Toys R Us Could Seek Bankruptcy Protection to Deal With Its Crushing Debt

timanny
Stock Clerk
Stock Clerk
Posts: 46
Joined: October 5th, 2016, 12:31 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Toys R Us Could Seek Bankruptcy Protection to Deal With Its Crushing Debt

Post by timanny »

wnetmacman wrote: March 15th, 2018, 6:09 am
arizonaguy wrote: March 14th, 2018, 5:52 pm Maybe not an 800 store chain, but a 200 - 300 store chain with 1 or 2 locations in most major metropolitan areas (with stores that were more "destination" type stores) would potentially be successful.
This was Toys "R" Us in the 1980's. Towns under 250,000 just didn't have one. Larger metro areas may have had 2 or 3. When they went to smaller stores in smaller metro areas, and the store-within-a-store model, it lost its luster and its way.
Funny, that's exactly how Macy's used to operate. If you had a population of under 100K, you didn't have a Macy's. And if you did have Macy's, they weren't in every mall, the way that Emporium-Capwell was.
arizonaguy
Store Manager
Store Manager
Posts: 1107
Joined: July 12th, 2013, 6:07 pm
Been thanked: 35 times
Status: Offline

Re: Toys R Us Could Seek Bankruptcy Protection to Deal With Its Crushing Debt

Post by arizonaguy »

timanny wrote: March 15th, 2018, 7:38 pm
wnetmacman wrote: March 15th, 2018, 6:09 am
arizonaguy wrote: March 14th, 2018, 5:52 pm Maybe not an 800 store chain, but a 200 - 300 store chain with 1 or 2 locations in most major metropolitan areas (with stores that were more "destination" type stores) would potentially be successful.
This was Toys "R" Us in the 1980's. Towns under 250,000 just didn't have one. Larger metro areas may have had 2 or 3. When they went to smaller stores in smaller metro areas, and the store-within-a-store model, it lost its luster and its way.
Funny, that's exactly how Macy's used to operate. If you had a population of under 100K, you didn't have a Macy's. And if you did have Macy's, they weren't in every mall, the way that Emporium-Capwell was.
Macy's did better when they operated that way.

I think that is where we're moving back towards in terms of brick and mortar retail.
rwsandiego
Store Manager
Store Manager
Posts: 1242
Joined: April 3rd, 2016, 10:57 pm
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 55 times
Status: Offline

Re: Toys R Us Could Seek Bankruptcy Protection to Deal With Its Crushing Debt

Post by rwsandiego »

From today's New Yorker:

Image
Super S
Posts: 2690
Joined: April 1st, 2009, 9:27 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 61 times
Status: Offline

Re: Toys R Us Could Seek Bankruptcy Protection to Deal With Its Crushing Debt

Post by Super S »

arizonaguy wrote: March 15th, 2018, 10:02 pm
timanny wrote: March 15th, 2018, 7:38 pm
wnetmacman wrote: March 15th, 2018, 6:09 am

This was Toys "R" Us in the 1980's. Towns under 250,000 just didn't have one. Larger metro areas may have had 2 or 3. When they went to smaller stores in smaller metro areas, and the store-within-a-store model, it lost its luster and its way.
Funny, that's exactly how Macy's used to operate. If you had a population of under 100K, you didn't have a Macy's. And if you did have Macy's, they weren't in every mall, the way that Emporium-Capwell was.
Macy's did better when they operated that way.

I think that is where we're moving back towards in terms of brick and mortar retail.
Macy's, Nordstrom, and to some extent JCPenney, seem to be gradually retreating to larger towns.

There are plenty of other chains that still have locations in smaller towns that are underperforming when compared to larger towns. It's not always the chain that is to blame though. Sometimes local management takes the attitude that things are "good enough" for a local area and really don't make an effort to make things better. I have seen differences in chain stores when comparing small towns to larger towns. I'm not talking about stores like JCPenney where stores can vary greatly in size, I am talking about stores where size is more consistent. Differences range from a lack of selection to a lack of employees, and in some cases a lack of store maintenance which is evident when you see dirty floors and burned out lights among other things. Some people do travel to larger towns because the overall experience is often better. There are exceptions of course, but some chains would do better if they paid more attention to the consistency of the store experience.
pseudo3d
Posts: 3851
Joined: November 12th, 2015, 7:01 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 77 times
Status: Offline

