What am I missing here?
In the US, it's common to have a major store people want to travel to (here IKEA, or a big Walmart, in the past it might have been Macy's) "anchor" a commercial development. A bunch of smaller ancillary stories and food places are built around the same parking area or indoor mall, in the theory that the foot traffic will drive business.
Also, a large, reliable renter makes the project financing smoother. There's (almost) no risk IKEA will stop paying for their space compared to "TigerTeamX's Emporium".
What the article is therefore claiming is that "if a giant commercial project with an IKEA fails, then no large commercial project is likely to be able to succeed".
I assume the market hall stuff is on site though.
The amount of sheer delusion exhibited by the people quoted in this article -some of whom seemingly possessing strong vested interests- is mindboggling. Rest assured that it will take nothing sort of multiple miracles to revitalize the area, IKEA opening shop not being one of them.