manitoba premier earlier today: "now don't go out and buy a head of lettuce and a colour tv!". LOL
Do you agree???
yep.
I like the essentials only. I never thought it was fair for the mom-and-pop clothing store...etc, had to close but Walmart and Costco, and others made big profits...I work in schools in Ontario. Are your schools closed?
not yet. my high schooler goes half days, my elementary schooler goes full days. virtually no spread in the schools in winnipeg so far, which just shows to me it's the adults that are the real problem.
Are kids getting randomly tested, or only when they have symptoms? Because aren't kids a lot more likely to be asymptomatic, and if you only test when there's symptoms you might not show kids are transmitting it when they are.
no random testing. I hadn't heard that kids are more likely to be asymptomatic. I had heard they don't spread it as easily as adults, and that they don't yet know why.
and if the kids were transmitting it, you'd think they'd be transmitting it to their parents and they'd find out that way if the kid had it.
That's true. Are they keeping track who has it in the family then?
manitoba premier earlier today: "now don't go out and buy a head of lettuce and a colour tv!". LOL
Do you agree???
yep.
I like the essentials only. I never thought it was fair for the mom-and-pop clothing store...etc, had to close but Walmart and Costco, and others made big profits...I work in schools in Ontario. Are your schools closed?
not yet. my high schooler goes half days, my elementary schooler goes full days. virtually no spread in the schools in winnipeg so far, which just shows to me it's the adults that are the real problem.
Are kids getting randomly tested, or only when they have symptoms? Because aren't kids a lot more likely to be asymptomatic, and if you only test when there's symptoms you might not show kids are transmitting it when they are.
no random testing. I hadn't heard that kids are more likely to be asymptomatic. I had heard they don't spread it as easily as adults, and that they don't yet know why.
and if the kids were transmitting it, you'd think they'd be transmitting it to their parents and they'd find out that way if the kid had it.
That's true. Are they keeping track who has it in the family then?
who do you mean by "they"? if someone tests positive, they recommend everyone in that household and close contacts get tested. public health keeps it on record, for sure, if that's what you mean.
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
I don’t get stores only selling essentials. Does covid attach more to non essential items?
no, they just don't want anyone going to the store unless it is expressly for essentials. taking away non-essentials takes away many of the customers coming to get stuff they don't necessarily need at the moment.
cabela's worked around that restriction previously by starting to sell propane when they weren't before, because hey, everyone needs a new tent a bowie knife during a pandemic, right?
That’s why I thought the lockdown was stupid. Seemed to me like no reason behind what was and was t allowed to stay open. Costco can because 10% of their merchandise is essential, but other big store like Bass Pro and Cabalas can’t unless hey find a propane loophole. But to me I find Cabalas as essential, they sell warm outdoor clothing. That’s pretty essential in Colorado and probably even more up there. Starbucks can stay open because everyone needs their $6 500 calorie morning latte, but a hobby store 10 times the size closes. The liquor store argument is dumb. I mean, if we’re really trying to limit the number of people going places, but your liquor when you go grocery shopping at the grocery store, and for a lot less money.
There really seemed like no rhyme or reason as to what was open. But I think they should all be, just reduce capacity, have hand sanitizer, space people out, etc
Your criticism of the health concern around stopping the booze sale is what is dumb. This is a real issue that real people would suffer from - and the people around the drunks would potentially be at risk, as well. Your suggested loophole also does not work - there are states where you cannot buy booze at grocery stores.
Yes, there are some states where booze is not sold on big stores. Most do. But okay, those can be exceptions. I didn’t criticize the health concern around addicts. My point was, if you are truly trying to limit the number of people indoors and crowded spaces, why not have people buy their alcohol in a large store with more open space, where they already go to buy groceries anyway? So Instead you’re asking them to go to a second, smaller and probably more crowded store, to buy their alcohol. Too many places are considered essential. A full lockdown is really only about a 25% lockdown. It just seems contradictory to me to say “hey everyone, stay at home unless absolutely necessary, and only go out as few times as possible to as few places as possible when you absolutely have to.” Then say “well you can buy your food and alcohol together here in one stop, but why don’t you just make a separate stop to your favorite corner liquor mart instead.” It’s almost like you’re not just trying to cater to an addict’s needs, but that they are exempt from any inconvenience that the rest of us experience. In a full lockdown most places were still open unless it was a record store or nail salon (obviously I’m exaggerating, but a large number of stores were allowed to remain open). If you’re going to lock down then lock down. Don’t half-ass it so 75% of stores can find an excuse to stay open because they threw a roll of toilet paper on the shelf. And in that scenario I think a lockdown is pointless, so I would prefer just strict guidelines instead.
People will not follow guidelines and most businesses have no grounds, legally, to enforce policies in the manner which might prove them useful.
The Sacramento Sheriff came out and said, flatly, that they have no intention of supporting the restrictions CA just announced in their jurisdiction. How in the heck are the stores meant to do this?
You are pulling numbers from thin air with your "25% lockdown" and "75% of stores can stay open."
From a webinar I participated in yesterday (retail is my business, we supports thousands of locations in North America and I work on a daily basis with Retail Operations and IT Executives) the update is pretty damn bleak for the larger population of retail sellers worldwide, but specifically in the US. If a lockdown happens experts expect to lose another 400-500k retail businesses.
Also...a snapshot of what year over year numbers look like across US retail segments:
There is (as always) a lot of information to unpack in slides like these, but the point is that everyone is getting kicked with the exception of e-tailers, grocers, mass merchants/club stores, and hard goods (HD, Lowes, Dick's, stores like that).
Guess how many of those types are in your malls? Almost none. 25/75 split you posed is way off.
This is a subject I could type about for a long time -- and I also would love for there to be a way to avoid lock-downs -- but the idea that we just need to put rules in place is not a sound one. Americans will not follow rules. People are dying.
IMO, the govt needs to take drastic measures to support the people, and the businesses that are suffering, at the same time as conduct lock-downs in the hot spots.
Leaving it willy-nilly is our worst possible approach. Better to do nothing and all cram on the roller coaster to hell, together.
my 75/25 statement was a guess, I should have been clear about that. But malls? Most malls are closing or have been closed for years anyway, no one shops at malls anymore, and that has nothing to do with covid. Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today? The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there, so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having.
I still don't think my 75% guess is going to be far off. In the first lockdown streets were still crwoded, there was still traffic, when I drive by a strip mall most stores are still open from lock smiths to dry cleaners, cafes, auto parts and coffee shops. Even Sherwin Williams remained open. I guess a paint store is considered essential? And many stores that weren't essential still found a way to operate. The brew supply store had curbside pickup, you call, tell them what you want, they bring it your car and you hand them your credit card. Best Buy did the same thing. So with so many exceptions to the lockdown I just see it as pointless. You force a small portion of the community to sacrifice and potentially close their business for good for something that didnt even work the first time. The local sports store was closed because it wasn't practical to have a curb side business, but the Target next door was operating like normal because they sold toilet paper, toilet paper that was never in stock and sold out immediately mind you. So I'm just not in favor of these half-assed lock downs. Do it right or don't do it. With as many exceptions as we have it is pointless.
My high school self would be sad to see this about the malls. Malls were the center of our social life universe back then. No social media - so it was off to the mall.
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
I don’t get stores only selling essentials. Does covid attach more to non essential items?
no, they just don't want anyone going to the store unless it is expressly for essentials. taking away non-essentials takes away many of the customers coming to get stuff they don't necessarily need at the moment.
cabela's worked around that restriction previously by starting to sell propane when they weren't before, because hey, everyone needs a new tent a bowie knife during a pandemic, right?
That’s why I thought the lockdown was stupid. Seemed to me like no reason behind what was and was t allowed to stay open. Costco can because 10% of their merchandise is essential, but other big store like Bass Pro and Cabalas can’t unless hey find a propane loophole. But to me I find Cabalas as essential, they sell warm outdoor clothing. That’s pretty essential in Colorado and probably even more up there. Starbucks can stay open because everyone needs their $6 500 calorie morning latte, but a hobby store 10 times the size closes. The liquor store argument is dumb. I mean, if we’re really trying to limit the number of people going places, but your liquor when you go grocery shopping at the grocery store, and for a lot less money.
There really seemed like no rhyme or reason as to what was open. But I think they should all be, just reduce capacity, have hand sanitizer, space people out, etc
Your criticism of the health concern around stopping the booze sale is what is dumb. This is a real issue that real people would suffer from - and the people around the drunks would potentially be at risk, as well. Your suggested loophole also does not work - there are states where you cannot buy booze at grocery stores.
Yes, there are some states where booze is not sold on big stores. Most do. But okay, those can be exceptions. I didn’t criticize the health concern around addicts. My point was, if you are truly trying to limit the number of people indoors and crowded spaces, why not have people buy their alcohol in a large store with more open space, where they already go to buy groceries anyway? So Instead you’re asking them to go to a second, smaller and probably more crowded store, to buy their alcohol. Too many places are considered essential. A full lockdown is really only about a 25% lockdown. It just seems contradictory to me to say “hey everyone, stay at home unless absolutely necessary, and only go out as few times as possible to as few places as possible when you absolutely have to.” Then say “well you can buy your food and alcohol together here in one stop, but why don’t you just make a separate stop to your favorite corner liquor mart instead.” It’s almost like you’re not just trying to cater to an addict’s needs, but that they are exempt from any inconvenience that the rest of us experience. In a full lockdown most places were still open unless it was a record store or nail salon (obviously I’m exaggerating, but a large number of stores were allowed to remain open). If you’re going to lock down then lock down. Don’t half-ass it so 75% of stores can find an excuse to stay open because they threw a roll of toilet paper on the shelf. And in that scenario I think a lockdown is pointless, so I would prefer just strict guidelines instead.
People will not follow guidelines and most businesses have no grounds, legally, to enforce policies in the manner which might prove them useful.
The Sacramento Sheriff came out and said, flatly, that they have no intention of supporting the restrictions CA just announced in their jurisdiction. How in the heck are the stores meant to do this?
You are pulling numbers from thin air with your "25% lockdown" and "75% of stores can stay open."
From a webinar I participated in yesterday (retail is my business, we supports thousands of locations in North America and I work on a daily basis with Retail Operations and IT Executives) the update is pretty damn bleak for the larger population of retail sellers worldwide, but specifically in the US. If a lockdown happens experts expect to lose another 400-500k retail businesses.
