Posts Tagged 'Macy’s'

Two comments on omnichannel

Here are a couple of RetailWire posts on the subject of whether e-commerce is eating into brick-and-mortar retail. The first comment was published after stores reported year-end sales:

“Omnichannel” retailers like Macy’s, JCP and Target are still heavily dependent on their physical footprint. Each store reported rapid e-commerce growth (from 17% in Penney’s case to 30% at Target), yet each of them also reported total comparable-sales declines in the low single digits. So it’s clear that the combination of brick-and-mortar and omnichannel isn’t driving sales yet.

All of these stores and others have opportunities to improve their assortments, customer service and overall store experience. Omnichannel initiatives like BOPIS and “ship from store” have put even more strain on retailers’ ability to execute these “Retail 101” issues better. But until they do, their overall sales will continue stuck in neutral.

The second comment was published today:

“Cannibalization” may be the wrong term, because retailers with true omnichannel strategies need to think about how to grow the overall pie. Continuing to think about business silos (e-commerce vs. brick-and-mortar) will stand in the way of a consistent overall approach to the business.

But there’s no doubt that brick-and-mortar is losing its relevance, as seen in the growing number of chains closing locations or throwing in the towel altogether. To go back to the question of how to grow the overall pie…why isn’t that happening? Why aren’t strategies like BOPIS (intended to drive traffic to stores) driving incremental sales?

These aren’t easy questions to answer, but I continue to believe that the operating demands of turning a physical store into a mini-distribution center are eroding the service-centric reasons why consumers shop in those stores in the first place.

“Cannibalization” may be the wrong term, because retailers with true omnichannel strategies need to think about how to grow the overall pie. Continuing to think about business silos (e-commerce vs. brick-and-mortar) will stand in the way of a consistent overall approach to the business.

But there’s no doubt that brick-and-mortar is losing its relevance, as seen in the growing number of chains closing locations or throwing in the towel altogether. To go back to the question of how to grow the overall pie…why isn’t that happening? Why aren’t strategies like BOPIS (intended to drive traffic to stores) driving incremental sales?

These aren’t easy questions to answer, but I continue to believe that the operating demands of turning a physical store into a mini-distribution center are eroding the service-centric reasons why consumers shop in those stores in the first place.

 

 

 

 

Department stores’ search for relevance

From a recent RetailWire blog post, I have some comments about the continuing struggles in the department store segment. Some of my concerns are based on the relevance of their merchandise content, and some are based on the “sameness” of the shopping experience:

There are two key “relevance” issues, especially pertaining to traditional department stores: First, are retailers using all of the technological tools at their disposal to enhance their brands? Are they leveraging today’s tools (mobile payment, RFID, and so forth) to improve customer service or simply to cut costs? And how has “omnichannel” (especially BOPIS) actually eroded the shopping experience? There is very little difference between shopping at Macy’s or Dillards today compared to 30 years ago, other than UPC scanning and more sophisticated POS terminals.

Second — and it always comes down to this — is merchandise content. I’ve shopped a lot of traditional department stores over the last few weeks, and I’m struck by how much inventory and square footage continues to be devoted to dressy career apparel for men and women. This may be the retailers’ sweet spot (as they see it), but the lack of adaptation to change is concerning. Do these stores not recognize that Boomers are retiring — and leaving the workforce — in droves? Do they not see that most Millennials are working in more casual environments and are shopping elsewhere for their wardrobe needs? (Add to this the slow reaction to the movement toward activewear-as-sportswear.)

Sometimes achieving “relevance” costs money — whether through new tech tools, more payroll or a fresh coat of paint. But mostly it’s about the products, brands and trends that stores choose to put forward.

Macy’s store closures don’t fix the problem

I commented on RetailWire in early January about Macy’s announcement of 2017 store closures:

I saw with a particular shudder that one of the Macy’s stores on the list is the “flagship” location in downtown Minneapolis — the old Dayton’s headquarters, where my wife and I both worked and eventually met. It’s hard to imagine that a store with an appropriately sized footprint can’t thrive in downtown Minneapolis — full of office workers and residents — unless there is something fundamentally wrong with how Macy’s is running its business. I’ve shopped their stores from California to Florida to Nevada to Illinois over the past couple of years, and continue to be disappointed by the merchandise content, the physical condition of the stores and the service experience. Until Macy’s addresses these “Retail 101” issues, it doesn’t matter how many stores they close.

Additional thoughts from RetailWire:

Some of our observations about Macy’s are based on 20/20 hindsight, not based on what seemed like a smart move at the time. Even though there was plenty of debate about the disappearance of powerful local nameplates like Marshall Field’s, the reality is that several of those retailers were in their own slow decline. So Macy’s effort to create a national brand (and economies of scale) paid off for awhile.

Where Macy’s has lost its way is in the failure of the “My Macy’s” initiative to cater more effectively to local tastes. The best data science in the world may not be a substitute for experienced managers who really understand their customers’ taste (and when things sell in a given climate). But the bigger issue is the overassortment of women’s brands, erosion of customer service and lack of capital spending; no amount of localization can overcome those hurdles.

And to add a final thought after visiting Macy’s Manhattan flagship in early March: This is a spectacular store that has gotten a big boost in capital investment over the last few years. But Macy’s is so focused on this location (visible to its investors, suppliers and competitors) that it has neglected hundreds of other locations around the country.

