canyonblue said:
Change careers before you get to far then. You will never be happy in aviation. BTW it is not the simple Home Depot analogy you profess to hang dear to, but rather a J C Penneys vs Target story. People used to shop at Penneys but before long they found some of the same items at Target and at a better price. The staff at Penneys seemed miffed when you asked them a question whereas the Target staff was attentive and helpful. With market share going away Penneys tried reinventing themselves as the hipper new place to shop. People didn't buy it and continued to shop at Target. Meanwhile the industry saw the downfall of Montgomery Wards and the bankruptcy of KMart. The workers in retail should heed the warnings of the past and not forget that people always vote with their feet. 75% off of crap, is still crap. It is not always about price, sometimes it is just about meeting expectations. The ones that do it the best will be there along time, fail, and you're looking at a new job.
Canyon,
I understand the analogy you are trying to make a point with about J.C. Penney. However, I was a part of the management team for Penney's in 1984 when they did the turnaround. The reaction was really not towards Target at all. A new President stepped in at Penney's in the early 80's and wanted to reinvent the company - not because of marketshare going away, but because he saw what he thought was the future of retail. They were tired of being the socks and underwear retailer. Let me tell you, there was a huge struggle in convincing everyone of this move, because they did have a very good marketshare of the lower end retailers.
So, they started to upgrade their image by being more "fashion forward," in an effort to compete with Dillards, Robinson-May, etc. What they found was that people were not comfortable with their shift in philosophy. They started to lose the market share of the lower end customer, so they put in "value" items, which went back to the lower price points on some items. They believed that they could get both sides of the market.
What caused the biggest challenge for them was getting vendors to buy into their philosophy. They could not get the big names, like Polo, Ralph Lauren, etc., that the big boys had. So, they did knock-offs of items. Let me give you an example.
There are only so many shoe manufacturers in the US. The biggest one is the Brown Shoe Company, which manufactures shoe for all the big companies. Nine West was the biggest shoe seller at that time. J.C. Penney was not able to get the name brand shoes into their stores, so they contracted with them to do the same shoes, with the same specs, but under a private label, which was Sutton Plaza. The same thing happened with Naturalizer Shoes, which J.C. Penney named 9-2-5. After some time, they were able to start getting contracts with larger shoe companies like Nike, but it took some doing.
Further, the company launched a whole "attitude" adjustment of the staff. I have to tell you that their management program was exceptional. They focused on every aspect of customer service, modeling after the Disney philosophy and that of Nordstrom. I believe that I gained my customer service attitude from J.C. Penney and the thorough education they gave me in operations, personnel, marketing, advertising, etc., has enabled me to run my business successfully for 17 years. They also taught me how to read balance sheets and financial statements, perform sales forecasting, salary cost calculations, etc. I got a great education from them and I will be forever grateful.
You use Target as an analogy. But if you look at the trend of Target now, they are trying to distance themselves from Walmart and Kmart. They have put many things into play with new merchandising, better products, etc. They have one thing that J.C. Penney did not. They are part of Dayton-Hudson corporation, which owns Marshall Fields, Mervyns, etc. So, they can attract big name vendors.
Anyway, I just thought I would provide my knowledge of the situation since I was there when it happened. I have no knowledge of what has happened since I left in 1987.
Kathy