my impressions of Portland, 2 weeks later (moving, Walmart, bike)

[gotigers123]

Originally Posted by Minervah

Very popular in many places.

Our Locations

Sure, and Starbucks is popular in 98% of the US. What's your point? It's a crappy chain. Portland has some of the best coffee in the US and this person is longing for some chain coffee from the midwest?

[scottfreez]

I wouldn't move to Portland for coffee.... I'd move to Portland for Beer!

[PNW-type-gal]

You know the OP is long gone, right?

[Minervah]

Originally Posted by gotigers123

Sure, and Starbucks is popular in 98% of the US. What's your point? It's a crappy chain. Portland has some of the best coffee in the US and this person is longing for some chain coffee from the midwest?

My point was that Caribou is plentiful in other places. I wasn't promoting it. I don't even drink coffee. I got the impression that you had never heard of it when you posted "Caribou?" It sounded like you were asking what it was. Sorry I misinterpreted your comment.

[khyron]

Originally Posted by PNW-type-gal

You know the OP is long gone, right?

Since this thread is pretty much nonsense at this point, I'll just post this photograph of the most epic moment ever to take place in a Starbucks. The geeks and the 30+ crowd will understand.

[karlsch]

Originally Posted by khyron

Since this thread is pretty much nonsense at this point, I'll just post this photograph of the most epic moment ever to take place in a Starbucks.

For even more nonsense, Starbucks from Best In Show (includes lactose intolerance):


YouTube - We Met At Starbucks

[LeftCoastee]

Originally Posted by khyron

I'll just post this photograph of the most epic moment ever to take place in a Starbucks. The geeks and the 30+ crowd will understand.

I am both, but I had to reverse image search the pic to find out. Very clever.

[NeutralZone]

Originally Posted by Nell Plotts

Bye bye. I hope you find a place that you can happily live.



I agree, Macy's seems to think that their brand name is good enough. They did the same thing to the Bon Marche in Seattle. There I times I think that all they wanted was to be able to advertise on the cheap with one identity and distribution center.

The issue I have with mega-retailers is that they think one merchandise array fits all. Many markets have distinctive needs and preferences. What looks fantastic to a buyer in New York may not be to OUR taste.

Bottom line, however, is that M & F imploded. If not Macy's then Broadway out of Chicago.

As someone who has been in retail management for almost 20 years, I just wanted to share a few observations:

Costs: Meir & Frank was a division of the May Department Stores. Macy's was a division of Federated Deptartment Stores. Both companies operated department stores around the country under different names.

May Dept. Stores divisions included Meir & Frank in the NW, Robinsons-May in southern California, Famous-Barr in the midwest, Foleys in Texas, Lord & Taylor on the east coast, Hechts and Strawbridges in the mid-Atlantic states, Filenes in New England, and a few others.

Federated divisions were Bon Marche in the NW, Burdines in Florida, Lazarus in Ohio, Abraham & Strauss in NY, Macy's nationwide, Bloomingdales nationwide, and a few others.

Each of these divisions in both companies had their own divisional corporate offices and buying offices. Each buying office bought individually from vendors, but with very limited leeway as to which vendors they dealt with. Each division in both companies advertised seperately. Even though May Dept Stores and Federated Dept Stores were national companies, neither one could do national advertising due to having several divisions with different nameplates.

While Meir & Frank might have had its loyal customers, the truth is the merchandise selection was virtually identical to what you would find at other May divisions in other parts of the company. The same with Federated.

Since all the divisions (with the exception of Lord & Taylor for the May Dept Stores and Bloomingdales for Federated) had almost identical merchandise and merchandising standards, financially it made sense to consolidate all the divisions under one name and consolidate all the buying offices into one buying organization. This saved a bundle of money. Instead of having 16 different buyers negotiating seperately with a vendor, one buyer could place one giant order and get a much better deal. The dept stores now have much more clout with vendors than ever before. Having one nationwide name also cuts down advertising and merchandising costs considerably. Dept. stores just can't depend on the large sales increases like they did in the '80's to make a profit, so they depend on cutting costs wherever they can.

Branding: Over the past 20 years or so, branding has become all important. It's been embraced by consumers as well as businesses. Starbucks and Mc Donalds are the prime examples. Anywhere in the world you go, there they are. Despite the fact that so many people HATE this trend (myself included), the fact is the majority of people like the idea of getting the same product without any surprises. They buy the brand because the know what they are getting. Retailers try hard to promote their brand image. You can't do that if you operate under 16 different names. One type doesn't fit all, but it does fit most.

Consumers: This issue is connected with the isssue of costs. For various reasons (only a few of which are connected to the current recession), consumers are driven by price. This was not necessarily true when I got into the business. There are many reasons for this change. One of them is the pressure put on traditional dept stores by mass merchandisers like Walmart, Target, etc. These stores elimated customer service and amenities and concentrated solely on price. Another reason is vendors themselves opening outlet stores all over. They compete directly with the dept stores and the customer doesn't always understand the difference between the current season selection at dept stores vs. old, unwanted merchandise at the outlets. They just see the brand name and difference in price. Customers are much more influenced by the brand name then any sort of intrinsic quality.

Vendors: Another reason is the consolidations in the clothing manufacturing sector. Few customers realize that the vast majority of clothes they buy under different labels are made by only a small number of large firms. They essentially make the same thing but slap on different labels. When these large clothing manufacturers bought out the smaller, more individualistic labels, they eliminated any sort of distinctiveness and all their clothing lines started looking the same. This is why you go into a dept store today and everything pretty much looks alike.

I'd like to see the revival of real regional dept stores. They would have roots in their communities and perhaps by able to customize their assortments more than the national chains could ever hope to do. They could resist the cookie cutter trend where every store looks just like every other store. They'd never become retail giants, but I think they could become successful. I think there is a retail niche out there that they could fill.

[Minervah]

I'd like to see the revival of real regional dept stores. They would have roots in their communities and perhaps by able to customize their assortments more than the national chains could ever hope to do. They could resist the cookie cutter trend where every store looks just like every other store. They'd never become retail giants, but I think they could become successful. I think there is a retail niche out there that they could fill.

Back in Chicago where I grew up we had Marshall Field's, Goldblatt's, Carson Pirie Scott, Wiebolts and probably others I can't remember. They were all local department stores and did very well until they were either swallowed up by the larger corporations or replaced by Targets and KMarts.

The best thing about these stores is that there was something for everyone. Field's for example had expensive designer clothes and linens but also a bargain basement with the same type of merchandise but less expensive. Goldblatt's and Wieblot's were cheap but served a lot of people for whom even Field's bargain basement was a bit too spendy.

A couple of days ago I went to the downtown Macy's to get some Frango Mints which is all I can afford to buy there. I went to the linen department to look at sheets and found only designer ones. The day I pay $130 for a sheet will never come.

I agree the regional department stores really served a need of the community.

[LucyI'mHome]

Caribou coffee? hmmm..wonder what part of the animal does it come from?