That said, these chains do know how to make a buck. Traditional previous discount chains like Sym’s (for men) and Lohmen’s (for women) crashed and burned when their sources in the NYC garment center moved off-shore and they had to procure at the same sources as the other department stores. Even on-line discounters like Sierra Trading decided to ditch and were acquired by TJX - who immediately increased their prices to what the market would bear (instead of cost-plus).
The problems with these news stories is they are paid for to generate business. Yes there is more discounted inventory. Yes Yes Yes the inventory is way up! It is for the Christmas shoppers in November like every other year.
My merchandise is on sale now as well. I am populating channels with ads.
Interesting that you bring up STP. One of the highlights of my work at TJX was to be on the “due diligence” team to evaluate the STP business prior to TJX making an offer to purchase that business. I was fortunate enough to fly on private corporate jets from Boston to Cheyenne, WY a number of trips to evaluate their IT infrastructure and data / analytics capabilities.
This was all done under highly guarded rules of confidentiality at the Executive level. What an exciting time in my career.
One of my sisters out of Boston was with TJX. She was an HR manager in charge of the Louisiana Territory, some 500 stores at the time. She wanted out badly after three years. Just writing up minimum wage employees to make sure they were rejected for a pay raise was not her calling. She went to MIT as HR manager/director. She has been there for over two decades and loves it. Married an MIT prof later, and her son went to MIT undergrad.
Exactly what I was thinking. My “news” feed on line has been loaded with “headlines” proclaiming “huge overstock of pickups, prices crashing”, in spite of the reality of soaring transaction prices and constrained supply, almost as often as screaming “headlines” that say “Motley Fool issues rare all-in buy alert”.
42 years ago, CNN broke the news. By going 24/7, they ensured that news would become what it’s become. There is no real news anymore, it’s all entertainment interspersed with lots and lots of ads, many overt ads and many covert ads.
And you’re right. And if anyone wants a very good read on why and how this happened:
Tom goes into great detail on what the news was before, at The Big Three networks, and what it came after the advent of the 24 hour news channel.
News used to be something that cost the networks. They could not sell enough ad money during the news shows to pay for the cost of quality news. BUT THEY DID IT. They felt it was a public need. For example, Tom was often stationed in the Middle East full-time, but was only expected to give stories a few times a year. But by being there full time he is able to cultivate sources. Create relationships. Know who to talk to, who to trust, who to question. So when a story breaks he has reliable information.
Tom then contrasts that to parachute journalism like we have today. Drop in a camera and a reporter and have them get a story quickly, having no idea who to talk to and who to trust. What is the worst that could happen?
It was inadvertent, I would say, and useful for a short period of time. My favorite was Headline News, where they simply reported the top stories over and over, so in 30 minutes I could get a complete roundup. Now every show is a minimum of 60 minutes, they have long, boring interview segments (because they’re cheaper to do) and they try to stretch every drop of drama from one or two stories, which is pretty much why I don’t watch much TV news anymore.
Apparently the 37th rerun of Forensic Files gets similar ratings, and since nobody cares about serving the public interest anymore, that’s what Headline News has become.