9 ms·

‘San Francisco changed dramatically’ – Nordstrom is bailing on a flagship store

43 points by archo 3y ago

archo 3y ago
‘The dynamics of the downtown San Francisco market have changed dramatically’: Nordstrom is bailing on a flagship store that’s 35 years old : https://archive.is/ozsZh https://archive.is/ozsZh
- berbec 3y ago
  infinite captcha for me :(
  - unforeseen9991 3y ago
    Are you on mobile? I have had this happen a few times now but no issues on desktop
    - berbec 3y ago
      firefox & windows
  - archo 3y ago
    Change your DNS You may also try an archive.today mirror ie.. https://archive.ph/ozsZh https://archive.ph/ozsZh https://archive.vn/ozsZh https://archive.vn/ozsZh
lusus_naturae 3y ago
I fail to understand how this is different from organized rings of train robbers in the old, old west. Maybe we need modern day cowboys now (per my recollection, cowboys played both sides of the law)? Most likely we'll have security drones, like Boston Dynamics's robot dog. Edit to say that having people hounded by security drones sounds like a terrible state of affairs. Having businesses robbed by organized gangs does as well. I think UBI and rent control or rent subsidies with high taxes on the wealthiest is a better solution in the short-term. For the long-term, philosophies that advocate for less materialism seem preferable (no need to rob if you're happy with less money etc.).
- Bostonian 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - kranke155 3y ago
    Train robbers were also idolised
  - QuercusMax 3y ago
    Part of the issue is that articles like this one tend to conflate individual poor people shoplifting small items with these organized gangs. These gangs aren't shoplifters, and calling them such is extremely misleading.
    - hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
      > Part of the issue is that articles like this one tend to conflate individual poor people shoplifting small items with these organized gangs. I consider myself liberal, but this sentence highlights the point a lot of people have issue with: that somehow many "on the left" have rationalized theft as being OK if you're poor. That is absolutely the point at which society and the social contract breaks down, because it becomes exceedingly easy for anyone to rationalize taking something from others because "they deserve it" in some way. I'm all for providing better services and support (not to mention a better structured economy) for those who are poor. I also believe "the punishment should fit the crime", and stealing low-dollar goods should result in commensurate punishment. I'm not for allowing the poor to steal with no consequences just because they can't afford stuff.
      - Timon3 3y ago
        > I consider myself liberal, but this sentence highlights the point a lot of people have issue with: that somehow many "on the left" have rationalized theft as being OK if you're poor. That is absolutely the point at which society and the social contract breaks down, because it becomes exceedingly easy for anyone to rationalize taking something from others because "they deserve it" in some way. But what is the alternative? Let's look at a dirt-poor person who hasn't eaten in multiple days. Sure, there are places you can try to get donated items, but those are getting more and more over-run. You can beg and try to get enough together to buy something, but it's not really a good alternative either, especially since it's not guaranteed. So at what point would someone be in their right to steal food to survive? Is it never okay, meaning they'll have to starve in the worst case? Naturally these problems should be solved long before anyone comes to the place of having to steal - but that's not the world we live in. And I'm strictly talking about absolute necessities, nothing beyond that. But surely at some point a human life is worth more than a bit of money in the store owners pockets?
kernal 3y ago
Why would any company operate a store in San Francisco when there are no deterrents to shoplifting and the criminals aren't even prosecuted? Additionally, this is not isolated to San Francisco as Oakland and Los Angeles are just as bad if not worse. California reaps what it sows.
