An anchor worth 49% of the rent can take 61% of it
In a retail centre, the anchor's share of the rent roll understates what its departure costs — because the leases around it are written to react.
The clause nobody models
A co-tenancy provision lets an inline tenant reduce rent, or leave, if a named anchor goes dark or if occupancy falls below a threshold. It is standard in retail leasing and it is almost never in the model.
The consequence is that the anchor's line on the rent roll is not what the anchor is worth. It is the floor.
The worked figure
On the retail centre used throughout this site, the anchor accounts for 49.4% of base rent. When the co-tenancy clauses in the inline leases fire, the centre loses 60.9% of its rent.
The extra eleven and a half points are tenants who are still in occupation, still trading, and now paying less — or entitled to walk.
What to do about it
Read the inline leases for the trigger, not just the anchor lease for the expiry. The thresholds vary: a named co-tenant, a percentage of GLA occupied, a period of continuous darkness before the remedy is available.
Then model the centre twice — once as it stands, once with the anchor gone and the clauses fired. The distance between those two numbers is the real concentration risk, and it is usually well beyond what the rent roll suggests.
Every figure above is asserted against the calculation engine in retail-example.test.ts — the same code a live deal runs.