5 ms·

in general, it is difficult for me to separate a reasonable concern borne of the knowledge that a thriving economy is important from a sense that, so far, the b

in general, it is difficult for me to separate a reasonable concern borne of the knowledge that a thriving economy is important from a sense that, so far, the big retail chains that are closing many locations sell junk that i both do not want and think is largely superfluous anyway. Anyone got a reasonable way to synthesize those competing thoughts?

Diederich 9y ago
I share them, but I don't think they need to be synthesized.
SolaceQuantum 9y ago
Would it help if you considered that if over 6000 stores closed, it is very likely the majority are small stored and not big chains? From what I saw in Bloomberg article it was 550/6000 are chain stores. That leaves significantly more to small shops that are trying to provide employment and selling worthwhile goods to their local communities. For example here in buffalo we have small stores for spiritual goods that also serve as community centers for such spiritual practices.
- eternalban 9y ago
  > stores ... that also serve as community centers ... Historically, public markets have also provided a platform for important non-commercial informal civic interactions. The review section of e.g. Amazon doesn't seem to cut it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bazaar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bazaar
  - munificent 9y ago
    > The review section of e.g. Amazon doesn't seem to cut it. True, but neither does the strip mall surrounding a Best Buy parking lot.
    - eternalban 9y ago
      Yes and no. When my family immigrated to US when I was a teenager, I was struck by the role played by the local 7/11 (!) and strip mall as the hang out place for the suburban kids. There was literaly no where else in the suburbs. So yes, not exactly an "agora" but better than nothing.
sandworm101 9y ago
>>> junk that i both do not want and think is largely superfluous anyway. I'm reminded of an article I read last year about parents buying presents for kids at Christmas. In the 90s it was easy. The kid wanted a thing. A gaming device, a dress, or a car... there was an object that the kid wanted to own. That object was sold at a store. But today's kids don't want things. They have the iPhone. What they want is 50,000 likes on facebook. Their happiness is tied less directly to things than social acceptance. Often having the thing leads to that social acceptance, but increasingly not. Your seeing the junk as superfluous, and mentioning it here on HN, fits with that shift away from retail goods and towards social acceptance via online communities.
- thefalcon 9y ago
  Thankfully 50,000 likes on Facebook is cheaper than the object at the store. (Only somewhat kidding. Don't buy your kids Facebook Likes.)
  - jacalata 9y ago
    My kids, no, but that will be a hilarious birthday present for my brother.
- lotsofpulp 9y ago
  I think they still want things, just happen to be more "experience" related, which are more expensive. International travel, expensive restaurants, "off the beaten" path type adventures, performances etc are all in vogue, and all are good for displaying status on Snapchat and Facebook. A $50 toy isn't good for that, and the younger kids probably find more enjoyment in using phones or with video games.
  - smileysteve 9y ago
    I think that this must be isolated in specific communities. Keep in mind that the "average American" rarely leaves their state.
viridian 9y ago
I think the synthesis is the hope that the market replacements for these stores is less terrible. The big displacer in the last few years has really been Amazon, who I think offers a better shopping experience than most overpriced specialty stores. Many of these stores only held firm in the market due to having an information advantage over the consumers, as well as the convenience of providing items that are similar in kind (ie toys at toys r us). The effects of a post online shopping and price comparison world are still being shaked out.
javajosh 9y ago
Optimistically, it means that workers will be freed up to do things that are more important. Cynically, all you (a generic programmer type) really need is food, lodging, a laptop, an internet connection, so anyone not producing or repairing those things are superfluous to you, which is actually the majority of humanity (even if you include infrastructure and supply chain). "Humanity" itself becomes a wasteful, carbon-emitting luxury you allow yourself for sentimental reasons. Or you can be sentimental for practical reasons: "Eliminating the middleman is never as simple as it sounds. ‘Bout 50% of the human race is middlemen, and they don’t take kindly to being eliminated." -Malcolm Reynolds (Firefly)
- geoka9 9y ago
  > so anyone not producing or repairing those things are superfluous to you But we don't program in a void, right? Somebody has to create work for us and those would be the ones doing "superfluous" things. In other words, nobody would need our programming if all they did was supporting our programming.
ChuckMcM 9y ago
It is general market dynamics that at times stores will have things that don't sell. Whether or not "you" find them useful or not is a different story, sometimes a store will be doing well selling things you might find useless, simply because you are not the target market. The confluence of events that the article alludes to are that many retail stores went through a period of consolidation and buyout through leveraged debt. As anyone with big credit card bills understands, it sucks when you're spending a huge chunk of your income just to pay interest on your credit cards. (or in these stores cases their junk bonds). This massive debt load is forcing changes faster than what one might see organically and as a result there is a lot of turmoil in the retail business.
- bsenftner 9y ago
  Plus, the strategists that put these retail chains in this debt are no longer there actively working on strategy within this mess. There is more profit for them, personally, working on other deals. Net result, the "rock-stars" set up a mess, pull huge gains from the table, then leave the 2nd or 3rd team to navigate a very difficult debt load they left behind.
petra 9y ago
Progress, at least under capitalism, enables(or pushes) more and more people to do stuff that is less and less necessary, because junk is growth and growth is what's capitalism aimed at.
- wmeredith 9y ago
  It's a Brave New World.
munificent 9y ago
I think the America that will result from this die-off is a better place. Less suburban sprawl. Less giant eyesore big-box stores that no one enjoys spending time in. More informed purchases because people buy stuff online where it's easier to compare reviews. But I think there will be significant, very painful collateral damage to people during this transition and I've very sympathetic to people hit by the job losses. Retail is one of the few remaining sectors in small towns. Most other work is becoming increasingly concentrated in big cities or automated away. The days of the US as a patchwork of thriving small towns is ending, but many people still live in those towns. Worse, the ones still there are often there because they are the least able to move — poverty, family commitments, etc. The US is rapidly turning into a country that has no place for the unskilled, but is also failing to provide the education needed to deal with the millions of unskilled citizens. I'm also confident that in all of this, it's not the finance industry that's going to be hurt. They'll pull another "too big to fail" maneuver and we taxpayers will bail them out, yet again transferring money to the ultra-rich.
- TallGuyShort 9y ago
  >> More informed purchases because people buy stuff online where it's easier to compare reviews. I was wondering about this forcing stores to provide more expertise and more flexible inventory. In my town 2 stores in a specific industry went out of business 3 years ago and made a big deal in the papers about how too many people were buying direct from manufacturers instead of visiting their store. I had been to both stores, asked some questions about products, got dumb answers and bad attitude, so I went home and bought everything online. In the last 2 years, 3 new stores in that same industry, 2 of them MASSIVE, have opened up near by (one of them in the same strip mall), and are doing very well. The difference? When you walk into these stores the employees know what they're talking about and they VERY quickly adjust inventory based on current market trends. Now I make most purchases in one of these 3 stores and not online - because I can do research better by talking to them and I can get most things immediately. It's required bigger investment from the owners, but they have thrived where previous stores failed and blamed e-commerce. Doesn't work with a lot of commodities, but if you're in retail, I think it's clear you need to specialize and add value - and that requires more investment. Don't just be there and expect to keep existing.
AnimalMuppet 9y ago
I'd say that "thriving" needs to be redefined. We think of "thriving" as being, say, 2007. It wasn't. That was an overheated, unsustainable bubble. "Thriving" means there's jobs, and growth, but it's not providing all the junk that everyone ever wants. Maybe "healthy" is a better word.