- retrocryptid 3y ago
  Asks someone who doesn't live in SF and accepts their news uncritically from cable outlets (and their web sites) with a vested interest in driving outrage driven online engagement. EDIT: People who are up voting this comment: NO! It's a snarky comment in opposition to the prevailing wisdom. It's intended to be downvoted. 2ND EDIT: thank you for downvoting. I can now rest easy knowing I'm a misunderstood genius amongst a sea of profane luddites. (Though truth to tell, most people here when they're not being snarky seem reasonably intelligent.)
  - kernal 3y ago
    What a strange reply. You are clearly oblivious to the problems in San Francisco and Oakland. I suggest you go to YouTube to see videos of people, that live in San Francisco, pointing out all of the closed stores and businesses.
- dee-bee 3y ago
  Same as anywhere: write off theft and make bank off the rich people. The idea that SF is somehow unique is asinine. If i were to guess they want the public to foot the bill for cops to just shoot shoplifters.
  - kernal 3y ago
    Asinine is thinking what's happening in San Francisco is the same everywhere. I suggest you visit YouTube and view the video's documenting all of the closed stores and businesses.
tedajax 3y ago
Another store lying about "crime" being the reason they're closing.
- evouga 3y ago
  The store may or may not be telling the truth. Either way, it's undeniable that SF has changed dramatically over the last several years, with dramatic upswing in property crime and complete unwillingness on the part of law enforcement to fight it.
  - eli 3y ago
    Sure but there's been a MUCH more dramatic shift around retail stores and how Americans buy goods.
  - retrocryptid 3y ago
    Good idea to watch something other than Fox News from time to time.
- stevehawk 3y ago
  Even if they're lying, SF seems to be in denial about the wasteland it's becoming. Everyone's got a list of things they blame, but no one seems to have a list of changes they're willing to make to correct it.
- gaulish 3y ago
  I think I good question we can ask, are any major brands building new stores in San Francisco? That would be a good indicator of whether or not brands see the market as too-risky or that Nordstrom is using a convenient scapegoat. I’m asking here the locals here, I haven’t been to the city in over 20 years so I haven’t the slightest idea.
  - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
    Not SF, but similar problem Seattle just got a Uniglo downtown (ironically in the old Macy’s/Bon Marche building). After losing more than a few brands this year (eg Nike), having a new one pop up was notable.
Tiktaalik 3y ago
> the latest retailer to capitulate to rising crime and lower foot traffic. Nordstrom also bailed on the entirety of the Canadian market. Was that also due to crime in SF? It's difficult to communicate and explain the enormous secular and systemic rippling shifts in economic conditions that have followed the pandemic and the shift to work from home, particularly and extraordinarily pronounced in SF for various reasons much more so than other places in the world. A much easier story to solely blame localized crime. It is doubtful this is the real cause.
- johnny99k 3y ago
  doubtful? Have you see the crime in SF? Walgreens has to have nearly everything locked up. You are right though. It's not just the crime. It's because the current government isn't willing to prosecute criminals that are stealing from these businesses. SF is starting to resemble Detroit, which has nearly no grocery stores in the city limits because of rampant crime.
  - jeffbee 3y ago
    Whole Foods just broke ground in the Western Addition, Lucky opened a new store in the Bayview, and a whole new local grocery chain called Luke's just sprang into existence in the last year.
    - darth_avocado 3y ago
      Flagship Whole Foods on market just shut down because of safety reasons. https://abc7.com/amp/whole-foods-san-francisco-store-closing-worker-safety-concerns/13115702/ https://abc7.com/amp/whole-foods-san-francisco-store-closing...