Also...a snapshot of what year over year numbers look like across US retail segments:
There is (as always) a lot of information to unpack in slides like these, but the point is that everyone is getting kicked with the exception of e-tailers, grocers, mass merchants/club stores, and hard goods (HD, Lowes, Dick's, stores like that).
Guess how many of those types are in your malls? Almost none. 25/75 split you posed is way off.
This is a subject I could type about for a long time -- and I also would love for there to be a way to avoid lock-downs -- but the idea that we just need to put rules in place is not a sound one. Americans will not follow rules. People are dying.
IMO, the govt needs to take drastic measures to support the people, and the businesses that are suffering, at the same time as conduct lock-downs in the hot spots.
Leaving it willy-nilly is our worst possible approach. Better to do nothing and all cram on the roller coaster to hell, together.
my 75/25 statement was a guess, I should have been clear about that. But malls? Most malls are closing or have been closed for years anyway, no one shops at malls anymore, and that has nothing to do with covid. Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today? The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there, so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having.
I still don't think my 75% guess is going to be far off. In the first lockdown streets were still crwoded, there was still traffic, when I drive by a strip mall most stores are still open from lock smiths to dry cleaners, cafes, auto parts and coffee shops. Even Sherwin Williams remained open. I guess a paint store is considered essential? And many stores that weren't essential still found a way to operate. The brew supply store had curbside pickup, you call, tell them what you want, they bring it your car and you hand them your credit card. Best Buy did the same thing. So with so many exceptions to the lockdown I just see it as pointless. You force a small portion of the community to sacrifice and potentially close their business for good for something that didnt even work the first time. The local sports store was closed because it wasn't practical to have a curb side business, but the Target next door was operating like normal because they sold toilet paper, toilet paper that was never in stock and sold out immediately mind you. So I'm just not in favor of these half-assed lock downs. Do it right or don't do it. With as many exceptions as we have it is pointless.
My high school self would be sad to see this about the malls. Malls were the center of our social life universe back then. No social media - so it was off to the mall.
manitoba premier earlier today: "now don't go out and buy a head of lettuce and a colour tv!". LOL
Do you agree???
yep.
I like the essentials only. I never thought it was fair for the mom-and-pop clothing store...etc, had to close but Walmart and Costco, and others made big profits...I work in schools in Ontario. Are your schools closed?
not yet. my high schooler goes half days, my elementary schooler goes full days. virtually no spread in the schools in winnipeg so far, which just shows to me it's the adults that are the real problem.
Are kids getting randomly tested, or only when they have symptoms? Because aren't kids a lot more likely to be asymptomatic, and if you only test when there's symptoms you might not show kids are transmitting it when they are.
no random testing. I hadn't heard that kids are more likely to be asymptomatic. I had heard they don't spread it as easily as adults, and that they don't yet know why.
and if the kids were transmitting it, you'd think they'd be transmitting it to their parents and they'd find out that way if the kid had it.
That's true. Are they keeping track who has it in the family then?
who do you mean by "they"? if someone tests positive, they recommend everyone in that household and close contacts get tested. public health keeps it on record, for sure, if that's what you mean.
They would be your school or whoever is keeping track of in school transmissions. My school was keeping track and used that data in part to determine to go full remote last week. The number if students testing positive was very low, but they also considered community transmission and other factors. According to our superintendent, "they" are tracking it, being county health officials and passing that information to the school.
0
Options
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 30,625
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
I don’t get stores only selling essentials. Does covid attach more to non essential items?
no, they just don't want anyone going to the store unless it is expressly for essentials. taking away non-essentials takes away many of the customers coming to get stuff they don't necessarily need at the moment.
cabela's worked around that restriction previously by starting to sell propane when they weren't before, because hey, everyone needs a new tent a bowie knife during a pandemic, right?
That’s why I thought the lockdown was stupid. Seemed to me like no reason behind what was and was t allowed to stay open. Costco can because 10% of their merchandise is essential, but other big store like Bass Pro and Cabalas can’t unless hey find a propane loophole. But to me I find Cabalas as essential, they sell warm outdoor clothing. That’s pretty essential in Colorado and probably even more up there. Starbucks can stay open because everyone needs their $6 500 calorie morning latte, but a hobby store 10 times the size closes. The liquor store argument is dumb. I mean, if we’re really trying to limit the number of people going places, but your liquor when you go grocery shopping at the grocery store, and for a lot less money.
There really seemed like no rhyme or reason as to what was open. But I think they should all be, just reduce capacity, have hand sanitizer, space people out, etc
Your criticism of the health concern around stopping the booze sale is what is dumb. This is a real issue that real people would suffer from - and the people around the drunks would potentially be at risk, as well. Your suggested loophole also does not work - there are states where you cannot buy booze at grocery stores.
Yes, there are some states where booze is not sold on big stores. Most do. But okay, those can be exceptions. I didn’t criticize the health concern around addicts. My point was, if you are truly trying to limit the number of people indoors and crowded spaces, why not have people buy their alcohol in a large store with more open space, where they already go to buy groceries anyway? So Instead you’re asking them to go to a second, smaller and probably more crowded store, to buy their alcohol. Too many places are considered essential. A full lockdown is really only about a 25% lockdown. It just seems contradictory to me to say “hey everyone, stay at home unless absolutely necessary, and only go out as few times as possible to as few places as possible when you absolutely have to.” Then say “well you can buy your food and alcohol together here in one stop, but why don’t you just make a separate stop to your favorite corner liquor mart instead.” It’s almost like you’re not just trying to cater to an addict’s needs, but that they are exempt from any inconvenience that the rest of us experience. In a full lockdown most places were still open unless it was a record store or nail salon (obviously I’m exaggerating, but a large number of stores were allowed to remain open). If you’re going to lock down then lock down. Don’t half-ass it so 75% of stores can find an excuse to stay open because they threw a roll of toilet paper on the shelf. And in that scenario I think a lockdown is pointless, so I would prefer just strict guidelines instead.
People will not follow guidelines and most businesses have no grounds, legally, to enforce policies in the manner which might prove them useful.
The Sacramento Sheriff came out and said, flatly, that they have no intention of supporting the restrictions CA just announced in their jurisdiction. How in the heck are the stores meant to do this?
You are pulling numbers from thin air with your "25% lockdown" and "75% of stores can stay open."
From a webinar I participated in yesterday (retail is my business, we supports thousands of locations in North America and I work on a daily basis with Retail Operations and IT Executives) the update is pretty damn bleak for the larger population of retail sellers worldwide, but specifically in the US. If a lockdown happens experts expect to lose another 400-500k retail businesses.
Also...a snapshot of what year over year numbers look like across US retail segments:
There is (as always) a lot of information to unpack in slides like these, but the point is that everyone is getting kicked with the exception of e-tailers, grocers, mass merchants/club stores, and hard goods (HD, Lowes, Dick's, stores like that).
Guess how many of those types are in your malls? Almost none. 25/75 split you posed is way off.
This is a subject I could type about for a long time -- and I also would love for there to be a way to avoid lock-downs -- but the idea that we just need to put rules in place is not a sound one. Americans will not follow rules. People are dying.
IMO, the govt needs to take drastic measures to support the people, and the businesses that are suffering, at the same time as conduct lock-downs in the hot spots.
Leaving it willy-nilly is our worst possible approach. Better to do nothing and all cram on the roller coaster to hell, together.
my 75/25 statement was a guess, I should have been clear about that. But malls? Most malls are closing or have been closed for years anyway, no one shops at malls anymore, and that has nothing to do with covid. Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today? The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there, so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having.
I still don't think my 75% guess is going to be far off.
OK, your 75/25 was a guess.
"But malls?" -- are all of these guesses as well?
Your statements are pretty far off from factual, in most cases, and they sound like ones from Rudy G at a press conference @ the Four Seasons.
"Most malls are closing" -- no, wrong. Malls are struggling but that is due to the over-saturation of brands/store types. Any retail executive would admit that most chains have too many stores. There will likely be continued closings - but the "most" type of verbiage you use is wrong. If 25% of them close I think that would be high. That is not most. And, this is a projection over the next few years. (Although, clearly COVID is rough on Malls and Mall Based Retailers.)
"Have been closed for years anyway" - no, wrong. No reason to even explain how wrong that is. Roughly 1,000 malls in the US.
"no one shops at malls anymore" - no, wrong. Just an crazy statement. Less than 20% of all retail sales was e-commerce last year. Most studies came back with less than 15%. There are roughly 1,000 malls in the US.
"Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today" - If you look at things based on sales vs. buildings, it is a very significant percentage. If you want to just look at # of stores this is the closest thing you share to a fact in your statements. I do not know the breakout but more stores would exist outside of mall environments, I do believe that.
"The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there" - This is ridiculous. You have 1,000 stores per mile? There is a store every 5-6 feet?
"so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having" - well, your view can be your own but it is without the consideration of facts, numbers, and any broader considerations someone presenting this off the cuff type of string of statements should really have. 1,000 malls in the US. How many people employed, on an average, at a mall? I would have to check with the ICSC and I don't have our site password. Malls are a major employer and a major area for retail sales to take a dive in the presence of COVID.
I do contend that the partial lock-downs or posting of rules will not work because of people. Too many people think they are experts at things they are not -- and in most cases know next to nothing about. I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on TV, nor did I even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. My opinion is based largely on how we see people acting in the US.
BTW, my business suffered tremendously this year -- and will continue to do so until things are better. Another lock-down will cost me another tens of thousands of dollars. IMO, making rules for reasonable behavior and expecting people to follow them after what we have seen in 2020 is not the way to go. People will not follow....too selfish.
Post edited by F Me In The Brain on
The love he receives is the love that is saved
0
Options
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 30,625
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
I don’t get stores only selling essentials. Does covid attach more to non essential items?
no, they just don't want anyone going to the store unless it is expressly for essentials. taking away non-essentials takes away many of the customers coming to get stuff they don't necessarily need at the moment.
cabela's worked around that restriction previously by starting to sell propane when they weren't before, because hey, everyone needs a new tent a bowie knife during a pandemic, right?
That’s why I thought the lockdown was stupid. Seemed to me like no reason behind what was and was t allowed to stay open. Costco can because 10% of their merchandise is essential, but other big store like Bass Pro and Cabalas can’t unless hey find a propane loophole. But to me I find Cabalas as essential, they sell warm outdoor clothing. That’s pretty essential in Colorado and probably even more up there. Starbucks can stay open because everyone needs their $6 500 calorie morning latte, but a hobby store 10 times the size closes. The liquor store argument is dumb. I mean, if we’re really trying to limit the number of people going places, but your liquor when you go grocery shopping at the grocery store, and for a lot less money.
