TARGET EXPRESS concept opening in Chicago...could itwork in downtown Detroit?

[Dan_the_man]

Quite off topic.

I'm talking about Target and Walmart. You're bringing up Meijer.

You are talking about a Meijer store at the edge of the city at eight mile with Ferndale right across the street. The OP is talking about downtown, 8 miles from there... Completely different environment. Not to mention the $16m in tax credits Meijer needed to build their first store so they wouldn't open up a couple blocks north in Ferndale.

Who knows what the results of the new Meijer store's losses will be at the Redford site; it's not even open yet.

I also haven't had much chance to price shop and compare Meijer vs. Walmart and Target as there isn't a Meijer location in Windsor. If they've got better pricing than Walmart, I say more power to them as that's how you run a successful and busy big box store that can compete with Walmart. Target didn't get it and that's why they went bankrupt in Canada.

Dave,

You're missing a few things here. Meijer is definitely in the same business as Target and Walmart, though they do tend to have a bit more food. Also the Detroit Meijer would have never been built in Ferndale, there's nowhere to put it.

More importantly Target has a very different perception among many people compared to Walmart. Walmart is perceived as cheap and trashy where as Target is cheap, but trendy. For example, you can get stylish clothing at Target, but not at Walmart. The young crowd that is living in Detroit is the perfect target for Target. They have a limited income, but still like to look good, and Target does not have a stigma against it. I think a City Target would work out quite well, although I don't know where they would find a good place to put it downtown. Midtown or New Center would probably be better, especially once M1 connects all of those areas together.

[Hypestyles]

the r_cism inherent in the "purely logical" 'shrinkage/loss prevention' rationale is rather glaring..

If Target, Kroger or Walmart continues to write off having an outlet within city limits, Meijer can have the city by default, I guess.

[davewindsor]

The Canadian operation was failure because Target though all English speaking North Americans liked the same things and shopped the same way. No, Americans and Canadians are different. They expanded too fast, could barely keep their stores stocked, and were just plain arrogant and inept to the Canadian market.

If that's the case, why didn't Walmart Canada fail? Walmart Canada is an American founded company just like Target Canada.

Expanding too fast also makes no sense because Walmart opened up in Canada in 1994 by buying out 123 leases from the former troubled Woolco in Canada. A very similar move to Target buying out 133 leases from the former Zeller's in Canada. A logistical system already existed through Zeller's that Target took over, just like Walmart took over the failing logistical system from Woolco Canada. So, by the same logic of "expanding too fast", why didn't Walmart Canada fail if their demise was because of "the Canadian market"? This is just the tip of a much bigger problem of what's happening with Target as a whole

Walmart has over 8500 stores across the globe and is over four times the size of Target. How could they have expanded too fast if they are much smaller than Walmart?

The store at Northland closed because Northland failed. And the fact there's a Target on Southfield Rd. that I'm sure gave it a run for its money.

Please give me a better indication than 11 stores closing that Target is a sinking ship.

First, anchors like big box stores closing kill malls, not the other way around. Target is an anchor store. Anchors are what make malls successful.

Second, I don't accept the proximity explanation either because Windsor has two Walmarts that are always very busy and are about 5 miles apart from one another using mapquest and both of those Walmarts have been there for well over a decade. The two Targets in Southfield were also about 5 miles apart from one to another using mapquest. A five mile proximity should not have caused this closure unless there's a deeper problem with Target as a whole. It's a sinking ship.

It is the flagship store for middle America but transcends socio-economic groups. Everyone shops there and is not taboo or exclusive like K-Mart and Wal-Mart or Saks, respectively.

So is Walmart. A lot of the middle class shop at Walmart too, not just low income earners. Everybody shops at Walmart just like Target. You just have to look at their huge parking lots in Windsor filled with shiny new cars owned by their customers to see that.

Low performing stores always close, but new stores in growing markets open up.

It shouldn't be low performing if there are more Walmarts per capita than Targets.

Had Target started slow in Canada like Nordstrom is doing, it could have proved a lot better.

Nope, it wouldn't have fared any better. Re-read my comments above.