      - ribosometronome 3y ago
        To the point argued by the OP in this comment thread, Flagship Whole Foods /claims/ they shut down because of safety reasons. It looks better for leadership if the reasons they have to shut down are outside of their control, rather than things they should have been reasonably able to predict and thus look bad on them, like that opening a high end grocery store in a largely office district during the middle of a pandemic when no one was there is going to the area lead to issues getting people there.
carabiner 3y ago
[flagged]
- retrocryptid 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - carabiner 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - retrocryptid 3y ago
      This thing that I have no personal experience with is completely like this other thing I have no personal experience with and is unlike this third thing I do have personal experience with because someone I don't know but has financial motivations to lie to me has said so. Ignorance becomes you.
retrocryptid 3y ago
This is what happens when you let tech billionaires into your city. Best to exile them to the suburbs.
bastawhiz 3y ago
Malls have been on the decline for decades. The two malls closest to me put a "no unattended minors" policy in place. When I was a teenager, you just...went to the mall. Mall management is choking off a huge source of foot traffic to avoid the hassle of telling kids to stop fucking around. The closest mall to me has lost two of its anchor stores. One of the malls near my old apartment in Chicago had a theater, an axe throwing venue...and some offices to fill some of the dozens of vacant retail locations. It's been in a downward spiral for years. Loss of visitors has led to more loss of visitors, shoplifting aside. And what happens when the "legitimate" foot traffic goes away? The shops are empty. Not just from shoppers, but from staff. I wanted to buy a dress shirt a couple weeks ago at my local Macy's. I walked around the floor for nearly 15 minutes and couldn't find a single employee. There was one at a single checkout in a back corner. And so why is it a surprise that when shoppers disappear, staff is cut, and the shoplifting rate goes up? It seems obvious to me. These big stores should have fewer locations that are smaller and more well-maintained. Spread themselves less thin and whole-ass the stores that they can actually afford to staff and secure.
- cozzyd 3y ago
  There certainly are more malls in downtown Chicago than are sustainable (900 N Michigan, Water Tower Place, Northbridge, Block 37, Roosevelt Collection). Water Tower Place probably should stop being a mall since it's probably the most bleak and it's basically across the street from the much nicer 900 N Michigan...Block 37 should put a grocery store in the basement (ok, I'm biased since that would be very convenient for me...)
notthemessiah 3y ago
Seems luxury retail is dying more so to cheaper competition from fast-fashion such as Zara, to individualized fashion online from Etsy, to hypebeast brands that seems to target younger demographics, to rising commercial real-estate rents and failure of shopping malls, to competition from delivery services, an an aging target audience (I don't know any millennials or younger who shop at Nordstrom). Retail theft is a drop in the bucket of their cash flow. Even the article mentions that "San Francisco has been in the midst of what some call a doom spiral, with office buildings and businesses still empty in the post-pandemic landscape." If you're working from home, no reason to make the commute to stop downtown at retailers. The major downtown retailers thrived in the pre-WWII age when people lived close to urban centers, white flight and suburbanization killed the department stores which were the Amazons of their age, in recent decades, this trend has been reversing as people moved into cities, but after the pandemic, if you get to work from home, there's not much to bring you into the city, especially in places like SF with skyrocketing housing prices.
- kyleee 3y ago