There really seemed like no rhyme or reason as to what was open. But I think they should all be, just reduce capacity, have hand sanitizer, space people out, etc
Your criticism of the health concern around stopping the booze sale is what is dumb. This is a real issue that real people would suffer from - and the people around the drunks would potentially be at risk, as well. Your suggested loophole also does not work - there are states where you cannot buy booze at grocery stores.
Yes, there are some states where booze is not sold on big stores. Most do. But okay, those can be exceptions. I didn’t criticize the health concern around addicts. My point was, if you are truly trying to limit the number of people indoors and crowded spaces, why not have people buy their alcohol in a large store with more open space, where they already go to buy groceries anyway? So Instead you’re asking them to go to a second, smaller and probably more crowded store, to buy their alcohol. Too many places are considered essential. A full lockdown is really only about a 25% lockdown. It just seems contradictory to me to say “hey everyone, stay at home unless absolutely necessary, and only go out as few times as possible to as few places as possible when you absolutely have to.” Then say “well you can buy your food and alcohol together here in one stop, but why don’t you just make a separate stop to your favorite corner liquor mart instead.” It’s almost like you’re not just trying to cater to an addict’s needs, but that they are exempt from any inconvenience that the rest of us experience. In a full lockdown most places were still open unless it was a record store or nail salon (obviously I’m exaggerating, but a large number of stores were allowed to remain open). If you’re going to lock down then lock down. Don’t half-ass it so 75% of stores can find an excuse to stay open because they threw a roll of toilet paper on the shelf. And in that scenario I think a lockdown is pointless, so I would prefer just strict guidelines instead.
People will not follow guidelines and most businesses have no grounds, legally, to enforce policies in the manner which might prove them useful.
The Sacramento Sheriff came out and said, flatly, that they have no intention of supporting the restrictions CA just announced in their jurisdiction. How in the heck are the stores meant to do this?
You are pulling numbers from thin air with your "25% lockdown" and "75% of stores can stay open."
From a webinar I participated in yesterday (retail is my business, we supports thousands of locations in North America and I work on a daily basis with Retail Operations and IT Executives) the update is pretty damn bleak for the larger population of retail sellers worldwide, but specifically in the US. If a lockdown happens experts expect to lose another 400-500k retail businesses.
Also...a snapshot of what year over year numbers look like across US retail segments:
There is (as always) a lot of information to unpack in slides like these, but the point is that everyone is getting kicked with the exception of e-tailers, grocers, mass merchants/club stores, and hard goods (HD, Lowes, Dick's, stores like that).
Guess how many of those types are in your malls? Almost none. 25/75 split you posed is way off.
This is a subject I could type about for a long time -- and I also would love for there to be a way to avoid lock-downs -- but the idea that we just need to put rules in place is not a sound one. Americans will not follow rules. People are dying.
IMO, the govt needs to take drastic measures to support the people, and the businesses that are suffering, at the same time as conduct lock-downs in the hot spots.
Leaving it willy-nilly is our worst possible approach. Better to do nothing and all cram on the roller coaster to hell, together.
my 75/25 statement was a guess, I should have been clear about that. But malls? Most malls are closing or have been closed for years anyway, no one shops at malls anymore, and that has nothing to do with covid. Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today? The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there, so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having.
I still don't think my 75% guess is going to be far off. In the first lockdown streets were still crwoded, there was still traffic, when I drive by a strip mall most stores are still open from lock smiths to dry cleaners, cafes, auto parts and coffee shops. Even Sherwin Williams remained open. I guess a paint store is considered essential? And many stores that weren't essential still found a way to operate. The brew supply store had curbside pickup, you call, tell them what you want, they bring it your car and you hand them your credit card. Best Buy did the same thing. So with so many exceptions to the lockdown I just see it as pointless. You force a small portion of the community to sacrifice and potentially close their business for good for something that didnt even work the first time. The local sports store was closed because it wasn't practical to have a curb side business, but the Target next door was operating like normal because they sold toilet paper, toilet paper that was never in stock and sold out immediately mind you. So I'm just not in favor of these half-assed lock downs. Do it right or don't do it. With as many exceptions as we have it is pointless.
My high school self would be sad to see this about the malls. Malls were the center of our social life universe back then. No social media - so it was off to the mall.
A reminder to your most capable modern self (I was going to put 30 year old self, but that would be a little much? ) that you would do well to believe half, or less, of what you read on the internet. Certainly the rants from a bunch of us on a rock band web site message board.
His statements are totally Trump-ian, absent of fact.
Malls are in a bad way - but his statements are just silly.
manitoba premier earlier today: "now don't go out and buy a head of lettuce and a colour tv!". LOL
Do you agree???
yep.
I like the essentials only. I never thought it was fair for the mom-and-pop clothing store...etc, had to close but Walmart and Costco, and others made big profits...I work in schools in Ontario. Are your schools closed?
not yet. my high schooler goes half days, my elementary schooler goes full days. virtually no spread in the schools in winnipeg so far, which just shows to me it's the adults that are the real problem.
Now are there financial support in place for the laid off workers, besides pogie...
manitoba premier earlier today: "now don't go out and buy a head of lettuce and a colour tv!". LOL
Do you agree???
yep.
I like the essentials only. I never thought it was fair for the mom-and-pop clothing store...etc, had to close but Walmart and Costco, and others made big profits...I work in schools in Ontario. Are your schools closed?
not yet. my high schooler goes half days, my elementary schooler goes full days. virtually no spread in the schools in winnipeg so far, which just shows to me it's the adults that are the real problem.
Are kids getting randomly tested, or only when they have symptoms? Because aren't kids a lot more likely to be asymptomatic, and if you only test when there's symptoms you might not show kids are transmitting it when they are.
no random testing. I hadn't heard that kids are more likely to be asymptomatic. I had heard they don't spread it as easily as adults, and that they don't yet know why.
and if the kids were transmitting it, you'd think they'd be transmitting it to their parents and they'd find out that way if the kid had it.
That's true. Are they keeping track who has it in the family then?
who do you mean by "they"? if someone tests positive, they recommend everyone in that household and close contacts get tested. public health keeps it on record, for sure, if that's what you mean.
They would be your school or whoever is keeping track of in school transmissions. My school was keeping track and used that data in part to determine to go full remote last week. The number if students testing positive was very low, but they also considered community transmission and other factors. According to our superintendent, "they" are tracking it, being county health officials and passing that information to the school.
i don't know. since there hasn't been any real spread in schools, don't know who would be tasked with keeping track. i would guess the school would probably keep track of their own but public health also would.
Flight Risk out NOW!
www.headstonesband.com
0
Options
hedonist
standing on the edge of forever Posts: 24,524
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
I don’t get stores only selling essentials. Does covid attach more to non essential items?
no, they just don't want anyone going to the store unless it is expressly for essentials. taking away non-essentials takes away many of the customers coming to get stuff they don't necessarily need at the moment.
cabela's worked around that restriction previously by starting to sell propane when they weren't before, because hey, everyone needs a new tent a bowie knife during a pandemic, right?
That’s why I thought the lockdown was stupid. Seemed to me like no reason behind what was and was t allowed to stay open. Costco can because 10% of their merchandise is essential, but other big store like Bass Pro and Cabalas can’t unless hey find a propane loophole. But to me I find Cabalas as essential, they sell warm outdoor clothing. That’s pretty essential in Colorado and probably even more up there. Starbucks can stay open because everyone needs their $6 500 calorie morning latte, but a hobby store 10 times the size closes. The liquor store argument is dumb. I mean, if we’re really trying to limit the number of people going places, but your liquor when you go grocery shopping at the grocery store, and for a lot less money.
There really seemed like no rhyme or reason as to what was open. But I think they should all be, just reduce capacity, have hand sanitizer, space people out, etc
Your criticism of the health concern around stopping the booze sale is what is dumb. This is a real issue that real people would suffer from - and the people around the drunks would potentially be at risk, as well. Your suggested loophole also does not work - there are states where you cannot buy booze at grocery stores.
Yes, there are some states where booze is not sold on big stores. Most do. But okay, those can be exceptions. I didn’t criticize the health concern around addicts. My point was, if you are truly trying to limit the number of people indoors and crowded spaces, why not have people buy their alcohol in a large store with more open space, where they already go to buy groceries anyway? So Instead you’re asking them to go to a second, smaller and probably more crowded store, to buy their alcohol. Too many places are considered essential. A full lockdown is really only about a 25% lockdown. It just seems contradictory to me to say “hey everyone, stay at home unless absolutely necessary, and only go out as few times as possible to as few places as possible when you absolutely have to.” Then say “well you can buy your food and alcohol together here in one stop, but why don’t you just make a separate stop to your favorite corner liquor mart instead.” It’s almost like you’re not just trying to cater to an addict’s needs, but that they are exempt from any inconvenience that the rest of us experience. In a full lockdown most places were still open unless it was a record store or nail salon (obviously I’m exaggerating, but a large number of stores were allowed to remain open). If you’re going to lock down then lock down. Don’t half-ass it so 75% of stores can find an excuse to stay open because they threw a roll of toilet paper on the shelf. And in that scenario I think a lockdown is pointless, so I would prefer just strict guidelines instead.
People will not follow guidelines and most businesses have no grounds, legally, to enforce policies in the manner which might prove them useful.
The Sacramento Sheriff came out and said, flatly, that they have no intention of supporting the restrictions CA just announced in their jurisdiction. How in the heck are the stores meant to do this?
You are pulling numbers from thin air with your "25% lockdown" and "75% of stores can stay open."
From a webinar I participated in yesterday (retail is my business, we supports thousands of locations in North America and I work on a daily basis with Retail Operations and IT Executives) the update is pretty damn bleak for the larger population of retail sellers worldwide, but specifically in the US. If a lockdown happens experts expect to lose another 400-500k retail businesses.
Also...a snapshot of what year over year numbers look like across US retail segments:
There is (as always) a lot of information to unpack in slides like these, but the point is that everyone is getting kicked with the exception of e-tailers, grocers, mass merchants/club stores, and hard goods (HD, Lowes, Dick's, stores like that).
Guess how many of those types are in your malls? Almost none. 25/75 split you posed is way off.
This is a subject I could type about for a long time -- and I also would love for there to be a way to avoid lock-downs -- but the idea that we just need to put rules in place is not a sound one. Americans will not follow rules. People are dying.
IMO, the govt needs to take drastic measures to support the people, and the businesses that are suffering, at the same time as conduct lock-downs in the hot spots.
