Target success (income, cost, stores, house)

[Randomdude]

Originally Posted by user_id

No idea why you are yapping about income levels when I'm talking about upper-class folks, these people typically have a lot of wealth. Also, they are in the area because that is where they are from.

Income is not only derived from wage.

Originally Posted by user_id

1.) These people travel all the time, 2.) They usually don't purchase their own household items, they have maids etc for that.

You are talking about maybe the top 5-10% of income levels. Most people in the top two income quintiles do not have personal assistants and full time maids, nor do they live a life of leisure which allows for "travel all the time".

Originally Posted by user_id

Again, the issue here is that you are equating "upper class" with "high income" and that is not accurate at all.

It is very accurate.

Originally Posted by user_id

I'm going to stop here as its clear you're not going to acknowledge reality or even both reading about matters. The distinctions between the social classes has nothing to do with income, its not even a factor.

Social classes and income classes are distinct from each other, with the former being completely based on image and connections. This is actually what Target thrives on.

Originally Posted by user_id

Even wealth is only mildly important. The distinctions between the social classes run very deep, its not just a matter of Family A having a net worth of $10 million and family B having a net worth of $100,000. Free feel to read about it.

Who is talking about "social classes"? If we are talking about social classes of COURSE Target is aiming for higher "social" classes, or people who feel they are a "higher" social class. Thats the whole goal of their marketing campaign. They arent aiming for "higher income levels", they are aiming for people who want to feel better then the next guy.

Originally Posted by user_id

Also, in terms of the demographic differences. Like I said pointless to "debate" about it as its clear you're just trying to convince yourself that Target shoppers are some how "suckers".

They largely are, if judged exclusively on price shopping.

Originally Posted by user_id

But reality differs, demographically Target shoppers have higher incomes, are younger and more female.

Of course Target shoppers are going to have some what higher incomes on average, because they are higher priced. The lower your household income, the less likely you are going to be to toss cash away on overpriced merchandise.

However, those Target shoppers are pretty much coming from the same income quintiles and same neighborhoods the Walmart shoppers do. As much as youd like to deny it, households making from about 25k-75k are usually commingled in the same middle class neighborhoods in most geographic areas. This encompasses pretty much about half way through the 2nd lowest income quintiles to the lower levels of the top income quintile.

Originally Posted by user_id

"And while all age groups choose Wal-Mart, at around a dominant 50 percent rate, note how Target's "edge" has built more affinity with the younger group: 33 percent of people age 18 to 29 prefer the store, as do 33 percent of those 30 to 49, 26 percent of those 50 to 64 and just 18 percent of those 65 or older. Moreover, if we factor out older females, those over 50, Target's affinity with women climbs to 41 percent, a much narrower gap with Wal-Mart's 47 percent. Indeed, among the 18- to-49 age group, males selecting Target even climb a couple points, to 24 percent."

Hmm, lets see, I cant imagine how advertising couldnt have possibly had any part in this.

Ironically though, that "young" demographic is also the most likely to be in the lower income quintiles.

Originally Posted by user_id

"Only 16 percent of those with incomes of $20,000 or less choose Target, but that climbs to 23 percent for those with incomes of $20,000 to $29,000, 26 percent for those earning $30,000 to $39,000.....

Ive already attacked your poll based data. If you want a full listing of what is wrong with a poll based on 1011 people throughout the US, I can give you a ton.

Obviously you cant determine this by yourself because you keep quoting poll based data.

Originally Posted by user_id

"First and foremost (as I’ve said numerous times) Target and Wal-Mart aren’t direct competitors due to having sharply different customer demographics"

This article is some what correct, Target and Walmart arent "direct" competitors, but that isnt for lack of selling identical merchandise, outside of groceries. It is about the perception of Target which has been carefully cultivated.

[texdav]

That perception is aimed at women who value thinking they are buying higher end than they are. But then target also has alot of lookie lous who just shop and buy little really.