  I am certain they are having a hard time getting customers in the younger demographics. For instance they rebranded their rewards program to “Nordy Club” in a ham fisted attempt to be hip. Just one telling example and I am sure they wasted millions on it.
  - unforeseen9991 3y ago
    Turns out when you fuck over the younger generation economically they don't have any money left for luxury goods. Who knew?
breakingrules 3y ago
[dead]
veavo 3y ago
[flagged]
- DonHopkins 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - DongNapkins 3y ago
    [flagged]
vikramkr 3y ago
Their stock is down 33 percent over the past month and 75% over the past 5 years and this location is in a shopping mall - not exactly something that's been performing well. Therefore clearly store closures that were announced in may are entirely because of issues with the location? It's obviously a factor in the decision but I don't think it's a good idea to take a corporate executive's stated reason for shutting down stores/factories/etc as gospel. Remember a few months ago layoffs were happening almost like it was a fad? Once people started laying folks off it provided cover for everyone else? Interesting how all the retailers also announced their closures all at once.
renewiltord 3y ago
That place lost a dramatic amount of foot traffic. But all these things have been a long time coming. Many big employers were already moving out of SF when the pandemic hit. PG&E and Bank of America were already out. Citi and McKesson are both going. And all the tech companies, of course. SF is a pretty parochial city and has attempted to keep local homeowner taxes as low as possible by extracting it from employers through payroll and gross revenue taxes. But ultimately the city as it was financially shaped was only possible through the employers. Unfortunately, SF locals do not see the link between things like a gross receipts tax and Friends of the Urban Forest losing funding so we're here. But I think it's overall a good thing. I'm not pro-austerity: we should spend on things. But now SF will be forced to spend on things that return.
- sundaeofshock 3y ago
  San Francisco has no real say in setting of property taxes due to prop 13, passed way back in the 1970s.
  - renewiltord 3y ago
    That's true, but it seems irrelevant. Mind explaining the connection with what I said more directly?
bigtones 3y ago
https://archive.is/ozsZh https://archive.is/ozsZh
rndmnflnce 3y ago
Which is worse? Chicago's dramatic change or San Francisco's dramatic change?
httpz 3y ago
While malls are declining nationwide, you can't deny the general safety of the area around this specific Nordstrom is an issue. When I walked out of the rear entrance of Nordstrom towards Mission St, I immediately smelled urine and saw five homeless person laying on the ground, Nobody else was on the street. I used to walk around this area everyday to go to work before the pandemic. It was a busy area with a lot of tech workers, tourists, and conference attendees. It's not the same anymore.
klipklop 3y ago
This situation is a perfect storm of: * Even post-covid it appears they are getting less customers coming in and buying stuff. * Due to deteriorating economic conditions more young people are willing to loot the store(s) than in the past. Almost like it's some form of revenge against the current system. * California, by vote, has softened their position on looting and shoplifting. We can pretend to be sad about it, but we have all collectively "voted" in many ways to end many forms of retail shopping. You can blame it on local SF politics, but really SF is just 5-10 years ahead of other metro areas. Often what happens in California's largest cities spreads to the rest of the country over time. This means both good and bad trends. I am not going to apply morality or a political slant to it, but we should evaluate what we want our cities to be like. If city living means high prices, high rate of property crimes and hollowed out empty commercial real estate, who would want to live there?
tamimio 3y ago
Looks like the company is trying to cash out and just looking for excuses, months ago they liquidated all their assets in Canada, even stores’ shelves and furniture were on sale.

