As a veteran of housewares imports, to read about this new opportunity is exciting, for it gets the old juices flowing again.
Macy's was at the right place at the right time and made the right move, first in NYC and then in SF and so on, with its Macy's basement store, which featured housewares back in the 1970s, and rode the kitchen craze that went of for 30 years, and lifted Sur La Table as well as countless kitchen stores.
An Apple exec has take over JCPenney's, and although he has had some fasle starts, his strategy os to use the kitchen store to bring in better paying customers. Who knows, he built Apple retail.
But eh article is about a lawsuit, so it is full of juicy details...
Home is not the sexiest of categories. It is things like sheets, towels, pots and toasters that are broadly available, low-margin and slow selling. Both Mr. Johnson and Mr. Lundgren said home goods rang up remarkably few sales per square foot. Mr. Johnson said that the category made $185 per square foot in 2007, but now made less than $80. And Mr. Lundgren said that at Macy’s, home was “generally the least profitable part of the store.”
OK... so you only have to beat $80 a SF to get either retailers attention. Good to know. Also, they have rediscovered "compete on design" so this is good for the start-up.
“The competitive advantage really lies with private label brands,” Mr. Brown said. “What drives consumers to a physical store is, is there something different?”
You only have to beat Martha Stewart's designs. That may not seem like much, but she knows what she is doing. Or maybe not...
Ms. Stewart is the biggest vendor to Macy’s home department, and Mr. Lundgren said that Macy’s had nothing lined up to replace her line.
There is a lawsuit, which can go either way...
As much as he was eager to have Ms. Stewart’s products, Mr. Johnson testified, it was Martha Stewart’s company and not Penney’s that came up with the idea that the store-within-a-store setup would let Penney’s carry products in the categories exclusive to Macy’s.
Either way, JCPenney is looking for new designs... and of the two, either way the case goes, I'd bet JCPenney wins... sell to JCPenney, ignore Macy's. That would be my bet.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
Macy's was at the right place at the right time and made the right move, first in NYC and then in SF and so on, with its Macy's basement store, which featured housewares back in the 1970s, and rode the kitchen craze that went of for 30 years, and lifted Sur La Table as well as countless kitchen stores.
An Apple exec has take over JCPenney's, and although he has had some fasle starts, his strategy os to use the kitchen store to bring in better paying customers. Who knows, he built Apple retail.
But eh article is about a lawsuit, so it is full of juicy details...
Home is not the sexiest of categories. It is things like sheets, towels, pots and toasters that are broadly available, low-margin and slow selling. Both Mr. Johnson and Mr. Lundgren said home goods rang up remarkably few sales per square foot. Mr. Johnson said that the category made $185 per square foot in 2007, but now made less than $80. And Mr. Lundgren said that at Macy’s, home was “generally the least profitable part of the store.”
OK... so you only have to beat $80 a SF to get either retailers attention. Good to know. Also, they have rediscovered "compete on design" so this is good for the start-up.
“The competitive advantage really lies with private label brands,” Mr. Brown said. “What drives consumers to a physical store is, is there something different?”
You only have to beat Martha Stewart's designs. That may not seem like much, but she knows what she is doing. Or maybe not...
Ms. Stewart is the biggest vendor to Macy’s home department, and Mr. Lundgren said that Macy’s had nothing lined up to replace her line.
There is a lawsuit, which can go either way...
As much as he was eager to have Ms. Stewart’s products, Mr. Johnson testified, it was Martha Stewart’s company and not Penney’s that came up with the idea that the store-within-a-store setup would let Penney’s carry products in the categories exclusive to Macy’s.
Either way, JCPenney is looking for new designs... and of the two, either way the case goes, I'd bet JCPenney wins... sell to JCPenney, ignore Macy's. That would be my bet.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
0 comments:
Post a Comment