E Ink CHALLENGE As E Ink Corporation’s real estate advisor for 15 years, Colliers International’s Suburban Brokerage group counseled E Ink in the implementation of a bold 2010 real estate strategy to more than double the company’s foot print and relocate the company’s headquarters from its current location at 733 Concord Avenue in Cambridge, Massachusetts. E Ink experienced explosive growth due to its strong and expanding position within the eReader market, rendering its Cambridge headquarters insufficient. E Ink sought a facility with over 120,000 square feet available, offering attractive economics, flexible terms, the ability to control expansion, immediate highway access, and one with a strong shell and core from which to construct space for heavy laboratory use. STRATEGY Colliers’ Suburban Brokerage group surveyed and presented more than 70 sites from Plymouth to Haverhill on Route 128 and Interstate 495 which met E Ink’s primary objectives. In selecting 1000 Technology Park Drive in Billerica, E Ink found an asset that was recently purchased by a first-class landlord at distressed pricing which provided tremendous opportunity for better-than-market deal terms. SERVICES Colliers relied heavily on its in-house capabilities in advising E Ink. Services included detailed financial analysis (GAAP accounting and cash flow), demographic studies, lease abstracting, construction pricing, design review, financing impacts and investment sales, particularly in determining pre-negotiated purchase price options. RESULTS Working in conjunction with E Ink’s outside counsel, Colliers successfully negotiated favorable lease terms for E Ink. In The Gutierrez Company, Colliers secured a well-qualified operator who provided E Ink with a heavy tenant improvement allowance, attractive rents, the ability to purchase the building, substantial free rent, multiple rights to extend the lease, the ability to expand the building by another 70,000-140,000 rentable square feet, and a right to terminate. In addition, the Colliers team successfully limited the landlord by capping the amount of debt that may be employed in financing the transaction, thus protecting against any over-leveraging concerns in the future.