Re: Toys R Us Could Seek Bankruptcy Protection to Deal With Its Crushing Debt

Post by pseudo3d »

wnetmacman wrote: March 15th, 2018, 6:09 am
arizonaguy wrote: March 14th, 2018, 5:52 pm Maybe not an 800 store chain, but a 200 - 300 store chain with 1 or 2 locations in most major metropolitan areas (with stores that were more "destination" type stores) would potentially be successful.
This was Toys "R" Us in the 1980's. Towns under 250,000 just didn't have one. Larger metro areas may have had 2 or 3. When they went to smaller stores in smaller metro areas, and the store-within-a-store model, it lost its luster and its way.
Waco had one with a population just over 100,000 with the metro area not much larger. It was a combined Kids R Us location and possibly the last "candy-striped" roof in existence.
storewanderer
Posts: 14379
Joined: February 23rd, 2009, 3:54 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 298 times
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: Toys R Us Could Seek Bankruptcy Protection to Deal With Its Crushing Debt

Post by storewanderer »

Toys R Us had a store in Reno since the 70's or 80's and back then Reno wasn't a very big place...

They still only have that one store despite the area expanding and most other "big box" (Best Buy, Bed Bath & Beyond, Office whatever, etc.) chains opening satellite locations in Sparks and Carson City.

I never really noticed Toys R Us locations in medium sized markets in my travels.

Maybe it was different in certain regions.

It will be interesting to see who buys some of the locations and keeps operating them even if it is after the current ownership runs liquidation. I do expect some will continue to operate under different ownership. They can get up and running again in time for Christmas.
timanny
Stock Clerk
Stock Clerk
Posts: 46
Joined: October 5th, 2016, 12:31 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Toys R Us Could Seek Bankruptcy Protection to Deal With Its Crushing Debt

Post by timanny »

arizonaguy wrote: March 15th, 2018, 10:02 pm
timanny wrote: March 15th, 2018, 7:38 pm
wnetmacman wrote: March 15th, 2018, 6:09 am

This was Toys "R" Us in the 1980's. Towns under 250,000 just didn't have one. Larger metro areas may have had 2 or 3. When they went to smaller stores in smaller metro areas, and the store-within-a-store model, it lost its luster and its way.
Funny, that's exactly how Macy's used to operate. If you had a population of under 100K, you didn't have a Macy's. And if you did have Macy's, they weren't in every mall, the way that Emporium-Capwell was.
Macy's did better when they operated that way.

I think that is where we're moving back towards in terms of brick and mortar retail.
They certainly did. And were a classy operation back then, too. Midwesterners are still rightly upset about the Marshall Field's name being removed, partially because Macy's was a step down. But the old Macy's California (which was just Northern California and Reno) was much closer to Field's than the modern Macy's. Even more so than the New York Macy's (which was still better then than now).
architect
Assistant Store Manager
Assistant Store Manager
Posts: 843
Joined: December 8th, 2015, 3:41 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 7 times
Status: Offline

Re: Toys R Us Could Seek Bankruptcy Protection to Deal With Its Crushing Debt

Post by architect »

timanny wrote: March 19th, 2018, 2:23 pm
arizonaguy wrote: March 15th, 2018, 10:02 pm
timanny wrote: March 15th, 2018, 7:38 pm

Funny, that's exactly how Macy's used to operate. If you had a population of under 100K, you didn't have a Macy's. And if you did have Macy's, they weren't in every mall, the way that Emporium-Capwell was.
Macy's did better when they operated that way.

I think that is where we're moving back towards in terms of brick and mortar retail.
They certainly did. And were a classy operation back then, too. Midwesterners are still rightly upset about the Marshall Field's name being removed, partially because Macy's was a step down. But the old Macy's California (which was just Northern California and Reno) was much closer to Field's than the modern Macy's. Even more so than the New York Macy's (which was still better then than now).
I definitely agree on the Macy's front. Back before the Federated name plate changes and the May acquisition, Macy's was a destination store with at most 2-3 stores in many large markets in the US outside of the coasts. They were certainly few and far between in small markets. As a result, their stores were generally in well-trafficked malls which tended to pull from a wider market area, vs. many regional department stores which tended to have many locations that were older/smaller/poorly located. Although these second-tier locations might be passed over by a national retailer, May was able to make them work due to the fact that each market was merchandised separately, and buyers knew what their shoppers were looking for in these stores. When Federated picked up May, this problem suddenly reared its head, and Macy's was forced to downscale its merchandise selection in many of its lower-tier locations in order to sustain sales. However, this had the affect of driving away customers which had grown accustomed to the upscale experience found across many of both the Federated and May banners, and simply reaked of commercialism. In addition, the products which resonated in New York simply didn't resonate in California or Florida, and Macy's quickly learned that national merchandising simply doesn't work for such a diverse chain. Fast forward to now, Macy's is in a position where they have driven away their customers looking for a more upscale experience, but also cannot compete with the discounters and fast fashion outlets which their more value-minded customers have grown accustomed to. They are stuck in a no mans land of sorts when compared to chains such as Nordstrom which have continued to reinforce an upscale image and have made investments in their stores which are equipping them to at least sustain current business.
pseudo3d
Posts: 3851
Joined: November 12th, 2015, 7:01 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 77 times
Status: Offline

