Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 763 posts

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#591

Post by hbossy »

dlkf wrote: post #557
alkonaut wrote: post #518

A cheap deodorant (Dove/whatever) is like $2-3 in expensive parts of Europe. That's not worth stealing. What makes them $8 or $10 in manhattan? It's an expensive area and I guess there aren't many large stores to buy from but more smaller pharmacies, but that still doesn't explain why there is a 2-3x price difference for deodorants in particular.

In Sweden, deodorant sticks are smaller than what I’d get in Canada. There’s also an appalling lack of variety. In particular, you never see Old Spice. I think there is a lucrative business opportunity in bringing American deodorant maximalism to the nordics.

A lot of American products have strong scents that are not really liked in Europe. Old spice started really aggressive advertising campaign a few years ago here. They had frequent and obviously high-budget commercials in TV and stocked middle shelves in popular stores, but no one wanted to buy it. People say it simply stinks. It's another Hershey chocolate.

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#592

Post by mschuster91 »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #297
axutio wrote: post #161

Most of the comments here are ignoring the difference between regular old shoplifting and the trend driving the increase discussed in the article, which they're referring to as "organized retail crime". I think it's very fair to have differing attitudes/moral thresholds for an impoverished mother shoplifting a week's worth of baby formula versus "a couple in Alabama [which] pled guilty to shifting $300,000-worth of s…

> I think it's very fair to have differing attitudes/moral thresholds for an impoverished mother shoplifting a week's worth of baby formula versus "a couple in Alabama [which] pled guilty to shifting $300,000-worth of stolen baby formula on eBay". I’ve also noticed a weird tendency to downplay theft lately, either through projecting a theoretical moral justification on to the shoplifter or by insinuating that retail…

> I’ve also noticed a weird tendency to downplay theft lately, either through projecting a theoretical moral justification on to the shoplifter or by insinuating that retail stores are evil corporations and therefore deserve no sympathy.

Well... it's not that weird. The big chain stores like Walmart ruthlessly exploit their workers to the point of them being forced to apply for food stamps [1], while the owner class makes literally a dozen billions of dollars a year in net profits [2]. Additionally, Walmart is infamous for killing off small businesses around them [3]. So, I don't have much sympathy at all for these corporations and Walmart in particular.

With ever more and more people being unable to make a honest living - over half the US has less than 1000$ in savings [4] - it's no surprise that shoplifting for survival is on the rise and at least somewhat accepted in society.

Unfortunately, small stores get caught up in the crossfire as they can't afford to bear the rising cost of shoplifting.

We need better wages for the 99% and higher taxes for the 1% so that we can get away from forcing people to steal to survive.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-...

[2] https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/WMT/walmart/net-in...

[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-09-14/radiating...

[4] https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/19/56percent-of-americans-cant-...

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#593

Post by erfgh »

rtpg wrote: post #136
Vaslo wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What punishment do you suggest then? The unacceptable answer is none.

If bankers can get away with treble damages, then maybe shoplifters should to. Even if you are super cynical, throwing a shoplifter in jail accomplishes what? If they have a job, they'll lose their job. If they have a home, they'll probably get evicted. They'll have to go through a court system that has to deal with this. People will have to do a bunch of work to move this person through the system. And at the end of…

Throwing shoplifters in jail results in other people afraid of trying shoplifting because if they do they might end up in jail.

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#594

Post by mschuster91 »

monero-xmr wrote: post #539
ryandrake wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’ve also noticed a weird tendency to downplay theft lately, either through projecting a theoretical moral justification on to the shoplifter or by insinuating that retail stores are evil corporations and therefore deserve no sympathy. Let me try to convince you without defending the morality of the shoplifter or declaring corporations evil. 1. On the totem pole of crimes, petty shoplifting (without violence) is pr…

It’s morally wrong to steal, and has been since the beginning of civilization. “Though shalt not steal” - Ten Commandments “If a man has stolen goods from a temple, or house, he shall be put to death; and he that has received the stolen property from him shall be put to death.” - Code of Hammurabi Private property is the foundation of civilization and pretending theft doesn’t matter undermines the basis of our world.…

And yet, even the Bible has provisions for poor people [1]:

> “If you go into your neighbor’s vineyard, you may eat your fill of grapes, as many as you wish, but you shall not put any in your bag. 25 If you go into your neighbor’s standing grain, you may pluck the ears with your hand, but you shall not put a sickle to your neighbor’s standing grain.

