Capital allocation
Capital scenarios shouldn't be a seasonal spreadsheet sprint.
Renew, relocate, consolidate and divest, modelled together against live lease data — with the co-tenancy and closure overlaps a spreadsheet cannot see, and a narrative your finance, real estate and legal teams can gate jointly.
What modelling drag looks like
8–48
weeks
A spreadsheet portfolio model lingers this long before leadership trusts it.
12–72
hours
Per scenario refresh, every time comparables or closure lists move.
30–72%
invalidated
Of scenarios, once co-tenancy, renewal overlap and capital timing collide.
>$3.8M
leakage
Realised when notice timelines miss the modelled window, on a 950-store comparable.
Brittle models
Why portfolio spreadsheets break under real volatility.
Not because the math is wrong. Because the inputs move, and nothing in the workbook knows they did.
Spreadsheet gravity
Mega-workbooks stitched together from the lease system, the finance system, loose spreadsheets and comparables PDFs. One broken link poisons an EBITDA outlook an executive then presents with confidence.
Every store on its own tab
Renewal and exit modelled per location, without shared closure inputs, capital pacing, clustering math or landlord concentration. The tabs never see each other.
Interdependency blindness
Co-tenancy-triggered closures, relocation sequences and clustered remodel windows get evaluated as line items — so the second-order effects on earnings and capital never surface.
No narrative layer
Analyst-grade tabs never become next steps that legal, lease admin and finance recognise as theirs, so the model rots the week after the steering committee.
Throughput
A manual stack decays the moment comparables change.
Manual — confidence decays
- Export rent roll snapshots
- Locate the latest comparables PDF
- Call the real estate lead for anecdotes
- Splice in closure lists by hand
- Update the appendix slide
Surfaice — continuous refresh
- Rebuild renew and exit ladders from live lease data and abstracts
- Cross-reference closures against co-tenancy and kickout exposure
- Regenerate earnings, cash and lease-accounting notes as inputs move
- Flag concentration and liquidity risk before the CFO readout
Interdependency
One clause can reorganise capital pacing for a whole corridor.
These are the ripples a per-store tab cannot model, because the effect lands on a different store than the cause.
Co-tenancy-linked rent relief
A revenue shock, an earnings drag, and relocation timing that now overlaps something else
Kickout thresholds
One closure cascades into capital smoothing and clustered labour moves across the corridor
Cross-guaranty and landlord concentration
Liquidity optics change when several renewals hinge on one counterparty's stance
Operating motion
Rebuild, stress, narrate — with someone accountable at the end.
- Rebuild the modelled renew and exit stacks from live lease data — no orphaned tabs
- Overlay closure waves, co-tenancy exposure and relocation overlap automatically
- Run the scenario matrix with earnings, cash timing, capital ramps and sensitivities annotated
- Emit the executive narration with citations to live inputs and owner-assigned milestones
Scenario matrix — five-year earnings delta against the modelled base
illustrative · not tenant-specificLive outputs annotate their sources, the assumption ladder behind each figure, and the sensitivities finance, real estate and legal gate together.
| Scenario lane | Capital read | Indicative 5-yr delta | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base roll-forward | As modelled | +$18.6M | — |
| Close bottom 42 | Improvement write-offs modelled | +$22.9M | Focus |
| Renegotiate tier-1 rents | Legal and retrofit | +$31.7M | — |
| Relocate flagged | Full relocation capital envelopes | +$27.9M | — |
| Hybrid A | Close, then relocate selectively | +$29.9M | — |
| Hybrid B | Renegotiation bias, phased exits | +$33.9M | — |
| Aggressive divest | Highest penalty exposure | +$41.9M | — |
| Conservative protect | Defer relocations and capital | +$15.9M | — |
Move the capital story off static slides.
A walk-through on your own lease footprint, your stakeholder map and your risk appetite — not a generic deck.