A City Target could very well work in downtown. Since it is a popular retailer, downtown workers, residents, and visitors alike would use it of course. Just because it failed in Canada doesn't mean it couldn't work here. We're not Canada. While Detroit may be a risk, it's not the same risk as Canada. The risk in Canada was based on pricing and demand. The risk in Detroit would be loss prevention and getting people into the store. Both of which can be handled.

Absolutely not. Target is a sinking ship. They're going to be downsizing with express stores, not expanding.

Department stores fail because of poor management at its very core. It has happened to many large department stores in Canada too like Eaton's, Simpson's, Tower's, Woolco, Zeller's, etc.

What happened with Target is exactly what I saw with stores like Eaton's before they went bankrupt... Forget about them opening up in downtown. Target is a sinking ship. They're in reorganization mode, not expansion mode.

[davewindsor]

Dave,

You're missing a few things here. Meijer is definitely in the same business as Target and Walmart, though they do tend to have a bit more food. Also the Detroit Meijer would have never been built in Ferndale, there's nowhere to put it.

I don't think I'm missing anything here. Why did Meijer need $16m in tax incentives to build a $20m store at 8 mile on the Detroit side? What kind of tax incentives do they get in other cities in metro?

More importantly Target has a very different perception among many people compared to Walmart.

Um, no they don't. My perception from day 1 was that Target is just another K-Mart that's going to compete with Walmart.

Walmart is perceived as cheap and trashy where as Target is cheap, but trendy. For example, you can get stylish clothing at Target, but not at Walmart.

You can get the same stylish clothing at Walmart. Walmart has designer labels like George London, Levi-Strauss, etc. It's no different. I see the same Hanes underwear on both stores' shelves. To me, stylish is Calvin Klein and neither Walmart nor Target sell Calvin Klein. I had to buy my Calvin Klein jacket at Macy's, or if I want to buy it in Windsor, Hudson's Bay.

The young crowd that is living in Detroit is the perfect target for Target. They have a limited income, but still like to look good, and Target does not have a stigma against it.

Are you kidding? If there's a stigma, they have the same stigma as Walmart.

I think a City Target would work out quite well, although I don't know where they would find a good place to put it downtown. Midtown or New Center would probably be better, especially once M1 connects all of those areas together.

It's irrelevant because it ain't happening in downtown, midtown, or New Center. I can guarantee it.

[detroitbob]

Sure it can work. You just need enough people living nearby, within a certain radius. The numbers I've seen bandied-about are that national retailers look for a population of 20,000 or more within a neighborhood.

WHOLE FOODS Midtown is a proof that if you build it they will shop...

[detroitbob]

It's irrelevant because it ain't happening in downtown, midtown, or New Center. I can guarantee it.

Oh wise one...what is your guarentee?

[detroitbob]

The 8 Mile Woodward Meijer is one of the most successful in the privately held, family owned company. The Meijer family doesn't release sales figures but they have indicated that even though the store is not open 24 hours it is a top performer. That led to the 2nd location going forward.

[dtowncitylover]

I don't think I'm missing anything here. Why did Meijer need $16m in tax incentives to build a $20m store at 8 mile on the Detroit side? What kind of tax incentives do they get in other cities in metro?


Um, no they don't. My perception from day 1 was that Target is just another K-Mart that's going to compete with Walmart.


You can get the same stylish clothing at Walmart. Walmart has designer labels like George London, Levi-Strauss, etc. It's no different. I see the same Hanes underwear on both stores' shelves. To me, stylish is Calvin Klein and neither Walmart nor Target sell Calvin Klein. I had to buy my Calvin Klein jacket at Macy's, or if I want to buy it in Windsor, Hudson's Bay.


Are you kidding? If there's a stigma, they have the same stigma as Walmart.



It's irrelevant because it ain't happening in downtown, midtown, or New Center. I can guarantee it.

You know nothing. The perception of Target is nothing like the perception of K-Mart. In the minds of most Americans KMart serves the poor, working class, and maybe some middle class customers. Target serves EVERYONE. Look where the last KMarts are then looks where the Targets in the metro area. Target, besides the data breach, has no stigma. People like to shop there.