Should Bass and Cabela’s maintain separate brand identities?

Bass is acquiring Cabela’s, and one key question it faces is whether to keep separate branding for the two giant outdoor goods retailers. Here’s my thought, as recently posted on RetailWire:

I think it’s arguable that Macy’s made the right call over the long haul, as the only traditional department store with a national footprint. It was important to create brand equity for the “Macy’s” name instead of trying to support a bunch of nameplates with regional appeal. (Bon Ton Stores, on the other hand, decided that “localized” brand identity was a better tactic.)

In the case of Bass and Cabela’s, I think both brands are worth maintaining. These are superstores usually drawing from large trade areas, and not necessarily in direct competition with each other — and both companies with loyal customer bases. There is no point in shutting down the Cabela’s brand in the short term when there will be plenty of other merger-related challenges to deal with first.

Is the pendulum swinging back on early Thanksgiving openings?

I’ve argued for awhile that earlier and earlier Black Friday (or Thursday) openings are counterproductive. Here are some recent thoughts posted on RetailWire:

Some of the biggest players (Walmart, Target, Macy’s, Kohl’s, JCPenney and Best Buy) still plan to open on Thanksgiving. But the pendulum is swinging back, and the Mall of America’s announcement that it plans to close on Thursday will be a major influence on other mall operators. It seems clear that the push for earlier “early bird” hours on Black Friday (followed by midnight openings, followed by Thursday openings) has had a diminishing effect on sales — by draining any sense of urgency out of Friday morning shopping. (And the availability of goods online hasn’t helped, either.)

It’s hard for the retailers who insist on being open for Thanksgiving to be the first one to blink, but it seems clear that consumer sentiment is tugging them in that direction.

And this more recent post:

While the reports of the death of Black Friday are greatly exaggerated, there is no doubt that it’s lost importance on the retail calendar. The shift to e-commerce is part of the reason, but the bigger cause is retailers’ greediness in pushing their “early bird” hours earlier and earlier and finally opening on Thanksgiving itself.

My long experience working for a company that knew how to “nail” Black Friday tells me that the event was once as much a social occasion as a way to hunt for deals. Opening earlier and earlier never seems to result in more net sales but actually becomes counterproductive when any sense of urgency about “early birds” flies out the window.

NRF’s 2016 fourth-quarter forecast: Blue skies ahead?

I published the following comment on RetailWire after the NRF forecast a 3.6% sales increase for Q4 but before the outcome of this week’s election:

If somebody tracked the annual NRF holiday forecast compared to actual results, I think they would find that this trade organization is consistently too optimistic. I feel the same way about their 2016 number.

And does their number include surging growth by e-commerce retailers, especially Amazon, or strictly brick-and-mortar and multichannel retailers like Macy’s? There isn’t much evidence from the numbers we’ve seen all year (especially from midtier retailers) to expect a sudden surge in demand. Some retailers have especially easy comparisons to 2015 (which will help), but I’d be pleasantly surprised to see numbers beyond the 2-3% range.

And I’m adding a couple of other comments posted just before and just after the election:

Consumer confidence measures are rising, along with the GDP, but the rosy forecasts for 4th quarter sales still feel high. General merchandisers are likely to benefit from soft comparisons and colder weather than last year, but there is nothing in the sales trends so far this year pointing to a huge comeback. There also isn’t much evidence of a big merchandise idea or key item likely to drive customers to stores.

Without tipping my hand, I also believe that next Tuesday’s election results could provide a “relief rally” by providing some closure one way or the other. Of course, I said the same thing before the 2000 election…

Now, a post-election post-mortem:

I’m trying to set aside ideology here, because the split verdict on the election leaves voters uncertain on both sides. Will Mr. Trump live up to his harshest platform promises or try to moderate his views? Today, nobody knows whether the answer to that question will chill 4th quarter sales or stimulate them.

So the only way to answer this over the long haul is to look at the economic impact on consumers. Tax cuts and infrastructure spending are good for businesses and consumers but (on the other hand) protectionism and tariffs will lead to higher prices. And any effort to restrict (or reverse) immigration patterns will stall the population growth that our economy depends on.

Finally, the plans to “repeal and replace” the ACA may have a huge impact. On one hand, lower costs benefit consumers and small businesses; on the other hand, if millions lose insurance coverage they will face an economic threat that will crimp their spending for the foreseeable future.

 

An Apple store inside Macy’s?

Catching up a bit by posting a September RetailWire comment about an Apple location inside Macy’s flagship store in Manhattan:

Part of Macy’s problem is its Herald Square-centric approach to the business, and this is another example. The flagship store in Manhattan has always been a showplace for new shop concepts and brand features, especially because it’s an easy place to show off to those members of the investment community who don’t do channel checks around the country.

Meanwhile, there are hundreds of Macy’s stores across the country — not just the 100 likely to be shuttered next year — that are in desperate need for capital investment and revamped merchandise assortments. Not long ago, I visited the Macy’s store at the University Town Center in La Jolla — and even though a brand-new Nordstrom store is being built next door, this Macy’s store hasn’t had a facelift (paint, tile, carpeting, lighting) in a long time.

So is a partnership between Apple and Macy’s a good idea? Sure, but it can’t mask the long list of issues that Macy’s management needs to address nationwide.