43 points by archo 3y ago

‘The dynamics of the downtown San Francisco market have changed dramatically’: Nordstrom is bailing on a flagship store that’s 35 years old : https://archive.is/ozsZh https://archive.is/ozsZh

berbec 3y ago
infinite captcha for me :(
- unforeseen9991 3y ago
  Are you on mobile? I have had this happen a few times now but no issues on desktop
  - berbec 3y ago
    firefox & windows
- archo 3y ago
  Change your DNS You may also try an archive.today mirror ie.. https://archive.ph/ozsZh https://archive.ph/ozsZh https://archive.vn/ozsZh https://archive.vn/ozsZh

lusus_naturae 3y ago

I fail to understand how this is different from organized rings of train robbers in the old, old west. Maybe we need modern day cowboys now (per my recollection, cowboys played both sides of the law)? Most likely we'll have security drones, like Boston Dynamics's robot dog. Edit to say that having people hounded by security drones sounds like a terrible state of affairs. Having businesses robbed by organized gangs does as well. I think UBI and rent control or rent subsidies with high taxes on the wealthiest is a better solution in the short-term. For the long-term, philosophies that advocate for less materialism seem preferable (no need to rob if you're happy with less money etc.).

Bostonian 3y ago
[flagged]
- kranke155 3y ago
  Train robbers were also idolised
- QuercusMax 3y ago
  Part of the issue is that articles like this one tend to conflate individual poor people shoplifting small items with these organized gangs. These gangs aren't shoplifters, and calling them such is extremely misleading.
  - hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
    > Part of the issue is that articles like this one tend to conflate individual poor people shoplifting small items with these organized gangs. I consider myself liberal, but this sentence highlights the point a lot of people have issue with: that somehow many "on the left" have rationalized theft as being OK if you're poor. That is absolutely the point at which society and the social contract breaks down, because it becomes exceedingly easy for anyone to rationalize taking something from others because "they deserve it" in some way. I'm all for providing better services and support (not to mention a better structured economy) for those who are poor. I also believe "the punishment should fit the crime", and stealing low-dollar goods should result in commensurate punishment. I'm not for allowing the poor to steal with no consequences just because they can't afford stuff.
    - Timon3 3y ago
      > I consider myself liberal, but this sentence highlights the point a lot of people have issue with: that somehow many "on the left" have rationalized theft as being OK if you're poor. That is absolutely the point at which society and the social contract breaks down, because it becomes exceedingly easy for anyone to rationalize taking something from others because "they deserve it" in some way. But what is the alternative? Let's look at a dirt-poor person who hasn't eaten in multiple days. Sure, there are places you can try to get donated items, but those are getting more and more over-run. You can beg and try to get enough together to buy something, but it's not really a good alternative either, especially since it's not guaranteed. So at what point would someone be in their right to steal food to survive? Is it never okay, meaning they'll have to starve in the worst case? Naturally these problems should be solved long before anyone comes to the place of having to steal - but that's not the world we live in. And I'm strictly talking about absolute necessities, nothing beyond that. But surely at some point a human life is worth more than a bit of money in the store owners pockets?

kernal 3y ago

Why would any company operate a store in San Francisco when there are no deterrents to shoplifting and the criminals aren't even prosecuted? Additionally, this is not isolated to San Francisco as Oakland and Los Angeles are just as bad if not worse. California reaps what it sows.

retrocryptid 3y ago
Asks someone who doesn't live in SF and accepts their news uncritically from cable outlets (and their web sites) with a vested interest in driving outrage driven online engagement. EDIT: People who are up voting this comment: NO! It's a snarky comment in opposition to the prevailing wisdom. It's intended to be downvoted. 2ND EDIT: thank you for downvoting. I can now rest easy knowing I'm a misunderstood genius amongst a sea of profane luddites. (Though truth to tell, most people here when they're not being snarky seem reasonably intelligent.)
- kernal 3y ago
  What a strange reply. You are clearly oblivious to the problems in San Francisco and Oakland. I suggest you go to YouTube to see videos of people, that live in San Francisco, pointing out all of the closed stores and businesses.
dee-bee 3y ago
Same as anywhere: write off theft and make bank off the rich people. The idea that SF is somehow unique is asinine. If i were to guess they want the public to foot the bill for cops to just shoot shoplifters.
- kernal 3y ago
  Asinine is thinking what's happening in San Francisco is the same everywhere. I suggest you visit YouTube and view the video's documenting all of the closed stores and businesses.

tedajax 3y ago

Another store lying about "crime" being the reason they're closing.

evouga 3y ago
The store may or may not be telling the truth. Either way, it's undeniable that SF has changed dramatically over the last several years, with dramatic upswing in property crime and complete unwillingness on the part of law enforcement to fight it.
- eli 3y ago
  Sure but there's been a MUCH more dramatic shift around retail stores and how Americans buy goods.
- retrocryptid 3y ago
  Good idea to watch something other than Fox News from time to time.
stevehawk 3y ago
Even if they're lying, SF seems to be in denial about the wasteland it's becoming. Everyone's got a list of things they blame, but no one seems to have a list of changes they're willing to make to correct it.
gaulish 3y ago
I think I good question we can ask, are any major brands building new stores in San Francisco? That would be a good indicator of whether or not brands see the market as too-risky or that Nordstrom is using a convenient scapegoat. I’m asking here the locals here, I haven’t been to the city in over 20 years so I haven’t the slightest idea.
- seanmcdirmid 3y ago
  Not SF, but similar problem Seattle just got a Uniglo downtown (ironically in the old Macy’s/Bon Marche building). After losing more than a few brands this year (eg Nike), having a new one pop up was notable.