[Shai_Hulud]

Um, no they don't. My perception from day 1 was that Target is just another K-Mart that's going to compete with Walmart.

You can get the same stylish clothing at Walmart. Walmart has designer labels like George London, Levi-Strauss, etc. It's no different. I see the same Hanes underwear on both stores' shelves. To me, stylish is Calvin Klein and neither Walmart nor Target sell Calvin Klein. I had to buy my Calvin Klein jacket at Macy's, or if I want to buy it in Windsor, Hudson's Bay.

Maybe it's different in Canada, but while there is a ton of overlap between Wal-Mart and Target many Americans perceive Target as being the more upmarket store.

1. Most importantly, Target is almost always better stocked and cleaner than Wal-Mart.
2. Target has Starbucks inside their stores, Wal-Mart has Gobank, Magic Jack and other services that are clearly aimed at lower income consumers.
3. Target is sometimes 10% more expensive than Wal-Mart for comparable items.
4. Target does not have rural locations like Wal-Mart, which serve a less affluent market.​

K-Mart isn't worth mentioning, the last time I walked in one it looked like it had been unchanged since the 1980's. I'm not saying Target is invulnerable but K-Mart, Sears, JC Penney, even Best Buy are in line for the axe before Target.

[Richard]

Target took a 7 billion hit and still is a major player,they pulled out of CDA because it would have taken 6 years before making a return.

Wal-Mart needs to have a full parking lot because they make pennies on most products they survive on volume.

They do have the largest distribution network in the world and the largest truck fleet in the country,they run logistics for the gov.

Most high end retailers pay $16 max for an $80 pair of jeans.

Target could absorb theft loss and out survive wal-mart by far as long as the store is still showing a profit.

In Orlando wal-mart has small neighborhood markets kinda like half the size of a piggly wiggly,they also have the largest sqft store in the country as a test store to see what works and what does not.

Impressive on some aspects but I still stick with Target,I remember back in the day when they sold the same things as Dayton-Hudson at half the price they were one in the same so they have the boomer following and picked up that following when they expanded in the south.

Look at Daytons and Hudson's ,they had a baby and it was Target which comes from good stock,and not even close to Wal-Mart ,they each have thier own nich.

[davewindsor]

Oh wise one...what is your guarentee?

You mean guarantee with an "a" after the "r"? For a lawyer, your spelling should be perfect.

When I say I guarantee what I say, I mean I can back up my statements with links and facts. I don't go around spreading rumors like Target will be opening up in downtown without providing a link to back up such a statement. That's the guarantee. Where's your link that Target is opening up downtown?? There is none because it's not.

[davewindsor]

WHOLE FOODS Midtown is a proof that if you build it they will shop...

After tonnes of gov't handouts to build it.... Why did it need to be heavily subsidized by the gov't if it's such a successful company?

And your statement still provides no proof that Target is opening up downtown.

[davewindsor]

You know nothing. The perception of Target is nothing like the perception of K-Mart. In the minds of most Americans KMart serves the poor, working class, and maybe some middle class customers. Target serves EVERYONE. Look where the last KMarts are then looks where the Targets in the metro area. Target, besides the data breach, has no stigma. People like to shop there.

And yet, K-Mart was born in Detroit, building that beautiful former headquarters building around Cass Park.

[davewindsor]

Maybe it's different in Canada, but while there is a ton of overlap between Wal-Mart and Target many Americans perceive Target as being the more upmarket store.

Based on what? Did the US government conduct a national survey saying that? Where's the link to this government data?

1. Most importantly, Target is almost always better stocked and cleaner than Wal-Mart.

Really? I didn't notice that.

2. Target has Starbucks inside their stores, Wal-Mart has Gobank, Magic Jack and other services that are clearly aimed at lower income consumers.

Having a Starbucks inside their stores makes them a higher end store?? How does that follow? Are you saying middle class earners are not "smart" shoppers and would never use those other services?

3. Target is sometimes 10% more expensive than Wal-Mart for comparable items.

I didn't see that in Canada. The difference was much more significant.

4. Target does not have rural locations like Wal-Mart, which serve a less affluent market.​

I've met plenty of rich farmers and wealthy rural dwellers. A dollar shop is a dollar shop no matter where it is, just like a Target is a Target and a Walmart is a Walmart.

