MODEL / 06 · Illustrative engagement model

Commercial leasing mandate, Mumbai office asset

A letting mandate on a Mumbai office asset. The commercial discipline is to optimise for rent actually received across the term — which frequently means accepting a lower headline rent from a stronger covenant on a longer lease rather than a higher rent from an uncertain tenant.

Asset class
Grade A / B office
Mandate
Landlord letting mandate
Typical scale
50,000 – 400,000 sq ft
Typical duration
12–30 months

This is an engagement model, not a client case study. It describes how this type of mandate is structured and what it is measured on. No client, project or outcome is represented.

The situation

What this kind of mandate starts from.

  • Headline rent is a poor comparison basis once loading factor, CAM, incentives and fit-out contribution are accounted for.
  • Void periods are expensive and are frequently under-counted against the rent being held out for.
  • Occupier decisions turn on total occupancy cost per usable area, which reorders shortlists set on headline rent.
  • Covenant strength determines whether the agreed rent is actually received in year three.
  • Flexibility provisions — break options, expansion rights — are priced terms that occupiers will pay for.

The approach

How it is run.

  1. 01

    Position the asset against transacted evidence

    Benchmark rents, incentives and terms actually transacted in the micro-market rather than quoted, and set a letting strategy against a defined target occupier profile.

  2. 02

    Model the trade-offs explicitly

    Covenant strength against rent, term length against flexibility, and incentive cost against void cost — so the landlord decides on modelled outcomes rather than on headline numbers.

  3. 03

    Negotiate the whole term sheet

    Escalation, lock-in, CAM treatment, fit-out contribution, deposit and handover condition, alongside the landlord's counsel.

  4. 04

    Coordinate handover and fit-out

    Handover condition verification, fit-out timeline coordination and snag resolution before occupation, so the lease commences cleanly.

Measurement

What the mandate is measured on.

The metrics and cadence — not claimed results.

Effective rent over term

Modelled

Net of incentives, rent-free periods and fit-out contribution — not the headline figure.

Void days

Reported monthly

Counted explicitly against the rent level being held out for.

Weighted average lease term

Reported

With covenant quality assessed, since term is only worth the tenant behind it.

Total occupancy cost benchmark

Benchmarked

Per usable square foot, against transacted comparables in the micro-market.

Landlords systematically under-count void cost against the rent they are holding out for. Making that comparison explicit usually changes the decision, and almost always shortens the letting cycle.

The lesson this model is built on

The first decision

Let's start before the building.

Send us the site, the scheme or the stalled inventory. We will tell you what we think — including when the answer is not to proceed.