These stats are all political. I dont trust either side. All i know is that when I walk into a CVS/Duane Reade in NYC, everything is locked up. Even the candy.
In other words, what motive do retailers have to lie?
Time never moves slower than waiting for an indeterminate time, possibly forever, for someone to come to open the plexiglass for you, especially as you're not even sure the button you pressed to call for help even worked.
It still makes sense to lock up your inventory if you're seeing a high rate of theft, regardless of whether it's organized crime or not.
When I see this I can’t help but think that these big box retailers are in a death spiral.
Does the Walgreens you’re talking about lock up everything, including the candy?
If so, what’s it like at that store. Does every patron get a personal chaperone or is the store filled with patrons waiting for an associate who does the rounds to show up?
its obviously just a stop gap solution to exiting the market entirely since these stores no longer operate in a market based economy where property rights are enforced, so just close up instead of operating a crippled store hanging on by a thread, inconveniencing random swaths of their remaining customers just because an excel spreadsheet said so
Onsite management is handed a recipe to implement, told someone is showing up to install locks in everything to, not because a specific store might need it but to normalize business operations with their paranoia.
Your experience is a reflection of their desire to normalize rather than customize
Data is only useful to a point. Generate all the stats you want. Millions of other stats attenuate the usefulness of any given stat, except for those of broad application. Getting super granular is programming equivalent of bike shedding and yak shaving.
Take a look at what CVS disclosed in official shareholder reports
> Whether they report those publicly is another story
Well, no, if they have evidence of a massive material increase in organized shoplifting and don't disclose that, it's securities fraud. Conversely, if they make false material claims in direct shareholder reports, that's also fraud.
In shareholder disclosures, yes. Which is, incidentally, where they have never made any of the claims the NRF is making! Those have been limited to PR statements with no legal obligations.
Who do you think the NRF consists of?
The fact that Duane Reade locks everything up now isn't evidence of anything; the people making those decisions are by definition the same ones influencing the NRF.