Leaving it willy-nilly is our worst possible approach. Better to do nothing and all cram on the roller coaster to hell, together.
my 75/25 statement was a guess, I should have been clear about that. But malls? Most malls are closing or have been closed for years anyway, no one shops at malls anymore, and that has nothing to do with covid. Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today? The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there, so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having.
I still don't think my 75% guess is going to be far off. In the first lockdown streets were still crwoded, there was still traffic, when I drive by a strip mall most stores are still open from lock smiths to dry cleaners, cafes, auto parts and coffee shops. Even Sherwin Williams remained open. I guess a paint store is considered essential? And many stores that weren't essential still found a way to operate. The brew supply store had curbside pickup, you call, tell them what you want, they bring it your car and you hand them your credit card. Best Buy did the same thing. So with so many exceptions to the lockdown I just see it as pointless. You force a small portion of the community to sacrifice and potentially close their business for good for something that didnt even work the first time. The local sports store was closed because it wasn't practical to have a curb side business, but the Target next door was operating like normal because they sold toilet paper, toilet paper that was never in stock and sold out immediately mind you. So I'm just not in favor of these half-assed lock downs. Do it right or don't do it. With as many exceptions as we have it is pointless.
My high school self would be sad to see this about the malls. Malls were the center of our social life universe back then. No social media - so it was off to the mall.
Right? Where do kids buy their drugs these days?
Swipe it from their parents, duh.
(worked for me!)
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,725
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
That's going to put a pinch on places (if you have them) like Dollar Tree, Big Lots and Walmart that sell 90% crap in the first place. I wonder how well they will be able to enforce all those restriction?
hey Brian, reading through these posts it appears we are neighbors, I grew up in El Dorado County, walked through Main St everyday on my way home from school. I currently live in Orangevale, sadly I think El Dorado County might end up being the COVID hotspot of Northern California soon. From the attitudes of friends and family up there to the blatant disregard for the stricter measures being put in place. Even by El Dorado County standards I thought the Sheriff's response to the curfew was misguided and reckless. Read a few of those comments and you kind of know where the majority of residents stand. Glad we have someone with common sense like yourself up there. Take care and good luck!
Hey neighbor! You are one of the few people here that knows of El Dorado County (besides what I've posted) let alone to have lived here!
I'm pretty much a fish out of water here. I grew up in the Bay Area and also have lived in Sonoma County, Chico, and briefly in the San Luis Obispo area. I moved here in 1996 and hadn't really planned on staying long but kind of got stuck here. And then I went to work at The Bookery and married one of the owners, Celia. So now I'm really stuck here, lol.
It's really a shame that people here are letting their guard down. So far, our COVID numbers here have been relatively low and I think that may be giving locals unrealistic confidence and things are getting too lax. I'm 69 and have a somewhat compromised immune system, so besides my on-line book business and handling the record section at the bookstore, I have pretty much quit working at the store other than a few hours now and then doing some organizing after closing time.
I hope things are relatively safe there in Orangevale. That's a nice area. I like how it's stayed fairly green despite not being far from Sac. A couple of years ago, we went to a memorial gathering for a friend. It was held at a place on Elm St. and I was surprised at how farm-country like it was there. Very nice!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
That's going to put a pinch on places (if you have them) like Dollar Tree, Big Lots and Walmart that sell 90% crap in the first place. I wonder how well they will be able to enforce all those restriction?
hey Brian, reading through these posts it appears we are neighbors, I grew up in El Dorado County, walked through Main St everyday on my way home from school. I currently live in Orangevale, sadly I think El Dorado County might end up being the COVID hotspot of Northern California soon. From the attitudes of friends and family up there to the blatant disregard for the stricter measures being put in place. Even by El Dorado County standards I thought the Sheriff's response to the curfew was misguided and reckless. Read a few of those comments and you kind of know where the majority of residents stand. Glad we have someone with common sense like yourself up there. Take care and good luck!
Hey neighbor! You are one of the few people here that knows of El Dorado County (besides what I've posted) let alone to have lived here!
I'm pretty much a fish out of water here. I grew up in the Bay Area and also have lived in Sonoma County, Chico, and briefly in the San Luis Obispo area. I moved here in 1996 and hadn't really planned on staying long but kind of got stuck here. And then I went to work at The Bookery and married one of the owners, Celia. So now I'm really stuck here, lol.
It's really a shame that people here are letting their guard down. So far, our COVID numbers here have been relatively low and I think that may be giving locals unrealistic confidence and things are getting too lax. I'm 69 and have a somewhat compromised immune system, so besides my on-line book business and handling the record section at the bookstore, I have pretty much quit working at the store other than a few hours now and then doing some organizing after closing time.
I hope things are relatively safe there in Orangevale. That's a nice area. I like how it's stayed fairly green despite not being far from Sac. A couple of years ago, we went to a memorial gathering for a friend. It was held at a place on Elm St. and I was surprised at how farm-country like it was there. Very nice!
I've been to the Bookery a number of times, great store! I moved out of El Dorado County in '03. It's a whacky place but I still have a lot of friends and family up there. Anyway take care and maybe I'll see you at those Oakland shows in '22 or whenever they happen!
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
I don’t get stores only selling essentials. Does covid attach more to non essential items?
no, they just don't want anyone going to the store unless it is expressly for essentials. taking away non-essentials takes away many of the customers coming to get stuff they don't necessarily need at the moment.
cabela's worked around that restriction previously by starting to sell propane when they weren't before, because hey, everyone needs a new tent a bowie knife during a pandemic, right?
That’s why I thought the lockdown was stupid. Seemed to me like no reason behind what was and was t allowed to stay open. Costco can because 10% of their merchandise is essential, but other big store like Bass Pro and Cabalas can’t unless hey find a propane loophole. But to me I find Cabalas as essential, they sell warm outdoor clothing. That’s pretty essential in Colorado and probably even more up there. Starbucks can stay open because everyone needs their $6 500 calorie morning latte, but a hobby store 10 times the size closes. The liquor store argument is dumb. I mean, if we’re really trying to limit the number of people going places, but your liquor when you go grocery shopping at the grocery store, and for a lot less money.
There really seemed like no rhyme or reason as to what was open. But I think they should all be, just reduce capacity, have hand sanitizer, space people out, etc
Your criticism of the health concern around stopping the booze sale is what is dumb. This is a real issue that real people would suffer from - and the people around the drunks would potentially be at risk, as well. Your suggested loophole also does not work - there are states where you cannot buy booze at grocery stores.
Yes, there are some states where booze is not sold on big stores. Most do. But okay, those can be exceptions. I didn’t criticize the health concern around addicts. My point was, if you are truly trying to limit the number of people indoors and crowded spaces, why not have people buy their alcohol in a large store with more open space, where they already go to buy groceries anyway? So Instead you’re asking them to go to a second, smaller and probably more crowded store, to buy their alcohol. Too many places are considered essential. A full lockdown is really only about a 25% lockdown. It just seems contradictory to me to say “hey everyone, stay at home unless absolutely necessary, and only go out as few times as possible to as few places as possible when you absolutely have to.” Then say “well you can buy your food and alcohol together here in one stop, but why don’t you just make a separate stop to your favorite corner liquor mart instead.” It’s almost like you’re not just trying to cater to an addict’s needs, but that they are exempt from any inconvenience that the rest of us experience. In a full lockdown most places were still open unless it was a record store or nail salon (obviously I’m exaggerating, but a large number of stores were allowed to remain open). If you’re going to lock down then lock down. Don’t half-ass it so 75% of stores can find an excuse to stay open because they threw a roll of toilet paper on the shelf. And in that scenario I think a lockdown is pointless, so I would prefer just strict guidelines instead.
People will not follow guidelines and most businesses have no grounds, legally, to enforce policies in the manner which might prove them useful.
The Sacramento Sheriff came out and said, flatly, that they have no intention of supporting the restrictions CA just announced in their jurisdiction. How in the heck are the stores meant to do this?
You are pulling numbers from thin air with your "25% lockdown" and "75% of stores can stay open."
From a webinar I participated in yesterday (retail is my business, we supports thousands of locations in North America and I work on a daily basis with Retail Operations and IT Executives) the update is pretty damn bleak for the larger population of retail sellers worldwide, but specifically in the US. If a lockdown happens experts expect to lose another 400-500k retail businesses.
Also...a snapshot of what year over year numbers look like across US retail segments:
There is (as always) a lot of information to unpack in slides like these, but the point is that everyone is getting kicked with the exception of e-tailers, grocers, mass merchants/club stores, and hard goods (HD, Lowes, Dick's, stores like that).
Guess how many of those types are in your malls? Almost none. 25/75 split you posed is way off.
This is a subject I could type about for a long time -- and I also would love for there to be a way to avoid lock-downs -- but the idea that we just need to put rules in place is not a sound one. Americans will not follow rules. People are dying.
IMO, the govt needs to take drastic measures to support the people, and the businesses that are suffering, at the same time as conduct lock-downs in the hot spots.
Leaving it willy-nilly is our worst possible approach. Better to do nothing and all cram on the roller coaster to hell, together.
my 75/25 statement was a guess, I should have been clear about that. But malls? Most malls are closing or have been closed for years anyway, no one shops at malls anymore, and that has nothing to do with covid. Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today? The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there, so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having.
I still don't think my 75% guess is going to be far off.
OK, your 75/25 was a guess.
"But malls?" -- are all of these guesses as well?
Your statements are pretty far off from factual, in most cases, and they sound like ones from Rudy G at a press conference @ the Four Seasons.
"Most malls are closing" -- no, wrong. Malls are struggling but that is due to the over-saturation of brands/store types. Any retail executive would admit that most chains have too many stores. There will likely be continued closings - but the "most" type of verbiage you use is wrong. If 25% of them close I think that would be high. That is not most. And, this is a projection over the next few years. (Although, clearly COVID is rough on Malls and Mall Based Retailers.)
"Have been closed for years anyway" - no, wrong. No reason to even explain how wrong that is. Roughly 1,000 malls in the US.
"no one shops at malls anymore" - no, wrong. Just an crazy statement. Less than 20% of all retail sales was e-commerce last year. Most studies came back with less than 15%. There are roughly 1,000 malls in the US.
"Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today" - If you look at things based on sales vs. buildings, it is a very significant percentage. If you want to just look at # of stores this is the closest thing you share to a fact in your statements. I do not know the breakout but more stores would exist outside of mall environments, I do believe that.
"The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there" - This is ridiculous. You have 1,000 stores per mile? There is a store every 5-6 feet?