Diederich 9y ago

I share them, but I don't think they need to be synthesized.

SolaceQuantum 9y ago

Would it help if you considered that if over 6000 stores closed, it is very likely the majority are small stored and not big chains? From what I saw in Bloomberg article it was 550/6000 are chain stores. That leaves significantly more to small shops that are trying to provide employment and selling worthwhile goods to their local communities. For example here in buffalo we have small stores for spiritual goods that also serve as community centers for such spiritual practices.

eternalban 9y ago
> stores ... that also serve as community centers ... Historically, public markets have also provided a platform for important non-commercial informal civic interactions. The review section of e.g. Amazon doesn't seem to cut it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bazaar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bazaar
- munificent 9y ago
  > The review section of e.g. Amazon doesn't seem to cut it. True, but neither does the strip mall surrounding a Best Buy parking lot.
  - eternalban 9y ago
    Yes and no. When my family immigrated to US when I was a teenager, I was struck by the role played by the local 7/11 (!) and strip mall as the hang out place for the suburban kids. There was literaly no where else in the suburbs. So yes, not exactly an "agora" but better than nothing.

sandworm101 9y ago

>>> junk that i both do not want and think is largely superfluous anyway. I'm reminded of an article I read last year about parents buying presents for kids at Christmas. In the 90s it was easy. The kid wanted a thing. A gaming device, a dress, or a car... there was an object that the kid wanted to own. That object was sold at a store. But today's kids don't want things. They have the iPhone. What they want is 50,000 likes on facebook. Their happiness is tied less directly to things than social acceptance. Often having the thing leads to that social acceptance, but increasingly not. Your seeing the junk as superfluous, and mentioning it here on HN, fits with that shift away from retail goods and towards social acceptance via online communities.

thefalcon 9y ago
Thankfully 50,000 likes on Facebook is cheaper than the object at the store. (Only somewhat kidding. Don't buy your kids Facebook Likes.)
- jacalata 9y ago
  My kids, no, but that will be a hilarious birthday present for my brother.
lotsofpulp 9y ago
I think they still want things, just happen to be more "experience" related, which are more expensive. International travel, expensive restaurants, "off the beaten" path type adventures, performances etc are all in vogue, and all are good for displaying status on Snapchat and Facebook. A $50 toy isn't good for that, and the younger kids probably find more enjoyment in using phones or with video games.
- smileysteve 9y ago
  I think that this must be isolated in specific communities. Keep in mind that the "average American" rarely leaves their state.