K-Mart isn't worth mentioning, the last time I walked in one it looked like it had been unchanged since the 1980's. I'm not saying Target is invulnerable but K-Mart, Sears, JC Penney, even Best Buy are in line for the axe before Target.

Nothing is invulnerable and all of them can go under, but recent developments put the target on Target.

[MicrosoftFan]

I think it could work.

[davewindsor]

Target took a 7 billion hit and still is a major player,they pulled out of CDA because it would have taken 6 years before making a return.

OK, so why go there like Walmart did to begin with if it's going to take 6 years and leave after 2 years? Really poor management decisions...

Wal-Mart needs to have a full parking lot because they make pennies on most products they survive on volume.

Do they make pennies on most products or is their buying department smart enough to negotiate much better discounts for buying in volume?

They do have the largest distribution network in the world and the largest truck fleet in the country,they run logistics for the gov.

They didn't magically become the largest distribution network in the world. Sam Walton started with one store and grew it into a empire. He started it all from bottom. I still don't get what happened with Target Canada.

Most high end retailers pay $16 max for an $80 pair of jeans.

That depends if they're selling their own brand or not. A high end retailer can't get $80 Calvin Klein jeans for $16 wholesale. It doesn't work that way unless they've invented their own brand like Bluenotes selling Bluenote jeans.

Target could absorb theft loss and out survive wal-mart by far as long as the store is still showing a profit.

What kind of profit is there? You just said they took a $7 billion dollar hit.

In Orlando wal-mart has small neighborhood markets kinda like half the size of a piggly wiggly,they also have the largest sqft store in the country as a test store to see what works and what does not.

Your point?

Impressive on some aspects but I still stick with Target,I remember back in the day when they sold the same things as Dayton-Hudson at half the price they were one in the same so they have the boomer following and picked up that following when they expanded in the south.

Look at Daytons and Hudson's ,they had a baby and it was Target which comes from good stock,and not even close to Wal-Mart ,they each have thier own nich.

What stock they come from is irrelevant. It's basically catering to the same market. Yes, each has their own rich, just like some Windsorites are Blue Jays fans and others are Detroit Tigers fans--it's a personal preference and I can agree with you on that point.

[Shai_Hulud]

Based on what? Did the US government conduct a national survey saying that? Where's the link to this government data?

The same place as the government data saying they have 100% cross shop. The whole argument is anecdotal. The thread itself is unlikely leap, so if we're looking for hard numbers we should be spending our time elsewhere.

Really? I didn't notice that.

It's easy to observe and mentioned in articles about Wal-Mart and it's competitors.

Having a Starbucks inside their stores makes them a higher end store?? How does that follow? Are you saying middle class earners are not "smart" shoppers and would never use those other services?

No, I don't think the person who routinely buys $7 drinks is the same person who buys $5 a month home phone service or uses a bank account with a $9 a month membership fee.

Now that I think about it, Wal-Mart offers check cashing service. Are you going to argue that's targeted at smart consumers?

I've met plenty of rich farmers and wealthy rural dwellers. A dollar shop is a dollar shop no matter where it is, just like a Target is a Target and a Walmart is a Walmart.

Urban households earn more and spend more than rural households. I can get you the government data on that if you like.

[davewindsor]

The same place as the government data saying they have 100% cross shop. The whole argument is anecdotal. The thread itself is unlikely leap, so if we're looking for hard numbers we should be spending our time elsewhere.

You said "many Americans perceive it". If you're going to make such a bold statement, you need to back it up. Otherwise, just be honest with everyone and say "You perceive it", not "Many Americans".

It's easy to observe and mentioned in articles about Wal-Mart and it's competitors.

What sources? And how are they influenced by these stores? Does the person writing these articles have shares in these companies or they are neutral parties?

No, I don't think the person who routinely buys $7 drinks is the same person who buys $5 a month home phone service or uses a bank account with a $9 a month membership fee.