"so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having" - well, your view can be your own but it is without the consideration of facts, numbers, and any broader considerations someone presenting this off the cuff type of string of statements should really have. 1,000 malls in the US. How many people employed, on an average, at a mall? I would have to check with the ICSC and I don't have our site password. Malls are a major employer and a major area for retail sales to take a dive in the presence of COVID.
I do contend that the partial lock-downs or posting of rules will not work because of people. Too many people think they are experts at things they are not -- and in most cases know next to nothing about. I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on TV, nor did I even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. My opinion is based largely on how we see people acting in the US.
BTW, my business suffered tremendously this year -- and will continue to do so until things are better. Another lock-down will cost me another tens of thousands of dollars. IMO, making rules for reasonable behavior and expecting people to follow them after what we have seen in 2020 is not the way to go. People will not follow....too selfish.
Some of what I said was poorly written. I'm not in retail so I'll believe what you said, but the following has been my perception about malls, and things I've heard repeated by many.
Malls are struggling, are you disputing that? Stores like JC Penney had over 2000 locations in the 80s and now they are down to under 900. Others like Mervins have completely closed. So while the mall itself may be open and running, many of the locations inside are struggling and many of the staples of the mall are gone forever. Toys R Us close for good a couple years ago. The big retails stores have closed hundreds, if not thousands, of locations in the last 20 years, they are struggling.
I meant to say I have 10,000 stores that are closer than the mall, not necessarily between here and the mall. What I wrote and what I pictured in my head were not the same. So that gives me about a 10 mile radius, or 300 square miles, so there probably are 10,000 stores that are closer than the nearest mall. Actually, probably a whole lot more than that.
The big malls of the 70s and 80s with huge department stores are dying. I'm not including promenades or big outlets or even giant parking lots with major retail chains spread throughout that are not connected as my definition of a mall. But just one giant building with JC Penny on one corner and a Dillards on another, and 2 empty corners that used to be Mervins and Toys R Us and a bunch of small stores inside with stores like Hot Topic and Lids. Promenades with boutique stores and chain stores seem to be doing pretty well actually. Of all the places I've lived in the last 10 years they do better than malls, the promenade in Santa Monica is always busy, busy enough to film The People's Court there with the dude from TMZ. Downtown Colorado Springs does better with shopping than the nearby malls. And now in the Denver area, the outdoor shopping, even in bad winter months, seems to be doing better than the one giant building concept of a mall. But I don't consider those outdoor shopping areas part of a mall.
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,725
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
That's going to put a pinch on places (if you have them) like Dollar Tree, Big Lots and Walmart that sell 90% crap in the first place. I wonder how well they will be able to enforce all those restriction?
hey Brian, reading through these posts it appears we are neighbors, I grew up in El Dorado County, walked through Main St everyday on my way home from school. I currently live in Orangevale, sadly I think El Dorado County might end up being the COVID hotspot of Northern California soon. From the attitudes of friends and family up there to the blatant disregard for the stricter measures being put in place. Even by El Dorado County standards I thought the Sheriff's response to the curfew was misguided and reckless. Read a few of those comments and you kind of know where the majority of residents stand. Glad we have someone with common sense like yourself up there. Take care and good luck!
Hey neighbor! You are one of the few people here that knows of El Dorado County (besides what I've posted) let alone to have lived here!
I'm pretty much a fish out of water here. I grew up in the Bay Area and also have lived in Sonoma County, Chico, and briefly in the San Luis Obispo area. I moved here in 1996 and hadn't really planned on staying long but kind of got stuck here. And then I went to work at The Bookery and married one of the owners, Celia. So now I'm really stuck here, lol.
It's really a shame that people here are letting their guard down. So far, our COVID numbers here have been relatively low and I think that may be giving locals unrealistic confidence and things are getting too lax. I'm 69 and have a somewhat compromised immune system, so besides my on-line book business and handling the record section at the bookstore, I have pretty much quit working at the store other than a few hours now and then doing some organizing after closing time.
I hope things are relatively safe there in Orangevale. That's a nice area. I like how it's stayed fairly green despite not being far from Sac. A couple of years ago, we went to a memorial gathering for a friend. It was held at a place on Elm St. and I was surprised at how farm-country like it was there. Very nice!
I've been to the Bookery a number of times, great store! I moved out of El Dorado County in '03. It's a whacky place but I still have a lot of friends and family up there. Anyway take care and maybe I'll see you at those Oakland shows in '22 or whenever they happen!
That would be awesome! You take car as well!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
I don’t get stores only selling essentials. Does covid attach more to non essential items?
no, they just don't want anyone going to the store unless it is expressly for essentials. taking away non-essentials takes away many of the customers coming to get stuff they don't necessarily need at the moment.
cabela's worked around that restriction previously by starting to sell propane when they weren't before, because hey, everyone needs a new tent a bowie knife during a pandemic, right?
That’s why I thought the lockdown was stupid. Seemed to me like no reason behind what was and was t allowed to stay open. Costco can because 10% of their merchandise is essential, but other big store like Bass Pro and Cabalas can’t unless hey find a propane loophole. But to me I find Cabalas as essential, they sell warm outdoor clothing. That’s pretty essential in Colorado and probably even more up there. Starbucks can stay open because everyone needs their $6 500 calorie morning latte, but a hobby store 10 times the size closes. The liquor store argument is dumb. I mean, if we’re really trying to limit the number of people going places, but your liquor when you go grocery shopping at the grocery store, and for a lot less money.
There really seemed like no rhyme or reason as to what was open. But I think they should all be, just reduce capacity, have hand sanitizer, space people out, etc
Your criticism of the health concern around stopping the booze sale is what is dumb. This is a real issue that real people would suffer from - and the people around the drunks would potentially be at risk, as well. Your suggested loophole also does not work - there are states where you cannot buy booze at grocery stores.
Yes, there are some states where booze is not sold on big stores. Most do. But okay, those can be exceptions. I didn’t criticize the health concern around addicts. My point was, if you are truly trying to limit the number of people indoors and crowded spaces, why not have people buy their alcohol in a large store with more open space, where they already go to buy groceries anyway? So Instead you’re asking them to go to a second, smaller and probably more crowded store, to buy their alcohol. Too many places are considered essential. A full lockdown is really only about a 25% lockdown. It just seems contradictory to me to say “hey everyone, stay at home unless absolutely necessary, and only go out as few times as possible to as few places as possible when you absolutely have to.” Then say “well you can buy your food and alcohol together here in one stop, but why don’t you just make a separate stop to your favorite corner liquor mart instead.” It’s almost like you’re not just trying to cater to an addict’s needs, but that they are exempt from any inconvenience that the rest of us experience. In a full lockdown most places were still open unless it was a record store or nail salon (obviously I’m exaggerating, but a large number of stores were allowed to remain open). If you’re going to lock down then lock down. Don’t half-ass it so 75% of stores can find an excuse to stay open because they threw a roll of toilet paper on the shelf. And in that scenario I think a lockdown is pointless, so I would prefer just strict guidelines instead.
People will not follow guidelines and most businesses have no grounds, legally, to enforce policies in the manner which might prove them useful.
The Sacramento Sheriff came out and said, flatly, that they have no intention of supporting the restrictions CA just announced in their jurisdiction. How in the heck are the stores meant to do this?
You are pulling numbers from thin air with your "25% lockdown" and "75% of stores can stay open."
From a webinar I participated in yesterday (retail is my business, we supports thousands of locations in North America and I work on a daily basis with Retail Operations and IT Executives) the update is pretty damn bleak for the larger population of retail sellers worldwide, but specifically in the US. If a lockdown happens experts expect to lose another 400-500k retail businesses.
Also...a snapshot of what year over year numbers look like across US retail segments:
There is (as always) a lot of information to unpack in slides like these, but the point is that everyone is getting kicked with the exception of e-tailers, grocers, mass merchants/club stores, and hard goods (HD, Lowes, Dick's, stores like that).
Guess how many of those types are in your malls? Almost none. 25/75 split you posed is way off.
This is a subject I could type about for a long time -- and I also would love for there to be a way to avoid lock-downs -- but the idea that we just need to put rules in place is not a sound one. Americans will not follow rules. People are dying.
IMO, the govt needs to take drastic measures to support the people, and the businesses that are suffering, at the same time as conduct lock-downs in the hot spots.
Leaving it willy-nilly is our worst possible approach. Better to do nothing and all cram on the roller coaster to hell, together.
my 75/25 statement was a guess, I should have been clear about that. But malls? Most malls are closing or have been closed for years anyway, no one shops at malls anymore, and that has nothing to do with covid. Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today? The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there, so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having.
I still don't think my 75% guess is going to be far off. In the first lockdown streets were still crwoded, there was still traffic, when I drive by a strip mall most stores are still open from lock smiths to dry cleaners, cafes, auto parts and coffee shops. Even Sherwin Williams remained open. I guess a paint store is considered essential? And many stores that weren't essential still found a way to operate. The brew supply store had curbside pickup, you call, tell them what you want, they bring it your car and you hand them your credit card. Best Buy did the same thing. So with so many exceptions to the lockdown I just see it as pointless. You force a small portion of the community to sacrifice and potentially close their business for good for something that didnt even work the first time. The local sports store was closed because it wasn't practical to have a curb side business, but the Target next door was operating like normal because they sold toilet paper, toilet paper that was never in stock and sold out immediately mind you. So I'm just not in favor of these half-assed lock downs. Do it right or don't do it. With as many exceptions as we have it is pointless.
My high school self would be sad to see this about the malls. Malls were the center of our social life universe back then. No social media - so it was off to the mall.
Right? Where do kids buy their drugs these days?
Right. One of our local malls had an ice skating rink which was basically like a Dazed and Confused hangout on the weekends. Ah, the good old days.
0
Options
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 30,625
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
I don’t get stores only selling essentials. Does covid attach more to non essential items?
no, they just don't want anyone going to the store unless it is expressly for essentials. taking away non-essentials takes away many of the customers coming to get stuff they don't necessarily need at the moment.
cabela's worked around that restriction previously by starting to sell propane when they weren't before, because hey, everyone needs a new tent a bowie knife during a pandemic, right?
That’s why I thought the lockdown was stupid. Seemed to me like no reason behind what was and was t allowed to stay open. Costco can because 10% of their merchandise is essential, but other big store like Bass Pro and Cabalas can’t unless hey find a propane loophole. But to me I find Cabalas as essential, they sell warm outdoor clothing. That’s pretty essential in Colorado and probably even more up there. Starbucks can stay open because everyone needs their $6 500 calorie morning latte, but a hobby store 10 times the size closes. The liquor store argument is dumb. I mean, if we’re really trying to limit the number of people going places, but your liquor when you go grocery shopping at the grocery store, and for a lot less money.
