Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes - it was like a two edged sword. Gays didn't find the idea of shopping in a traditional and family kind of store very appealing but traditional and family types don't want to buy clothes that make them look gay. People can be tolerant of gays but still not want to dress like them.
Please enlighten us as to how most gay people dress. Considering the entire Fashion world is basically run by gays, most likely whatever you decide to throw on started as a design by a gay person or at least had one involved in the process. Gays are notoriously and stereotypically much more fashion conscious and stylish than their straight counterparts.
No, they were out to make more money by trying to attract a younger, more hip customer.
Which was a stupid decision to begin with. Young and hip shop at A&F, H&M, Macy's, the Gap, Banana Republic, etc., and if they have money, the high end designers.
You have some great points on marketing and merchandising. JCP coupons and sale events were like heroin for their shoppers. Kohls shoppers are cut from the same mold as the JCP shopper.
Yup. I can understand the rationale behind Penny cutting down on the number of sales- when there is a big sale every 2 weeks, the 'big' part of the sale becomes meaningless.
JC Penny had a very long tradition of high quality house brands in a lot of the basics everyone needs; it's underwear, stockings, work clothing and foot ware, house goods, etc. were all very well made, well fitting and durable goods at good prices. But that was back when it was all American made.
I believe that if Penny had sought out US made suppliers and made a big deal out of buying domestic goods at Penny's, they would have done much better. When folks go in for the necessities, the fashions are right there on the floor waiting to be discovered. The big problem for all the big chains is getting customers on the sales floor these days.
"After the closing bell, the department-store operator announced President Michael Francis was leaving, effective today, after only eight months on the job. Shares dropped 6.5% in after-hours trading to $22.75 in after-hours trading. The stock is down nearly 50% since early February.
J.C. Penney said CEO Ron Johnson, a former Apple and Target executive, would oversee the company’s marketing and merchandising functions.
Francis was Target’s top marketing executive for 10 years before he left last fall to take the position with J.C. Penney. He was one of Johnson’s first picks to help him run the company, and was with him on stage in January when the two unveiled Penney’s new sales pitch.
“The sudden nature of the departure underscores, in our opinion, the big-time mistakes JC Penney has made in articulating [its] new image,†said Brian Sozzi, an analyst at NBG Productions.
Much has changed in a short amount of time. Last month, J.C. Penney dropped a tape bomb by reporting a quarterly loss, suspending its dividend to save cash and predicting it wouldn’t meet its previous annual earnings targets."
This is what happens when a guy who was used to a highly-educated, liberal clientele takes over a company with a very working-class clientele. He's out of touch and alienating JCPenney's customerbase, and stockholders.
Please enlighten us as to how most gay people dress. Considering the entire Fashion world is basically run by gays, most likely whatever you decide to throw on started as a design by a gay person or at least had one involved in the process. Gays are notoriously and stereotypically much more fashion conscious and stylish than their straight counterparts.
Proof positive that the quoted poster has NO clue as to what they are speaking of.
Makes me wanna post our fave "The Devil Wears Prada" clip again.
Not that the quoted poster would understand how the analogy would apply.
Speculation. And let's get our story straight on one thing: Did JCP start losing business before they began openly supporting homosexuality, or after? Because if it was before, we've no reason to think that their promotion of "the gay agenda" (as non-thinkers just love to call it) had any negative effect whatsoever. And if it was after, their hiring gay spokespersons/models had to have been inspired by something other than a sense of impending doom.
No matter. There's no justification for punishing the hiring of a person just because they're homosexual. Even Bill O'Reilly agrees. That's promotion of nothing short of discrimination, one of America's purest forms of evil, as is the punishment of promoting tolerance in general, regardless of why the promoter did so. End of story.
Not only did they NOT attract new customers but they lost more of their base.
Their move backfired.
Speculation ? Go look at their balance sheet and annual reports.
Which was a stupid decision to begin with. Young and hip shop at A&F, H&M, Macy's, the Gap, Banana Republic, etc., and if they have money, the high end designers.
JC Penney has always been frumpy traditional.
I think you're confusing income correlation (or middle class) with hip.
Not only did they NOT attract new customers but they lost more of their base.
Their move backfired.
Speculation ? Go look at their balance sheet and annual reports.
But if they were losing customers already, why are you assuming it was this "move" that hurt them? Maybe it was just the continuation of whatever was already making them lose customers?
Yes, speculation. That they were solely motivated by money (or survival of their business) when they chose to make their approval of homosexuality public.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.