Who says the people visiting Target are buying $7 drinks? They could be just spending $2 bucks for their basic tea or coffee. Just because it's there doesn't mean people are lining up at Target's Starbucks. The Walmarts in Canada all have an Express McDonald's in them that sells gourmet or regular coffee too. Personally, I think McDonald's coffee tastes a hell of a lot better than Starbucks. Starbucks coffee tastes like the free grub I can get at the bank or local credit union while waiting in line.

Now that I think about it, Wal-Mart offers check cashing service. Are you going to argue that's targeted at smart consumers?

Offering check cashing and other services can just mean they are going after a much larger market share than Target. I don't see how it follows that they are now in a separate income category because they offer more services. More services just means more customers and more income sources.

Urban households earn more and spend more than rural households. I can get you the government data on that if you like.

Sure, let's see what you've got.

[Shai_Hulud]

You said "many Americans perceive it". If you're going to make such a bold statement, you need to back it up. Otherwise, just be honest with everyone and say "You perceive it", not "Many Americans".

What sources? And how are they influenced by these stores? Does the person writing these articles have shares in these companies or they are neutral parties?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=target+vs.+wal-mart+clealiness

As many pages as you want mostly full of people, undoubtedly, many of them American, and with varied alliances, complaining about poor customer service, low quality products and messy stores at Wal-Mart with positive comments sprinkled in about Wal-Mart having the lowest prices.

Then there is this little gem. http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/

Who says the people visiting Target are buying $7 drinks? They could be just spending $2 bucks for their basic tea or coffee. Just because it's there doesn't mean people are lining up at Target's Starbucks. The Walmarts in Canada all have an Express McDonald's in them that sells gourmet or regular coffee too. Personally, I think McDonald's coffee tastes a hell of a lot better than Starbucks. Starbucks coffee tastes like the free grub I can get at the bank or local credit union while waiting in line.

Or they could be buying a $4 jar of Folgers and having coffee for days.

The point is that Starbucks is a mid market chain who's marketing --because that's what this is really all about-- is toward people who will drop a $20 on coffee without thinking about it and they are in bed with Target.

McDonald's is marketing value, and they make sure you know that even there "gourmet" items are priced lower than comparable items at upmarket competitors.

Offering check cashing and other services can just mean they are going after a much larger market share than Target. I don't see how it follows that they are now in a separate income category because they offer more services. More services just means more customers and more income sources.

Semantics. Check cashing services are inarguably aimed at lower income customers.

Yes, Wal-Mart can grab market share by aggressively marketing to low income shoppers in a way that their competitors don't. The entire market also watches them do this, which is part of where that perception of being a low end store comes from.

I didn't say they were in separate income categories. I said people think Target is nicer.

Sure, let's see what you've got.

First result on a google search for "Rural vs urban spending." Note the.gov.

http://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-2...ds-in-2011.htm

[Király]

I still don't get what happened with Target Canada.

This blog post from a Target Canada upper manager explains what happened. It was a multi-level management failure on many fronts.

[canuck]

This blog post from a Target Canada upper manager explains what happened. It was a multi-level management failure on many fronts.

Thank you for the link, Kiraly, it sums up my frustration the few times I shopped at Target.
We had a Target a ten minute walk from where I live in downtown Montreal [[Alexis Nihon Plaza, Atwater metro station) that closed a couple of weeks ago. I would go in there and sure enough, there were empty shelves. I couldn't believe how awkard the whole thing was. I remember looking at brooms that were hidden behind a horizontal shelf of some kind that blocked the customer from picking the item in a very dumb way. Zellers always was well-stocked, and the system was very tight, the service more than adequate. I actually felt sorry for the staff at Target, many of whom were former Zellers employees.

Also, when Target came in, the promise, according to media was that a certain flair in home design products had an Ikea edge as opposed to the 5 and dime of competitors like Walmart. The disappointment was an early one for me, I didn't think much of the stock. Target spent an enormous amount just to get these stores up, I don't know what the commercial lease terms were, but it is a shame that all this is for nought.

[davewindsor]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=target+vs.+wal-mart+clealiness

As many pages as you want mostly full of people, undoubtedly, many of them American, and with varied alliances, complaining about poor customer service, low quality products and messy stores at Wal-Mart with positive comments sprinkled in about Wal-Mart having the lowest prices.