There really seemed like no rhyme or reason as to what was open. But I think they should all be, just reduce capacity, have hand sanitizer, space people out, etc
Your criticism of the health concern around stopping the booze sale is what is dumb. This is a real issue that real people would suffer from - and the people around the drunks would potentially be at risk, as well. Your suggested loophole also does not work - there are states where you cannot buy booze at grocery stores.
Yes, there are some states where booze is not sold on big stores. Most do. But okay, those can be exceptions. I didn’t criticize the health concern around addicts. My point was, if you are truly trying to limit the number of people indoors and crowded spaces, why not have people buy their alcohol in a large store with more open space, where they already go to buy groceries anyway? So Instead you’re asking them to go to a second, smaller and probably more crowded store, to buy their alcohol. Too many places are considered essential. A full lockdown is really only about a 25% lockdown. It just seems contradictory to me to say “hey everyone, stay at home unless absolutely necessary, and only go out as few times as possible to as few places as possible when you absolutely have to.” Then say “well you can buy your food and alcohol together here in one stop, but why don’t you just make a separate stop to your favorite corner liquor mart instead.” It’s almost like you’re not just trying to cater to an addict’s needs, but that they are exempt from any inconvenience that the rest of us experience. In a full lockdown most places were still open unless it was a record store or nail salon (obviously I’m exaggerating, but a large number of stores were allowed to remain open). If you’re going to lock down then lock down. Don’t half-ass it so 75% of stores can find an excuse to stay open because they threw a roll of toilet paper on the shelf. And in that scenario I think a lockdown is pointless, so I would prefer just strict guidelines instead.
People will not follow guidelines and most businesses have no grounds, legally, to enforce policies in the manner which might prove them useful.
The Sacramento Sheriff came out and said, flatly, that they have no intention of supporting the restrictions CA just announced in their jurisdiction. How in the heck are the stores meant to do this?
You are pulling numbers from thin air with your "25% lockdown" and "75% of stores can stay open."
From a webinar I participated in yesterday (retail is my business, we supports thousands of locations in North America and I work on a daily basis with Retail Operations and IT Executives) the update is pretty damn bleak for the larger population of retail sellers worldwide, but specifically in the US. If a lockdown happens experts expect to lose another 400-500k retail businesses.
Also...a snapshot of what year over year numbers look like across US retail segments:
There is (as always) a lot of information to unpack in slides like these, but the point is that everyone is getting kicked with the exception of e-tailers, grocers, mass merchants/club stores, and hard goods (HD, Lowes, Dick's, stores like that).
Guess how many of those types are in your malls? Almost none. 25/75 split you posed is way off.
This is a subject I could type about for a long time -- and I also would love for there to be a way to avoid lock-downs -- but the idea that we just need to put rules in place is not a sound one. Americans will not follow rules. People are dying.
IMO, the govt needs to take drastic measures to support the people, and the businesses that are suffering, at the same time as conduct lock-downs in the hot spots.
Leaving it willy-nilly is our worst possible approach. Better to do nothing and all cram on the roller coaster to hell, together.
my 75/25 statement was a guess, I should have been clear about that. But malls? Most malls are closing or have been closed for years anyway, no one shops at malls anymore, and that has nothing to do with covid. Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today? The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there, so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having.
I still don't think my 75% guess is going to be far off.
OK, your 75/25 was a guess.
"But malls?" -- are all of these guesses as well?
Your statements are pretty far off from factual, in most cases, and they sound like ones from Rudy G at a press conference @ the Four Seasons.
"Most malls are closing" -- no, wrong. Malls are struggling but that is due to the over-saturation of brands/store types. Any retail executive would admit that most chains have too many stores. There will likely be continued closings - but the "most" type of verbiage you use is wrong. If 25% of them close I think that would be high. That is not most. And, this is a projection over the next few years. (Although, clearly COVID is rough on Malls and Mall Based Retailers.)
"Have been closed for years anyway" - no, wrong. No reason to even explain how wrong that is. Roughly 1,000 malls in the US.
"no one shops at malls anymore" - no, wrong. Just an crazy statement. Less than 20% of all retail sales was e-commerce last year. Most studies came back with less than 15%. There are roughly 1,000 malls in the US.
"Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today" - If you look at things based on sales vs. buildings, it is a very significant percentage. If you want to just look at # of stores this is the closest thing you share to a fact in your statements. I do not know the breakout but more stores would exist outside of mall environments, I do believe that.
"The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there" - This is ridiculous. You have 1,000 stores per mile? There is a store every 5-6 feet?
"so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having" - well, your view can be your own but it is without the consideration of facts, numbers, and any broader considerations someone presenting this off the cuff type of string of statements should really have. 1,000 malls in the US. How many people employed, on an average, at a mall? I would have to check with the ICSC and I don't have our site password. Malls are a major employer and a major area for retail sales to take a dive in the presence of COVID.
I do contend that the partial lock-downs or posting of rules will not work because of people. Too many people think they are experts at things they are not -- and in most cases know next to nothing about. I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on TV, nor did I even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. My opinion is based largely on how we see people acting in the US.
BTW, my business suffered tremendously this year -- and will continue to do so until things are better. Another lock-down will cost me another tens of thousands of dollars. IMO, making rules for reasonable behavior and expecting people to follow them after what we have seen in 2020 is not the way to go. People will not follow....too selfish.
Some of what I said was poorly written. I'm not in retail so I'll believe what you said, but the following has been my perception about malls, and things I've heard repeated by many.
Malls are struggling, are you disputing that? Stores like JC Penney had over 2000 locations in the 80s and now they are down to under 900. Others like Mervins have completely closed. So while the mall itself may be open and running, many of the locations inside are struggling and many of the staples of the mall are gone forever. Toys R Us close for good a couple years ago. The big retails stores have closed hundreds, if not thousands, of locations in the last 20 years, they are struggling.
I meant to say I have 10,000 stores that are closer than the mall, not necessarily between here and the mall. What I wrote and what I pictured in my head were not the same. So that gives me about a 10 mile radius, or 300 square miles, so there probably are 10,000 stores that are closer than the nearest mall. Actually, probably a whole lot more than that.
The big malls of the 70s and 80s with huge department stores are dying. I'm not including promenades or big outlets or even giant parking lots with major retail chains spread throughout that are not connected as my definition of a mall. But just one giant building with JC Penny on one corner and a Dillards on another, and 2 empty corners that used to be Mervins and Toys R Us and a bunch of small stores inside with stores like Hot Topic and Lids. Promenades with boutique stores and chain stores seem to be doing pretty well actually. Of all the places I've lived in the last 10 years they do better than malls, the promenade in Santa Monica is always busy, busy enough to film The People's Court there with the dude from TMZ. Downtown Colorado Springs does better with shopping than the nearby malls. And now in the Denver area, the outdoor shopping, even in bad winter months, seems to be doing better than the one giant building concept of a mall. But I don't consider those outdoor shopping areas part of a mall.
If we are debating facts with personal perceptions and what you have heard others say there is not much of a point in having the discussion.
There are many reasons why TrU, JC Penney, and Mervins suck(ed).
Overall the impact of COVID-19 on malls as a portion of retail in the US, is very large. It is worthy of consideration. That is a fact and an opinion. You can feel free to disagree with the first (you would be wrong) and also with the second. (My opinion and not a fact but there are so many Americans who I think are worthy of consideration.)
Neither of us want for there to have to be lock-downs. You seem to feel the general population can follow rules to combat the spread -- I feel that the general population not listening to rules is how we are in this position.
The love he receives is the love that is saved
0
Options
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 30,625
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
I don’t get stores only selling essentials. Does covid attach more to non essential items?
no, they just don't want anyone going to the store unless it is expressly for essentials. taking away non-essentials takes away many of the customers coming to get stuff they don't necessarily need at the moment.
cabela's worked around that restriction previously by starting to sell propane when they weren't before, because hey, everyone needs a new tent a bowie knife during a pandemic, right?
That’s why I thought the lockdown was stupid. Seemed to me like no reason behind what was and was t allowed to stay open. Costco can because 10% of their merchandise is essential, but other big store like Bass Pro and Cabalas can’t unless hey find a propane loophole. But to me I find Cabalas as essential, they sell warm outdoor clothing. That’s pretty essential in Colorado and probably even more up there. Starbucks can stay open because everyone needs their $6 500 calorie morning latte, but a hobby store 10 times the size closes. The liquor store argument is dumb. I mean, if we’re really trying to limit the number of people going places, but your liquor when you go grocery shopping at the grocery store, and for a lot less money.
There really seemed like no rhyme or reason as to what was open. But I think they should all be, just reduce capacity, have hand sanitizer, space people out, etc
Your criticism of the health concern around stopping the booze sale is what is dumb. This is a real issue that real people would suffer from - and the people around the drunks would potentially be at risk, as well. Your suggested loophole also does not work - there are states where you cannot buy booze at grocery stores.
Yes, there are some states where booze is not sold on big stores. Most do. But okay, those can be exceptions. I didn’t criticize the health concern around addicts. My point was, if you are truly trying to limit the number of people indoors and crowded spaces, why not have people buy their alcohol in a large store with more open space, where they already go to buy groceries anyway? So Instead you’re asking them to go to a second, smaller and probably more crowded store, to buy their alcohol. Too many places are considered essential. A full lockdown is really only about a 25% lockdown. It just seems contradictory to me to say “hey everyone, stay at home unless absolutely necessary, and only go out as few times as possible to as few places as possible when you absolutely have to.” Then say “well you can buy your food and alcohol together here in one stop, but why don’t you just make a separate stop to your favorite corner liquor mart instead.” It’s almost like you’re not just trying to cater to an addict’s needs, but that they are exempt from any inconvenience that the rest of us experience. In a full lockdown most places were still open unless it was a record store or nail salon (obviously I’m exaggerating, but a large number of stores were allowed to remain open). If you’re going to lock down then lock down. Don’t half-ass it so 75% of stores can find an excuse to stay open because they threw a roll of toilet paper on the shelf. And in that scenario I think a lockdown is pointless, so I would prefer just strict guidelines instead.
People will not follow guidelines and most businesses have no grounds, legally, to enforce policies in the manner which might prove them useful.