Re: Toys R Us Could Seek Bankruptcy Protection to Deal With Its Crushing Debt

Post by pseudo3d »

architect wrote: March 19th, 2018, 5:42 pm
timanny wrote: March 19th, 2018, 2:23 pm
arizonaguy wrote: March 15th, 2018, 10:02 pm

Macy's did better when they operated that way.

I think that is where we're moving back towards in terms of brick and mortar retail.
They certainly did. And were a classy operation back then, too. Midwesterners are still rightly upset about the Marshall Field's name being removed, partially because Macy's was a step down. But the old Macy's California (which was just Northern California and Reno) was much closer to Field's than the modern Macy's. Even more so than the New York Macy's (which was still better then than now).
I definitely agree on the Macy's front. Back before the Federated name plate changes and the May acquisition, Macy's was a destination store with at most 2-3 stores in many large markets in the US outside of the coasts. They were certainly few and far between in small markets. As a result, their stores were generally in well-trafficked malls which tended to pull from a wider market area, vs. many regional department stores which tended to have many locations that were older/smaller/poorly located. Although these second-tier locations might be passed over by a national retailer, May was able to make them work due to the fact that each market was merchandised separately, and buyers knew what their shoppers were looking for in these stores. When Federated picked up May, this problem suddenly reared its head, and Macy's was forced to downscale its merchandise selection in many of its lower-tier locations in order to sustain sales. However, this had the affect of driving away customers which had grown accustomed to the upscale experience found across many of both the Federated and May banners, and simply reaked of commercialism. In addition, the products which resonated in New York simply didn't resonate in California or Florida, and Macy's quickly learned that national merchandising simply doesn't work for such a diverse chain. Fast forward to now, Macy's is in a position where they have driven away their customers looking for a more upscale experience, but also cannot compete with the discounters and fast fashion outlets which their more value-minded customers have grown accustomed to. They are stuck in a no mans land of sorts when compared to chains such as Nordstrom which have continued to reinforce an upscale image and have made investments in their stores which are equipping them to at least sustain current business.
Macy's basically saturated their store base with a lot of rural/second-tier stores (some malls Macy's went into were gone within 2-3 years of the takeover and were already dead malls by that point) and as a result dramatically changed their demographics. It begs to question if Macy's was to never rebrand and consolidate the buying offices of the May Co. stores, if they would be better off today.
storewanderer
Posts: 14379
Joined: February 23rd, 2009, 3:54 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 298 times
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: Toys R Us Could Seek Bankruptcy Protection to Deal With Its Crushing Debt

Post by storewanderer »

Macy's should have kept the old mid-range May brands and kept Macy's as a more upper tier brand. Macy's tried to be everything to everyone, and got lost.

Macy's could have run its online business, credit card program, etc. using the Macy's name too. The old Macy's California and then Macy's West was definitely run to a higher standard than the rest of the company, but after enough years of annual restructurings, layoffs, etc. that all seemed to sort of fall apart. The conditions in the Reno Macy's the past few years have become unreal. Yes, it is a high traffic store (for Reno anyway). Yes, it is very well stocked. The employees are miserable. The store is dirty and messy. For some reason, customers seem to like to leave empty drink cups or other food containers all over the store, and nobody picks any of it up for days on end. Their "last act" clearance program looks worse than a thrift store and is not effective at all at moving product. The home category which has been very strong historically in Reno got downsized by about 20% when they decided to put a ton of mattresses in some of that space and is now rather useless.

Back on topic, remember this deal?
https://www.toysrusinc.com/press/macys- ... lect-macys
Post Reply