[Niners fan]

It's enjoyable to see two people like user_id and randomdude slap each other around.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by Randomdude

You are talking about maybe the top 5-10% of income levels.

No, I'm not. How many times do I have to say it? I'm talking about the upper class, the upper class are not the "top 5~10% income levels". The top 10% is not even high, hell the top 5% are not even high (that is $157k/year and above).

Originally Posted by Randomdude

Social classes and income classes are distinct from each other...

Haha, you just said that its "accurate" to equate the two...now you say they are distinct. Make up your mind.

Originally Posted by Randomdude

Who is talking about "social classes"? If we are talking about social classes of COURSE Target is aiming for higher "social" classes....

This is so ridiculous. I've been talking about social class the entire time, hence the usage of words like "middle-class", "upper-class".

Not even going to bother reading anything else, its as if you live in another world.

[Randomdude]

Originally Posted by user_id

Haha, you just said that its "accurate" to equate the two...now you say they are distinct. Make up your mind.

I never said it was accurate to equate the two, EVER. They are not equal, and thats EXACTLY what Target is feasting on. You are the one who is using them interchangeably throughout the whole thread.

If they were one in the same, Target would be completely out of business. They would lose all their shoppers who have incomes low enough that price makes a difference, who currently turn their nose up at Walmart.

Originally Posted by user_id

This is so ridiculous. I've been talking about social class the entire time, hence the usage of words like "middle-class", "upper-class".

Thats funny, then why did you make these quotes

"These people are not living in the same neighborhoods."

This would infer that people of the "upper class" have the means to be able to purchase (which is related to income), houses in distinct neighborhoods removed from the middle and lower classes.

"the former is more so poor to lower-middle class."

Here you make the comment of "poor". I dont know what language poor is not directly attributable to income level, but its certainly not English.

"The store is geared towards lower income shoppers and sales low quality items."

Here you directly mention INCOME. Cant really deny this one.

Further more, youve been attacking my premise that Target and Walmart are both after primarily people in similiar income brackets, which means you presented a counter argument COMPLETELY based on income.

Originally Posted by user_id

Not even going to bother reading anything else, its as if you live in another world.

Thats a safe shell you always end up hiding in after you get your ass handed to you.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by Randomdude

You are the one who is using them interchangeably throughout the whole thread.

This is pure hogwash, I've been using words that indicate social class and have numerous times pointed out that social class is about much more than money.

You on the other hand kept yapping about income.

Originally Posted by Randomdude

This would infer that people of the "upper class" have the means to be able to purchase (which is related to income), houses in distinct neighborhoods removed from the middle and lower classes.

No, it would infer that the social classes tend to divide themselves up. I said nothing about income or the homes being nicer, etc.

Originally Posted by Randomdude

Here you make the comment of "poor". I dont know what language poor is not directly attributable to income level, but its certainly not English.

In the context its obvious I'm talking about the working poor, which is a name of a social class.

Originally Posted by Randomdude

Here you directly mention INCOME. Cant really deny this one.

Yes, what is your point? I mentioned income when I spoke about the differences between Target and Wal-mart because ahem....you mentioned income.

In terms of social class I stated that Wal-mart is more so lower middle-class where as Target is more so middle-class to upper middle-class. You also don't seem to understand how income is associated with social class, different income levels are in a sense necessary conditions for being in such and such social class but they are not sufficient conditions.

I always find it funny how highly you think of yourself. Yes you sure "handed it to me". But seriously, stop back peddling its a waste of time.

[Brave Stranger]

Originally Posted by Randomdude

I never said it was accurate to equate the two, EVER. They are not equal, and thats EXACTLY what Target is feasting on. You are the one who is using them interchangeably throughout the whole thread.

If they were one in the same, Target would be completely out of business. They would lose all their shoppers who have incomes low enough that price makes a difference, who currently turn their nose up at Walmart.