The Sacramento Sheriff came out and said, flatly, that they have no intention of supporting the restrictions CA just announced in their jurisdiction. How in the heck are the stores meant to do this?
You are pulling numbers from thin air with your "25% lockdown" and "75% of stores can stay open."
From a webinar I participated in yesterday (retail is my business, we supports thousands of locations in North America and I work on a daily basis with Retail Operations and IT Executives) the update is pretty damn bleak for the larger population of retail sellers worldwide, but specifically in the US. If a lockdown happens experts expect to lose another 400-500k retail businesses.
Also...a snapshot of what year over year numbers look like across US retail segments:
There is (as always) a lot of information to unpack in slides like these, but the point is that everyone is getting kicked with the exception of e-tailers, grocers, mass merchants/club stores, and hard goods (HD, Lowes, Dick's, stores like that).
Guess how many of those types are in your malls? Almost none. 25/75 split you posed is way off.
This is a subject I could type about for a long time -- and I also would love for there to be a way to avoid lock-downs -- but the idea that we just need to put rules in place is not a sound one. Americans will not follow rules. People are dying.
IMO, the govt needs to take drastic measures to support the people, and the businesses that are suffering, at the same time as conduct lock-downs in the hot spots.
Leaving it willy-nilly is our worst possible approach. Better to do nothing and all cram on the roller coaster to hell, together.
my 75/25 statement was a guess, I should have been clear about that. But malls? Most malls are closing or have been closed for years anyway, no one shops at malls anymore, and that has nothing to do with covid. Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today? The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there, so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having.
I still don't think my 75% guess is going to be far off. In the first lockdown streets were still crwoded, there was still traffic, when I drive by a strip mall most stores are still open from lock smiths to dry cleaners, cafes, auto parts and coffee shops. Even Sherwin Williams remained open. I guess a paint store is considered essential? And many stores that weren't essential still found a way to operate. The brew supply store had curbside pickup, you call, tell them what you want, they bring it your car and you hand them your credit card. Best Buy did the same thing. So with so many exceptions to the lockdown I just see it as pointless. You force a small portion of the community to sacrifice and potentially close their business for good for something that didnt even work the first time. The local sports store was closed because it wasn't practical to have a curb side business, but the Target next door was operating like normal because they sold toilet paper, toilet paper that was never in stock and sold out immediately mind you. So I'm just not in favor of these half-assed lock downs. Do it right or don't do it. With as many exceptions as we have it is pointless.
My high school self would be sad to see this about the malls. Malls were the center of our social life universe back then. No social media - so it was off to the mall.
Right? Where do kids buy their drugs these days?
Right. One of our local malls had an ice skating rink which was basically like a Dazed and Confused hangout on the weekends. Ah, the good old days.
When it was still somewhat safe to be an idiot kid. Ah, the good old days. I miss them as well.
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
I don’t get stores only selling essentials. Does covid attach more to non essential items?
no, they just don't want anyone going to the store unless it is expressly for essentials. taking away non-essentials takes away many of the customers coming to get stuff they don't necessarily need at the moment.
cabela's worked around that restriction previously by starting to sell propane when they weren't before, because hey, everyone needs a new tent a bowie knife during a pandemic, right?
That’s why I thought the lockdown was stupid. Seemed to me like no reason behind what was and was t allowed to stay open. Costco can because 10% of their merchandise is essential, but other big store like Bass Pro and Cabalas can’t unless hey find a propane loophole. But to me I find Cabalas as essential, they sell warm outdoor clothing. That’s pretty essential in Colorado and probably even more up there. Starbucks can stay open because everyone needs their $6 500 calorie morning latte, but a hobby store 10 times the size closes. The liquor store argument is dumb. I mean, if we’re really trying to limit the number of people going places, but your liquor when you go grocery shopping at the grocery store, and for a lot less money.
There really seemed like no rhyme or reason as to what was open. But I think they should all be, just reduce capacity, have hand sanitizer, space people out, etc
Your criticism of the health concern around stopping the booze sale is what is dumb. This is a real issue that real people would suffer from - and the people around the drunks would potentially be at risk, as well. Your suggested loophole also does not work - there are states where you cannot buy booze at grocery stores.
Yes, there are some states where booze is not sold on big stores. Most do. But okay, those can be exceptions. I didn’t criticize the health concern around addicts. My point was, if you are truly trying to limit the number of people indoors and crowded spaces, why not have people buy their alcohol in a large store with more open space, where they already go to buy groceries anyway? So Instead you’re asking them to go to a second, smaller and probably more crowded store, to buy their alcohol. Too many places are considered essential. A full lockdown is really only about a 25% lockdown. It just seems contradictory to me to say “hey everyone, stay at home unless absolutely necessary, and only go out as few times as possible to as few places as possible when you absolutely have to.” Then say “well you can buy your food and alcohol together here in one stop, but why don’t you just make a separate stop to your favorite corner liquor mart instead.” It’s almost like you’re not just trying to cater to an addict’s needs, but that they are exempt from any inconvenience that the rest of us experience. In a full lockdown most places were still open unless it was a record store or nail salon (obviously I’m exaggerating, but a large number of stores were allowed to remain open). If you’re going to lock down then lock down. Don’t half-ass it so 75% of stores can find an excuse to stay open because they threw a roll of toilet paper on the shelf. And in that scenario I think a lockdown is pointless, so I would prefer just strict guidelines instead.
People will not follow guidelines and most businesses have no grounds, legally, to enforce policies in the manner which might prove them useful.
The Sacramento Sheriff came out and said, flatly, that they have no intention of supporting the restrictions CA just announced in their jurisdiction. How in the heck are the stores meant to do this?
You are pulling numbers from thin air with your "25% lockdown" and "75% of stores can stay open."
From a webinar I participated in yesterday (retail is my business, we supports thousands of locations in North America and I work on a daily basis with Retail Operations and IT Executives) the update is pretty damn bleak for the larger population of retail sellers worldwide, but specifically in the US. If a lockdown happens experts expect to lose another 400-500k retail businesses.
Also...a snapshot of what year over year numbers look like across US retail segments:
There is (as always) a lot of information to unpack in slides like these, but the point is that everyone is getting kicked with the exception of e-tailers, grocers, mass merchants/club stores, and hard goods (HD, Lowes, Dick's, stores like that).
Guess how many of those types are in your malls? Almost none. 25/75 split you posed is way off.
This is a subject I could type about for a long time -- and I also would love for there to be a way to avoid lock-downs -- but the idea that we just need to put rules in place is not a sound one. Americans will not follow rules. People are dying.
IMO, the govt needs to take drastic measures to support the people, and the businesses that are suffering, at the same time as conduct lock-downs in the hot spots.
Leaving it willy-nilly is our worst possible approach. Better to do nothing and all cram on the roller coaster to hell, together.
my 75/25 statement was a guess, I should have been clear about that. But malls? Most malls are closing or have been closed for years anyway, no one shops at malls anymore, and that has nothing to do with covid. Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today? The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there, so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having.
I still don't think my 75% guess is going to be far off.
OK, your 75/25 was a guess.
"But malls?" -- are all of these guesses as well?
Your statements are pretty far off from factual, in most cases, and they sound like ones from Rudy G at a press conference @ the Four Seasons.
"Most malls are closing" -- no, wrong. Malls are struggling but that is due to the over-saturation of brands/store types. Any retail executive would admit that most chains have too many stores. There will likely be continued closings - but the "most" type of verbiage you use is wrong. If 25% of them close I think that would be high. That is not most. And, this is a projection over the next few years. (Although, clearly COVID is rough on Malls and Mall Based Retailers.)
"Have been closed for years anyway" - no, wrong. No reason to even explain how wrong that is. Roughly 1,000 malls in the US.
"no one shops at malls anymore" - no, wrong. Just an crazy statement. Less than 20% of all retail sales was e-commerce last year. Most studies came back with less than 15%. There are roughly 1,000 malls in the US.
"Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today" - If you look at things based on sales vs. buildings, it is a very significant percentage. If you want to just look at # of stores this is the closest thing you share to a fact in your statements. I do not know the breakout but more stores would exist outside of mall environments, I do believe that.
"The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there" - This is ridiculous. You have 1,000 stores per mile? There is a store every 5-6 feet?
"so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having" - well, your view can be your own but it is without the consideration of facts, numbers, and any broader considerations someone presenting this off the cuff type of string of statements should really have. 1,000 malls in the US. How many people employed, on an average, at a mall? I would have to check with the ICSC and I don't have our site password. Malls are a major employer and a major area for retail sales to take a dive in the presence of COVID.
I do contend that the partial lock-downs or posting of rules will not work because of people. Too many people think they are experts at things they are not -- and in most cases know next to nothing about. I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on TV, nor did I even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. My opinion is based largely on how we see people acting in the US.
BTW, my business suffered tremendously this year -- and will continue to do so until things are better. Another lock-down will cost me another tens of thousands of dollars. IMO, making rules for reasonable behavior and expecting people to follow them after what we have seen in 2020 is not the way to go. People will not follow....too selfish.
Some of what I said was poorly written. I'm not in retail so I'll believe what you said, but the following has been my perception about malls, and things I've heard repeated by many.
Malls are struggling, are you disputing that? Stores like JC Penney had over 2000 locations in the 80s and now they are down to under 900. Others like Mervins have completely closed. So while the mall itself may be open and running, many of the locations inside are struggling and many of the staples of the mall are gone forever. Toys R Us close for good a couple years ago. The big retails stores have closed hundreds, if not thousands, of locations in the last 20 years, they are struggling.
I meant to say I have 10,000 stores that are closer than the mall, not necessarily between here and the mall. What I wrote and what I pictured in my head were not the same. So that gives me about a 10 mile radius, or 300 square miles, so there probably are 10,000 stores that are closer than the nearest mall. Actually, probably a whole lot more than that.
The big malls of the 70s and 80s with huge department stores are dying. I'm not including promenades or big outlets or even giant parking lots with major retail chains spread throughout that are not connected as my definition of a mall. But just one giant building with JC Penny on one corner and a Dillards on another, and 2 empty corners that used to be Mervins and Toys R Us and a bunch of small stores inside with stores like Hot Topic and Lids. Promenades with boutique stores and chain stores seem to be doing pretty well actually. Of all the places I've lived in the last 10 years they do better than malls, the promenade in Santa Monica is always busy, busy enough to film The People's Court there with the dude from TMZ. Downtown Colorado Springs does better with shopping than the nearby malls. And now in the Denver area, the outdoor shopping, even in bad winter months, seems to be doing better than the one giant building concept of a mall. But I don't consider those outdoor shopping areas part of a mall.