viridian 9y ago

I think the synthesis is the hope that the market replacements for these stores is less terrible. The big displacer in the last few years has really been Amazon, who I think offers a better shopping experience than most overpriced specialty stores. Many of these stores only held firm in the market due to having an information advantage over the consumers, as well as the convenience of providing items that are similar in kind (ie toys at toys r us). The effects of a post online shopping and price comparison world are still being shaked out.

javajosh 9y ago

Optimistically, it means that workers will be freed up to do things that are more important. Cynically, all you (a generic programmer type) really need is food, lodging, a laptop, an internet connection, so anyone not producing or repairing those things are superfluous to you, which is actually the majority of humanity (even if you include infrastructure and supply chain). "Humanity" itself becomes a wasteful, carbon-emitting luxury you allow yourself for sentimental reasons. Or you can be sentimental for practical reasons: "Eliminating the middleman is never as simple as it sounds. ‘Bout 50% of the human race is middlemen, and they don’t take kindly to being eliminated." -Malcolm Reynolds (Firefly)

geoka9 9y ago
> so anyone not producing or repairing those things are superfluous to you But we don't program in a void, right? Somebody has to create work for us and those would be the ones doing "superfluous" things. In other words, nobody would need our programming if all they did was supporting our programming.

ChuckMcM 9y ago

It is general market dynamics that at times stores will have things that don't sell. Whether or not "you" find them useful or not is a different story, sometimes a store will be doing well selling things you might find useless, simply because you are not the target market. The confluence of events that the article alludes to are that many retail stores went through a period of consolidation and buyout through leveraged debt. As anyone with big credit card bills understands, it sucks when you're spending a huge chunk of your income just to pay interest on your credit cards. (or in these stores cases their junk bonds). This massive debt load is forcing changes faster than what one might see organically and as a result there is a lot of turmoil in the retail business.

bsenftner 9y ago
Plus, the strategists that put these retail chains in this debt are no longer there actively working on strategy within this mess. There is more profit for them, personally, working on other deals. Net result, the "rock-stars" set up a mess, pull huge gains from the table, then leave the 2nd or 3rd team to navigate a very difficult debt load they left behind.

petra 9y ago

Progress, at least under capitalism, enables(or pushes) more and more people to do stuff that is less and less necessary, because junk is growth and growth is what's capitalism aimed at.

wmeredith 9y ago
It's a Brave New World.

munificent 9y ago

I think the America that will result from this die-off is a better place. Less suburban sprawl. Less giant eyesore big-box stores that no one enjoys spending time in. More informed purchases because people buy stuff online where it's easier to compare reviews. But I think there will be significant, very painful collateral damage to people during this transition and I've very sympathetic to people hit by the job losses. Retail is one of the few remaining sectors in small towns. Most other work is becoming increasingly concentrated in big cities or automated away. The days of the US as a patchwork of thriving small towns is ending, but many people still live in those towns. Worse, the ones still there are often there because they are the least able to move — poverty, family commitments, etc. The US is rapidly turning into a country that has no place for the unskilled, but is also failing to provide the education needed to deal with the millions of unskilled citizens. I'm also confident that in all of this, it's not the finance industry that's going to be hurt. They'll pull another "too big to fail" maneuver and we taxpayers will bail them out, yet again transferring money to the ultra-rich.

TallGuyShort 9y ago
>> More informed purchases because people buy stuff online where it's easier to compare reviews. I was wondering about this forcing stores to provide more expertise and more flexible inventory. In my town 2 stores in a specific industry went out of business 3 years ago and made a big deal in the papers about how too many people were buying direct from manufacturers instead of visiting their store. I had been to both stores, asked some questions about products, got dumb answers and bad attitude, so I went home and bought everything online. In the last 2 years, 3 new stores in that same industry, 2 of them MASSIVE, have opened up near by (one of them in the same strip mall), and are doing very well. The difference? When you walk into these stores the employees know what they're talking about and they VERY quickly adjust inventory based on current market trends. Now I make most purchases in one of these 3 stores and not online - because I can do research better by talking to them and I can get most things immediately. It's required bigger investment from the owners, but they have thrived where previous stores failed and blamed e-commerce. Doesn't work with a lot of commodities, but if you're in retail, I think it's clear you need to specialize and add value - and that requires more investment. Don't just be there and expect to keep existing.

AnimalMuppet 9y ago

I'd say that "thriving" needs to be redefined. We think of "thriving" as being, say, 2007. It wasn't. That was an overheated, unsustainable bubble. "Thriving" means there's jobs, and growth, but it's not providing all the junk that everyone ever wants. Maybe "healthy" is a better word.