Thats funny, then why did you make these quotes

"These people are not living in the same neighborhoods."

This would infer that people of the "upper class" have the means to be able to purchase (which is related to income), houses in distinct neighborhoods removed from the middle and lower classes.

"the former is more so poor to lower-middle class."

Here you make the comment of "poor". I dont know what language poor is not directly attributable to income level, but its certainly not English.

"The store is geared towards lower income shoppers and sales low quality items."

Here you directly mention INCOME. Cant really deny this one.

Further more, youve been attacking my premise that Target and Walmart are both after primarily people in similiar income brackets, which means you presented a counter argument COMPLETELY based on income.




Thats a safe shell you always end up hiding in after you get your ass handed to you.

I have no horse in this race.......but you cleaned this guy's clock. Good job..

[Randomdude]

Originally Posted by user_id

This is pure hogwash, I've been using words that indicate social class and have numerous times pointed out that social class is about much more than money.

You did bring up social class and you did bring up that its not about money, however you also, on several occassions, used the same class references in regards to income.

Originally Posted by user_id

You on the other hand kept yapping about income.

My argument was 100% about income, always was, and always will be. In fact, this is from my very first post

"even though both stores abuse their employees equally, sell almost exclusively Chinese made crap, and draw from the same household income demographics."

Not 3 post later you were on the attack claiming that Target goes after a different class that doesnt even live in the same neighborhood as Walmart shoppers, which is absolute crap.

So, you can either admit one of two things, you dont know what you are talking about, or you were once again selectively reading my post, and then setting up a straw man, which Ive called you out on many times.

Originally Posted by user_id

No, it would infer that the social classes tend to divide themselves up. I said nothing about income or the homes being nicer, etc.

Well considering that you replied to a post that specifically referenced income levels with this reply, I cant imagine how it could possibly be taken out of context.

Originally Posted by user_id

In the context its obvious I'm talking about the working poor, which is a name of a social class.

Of course.....

Originally Posted by user_id

In terms of social class I stated that Wal-mart is more so lower middle-class where as Target is more so middle-class to upper middle-class. You also don't seem to understand how income is associated with social class, different income levels are in a sense necessary conditions for being in such and such social class but they are not sufficient conditions.

No, its more like social class and its relation to income are not applicable to my original post that you attacked. I understand the difference between social and income classes, and if you pay attention, thats actually what my whole entire stratification argument is about. However, that would cut in on your need to constantly counter someone.

Originally Posted by user_id

I always find it funny how highly you think of yourself. Yes you sure "handed it to me". But seriously, stop back peddling its a waste of time.

Dude, other people on this board can see it. I dont really even need to point it out. You have once again straw manned the argument (Im going to give you the benefit of the doubt here, since in my past experiences with you, you constantly do this), and you are the only one who cant seem to realize it.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by Randomdude

... on several occassions, used the same class references in regards to income.

No, I did not. I spoke about income when you did.

Originally Posted by Randomdude

My argument was 100% about income, always was, and always will be. In fact, this is from my very first post

Your ability to distort reality to fit your needs is amazing. Go read your original post that I responded to, there is not one mention of income but there is mention of social class see:

"I think Target will be fine as long as they can continue to successfully stratify the middle to lower classes."

You spoke about demographics and social class, not income. You later tried to equate income level with social class, but I guess you figured out that was silly a bit later.

1984 style revision, yet the original record is still posted....This is amusing psychologically speaking if anything else...

[texdav]

I agree that target and wal-mart ceertaqinly don't target the middle to upper middle class.Ther merchaentdise is teh same type. For example their clohesw are not een to J C Penny satndards which is very middle class. Ther groceries are if you look much higher than even local groceries stores. The bascailly target women i the middle to lower middle class really. look athtier shoppers next time your I the store.hey just don't get near the customers because they are higher on the same quilty than wal-mart but most can equal wal-marts price overall.