CASE STUDIES / DECISION EVIDENCE

Evidence before commitment.

KANTARIGAN does not seek to make every opportunity work. Strategic review determines the strongest route: Optimise · Reposition · Convert · Acquire · Hold · Exit · Do Not Proceed.

The Strategic Asset Snapshot is the initial qualification and briefing stage. Where justified, deeper financial, development, planning or asset-performance analysis follows separately.

01Primary case

ACTON W3

When Further Development Was Not the Best Route

£80k–£150kEstimated potential expenditure avoided

Acton W3 mixed-use property analysed through KANTARIGAN’s Decision Map: Potential, Performance, Constraint and Evidence — 01
**Complimentary Strategic Asset Snapshot**
Initial qualification and briefing to identify the principal constraint, the first decision to test and whether deeper analysis is justified.
02
**Strategic Asset Performance Review**
A more focused analytical review of asset economics, risks, strategic options and the likely value of intervention before capital is committed.
03
**Decision Outcome**
The review indicated that further development was unlikely to justify the added cost, risk and time, supporting a simpler sale strategy targeting the family-home market.

Context

An existing mixed-use building was being considered for a more complex development and repositioning strategy.

Strategic question

Would further development expenditure create enough incremental value to justify the cost, risk and time?

Review and finding

The review compared the proposed route, likely expenditure, value potential and alternative exits. Additional complexity was unlikely to create sufficient incremental value.

Decision

Do not force the development route. A simpler sale strategy targeting the family-home market offered the stronger commercial route.

Key insight

The highest-value decision is not always to develop more. Sometimes it is knowing when additional complexity will not generate sufficient return.

“Really appreciate all of that... realising slowly that what we're spending with architect could be a waste of money so far (as my hubby is telling me, ouch!). You know your onions, I can see that.”
— Paulette W., Property Owner, Acton W3

02 · SUPPORTING DECISION CASE

36-Key Aparthotel

When the Economics Said Do Not Proceed

Asset36-key C1 aparthotel

StrategyGround-up modular development

Total project cost£9.16m

Fixed lease£300k p.a.

Yield on Cost3.03%

Zero-module-cost stress test6.35%

DecisionDO NOT PROCEED

The relationship between capital commitment and achievable income remained structurally weak even under materially improved cost assumptions. The project was discontinued before further capital was committed, the holding deposit was returned and the strategy shifted towards existing buildings with optimisation, repositioning or conversion potential.

Key insight: Strategic analysis should not justify a transaction. It should determine whether the proposed route makes economic sense.

Case details have been anonymised. Figures are presented to illustrate the strategic decision process.

03 · ANOTHER DECISION IN NUMBERS

Rejected at initial screening

The opportunity failed KANTARIGAN’s core investment discipline before deeper due diligence was justified.

£25mopportunity

3.98%Yield on Cost

25.1 yrspayback

−1.6%Cash-on-Cash

0.87×DSCR

THE FIRST DECISION

A full review is not always the first requirement.

The first decision is whether the asset presents a material strategic issue or opportunity worth investigating further.

BEGIN REVIEW