Super S wrote:Clackamas Town Center where Macy's has a separate home store (which never seems to have any customers) in the old Montgomery Ward in addition to their main store..
It would make the most sense to me that these would be the stores Macy's would be most interested in closing. Most malls, with the exception of top performers such as Valley Fair do not need two Macy's stores. Some other examples of malls that do not need multiple stores include Sunrise Mall in Citrus Heights,CA and their three store behemoth in Mission Valley.
But in Macys world, those malls where the same mall has two physical stores, actually only count as "one store" for Macys Store Count. We have the same situation in Reno where Macys actually has 3 physical locations (2 in the mall, then a furniture store in half of the long-failed Pak N Save across the road from the mall) but all are the same "store number" and count as only one location on Macys books.
So I wonder if closing 100 stores means literally closing 100 stores out of the current store count, or doing some consolidating in malls where they currently have multiple stores?
I am a little surprised to see them closing this many stores at once. Also reading they are looking to sell their men's building in Union Square in San Francisco. I assume they will consolidate into the larger women's building. I will really miss that men's store. It was the inspiration for JCP's "shops."
When they announced the 40 stores they were closing, they counted the stores as separate entities despite their same store number so I'd assume this would be the same case.
I am just surprised how many underperforming stores they seem to have. They do have a good number of stores they inherited from May that were pretty crappy, like Mervyns level in quality and appearance, so I can see how this may also be a situation where upgrading the stores to fit the image Macys should have given the brands it carries may not be something that will get them a return on their investment.
We are a little bit biased as we are in a long-standing Macys territory (NorCal) where Macys itself has been operating since the 70's if not longer. Macy's in this territory enjoys an upscale reputation and is generally known for having better brands than its competitors (other than Nordstrom) and typically nicer stores. In many places in the middle of the US, Macys is running someone else's stores they bought, and these stores are barely even a full step better than a Kohl's or JCP. Maybe a 1/2 step better.
I can almost guarantee that the Macy's at Greenspoint Mall is one of them. The upper level has been completely closed for a number of years now, there's stained ceiling tiles, etc...it was once an attractive and large Foley's store though its glory days were long past even back in 2006.
storewanderer wrote:I am just surprised how many underperforming stores they seem to have. They do have a good number of stores they inherited from May that were pretty crappy, like Mervyns level in quality and appearance, so I can see how this may also be a situation where upgrading the stores to fit the image Macys should have given the brands it carries may not be something that will get them a return on their investment.
We are a little bit biased as we are in a long-standing Macys territory (NorCal) where Macys itself has been operating since the 70's if not longer. Macy's in this territory enjoys an upscale reputation and is generally known for having better brands than its competitors (other than Nordstrom) and typically nicer stores. In many places in the middle of the US, Macys is running someone else's stores they bought, and these stores are barely even a full step better than a Kohl's or JCP. Maybe a 1/2 step better.
In SoCal, most of the Macy's are in dreadful condition. The Mission Valley main store has improved since being acquired as part of MayCo. UTC (near LaJolla) is a train wreck. That store was a Broadway and has not been touched since before Macy's took it over in the 1990's. I can't say I've been in an LA-area Macy's that was particularly appealing or upscale. South Coast Plaza is OK. On the other hand, their Chicago-area (former Marshall Field's) stores are quite upscale.
Macy's opened 5 new modern stores in the LA area before the purchase of Robinsons May. These stores were clean, bright, non cluttered and had the Macy's excitement
2002 Temecula (became women's only store)
2002 Montebello (closed in 2006 then became Macy's home in 2007)
2002-2006 Lakewood (closed and demolished for Costco)
2002-2006 Westminster (closed and became Target)
2004 Victoria Gardens (became women's store)
Montebello at 80k feet was by far the smallest and Lakewood at 210,000 the largest. Sadly three of these stores closed within 4 years of opening. Target kept the Macy's exterior when they moved in. When Macy's moved into the robinsons may locations some of these stores didn't have a remodel since the 80s or even earlier. Macy's Montebello looks like it did when the May Co opened in 1985. Not much remodeling. Home store on the other hand has the modern Macy's look (even though the lower level furniture area is dark compared to when it was a soft line store)..
Macy's is opening new store next year in Century City. This is the first Macy's to open since 2004 up here (San Diego had Otay open in 2006).
I am very curious to see what the Century City Macy's is like. I feel like it will be an example of what a "real" Macy's is supposed to be like. As has been said above, the condition of their stores here in the LA area is pretty bad all around due to the fact that most locations were acquired. The closest to me is Manhattan Beach and their Men's store is old, dark and depressing. I think the absolute worst I have seen is Plaza Camino Real in Carlsbad. Just really, really sad. A typical Ross has a better environment.
I remember when Macy's took over the stores there was quite a bit of buzz...this famous, fancy New York store was coming to town. That quickly fizzled as not one dime appears to have been put into the stores.
