4 ms·

Home Depot had USD$88.5 B revenue for 2016. Kroger had $108 B. Walmart had $485.9 B. When you're selling that kind of volume, you're not doing it without alg

by ethbro 9y ago

Home Depot had USD$88.5 B revenue for 2016. Kroger had $108 B. Walmart had $485.9 B. When you're selling that kind of volume, you're not doing it without algorithmic help. Absolutely agree that OP should have been able to more easily get an in-person override. But I understand why the original rejection happened: or rather, I understand why HD uses a data mining company to attempt to prevent theft. PS: Side note, you'd be surprised how big of a chunk of theft directly involves receipts / returns in some way or another.

acdha 9y ago
The number can’t tell you that in isolation: Home Depot might gross that much but they also have hundreds of thousands of employees at thousands of stores. The amount of money a particular manager is responsible for is going to be a lot more reasonable, especially when you think about how much of that is going to be a few contractors buying large amounts on a regular basis. In any case it’s ridiculous that a manager can’t look at someone’s history of buying lots of stuff and override a one-time return for a fraction of a percent of their recent history.
- ethbro 9y ago
  Ridiculous until you realize that there's an approximately equal percentage of internal and external theft in retail. The right answer here is that the algorithm probably screwed up in this instance. There was a clear signal for a legitimate customer: large order, small return.
  - acdha 9y ago
    If your concern is pervasive internal theft by your managers you need a lot more than this speed bump. Saying that the algorithm screwed up is confusing a symptom with the problem: making business processes so inflexible that local staff cannot correct mistakes.
inetknght 9y ago
> When you're selling that kind of volume, you're not doing it without algorithmic help. These companies have been profitable for a long time prior to now. Why is it that they suddenly need algorithmic help?
- ethbro 9y ago
  I'd be very surprised if their net margins haven't shrunk, comparing 50 or 100 years ago. If you're running a < 5% net profit margin, as most of these businesses are, then 1.5% inventory shrink (approx average) is a pretty big deal.

by ethbro 9y ago

acdha 9y ago

The number can’t tell you that in isolation: Home Depot might gross that much but they also have hundreds of thousands of employees at thousands of stores. The amount of money a particular manager is responsible for is going to be a lot more reasonable, especially when you think about how much of that is going to be a few contractors buying large amounts on a regular basis. In any case it’s ridiculous that a manager can’t look at someone’s history of buying lots of stuff and override a one-time return for a fraction of a percent of their recent history.

ethbro 9y ago
Ridiculous until you realize that there's an approximately equal percentage of internal and external theft in retail. The right answer here is that the algorithm probably screwed up in this instance. There was a clear signal for a legitimate customer: large order, small return.
- acdha 9y ago
  If your concern is pervasive internal theft by your managers you need a lot more than this speed bump. Saying that the algorithm screwed up is confusing a symptom with the problem: making business processes so inflexible that local staff cannot correct mistakes.

inetknght 9y ago

> When you're selling that kind of volume, you're not doing it without algorithmic help. These companies have been profitable for a long time prior to now. Why is it that they suddenly need algorithmic help?

ethbro 9y ago
I'd be very surprised if their net margins haven't shrunk, comparing 50 or 100 years ago. If you're running a < 5% net profit margin, as most of these businesses are, then 1.5% inventory shrink (approx average) is a pretty big deal.