Hacker News Reader

Comment by alexhutcheson | Hacker News Reader

Neil Saunders wrote a good Twitter thread last week about how mid-scale US department stores don't execute the basics of retail very well: https://twitter.com/NeilRetail/status/1079785924966445058

Others have pointed out that Target seems to do a much better job with organization, presentation, and flow. Not coincidentally, it seems to be performing much better than legacy department stores that historically targeted the same class of shopper, like JCPenney and Sears.

Brick and mortar isn't as dead as commentators sometimes present it, but the increased competition is certainly weeding out dead wood that managed to persist for decades based on natural local monopolies and oligopolies.

View on HN

Good thread, found it really interesting!

I am processing some research on DICK's Sporting Goods, 750 stores and 90% are their core brand. I knew the reality was something along these lines but just didn't expect the % to be so small: "The Company's eCommerce sales penetration to total net sales has increased from 2.8% in fiscal 2010 to 10.3% in fiscal 2015."[1]

It's certainly growing every year for them, easy to see since it's a public company, but not at a tremendous rate like my news bubble or profession would have me believe. It furthers your point that brick & mortar are certainly not dead, or even dying, since many people still shop in-store.

Of note, a good portion of their 10k was devoted to omni-channel experience, which is the thinking that customers are customers and not defined by online or offline alone--they use both. Omni-channel strategies seem pretty basic at this point but also well worth their investment.

[1] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1089063/000108906316...

Sport gear is very hands-on, so it makes sense to go into the store to choose your next running shoe / tennis racket / hunting rifle... instead of buying the wrong one online and having to return it.

Absolutely. And since they stock different brands, it's even more important to get the sizing right. I remember reading shoes and apparel made up a high portion of their gross sales.

In general, my experience is that the higher the price, the longer and more intense the buying cycle is. It's not ground-breaking to think that but I also think it will indicate the last retail stores to bend at the will of online demand: cars, boats, engagement rings, etc.

Re: flow, I wonder how much Sears and Pennys were hamstrung by the layout of their locations. Target, with their big loop and registers up front, has a "visit the whole store" flow that encourages you to keep shopping (and get a cart) even when you've gotten what you came for.

Classic Sears and Pennys both had multiple entrances, sometimes on multiple floors, and registers scattered around the retail space. Once you get what you came for you look for the closest line, check out, and you're done; there's no opportunity for a "grab a DVD on the way out" up-sell.

Target is a step below JCPenny or Sears, IMO. You could get decent dress cloths at either of the former, but the best that Target carries is still pretty bad. I don't think you can buy a suit at Target at all.

Pennys and Sears also used to have salespeople in the clothing department who were actually knowledgeable and able to help with sizing, styles, etc. but that ended sometime in the 1980s I think.

That said, the shopping experience, finding stuff, getting in and out, etc is definitely better at Target, for what they do carry.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com