In October 2001 Topland, the real estate company privately owned by two brothers who emigrated from Israel to Great Britain won the rude struggle for the part of the property that formerly belonged to Mark & Spencer warehouse network.   The whole thing was about 80 property outlets of company’s best estate. Having sold these properties M&S rented them under 25-year-term agreement. Topland paid GBP 348 million ($641 million) for them. After two years Topland managed to sell this portfolio for GBP 450 million ($829 million) having benefited GBP 100 million net, which, at the end of the days, showed the potential value of M&S property.   Nowadays, Mark & Spencer struggles for extra income for its auctioneers. Its portfolio has been considered one of the best for a long time among those owned by British retailers. According to consultants and developers notice, the company will put a part of the owned properties for sale while the real estate market experiences another boom. The official value of assets has not been reconsidered since 1988. Joe Valent, Head of Analytical Department for DTZ Debenham Tie Leung Consulting Company believes if M&S decides to sell its property and sign long lease agreements for the sold property, there’ll be no end of buyers. Retail companies still remain best real estate market handlers since stock markets showed a decline in 2000.   However, this strategy can be the matter of considerable financial risks for M&S. The potential value of the company’s real estate portfolio illustrates the symbiosis that dragged retailers into the real estate market. According to analytical data supplied by Cushman & Wakefield Healey & Baker, nearly 80% of assets of some retail networks are concentrated in real estate. On the one hand, it provides these companies with efficient tools for market control; on the other hand, they appear in a position when the major part of their capital is involved in real estate, i.e. a less profitable field than retail business itself. To ensure spare cash, retailers had to sell their property to investors and then lease it (the so called ‘lease back’). It’s normally the matter of 25-year-lease agreements with reinstalling the rent payments every five years.   According to the agreement the rent is never considered to lower amounts, even if a property becomes unattractive for investors. The leaser has to receive lender’s consent any time he wants to perform any redesign. Most of the owners consider this feature a reasonable ground for raising rents. No sublease is possible without owner’s prior approval. In fact, this means that retailers have to pay high price for properties they owned. M&S were not ready for that until now.   Edmund Kamerer-Kass, Director of Property Information Project analytical company and a retail real estate specialist pointed out that stores located downtown are much more profitable if their floor space is relatively small. The most prescient developers cornered large department stores in downtown areas, that realtors were selling in 80-s and acquired fabulous incomes by reequipping them into smaller shopping outlets.