41–50 of 58 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have never seen an empty shelf in any major brand store. The idea is insane. Especially for a store targeting an upmarket clientele with high prices.
I have recently, in Sears. Retail protip: don't be like Sears.
It means that it's easy to find stuff in the back room if you are out on the shelf, it's easy to tae inventory and have accurate stock counts (and fix if you are off), and it's easy to make sure you don't end up with some idiot facing the aisles obscuring that you are out of stuff on the shelf when you have some in the back room (and reducing sales). Relatedly, it's a good way of making sure you order the right amount of things that sale and the right amount of things that don't sell.
It's how you should run a grocery store. Most grocery stores get in new grocery loads 3-4 times a week, so there's not a real need to keep a lot of backstock (especially if your shelf space is allocated properly).
If you live by just-in-time-inventory, you will die by just-in-time-inventory. It's one of those things that sounds good on paper, and can work, but it's damn hard to get right in real-life. The JIT model assumes you have the necessary data and models to predict when things need to be ordered, how long they'll take to be shipped out by the supplier, how long they'll take to arrive, etc. In reality, there are a LOT of…
The headline hints--to this non-industry reader--at a dark ulterior motive, like perhaps driving customer behavior by suggesting scarcity. But I would welcome a policy that leaves the cilantro shelf space empty rather than fill it with parsley.
If it isn't available, that is scarcity.
1. Maybe they have plenty of cilantro and instead leave 90% of the cilantro shelf empty. "oh wow it's almost gone, I'd better get some!"
2. They're actually out of cilantro and maybe it's better to have an empty shelf rather than fill it with something else.
The headline hints--to this non-industry reader--at a dark ulterior motive, like perhaps driving customer behavior by suggesting scarcity. But I would welcome a policy that leaves the cilantro shelf space empty rather than fill it with parsley.
If it isn't available, that is scarcity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It gives the store a scruffy, downmarket image. Also, it removes convenience. If I cannot get all the items on my list at a single store, then I will immediately stop going to that store...likely to never return. Companies have been trying to reinvent the grocery store for decades now. What can be done has already been done, and now they are trying to alter the way their customers shop. Guess what! That doesn't work.…
" If I cannot get all the items on my list at a single store, then I will immediately stop going to that store." You've got it completely backwards - this new policy is designed for you - the goal is to ensure they always keep product in stock, and the "holes" are a forcing function. Previously WF would just put something else in place, thereby reducing the pressure to restock. Now, the goal is to quickly as possible…
This empty shelves thing is enough of a thing that it seems like it's not really working.
And empty shelves sends such a terrible message to everybody who encounters them that I question the wisdom of who picked that as a "forcing function." Whenever I see that in a store, it just reeks of failure and decay.
Is this based on yet another neuroscience "research" we get to "enjoy" at supermarkets world-wide? "In Soviet something" instantly comes to mind... Let's emulate shortages, despite queueing solved since 60s and likely warehouse full of necessary stuff nearby. 1st world in the need to emulate 2nd world.
Except you aren’t forced to shop at Whole Foods. Even Vons/Albertsons/Safeway is better these days.
The headline hints--to this non-industry reader--at a dark ulterior motive, like perhaps driving customer behavior by suggesting scarcity. But I would welcome a policy that leaves the cilantro shelf space empty rather than fill it with parsley.
The answer seems to be that management is grossly incompetent and totally out of touch with reality which are pretty important facts for investors to be aware of.
Of course, there are a lot of people who would very much like Amazon to fail here, so that may have something to do with it to.
The headline hints--to this non-industry reader--at a dark ulterior motive, like perhaps driving customer behavior by suggesting scarcity. But I would welcome a policy that leaves the cilantro shelf space empty rather than fill it with parsley.
I think the writer is genuinely shocked as to how the leading luxury food retailer can have their grocery stores looking like Venezuela. They are just trying to make sense of it. The answer seems to be that management is grossly incompetent and totally out of touch with reality which are pretty important facts for investors to be aware of. Of course, there are a lot of people who would very much like Amazon to fail h…
They did build the big, succefull business in a super-competitive market that is grocery. You cannot possibly achieve that if you are incompetent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It gives the store a scruffy, downmarket image. Also, it removes convenience. If I cannot get all the items on my list at a single store, then I will immediately stop going to that store...likely to never return. Companies have been trying to reinvent the grocery store for decades now. What can be done has already been done, and now they are trying to alter the way their customers shop. Guess what! That doesn't work.…
" If I cannot get all the items on my list at a single store, then I will immediately stop going to that store." You've got it completely backwards - this new policy is designed for you - the goal is to ensure they always keep product in stock, and the "holes" are a forcing function. Previously WF would just put something else in place, thereby reducing the pressure to restock. Now, the goal is to quickly as possible…
Trying to get consumers to change their grocery shopping habits never works.