Then there is this little gem. http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/

That doesn't prove Target is better than Walmart. Target has just as many complaints. Google "Target Sucks" and see many pages of the same kinds of complaints are made against target. There are tonnes of them literally and Walmart is more than 4 times the size so they're going to get hit too.

This website has 1,419 complaints made by consumers against Target with only 3 complaints resolved. http://target.pissedconsumer.com/

Let me cut and paste one of the comments as well.

http://target.pissedconsumer.com/rev...127587495.html

Target on beach blvd jacksonville fl.Short balding dirty little guy covered in tattoos verbally assaulted me in front of other cusTomers including children as I was leaving store.

He claimed to be the manager but I cannot believe a man who presents himself this way is the kind of manager any company would want. I thought he was homeless at first, but he had a uniformed security guy standing sheepishly next to him. I don't know if this was a case of mistaken identity or if he was just off his meds.

Im telling anyone who will listen about this including local news And Organizing A Picket.Target, what are you thinking??

11f7788c review #587495

Here's a website of Target's many disgruntled ex-employees complaining about how poorly Target is run: http://www.ihatetarget.net/

Having haters doesn't prove one is better than the other because both have them.

Or they could be buying a $4 jar of Folgers and having coffee for days.

The point is that Starbucks is a mid market chain who's marketing --because that's what this is really all about-- is toward people who will drop a $20 on coffee without thinking about it and they are in bed with Target.

McDonald's is marketing value, and they make sure you know that even there "gourmet" items are priced lower than comparable items at upmarket competitors.

That's just nonsense. Those Starbucks are franchises licensed to Target, just like McDonald's Express franchises are licensed to Walmart. Any large department chain can do the same thing. K-Mart could do it too if they wanted to spend the money.

Semantics. Check cashing services are inarguably aimed at lower income customers.

Yes, Wal-Mart can grab market share by aggressively marketing to low income shoppers in a way that their competitors don't. The entire market also watches them do this, which is part of where that perception of being a low end store comes from.

Where do you get that they are "aggressively" marketing to low income shoppers from they have this cheque cashing service as an option??

They market to everybody because it's more profitable to have more profit centers. It's just good business sense. Maybe it changes the perception for you in whatever world you're living in, but it doesn't change the perception for me or most people.

I didn't say they were in separate income categories. I said people think Target is nicer.

You mean you think it's nicer. Some people think Walmart is nicer; some people think Target is nicer. It's just a personal preference on two stores that are basically the same.

First result on a google search for "Rural vs urban spending." Note the.gov.

http://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-2...ds-in-2011.htm

Ok, so according to the article, "In 2011, urban households spent $50,348, which was 18 percent more than the $42,540 spent by rural households."

So, that's a $7,808 difference. And looking at the article again, urban dwellers spend $5,111.00 more on housing than rural dwellers because of the higher costs of urban housing. So, we're really talking about an average $2,500 difference in spending levels.

The average household incomes, according to the article, is around $65K urban, $49K rural before taxes. Now, factor in the fact that most rural dwellers are self-employed [[as opposed to employees) and deducting things like the pickup, insurance, gas, jeans for work, and other items as business related expenses and you're pretty much looking at the same after tax spending power.

So from your government article, we can deduce that rural household dwellers aren't low income customers as you suggest. They are basically in the same category as your average urban households with similar after tax disposable income levels.

[davewindsor]

This blog post from a Target Canada upper manager explains what happened. It was a multi-level management failure on many fronts.

What happened in Canada is part of a bigger problem with Target in the US. They've closed 11 stores in the the US since February of this year. Then, they further announced in February of this year that they are axing 3,100 Target jobs in the US. They are downsizing, not expanding, because it's a sinking ship.

