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.
Retailers report surprisingly weak December | Top AP Stories | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/7368381.html - broken link)
It's getting like with the gov't data, report the false positive numbers first, then quietly release the honest and much less positive data later.
What are you trying to top him in receiving the reward for most unrealistic negative spin? The article you are linking to has a headline of:
December increase seals strong holiday for retail
The first paragraph is:
NEW YORK — Retailers sealed their strongest holiday sales increase since 2006, as a robust November more than offset spending that tapered off in December. For investors, whose expectations were riding high, the December figures were disappointing. But retail revenue still rose significantly. Combining November and December, holiday revenue at stores open at least a year rose 3.8 percent over last year, according to an index compiled by the International Council of Shopping Centers. That's the biggest increase since 2006, when the same figure rose 4.4 percent. The index tailed off to a 3.1 percent increase in December after a 5.4 percent rise in November.
From this you conclude that the initial post saying Christmas sales reality is -4.1% is correct, as opposed to all the counters that despite slower December it would still be a strong season?
What are you trying to top him in receiving the reward for most unrealistic negative spin? The article you are linking to has a headline of:
December increase seals strong holiday for retail
The first paragraph is:
NEW YORK — Retailers sealed their strongest holiday sales increase since 2006, as a robust November more than offset spending that tapered off in December. For investors, whose expectations were riding high, the December figures were disappointing. But retail revenue still rose significantly. Combining November and December, holiday revenue at stores open at least a year rose 3.8 percent over last year, according to an index compiled by the International Council of Shopping Centers. That's the biggest increase since 2006, when the same figure rose 4.4 percent. The index tailed off to a 3.1 percent increase in December after a 5.4 percent rise in November.
From this you conclude that the initial post saying Christmas sales reality is -4.1% is correct, as opposed to all the counters that despite slower December it would still be a strong season?
Part of the problem with these numbers is there are so many smaller companies that went out of business and many companies that consolidated that the spending we see is being concentrated in fewer players.
It is just like Unemployment, it is easy to show better numbers when you exclude people who can't find work and give up.
What are you trying to top him in receiving the reward for most unrealistic negative spin? The article you are linking to has a headline of:
December increase seals strong holiday for retail
The first paragraph is:
NEW YORK — Retailers sealed their strongest holiday sales increase since 2006, as a robust November more than offset spending that tapered off in December. For investors, whose expectations were riding high, the December figures were disappointing. But retail revenue still rose significantly. Combining November and December, holiday revenue at stores open at least a year rose 3.8 percent over last year, according to an index compiled by the International Council of Shopping Centers. That's the biggest increase since 2006, when the same figure rose 4.4 percent. The index tailed off to a 3.1 percent increase in December after a 5.4 percent rise in November.
From this you conclude that the initial post saying Christmas sales reality is -4.1% is correct, as opposed to all the counters that despite slower December it would still be a strong season?
I don't see the sales figures are adjusted.
Higher prices lead to higher numbers. If prices were the same as 2006, would their have been an increase, yes or no?
In reading the article, what we see is:
November more than offset spending that tapered off in December.
Why? Why did spending "taper off" in December? That makes it appear as though consumer confidence dropped or people ran out of money.
Combining November and December, holiday revenue at stores open at least a year rose 3.8 percent over last year,
Why? Why did we combine November AND December? Is that a normal practice (I really don't know if it is or isn't)? Or was it necessary to combine the two months in order to put a positive spin on it?The index tailed off to a 3.1 percent increase in December after a 5.4 percent rise in November.
That is a decline of 2.3 points or 42%.
A 42% decline from November to December is not good. That goes back to why did spending taper off?In November there were 1,586 mass layoff actions involving 152,816 workers. I can't believe for a moment that had a significant impact. In the grand scheme of things that one be like one person who didn't show up at the mall.
From this you conclude that the initial post saying Christmas sales reality is -4.1% is correct, as opposed to all the counters that despite slower December it would still be a strong season?
That was not the OP post I made.
That -4.1% was for the WEEK BEFORE CHRISTMAS..not the entire Christmas sales.
Sorry if you don't think the week before Chrismas makes a difference in sales but I would think that should have been their best week.
Part of the problem with these numbers is there are so many smaller companies that went out of business and many companies that consolidated that the spending we see is being concentrated in fewer players.
It is just like Unemployment, it is easy to show better numbers when you exclude people who can't find work and give up.
I think you may have got this right. It would be helpful to see the boutique/small shops report as opposed to the Big Box stores report. Sure the economy is looking good for many while just as many go under.
Also, many people are shopping at Walmart, etc. for basic necessities such as food, and that figure may be glumped in with overall sales. Statistics (apologies to those who trust in them) can be so deceiving, there's always a spin.
And, as per Mircea's observation, above, higher prices translate to higher sales reports. Was that higher $ sales, or higher volume??
I think you may have got this right. It would be helpful to see the boutique/small shops report as opposed to the Big Box stores report. Sure the economy is looking good for many while just as many go under.
Also, many people are shopping at Walmart, etc. for basic necessities such as food, and that figure may be glumped in with overall sales. Statistics (apologies to those who trust in them) can be so deceiving, there's always a spin.
And, as per Mircea's observation, above, higher prices translate to higher sales reports. Was that higher $ sales, or higher volume??
They don't seem to adjust anymore when reporting figures compared to previous years. Maybe cause the USG says there is no inflation ?
Food and energy are up 18% over one year ago; something like that could definitely affect Walmart and Target as both do sell food now.
So you mean you never read the link I posted ?
the title doesn't state what that -4.1% was for but was detailed in #1 post.
Did you assume the post was about the entire Christmas shopping period ?
LOL yeah why on Earth would I assume this headline: "So much for the "best Christmas numbers since 2008" ..reality -4.1%" was about the Christmas shopping period? Crazy of me I know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
Guess all you guys are right..it was just one bad week.
Apparently you don't have to fess up, since you have now decided you were just referencing one week afterall the whole time.
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.
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.
