Macy's Should Monetize Its Former Brands [View article]
A final thought....... Bon-Ton, the company who runs department stores under various old nameplates including Carson-Pirie-Scott, Elder-Beerman, Younkers, Bon-Ton, Herbergers ect. is said by many to be nearing bankruptcy. So obviously, keeping the regional names that are supposedly soooooo beloved by shoppers actually does not make a difference!
Macy's Should Monetize Its Former Brands [View article]
The issue with Macy’s sales has nothing to do with converting former May nameplates. It's the economy stupid. By the articles own admission, Macy's is outperforming every one of its competitors. It is taking market share. The idea that it should use the former names in branded products is preposterous. The example of John Wanamaker is ridiculous in that is a brand that the May Company eliminated! Macy's is creating a national brand. That does not happen over night. The restaurants, the ultra successful e-Spot machines and FAO Schwartz etc. are what will drive Macy's success.
Macy's has not lost business in St. Louis' 6 most successful malls. It was no secret that the downtown store as well as suburban branches in Crestwood Mall, Jamestown Mall and Northwest Plaza was floundering under May and the Famous-Barr name and continues to do so today. It is not Macy's but the malls and neighborhoods they are in. While the Crestwood store is now closing, the other 3 will in due time. Dillard's has already left downtown and the 3 mentioned malls.
Everyone can be nostalgic for old names....not just department store names. Those "boycotting" and protesting in Chicago have made no difference in sales and in fact have made themselves look like fools. They act like spoiled brat self absorbed teenagers who have to tell half-truths and down right lies to make their erroneous points. Ironically, the Chicago stores are one of the markets that are seeing a marked increase in sales because of the "My Macy's" program, despite the economy.
There are very few actually "protesting" for the return of Marshall Field's to Chicago. These fewer than a hundred people in a city of over 7 million attest to that. If you check Jim's website or other blogs it is always the same tired comments by the same tired people.
We are currently in an economic tailspin. These are not ordinary times and to still be blaming the May purchase for Macy's current position is preposterous. Considering the times, and how much better Macy's is doing, relative to its competition, speaks volumes that Macy's is on the right track.
As far as the past is concerned, the May Company had stores that were uninspired and in line with Kohl's and Penney's. Yes, I will grant that Field's sold some higher priced brands and were a step above Macy's, but still far below Nordstrom and Bloomingdale's. Unfortunately, sales at Field's had been on the decline since 1999 (Ironically, Target's decision to rebrand all it's department stores- Dayton's and Hudson's to Field's --was a failed attempt to save the chain.) The move upscale for Field's proved disastrous. It also had a pretty poor history outside Chicago. Stores were opened and closed in Texas and Columbus, Ohio and all but one location closed in Milwaukee. The converted stores in Minnesota and Michigan (Dayton's and Hudson's) were also a drag on the chain.
As far as the future, Macy's will be reducing it's regional divisions even further in 2009 as is it works to have a structure that is required of a national chain. Unfortunately, the May Company wasn't constantly pruning it's store base of dead wood as Macy's, Dillard's and others do regularly, so look for 10 to 20 Macy's store closings in early 2009. All in dead malls that have been taken over by gangbangers. Macy's is doing fine in Chicago...despite what Jim says, so none will close there but look for 1 (possibly 2) to close in Minneapolis (both stores were poor performers under Field's---google: "Brookdale: A ghost of its former self" --click "news"-- to see about one of the possible closures.) and 1 in Michigan.
As far as whom the Grinch will steal...the owner of Carson’s, Bon-ton is in dire straights. Look for their bankruptcy in 2009. And Sears too.
Once the economy improves, a new Macy's store is planned to open in Chicago's northern burbs. As of right now it is set to open in 2011. Macy's is in Chicago to stay. Field's is 6 feet under and is staying there.
Sort by:
Latest | Highest ratedMacy's Should Monetize Its Former Brands [View article]
Macy's Should Monetize Its Former Brands [View article]
Macy's has not lost business in St. Louis' 6 most successful malls. It was no secret that the downtown store as well as suburban branches in Crestwood Mall, Jamestown Mall and Northwest Plaza was floundering under May and the Famous-Barr name and continues to do so today. It is not Macy's but the malls and neighborhoods they are in. While the Crestwood store is now closing, the other 3 will in due time. Dillard's has already left downtown and the 3 mentioned malls.
Everyone can be nostalgic for old names....not just department store names. Those "boycotting" and protesting in Chicago have made no difference in sales and in fact have made themselves look like fools. They act like spoiled brat self absorbed teenagers who have to tell half-truths and down right lies to make their erroneous points. Ironically, the Chicago stores are one of the markets that are seeing a marked increase in sales because of the "My Macy's" program, despite the economy.
Macy's' Goodwill Is a Red Flag [View article]
We are currently in an economic tailspin. These are not ordinary times and to still be blaming the May purchase for Macy's current position is preposterous. Considering the times, and how much better Macy's is doing, relative to its competition, speaks volumes that Macy's is on the right track.
As far as the past is concerned, the May Company had stores that were uninspired and in line with Kohl's and Penney's. Yes, I will grant that Field's sold some higher priced brands and were a step above Macy's, but still far below Nordstrom and Bloomingdale's. Unfortunately, sales at Field's had been on the decline since 1999 (Ironically, Target's decision to rebrand all it's department stores- Dayton's and Hudson's to Field's --was a failed attempt to save the chain.) The move upscale for Field's proved disastrous. It also had a pretty poor history outside Chicago. Stores were opened and closed in Texas and Columbus, Ohio and all but one location closed in Milwaukee. The converted stores in Minnesota and Michigan (Dayton's and Hudson's) were also a drag on the chain.
As far as the future, Macy's will be reducing it's regional divisions even further in 2009 as is it works to have a structure that is required of a national chain. Unfortunately, the May Company wasn't constantly pruning it's store base of dead wood as Macy's, Dillard's and others do regularly, so look for 10 to 20 Macy's store closings in early 2009. All in dead malls that have been taken over by gangbangers. Macy's is doing fine in Chicago...despite what Jim says, so none will close there but look for 1 (possibly 2) to close in Minneapolis (both stores were poor performers under Field's---google: "Brookdale: A ghost of its former self" --click "news"-- to see about one of the possible closures.) and 1 in Michigan.
As far as whom the Grinch will steal...the owner of Carson’s, Bon-ton is in dire straights. Look for their bankruptcy in 2009. And Sears too.
Once the economy improves, a new Macy's store is planned to open in Chicago's northern burbs. As of right now it is set to open in 2011. Macy's is in Chicago to stay. Field's is 6 feet under and is staying there.