http://targetfiling.blogspot.ca/

3/10/15


Target Confirms 3,100 Jobs Being Cut,

Left Unfilled At Minneapolis Headquarters



By Ashlee Kieler March 10, 2015

When Target announced it would shut down its Canadian operation, 17,600 people lost their jobs. Now, as the company prepares to embark on a $2 billion cost-cutting effort over the next two years, it has eliminated an additional 3,100 positions, this time at its Minneapolis headquarters.
The Star Tribune reports that the retailer began laying off 1,700 people Tuesday and got rid of another 1,400 currently unfilled positions.
Target announced last week that thousands of jobs were on the chopping block because of new cost-cutting efforts. However, today was the first time the company has used specific numbers to describe the mass layoff.
In all, the eliminated jobs represent about 13% of the company’s corporate employees. Currently, the retailer employs 13,000 workers at its headquarters and another 14,000 people at retail locations around the country. [[NOTE: Small error here, it is 14,000 in other Mn. locations, not nationwide)
“Today is a very difficult day for the Target team, but we believe these are the right decisions for the company,” the company said in a statement.
Each of the recently laid off employees will receive at least 15 weeks of pay plus additional severance amounts based on their time with the company, as well as six months of benefits, Target said.
The severance costs are expected to reach roughly $100 million, the Star Tribune reports.
Target layoffs will hit 1,700 today, with another 1,400 jobs going unfilled [Star Tribune]

BTW, These cuts are on top of the 550 Corporate workers laid off last month from the Canadian Operations: "...The company added that 1,400 open jobs would not be filled. The cuts amounted to 13 percent of the 13,000 HQ employees in the metro area. They come on top of the 550 corporate workers in the Twin Cities who were let go last month because of Target’s decision to close its Canadian operations." http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle...1&c=y#continue

[detroitbob]

Target employs about 350,000 worldwide. The Express concept is moving forward because it is a logical extension to service the urban worker who needs the convenience store feature on a larger scale than, say a CVS or Walgreens. Walmart opened express markets in similar settings...and of course Target has the City Target stores in downtown, cenralized locations such as Atlanta and Chicago's LOOP. The Chicago store spans three floors in the old Carson Pirie Scott and Company store on State Street to great success. Target dealt with the historic location successfully by discrete signage and keeping the scale of the grand main floor space.intact. The store is open 7 days a week and is busy throughout the day and evening. Downtown Detroit may not be ready for this concept yet, but it is ready for a 25k express store.

[Shai_Hulud]

That doesn't prove Target is better than Walmart. Target has just as many complaints. Google "Target Sucks" and see many pages of the same kinds of complaints are made against target.

Here's a website of Target's many disgruntled ex-employees complaining about how poorly Target is run: http://www.ihatetarget.net/

Loaded search. Of course "Target sucks" returns complaints about Target, the website gave you what you asked for. Ask for a neutral comparison of the two, Wal-Mart takes most of the lumps.

Didn't say Target was ran any better than Wal-Mart, all the big box stores are run basically the same and suck to work at as a low level employee.

But there does not seem to be a website with tons of Target shoppers in pajamas, dirty underwear, and using bungee cords as suspenders. I wonder why.

That's just nonsense. Those Starbucks are franchises licensed to Target, just like McDonald's Express franchises are licensed to Walmart. Any large department chain can do the same thing. K-Mart could do it too if they wanted to spend the money.

You mean if K-Mart thought it would make a profit. If K-Mart thought that enough of their customers would stop at the Starbucks counter and buy something profitable for it to be worth their investment. It seems they do not.

Where do you get that they are "aggressively" marketing to low income shoppers from they have this cheque cashing service as an option??

They market to everybody because it's more profitable to have more profit centers. It's just good business sense. Maybe it changes the perception for you in whatever world you're living in, but it doesn't change the perception for me or most people.

Talk around it all you want. Target still manages to compete without additional "profit centers" marketed at "everybody."

So either they're beating Wal-Mart on the back end, which is unlikely, or they have a better mix on the front end.

You mean you think it's nicer. Some people think Walmart is nicer; some people think Target is nicer. It's just a personal preference on two stores that are basically the same.

I do and as evidenced by the other people in this thread expressing similar, I'm not alone.

The average household incomes, according to the article, is around $65K urban, $49K rural before taxes. Now, factor in the fact that most rural dwellers are self-employed [[as opposed to employees) and deducting things like the pickup, insurance, gas, jeans for work, and other items as business related expenses and you're pretty much looking at the same after tax spending power.

No, you don't get to add your own assumptions. Unless you want to post links to support that.