Apple’s UK retail stores are already the apple of computer consumer’s eyes – now the company’s flagship Regent Street store takes more cash per square foot than the world’s most prestigious department store, Harrods, new data claims.
iMacs, iPhones, iPods and Macs are flying out the door of the hugely profitable store, with takings reaching £60 million per year, that’s £2,000 (c.$3,262) per square foot, double the estimated take at Harrods.
Neil Saunders, a spokesman for commercial property agency Verdict, which estimated the figure, told the Evening Standard: "To make £60million a year from a shop of Apple’s size is absolutely phenomenal. We’ve known for a while that Apple is far more than just a computing brand, and the latest findings prove it.
“Apple’s Regent Street store has extremely strong footfall, since it has become a tourist attraction in its own right, and as it stocks its own products, it controls the price, helping it to boost profit. Shoppers pay a premium for the Apple brand, and there is never discounting, so customers don’t waver over buying elsewhere.”
In contrast, Harrods makes £751 per square foot, while Topshop in Oxford Circus takes about £1,000 per square foot. Rival electrical retailers average about £722 per square foot.
The story is the same in the US, where Apple’s stores are defying the recession with huge crowds and strong sales, even while high street sales generally decline. Apple increased store revenue to $3 billion in its most recent quarter, up 2.5 per cent year-on-year while US retail sales generally fell 9.2 per cent.
Recent NPD figures claimed 66 per cent of laptops sold in US retail stores that cost $1,000 or more are Macs.
No wonder they’re dancing in the aisles at Apple retail…
“the world’s most prestigious department store, Harrods” – really? Whilst it’s a magnificent building in a great area it’s not where Londoners like me would ever choose to go.
Selfridge’s is a much, much better store and, if something can’t be bought in Selfridge’s (or the fab John Lewis) it’s probably not worth buying. (Thankfully they both sell Apple products).
The Apple Store Regent Street is both a magnificent building and a great place to visit — although it’s overwhelmingly busy sometimes. Great staff, though.
He said “prestigious”, not “best”
It is an amazing store! I’ve bought all of my apple products there. Apparently it is also the largest Apple Store in the world… Go London!
The largest, really? Maybe it just doesn’t look that large because the multitude of people inside make it look cramped.
That said, I’ve just been down to grab Snow Leopard and had to queue for all of maybe two minutes and was served by someone who engaged me in an actual conversation. So I don’t think the crowds actually make it harder to buy things.
Don’t really see how “takes more cash per square foot” translates to “bigger”!
I would guess they meant “bigger” as in more popular or significant.
Well, “bigger” sounds better than “denser”.
Dear god, who’s writing your headlines? Not bigger. Bigger sales per square foot. Harrods is a big, big rambling department store that could swallow a multitude of apple stores. What’s next: “Apple stores bigger than Wembley Stadium”?
Regent Street is still the biggest in the world (currently) in terms of square feet of floor space. It is bigger than all three New York stores including the Fifth Avenue ‘cube’ store.
Regent Street has over 28,000 square feet, I believe the Boylston Street store in Boston is about 21,500 square ft and the Fifth Avenue store is about 18,000 square feet.
Regent Street no longer has the longest Genius bar though, I believe that honour now goes to the Apple Store in Sydney Australia with I believe 50 feet vs. Regent Street’s 46 feet.
BIGGER – as in: BIGGER SALES PER QUARE FOOT.
Derrr…