Tiktaalik 3y ago

> the latest retailer to capitulate to rising crime and lower foot traffic. Nordstrom also bailed on the entirety of the Canadian market. Was that also due to crime in SF? It's difficult to communicate and explain the enormous secular and systemic rippling shifts in economic conditions that have followed the pandemic and the shift to work from home, particularly and extraordinarily pronounced in SF for various reasons much more so than other places in the world. A much easier story to solely blame localized crime. It is doubtful this is the real cause.

johnny99k 3y ago
doubtful? Have you see the crime in SF? Walgreens has to have nearly everything locked up. You are right though. It's not just the crime. It's because the current government isn't willing to prosecute criminals that are stealing from these businesses. SF is starting to resemble Detroit, which has nearly no grocery stores in the city limits because of rampant crime.
- jeffbee 3y ago
  Whole Foods just broke ground in the Western Addition, Lucky opened a new store in the Bayview, and a whole new local grocery chain called Luke's just sprang into existence in the last year.
  - darth_avocado 3y ago
    Flagship Whole Foods on market just shut down because of safety reasons. https://abc7.com/amp/whole-foods-san-francisco-store-closing-worker-safety-concerns/13115702/ https://abc7.com/amp/whole-foods-san-francisco-store-closing...
    - ribosometronome 3y ago
      To the point argued by the OP in this comment thread, Flagship Whole Foods /claims/ they shut down because of safety reasons. It looks better for leadership if the reasons they have to shut down are outside of their control, rather than things they should have been reasonably able to predict and thus look bad on them, like that opening a high end grocery store in a largely office district during the middle of a pandemic when no one was there is going to the area lead to issues getting people there.

carabiner 3y ago

[flagged]

retrocryptid 3y ago
[flagged]
- carabiner 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - retrocryptid 3y ago
    This thing that I have no personal experience with is completely like this other thing I have no personal experience with and is unlike this third thing I do have personal experience with because someone I don't know but has financial motivations to lie to me has said so. Ignorance becomes you.

retrocryptid 3y ago

This is what happens when you let tech billionaires into your city. Best to exile them to the suburbs.

bastawhiz 3y ago

Malls have been on the decline for decades. The two malls closest to me put a "no unattended minors" policy in place. When I was a teenager, you just...went to the mall. Mall management is choking off a huge source of foot traffic to avoid the hassle of telling kids to stop fucking around. The closest mall to me has lost two of its anchor stores. One of the malls near my old apartment in Chicago had a theater, an axe throwing venue...and some offices to fill some of the dozens of vacant retail locations. It's been in a downward spiral for years. Loss of visitors has led to more loss of visitors, shoplifting aside. And what happens when the "legitimate" foot traffic goes away? The shops are empty. Not just from shoppers, but from staff. I wanted to buy a dress shirt a couple weeks ago at my local Macy's. I walked around the floor for nearly 15 minutes and couldn't find a single employee. There was one at a single checkout in a back corner. And so why is it a surprise that when shoppers disappear, staff is cut, and the shoplifting rate goes up? It seems obvious to me. These big stores should have fewer locations that are smaller and more well-maintained. Spread themselves less thin and whole-ass the stores that they can actually afford to staff and secure.

cozzyd 3y ago
There certainly are more malls in downtown Chicago than are sustainable (900 N Michigan, Water Tower Place, Northbridge, Block 37, Roosevelt Collection). Water Tower Place probably should stop being a mall since it's probably the most bleak and it's basically across the street from the much nicer 900 N Michigan...Block 37 should put a grocery store in the basement (ok, I'm biased since that would be very convenient for me...)

notthemessiah 3y ago

Seems luxury retail is dying more so to cheaper competition from fast-fashion such as Zara, to individualized fashion online from Etsy, to hypebeast brands that seems to target younger demographics, to rising commercial real-estate rents and failure of shopping malls, to competition from delivery services, an an aging target audience (I don't know any millennials or younger who shop at Nordstrom). Retail theft is a drop in the bucket of their cash flow. Even the article mentions that "San Francisco has been in the midst of what some call a doom spiral, with office buildings and businesses still empty in the post-pandemic landscape." If you're working from home, no reason to make the commute to stop downtown at retailers. The major downtown retailers thrived in the pre-WWII age when people lived close to urban centers, white flight and suburbanization killed the department stores which were the Amazons of their age, in recent decades, this trend has been reversing as people moved into cities, but after the pandemic, if you get to work from home, there's not much to bring you into the city, especially in places like SF with skyrocketing housing prices.