HelloOutThere wrote:I am very curious to see what the Century City Macy's is like. I feel like it will be an example of what a "real" Macy's is supposed to be like. ...
Based on what I saw when I traveled out East, legacy Macy's was nothing to write home about. The converted Burdine's stores were pretty nice and as I mentioned previously the former Field's stores were, too. The Bay Area Macy's, which have been Macy's for many, many years were not great. They bought up Southern California stores 20 years ago and haven't touched hem. No excuse for that.
HelloOutThere wrote:...I think the absolute worst I have seen is Plaza Camino Real in Carlsbad. Just really, really sad. A typical Ross has a better environment....
Funny, but I almost typed the same thing about the same store. I think Mission Valley Center is worse than Plaza Camino Real and that's saying something.
The Reno Macys is interesting. The first floor of the women's store got a remodel sometime in the past 10 years and it looks okay, but once you start going into the clothing rack areas you notice the carpets and walls are not well maintained and generally the place seems disorganized and feels a bit dirty. (Sears feels cleaner- but the Reno Sears is in nice physical condition due to being a 1995 build vs. Macys 1978). Go to the second floor of the women's Macys which also houses kids items and that floor has never been touched in my lifetime (30+ years) and while it has some nice features (skylights) it feels dated and again once you move into the racks it is just a dirty messy feeling place. Lighting doesn't seem right, or maybe it is just not clean. The right lights can really make a difference.
Then there is the men's Macys. This is a former Liberty House, I guess Macys got it in the early 1980's. 1978 build. The bottom floor I believe is largely original to how it was as a Liberty House, based on what I have been told. The floor through all of the walkways is a light wood 80's looking floor that is scuffed up so bad you'd think you were at... I don't even know... somewhere not nice. They recently re-carpeted some of the clothing areas which helped but went with dark carpet and this doesn't help the lighting. The top floor houses home goods and parts of that department look okay and others again look dated, old carpet, etc. Macy's has the worst looking stores at the mall in Reno but has the best products, best staffing levels, and is by far the busiest operator at the mall. Funny how that works.
I hope the ultimate plan here is to get rid of the low performers and get it to a point where the top performers are stores they can start investing more money into cosmetic type upgrades vs. "needs based" type upgrades which seems to be the current strategy. Maybe they have been wasting too much money for too long just doing routine maintenance on barely profitable stores.
For what it's worth I was in a new build Macys in Hillsboro, OR last year and was not too impressed with it. It looked just fine but not particularly special. Dillard's newer stores are MUCH nicer than that store was in atmosphere (too bad Macys has a lot better overall product mix than Dillards).
storewanderer wrote:The Reno Macys is interesting. The first floor of the women's store got a remodel sometime in the past 10 years and it looks okay, but once you start going into the clothing rack areas you notice the carpets and walls are not well maintained and generally the place seems disorganized and feels a bit dirty. (Sears feels cleaner- but the Reno Sears is in nice physical condition due to being a 1995 build vs. Macys 1978). Go to the second floor of the women's Macys which also houses kids items and that floor has never been touched in my lifetime (30+ years) and while it has some nice features (skylights) it feels dated and again once you move into the racks it is just a dirty messy feeling place. Lighting doesn't seem right, or maybe it is just not clean. The right lights can really make a difference.
Then there is the men's Macys. This is a former Liberty House, I guess Macys got it in the early 1980's. 1978 build. The bottom floor I believe is largely original to how it was as a Liberty House, based on what I have been told. The floor through all of the walkways is a light wood 80's looking floor that is scuffed up so bad you'd think you were at... I don't even know... somewhere not nice. They recently re-carpeted some of the clothing areas which helped but went with dark carpet and this doesn't help the lighting. The top floor houses home goods and parts of that department look okay and others again look dated, old carpet, etc. Macy's has the worst looking stores at the mall in Reno but has the best products, best staffing levels, and is by far the busiest operator at the mall. Funny how that works.
I hope the ultimate plan here is to get rid of the low performers and get it to a point where the top performers are stores they can start investing more money into cosmetic type upgrades vs. "needs based" type upgrades which seems to be the current strategy. Maybe they have been wasting too much money for too long just doing routine maintenance on barely profitable stores.
For what it's worth I was in a new build Macys in Hillsboro, OR last year and was not too impressed with it. It looked just fine but not particularly special. Dillard's newer stores are MUCH nicer than that store was in atmosphere (too bad Macys has a lot better overall product mix than Dillards).
That Hillsboro Macy's actually opened as Meier & Frank. I think it was the last store they built from scratch. Another interesting note is the store in Vancouver, WA...a remodel and expansion began while the store was Meier & Frank, but the name change took place during the remodel and it was a Macy's by the time it was finished.
A couple of the older stores, specifically Lloyd Center and Salem Center, seem to do ok but there are random things here and there which are oddly laid out and reveal the true age of the stores.
