptcy in February in part because of dismal holiday sales in 2008 and the high expense of expanding into Lord & Taylor stores, and was bought by liquidators, marking the end of an 87-year iconic presence in the New York area during which it was known for its jewelry and home furnishing.  It had been bought by Lord & Taylor’s owner NRDC Equity Partners, in March 2008 for $100 million.

Asked if Fortunoff’s demise offered his company any lessons, Kowalski declined to address Fortunoff directly but said it would be better for Tiffany to continue to concentrate on what it is known for.

 ”We are relatively focused on jewelry and watches, ” Kowalski.  “We look at ourselves as a jeweler not a lifestyle brand.”

In other words, don’t expect Tiffany-branded deck chairs any time soon.

(UPDATES TO INCLUDE MORE DETAIL ON ITS BANKRUPTCY, AND TO REFLECT IT HAD BEEN SELLING HOUSEWARES FOR MANY YEARS.)

IPOs can be very tempting for exchanges, allowing members big payouts and giving the exchanges more financial flexibility to take on new markets.

In the last few years, the majority of the biggest players in the space, from New York Stock Exchange operator NYSE Euronext, and Nasdaq OMX, to Chicago Merc operator CME Group and InterContinentalExchange have gone public.

Several of the few non-public trading venues left, including options exchange CBOE, and electronic venues Liquidnet and Direct Edge, still have IPO plans.

But being public comes at a price — stressed-out employees with options and investors watching plunging stocks. According to the Dow Jones Global Exchanges Index, exchanges’ shares have fallen by nearly half since last May.

At the Reuters Global Exchanges and Trading Summit this week, the CEOs of both CBOE and Liquidnet said the unplanned delays in their IPOs had been a blessing in disguise.

In their own words:
 -Bill Brodsky, CBOE CEO: “The irony is that for the last 12 months, we’ve been better off not being a demutualized or a public exchange because the market has so crushed the multiples of the exchanges.”
- Seth Merrin, Liquidnet CEO: “Thank God we didn’t do the IPO in the fall- who needs the distraction of watching your stock drop?”
(DirectEdge CEO Bill O’Brien said no IPO for at least another year, by which time — god willing — the IPO market should be closer to back to normal.)

One holdout has said thanks but no thanks for an IPO for the forseeable future:
- Joe Ratterman, BATS Trading CEO: Investors are quite happy with our company, and somewhere down the road we may monetize this but this is up  toour ownership.”
Maybe he doesn’t need the agita of seeing his stock go up and down.

(PICTURE: Direct Edge CEO William O’Brien. REUTERS/ERIC THAYER)

The exchanges industry has seen countless trans-Atlantic mergers in the past few years, from the New York Stock Exchange combining with Euronext, and Nasdaq buying up Nordic exchange operator OMX, to Deutsche Boerse’e Eurex snagging the International Securities Exchange.

But you are not likely to see CME Group, parent of the Chicago Merc and the world’s largest derivatives exchange, flirt with any European counterparts anytime soon, CME CEO Craig Donohue hinted at the Reuters Exchanges & Trading Summit on Monday.

Europe is too bureaucratic for his taste and some deals are better in theory than practice, Donohue said, speaking from Sao Paulo:

“From a vantage point of distance, I just think those are incredibly difficult deals to do– the multiplicity of regulators, labor laws– all create a management not free to maximize synergies or value shareholders. I’m not saying these are bad deals, but they are more difficult.”

In other words, no European shopping trips are in the offing for the well traveled Donohue.

As if providing a trading platform, prestige and market data weren’t enough, stock exchanges are facing growing demands from the CEOs of their listed companies to help halt their stocks’ slide, BATS Trading CEO Joe Ratterman said at the Reuters Global Exchanges and Trading Summit on Monday.

Ratterman said he has been hearing of company bosses he calls “issuer-CEOs” giving the high-ups at rival exchanges, the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq, an earful when the stocks of those companies come under attack from short sellers.

“I had no idea of the power or influence they try to wield on exchanges executives with the market falling off and stocks falling down.,” Ratterman said. “CEOs have gotten involved and called my counterparts at Nasdaq and NYSE and said. ‘What are you doing to stop my stock price from falling?’”

Essentially, he said, companies are telling those exchanges, “You’re my lobby.”

That hassle may be one of the reasons Ratterman said BATS was not interested in competing with NYSE and Nasdaq for listings business, unlike Direct Edge, which last week filed to become a stock exchange operator and is considering going after the competitive new listings business.

(PHOTO: REUTERS/ERIC THAYER)

The emergence of off exchange stock trading in the United States in the past 10 years has eaten away at the market share of the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq by breaking their duopoly.

But those two U.S.-based exchanges have had strong management to help them weather the storm, Liquidnet CEO Seth Merrin said at the Reuters Global Exchanges and Trading Summit.

Europe only last year began to allow competition for stock trading with the introduction of new European Union rules known as MiFID, which have forced the London Stock Exchange to slash prices.

But Merrin said that exchange CEO’s used to operating in a monopoly or duopoly are ill equipped to help navigate their businesses in a more competitive environment.

Merrin recalled telling Clara Furse, head of the London Stock Exchange, two years ago to get ready for competition.

“Even two years ago, they didn’t believe us- thought we were a fad,: Merrin said. “That’s why you see a Clara Furse go,” he said of the LSE head, who said in November she would step down. 

And Merrin lavished praise on the current management of the New York Stock Excahange, especially compared to a earlier head of the exchange:

“Can you imagine if (Dick) Grasso were still in charge of the Stock Exchange? It would, or could, be bankrupt today: they have excellent management.”