[1] https://www.bibleserver.com/ESV/Deuteronomy23%3A25

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#595

Post by falcor84 »

monero-xmr wrote: post #539
ryandrake wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’ve also noticed a weird tendency to downplay theft lately, either through projecting a theoretical moral justification on to the shoplifter or by insinuating that retail stores are evil corporations and therefore deserve no sympathy. Let me try to convince you without defending the morality of the shoplifter or declaring corporations evil. 1. On the totem pole of crimes, petty shoplifting (without violence) is pr…

It’s morally wrong to steal, and has been since the beginning of civilization. “Though shalt not steal” - Ten Commandments “If a man has stolen goods from a temple, or house, he shall be put to death; and he that has received the stolen property from him shall be put to death.” - Code of Hammurabi Private property is the foundation of civilization and pretending theft doesn’t matter undermines the basis of our world.…

While I agree that it's morally wrong to steal, you lost me at "All theft is wrong". I think there's a deep reason why stories about moral (or at least mostly ambiguous) thieves are so prevalent. Two major examples are Robin Hood and more recently Andor, both about stealing as a way to rebel against an overwhelmingly powerful and negative authority.

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#596

Post by wrasee »

Manuel_D wrote: post #207
el_nahual wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To further underline your point, if the chain is (thief)→(amazon)→(end user) then the fence isn't "anyone with an Amazon" account: the fence is amazon .

Isn't the chain: (thief) -> (fence) -> (Amazon) -> (customer)? If a fence sells his wares in a bazaar, the bazaar is the fence? No, the fence is the fence the bazaar is the marketplace.

Perhaps the definition is that to be a fence you have had to buy the good and take ownership (and responsibility) for the goods yourself. You then resell them to pass on ownership. Otherwise you're just providing services, whether that's storage, transport or whatever. So do Amazon take ownership, or do they just sell them on your behalf?

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#597

Post by generj »

WalterBright wrote: post #536
ryandrake wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’ve also noticed a weird tendency to downplay theft lately, either through projecting a theoretical moral justification on to the shoplifter or by insinuating that retail stores are evil corporations and therefore deserve no sympathy. Let me try to convince you without defending the morality of the shoplifter or declaring corporations evil. 1. On the totem pole of crimes, petty shoplifting (without violence) is pr…

From the article: "Rite Aid, a pharmacy, closed a branch in Hell’s Kitchen in February after losing $200,000 worth of stuff last winter. And last week Target, a big retailer, reported that a rise in “shrink” (to use the industry jargon) had reduced its gross profit margin by $400m so far this year. The National Retail Federation says inventory loss, largely driven by theft, cost retailers a record $95bn last year." I…

Just as an addition, it’s worth noting most store theft comes from employees not the public.

It’s expensive to minimize opportunities for the public to steal. Basic speed bumps preventing employees (who can steal more extensively) are less expensive and tend to be the focus.

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#598

Post by rocqua »

magic_hamster wrote: post #510
abvdasker wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already tried this. It was called The War on Drugs and it failed totally, completely and unambiguously. If there's one thing to understand about the last 60 years of United States drug criminalization and enforcement, it's that those policies have utterly failed to curb drug abuse and addiction. There are a mind-boggling number of studies which show that criminalizing drug use doesn't create fewer drug addicts.

What is a better solution?

Decriminalize drug use, thorough social services support, start treating drug-users as patients with an illness rather than criminals with a moral-failing.

This will probably require some decriminalization of drug sales. Just to get the drug-users out of constant contact with crime.

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#599

Post by Reason077 »

Don't stores in Manhattan employ security guards? Most busy central London shops certainly do, at least at busy times of day. That seems to sufficiently deter shrinkage, without having to resort to lock boxes on the shelves.

Sometimes you'll see high-value items (like expensive bottles of alcohol) with security tags that need to be removed at checkout, but I don't recall seeing locked down shelves.

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#600

Post by Reason077 »

anonu wrote: post #322
adrr wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a whole industry based around arbitraging price differences between Amazon and brick and mortar merchants. Just search YouTube for “get rich with FBA”. How would Amazon know if it was stolen or retail arbitrage?

Who wants to buy a $10 deodorant from a NYC CVS when you can buy the same thing for much cheaper online. The thieves are only accelerating the demise of overpriced brick and mortar stores. Plus the experience of going into a CVS and having to press a button and wait for an employee to hand you a deodorant is horrible. (Not condoning theft, but at least the free market is speaking here somewhat)

> "Who wants to buy a $10 deodorant from a NYC CVS when you can buy the same thing for much cheaper online."

The reverse is usually true in the UK. Amazon is great for convenience, but most of the time, physical pharmacies and/or supermarkets are cheaper for these types of products. Not to mention discount stores like Poundland.

Post reply on HN