kyleee 3y ago
I am certain they are having a hard time getting customers in the younger demographics. For instance they rebranded their rewards program to “Nordy Club” in a ham fisted attempt to be hip. Just one telling example and I am sure they wasted millions on it.
- unforeseen9991 3y ago
  Turns out when you fuck over the younger generation economically they don't have any money left for luxury goods. Who knew?

breakingrules 3y ago

[dead]

veavo 3y ago

[flagged]

DonHopkins 3y ago
[flagged]
- DongNapkins 3y ago
  [flagged]

vikramkr 3y ago

Their stock is down 33 percent over the past month and 75% over the past 5 years and this location is in a shopping mall - not exactly something that's been performing well. Therefore clearly store closures that were announced in may are entirely because of issues with the location? It's obviously a factor in the decision but I don't think it's a good idea to take a corporate executive's stated reason for shutting down stores/factories/etc as gospel. Remember a few months ago layoffs were happening almost like it was a fad? Once people started laying folks off it provided cover for everyone else? Interesting how all the retailers also announced their closures all at once.

renewiltord 3y ago

That place lost a dramatic amount of foot traffic. But all these things have been a long time coming. Many big employers were already moving out of SF when the pandemic hit. PG&E and Bank of America were already out. Citi and McKesson are both going. And all the tech companies, of course. SF is a pretty parochial city and has attempted to keep local homeowner taxes as low as possible by extracting it from employers through payroll and gross revenue taxes. But ultimately the city as it was financially shaped was only possible through the employers. Unfortunately, SF locals do not see the link between things like a gross receipts tax and Friends of the Urban Forest losing funding so we're here. But I think it's overall a good thing. I'm not pro-austerity: we should spend on things. But now SF will be forced to spend on things that return.

sundaeofshock 3y ago
San Francisco has no real say in setting of property taxes due to prop 13, passed way back in the 1970s.
- renewiltord 3y ago
  That's true, but it seems irrelevant. Mind explaining the connection with what I said more directly?

bigtones 3y ago

https://archive.is/ozsZh https://archive.is/ozsZh

rndmnflnce 3y ago

Which is worse? Chicago's dramatic change or San Francisco's dramatic change?

httpz 3y ago

While malls are declining nationwide, you can't deny the general safety of the area around this specific Nordstrom is an issue. When I walked out of the rear entrance of Nordstrom towards Mission St, I immediately smelled urine and saw five homeless person laying on the ground, Nobody else was on the street. I used to walk around this area everyday to go to work before the pandemic. It was a busy area with a lot of tech workers, tourists, and conference attendees. It's not the same anymore.

klipklop 3y ago

This situation is a perfect storm of: * Even post-covid it appears they are getting less customers coming in and buying stuff. * Due to deteriorating economic conditions more young people are willing to loot the store(s) than in the past. Almost like it's some form of revenge against the current system. * California, by vote, has softened their position on looting and shoplifting. We can pretend to be sad about it, but we have all collectively "voted" in many ways to end many forms of retail shopping. You can blame it on local SF politics, but really SF is just 5-10 years ahead of other metro areas. Often what happens in California's largest cities spreads to the rest of the country over time. This means both good and bad trends. I am not going to apply morality or a political slant to it, but we should evaluate what we want our cities to be like. If city living means high prices, high rate of property crimes and hollowed out empty commercial real estate, who would want to live there?

tamimio 3y ago

Looks like the company is trying to cash out and just looking for excuses, months ago they liquidated all their assets in Canada, even stores’ shelves and furniture were on sale.