What sort of capitalist hellscape do you live in?
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
new crazy restrictions in manitoba effective tomorrow. no one allowed in your house if they don't live there, with some exceptions (health care, child care, etc). stores only allowed to sell essentials. all other items are to be removed from shelves by saturday open. no outdoor gatherings of more than 5. ticket of $298 for not wearing a mask inside.
I don’t get stores only selling essentials. Does covid attach more to non essential items?
no, they just don't want anyone going to the store unless it is expressly for essentials. taking away non-essentials takes away many of the customers coming to get stuff they don't necessarily need at the moment.
cabela's worked around that restriction previously by starting to sell propane when they weren't before, because hey, everyone needs a new tent a bowie knife during a pandemic, right?
That’s why I thought the lockdown was stupid. Seemed to me like no reason behind what was and was t allowed to stay open. Costco can because 10% of their merchandise is essential, but other big store like Bass Pro and Cabalas can’t unless hey find a propane loophole. But to me I find Cabalas as essential, they sell warm outdoor clothing. That’s pretty essential in Colorado and probably even more up there. Starbucks can stay open because everyone needs their $6 500 calorie morning latte, but a hobby store 10 times the size closes. The liquor store argument is dumb. I mean, if we’re really trying to limit the number of people going places, but your liquor when you go grocery shopping at the grocery store, and for a lot less money.
There really seemed like no rhyme or reason as to what was open. But I think they should all be, just reduce capacity, have hand sanitizer, space people out, etc
Your criticism of the health concern around stopping the booze sale is what is dumb. This is a real issue that real people would suffer from - and the people around the drunks would potentially be at risk, as well. Your suggested loophole also does not work - there are states where you cannot buy booze at grocery stores.
Yes, there are some states where booze is not sold on big stores. Most do. But okay, those can be exceptions. I didn’t criticize the health concern around addicts. My point was, if you are truly trying to limit the number of people indoors and crowded spaces, why not have people buy their alcohol in a large store with more open space, where they already go to buy groceries anyway? So Instead you’re asking them to go to a second, smaller and probably more crowded store, to buy their alcohol. Too many places are considered essential. A full lockdown is really only about a 25% lockdown. It just seems contradictory to me to say “hey everyone, stay at home unless absolutely necessary, and only go out as few times as possible to as few places as possible when you absolutely have to.” Then say “well you can buy your food and alcohol together here in one stop, but why don’t you just make a separate stop to your favorite corner liquor mart instead.” It’s almost like you’re not just trying to cater to an addict’s needs, but that they are exempt from any inconvenience that the rest of us experience. In a full lockdown most places were still open unless it was a record store or nail salon (obviously I’m exaggerating, but a large number of stores were allowed to remain open). If you’re going to lock down then lock down. Don’t half-ass it so 75% of stores can find an excuse to stay open because they threw a roll of toilet paper on the shelf. And in that scenario I think a lockdown is pointless, so I would prefer just strict guidelines instead.
People will not follow guidelines and most businesses have no grounds, legally, to enforce policies in the manner which might prove them useful.
The Sacramento Sheriff came out and said, flatly, that they have no intention of supporting the restrictions CA just announced in their jurisdiction. How in the heck are the stores meant to do this?
You are pulling numbers from thin air with your "25% lockdown" and "75% of stores can stay open."
From a webinar I participated in yesterday (retail is my business, we supports thousands of locations in North America and I work on a daily basis with Retail Operations and IT Executives) the update is pretty damn bleak for the larger population of retail sellers worldwide, but specifically in the US. If a lockdown happens experts expect to lose another 400-500k retail businesses.
Also...a snapshot of what year over year numbers look like across US retail segments:
There is (as always) a lot of information to unpack in slides like these, but the point is that everyone is getting kicked with the exception of e-tailers, grocers, mass merchants/club stores, and hard goods (HD, Lowes, Dick's, stores like that).
Guess how many of those types are in your malls? Almost none. 25/75 split you posed is way off.
This is a subject I could type about for a long time -- and I also would love for there to be a way to avoid lock-downs -- but the idea that we just need to put rules in place is not a sound one. Americans will not follow rules. People are dying.
IMO, the govt needs to take drastic measures to support the people, and the businesses that are suffering, at the same time as conduct lock-downs in the hot spots.
Leaving it willy-nilly is our worst possible approach. Better to do nothing and all cram on the roller coaster to hell, together.
my 75/25 statement was a guess, I should have been clear about that. But malls? Most malls are closing or have been closed for years anyway, no one shops at malls anymore, and that has nothing to do with covid. Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today? The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there, so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having.
I still don't think my 75% guess is going to be far off.
OK, your 75/25 was a guess.
"But malls?" -- are all of these guesses as well?
Your statements are pretty far off from factual, in most cases, and they sound like ones from Rudy G at a press conference @ the Four Seasons.
"Most malls are closing" -- no, wrong. Malls are struggling but that is due to the over-saturation of brands/store types. Any retail executive would admit that most chains have too many stores. There will likely be continued closings - but the "most" type of verbiage you use is wrong. If 25% of them close I think that would be high. That is not most. And, this is a projection over the next few years. (Although, clearly COVID is rough on Malls and Mall Based Retailers.)
"Have been closed for years anyway" - no, wrong. No reason to even explain how wrong that is. Roughly 1,000 malls in the US.
"no one shops at malls anymore" - no, wrong. Just an crazy statement. Less than 20% of all retail sales was e-commerce last year. Most studies came back with less than 15%. There are roughly 1,000 malls in the US.
"Aren't mall retail stores a very small portion of stores today" - If you look at things based on sales vs. buildings, it is a very significant percentage. If you want to just look at # of stores this is the closest thing you share to a fact in your statements. I do not know the breakout but more stores would exist outside of mall environments, I do believe that.
"The closest mall to my house is about 10 miles away and there's probably 10,000 stores between here and there" - This is ridiculous. You have 1,000 stores per mile? There is a store every 5-6 feet?
"so I wouldn't put much consideration into how malls are doing in terms of the impact covid is having" - well, your view can be your own but it is without the consideration of facts, numbers, and any broader considerations someone presenting this off the cuff type of string of statements should really have. 1,000 malls in the US. How many people employed, on an average, at a mall? I would have to check with the ICSC and I don't have our site password. Malls are a major employer and a major area for retail sales to take a dive in the presence of COVID.
I do contend that the partial lock-downs or posting of rules will not work because of people. Too many people think they are experts at things they are not -- and in most cases know next to nothing about. I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on TV, nor did I even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. My opinion is based largely on how we see people acting in the US.
BTW, my business suffered tremendously this year -- and will continue to do so until things are better. Another lock-down will cost me another tens of thousands of dollars. IMO, making rules for reasonable behavior and expecting people to follow them after what we have seen in 2020 is not the way to go. People will not follow....too selfish.
Some of what I said was poorly written. I'm not in retail so I'll believe what you said, but the following has been my perception about malls, and things I've heard repeated by many.
Malls are struggling, are you disputing that? Stores like JC Penney had over 2000 locations in the 80s and now they are down to under 900. Others like Mervins have completely closed. So while the mall itself may be open and running, many of the locations inside are struggling and many of the staples of the mall are gone forever. Toys R Us close for good a couple years ago. The big retails stores have closed hundreds, if not thousands, of locations in the last 20 years, they are struggling.
I meant to say I have 10,000 stores that are closer than the mall, not necessarily between here and the mall. What I wrote and what I pictured in my head were not the same. So that gives me about a 10 mile radius, or 300 square miles, so there probably are 10,000 stores that are closer than the nearest mall. Actually, probably a whole lot more than that.
The big malls of the 70s and 80s with huge department stores are dying. I'm not including promenades or big outlets or even giant parking lots with major retail chains spread throughout that are not connected as my definition of a mall. But just one giant building with JC Penny on one corner and a Dillards on another, and 2 empty corners that used to be Mervins and Toys R Us and a bunch of small stores inside with stores like Hot Topic and Lids. Promenades with boutique stores and chain stores seem to be doing pretty well actually. Of all the places I've lived in the last 10 years they do better than malls, the promenade in Santa Monica is always busy, busy enough to film The People's Court there with the dude from TMZ. Downtown Colorado Springs does better with shopping than the nearby malls. And now in the Denver area, the outdoor shopping, even in bad winter months, seems to be doing better than the one giant building concept of a mall. But I don't consider those outdoor shopping areas part of a mall.
Before I begin, I'd like to repeat what I said the last time I re-entered this discussion: I am not here to debate the merits of in-person or online learning. Everyone is doing the best they can with what they've been given. Personally, I don't find any use in getting angry about things I can't control, and I have faith that our kids will recover from this temporary situation. That's just me. Regardless of your perception, I have a tremendous amount of empathy for all the families who are struggling with online learning. But I'm not here to rehash all that. I'm here again to counter the myth that it has been "proven" the virus doesn't spread in schools. It's just one of those stories that took off after one study of about 1000 kids in daycare centers back in April. The real fact is that we still do not know. The data right now does not prove anything.
From the World Health Organization: "Considering that many countries are starting to slowly lift restrictions on activities, the longer-term effects of keeping schools open on community transmission are yet to be evaluated. Some modelling studies suggest that school re-opening might have a small effect on wider transmission in the community, but this is not well understood. Further studies are underway on the role of children in transmission in and outside of educational settings. WHO is collaborating with scientists around the world to develop protocols that countries can use to study COVID-19 transmission in educational institutions."
From EdWeek: "More than 70,000 new cases of COVID-19 were identified among U.S. children in the last week of August and first week of September, as schools began to reopen. But there was no systematic way for education leaders to know whether sick children or their ill adult peers ended up on campus—or for district leaders to get a handle on when to close schools to curb an outbreak . . . Nationwide, fewer than half of states collect and provide (or are preparing to provide) any public data on COVID-19 infections related to schools." From Politico: "The data on how coronavirus is spreading at schools and colleges is inconsistent, erratic — and sometimes purposely kept out of the public’s reach. . . . Federal rules don’t specifically require tracking or reporting the numbers by school or college, despite pressure from President Donald Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos to open schools and colleges for in-person classes. The result is a distorted picture of how and where the virus may be spreading, not just for parents, teachers, students and professors, but the cities and towns where campuses are located. . . . The data about cases and testing in education settings is crucial to determining whether students are to blame if there is a sudden rise in the broader community. Researchers have found that kids infected with the virus are more likely than adults not to display symptoms and can still transmit the disease. If those children aren’t tested, they could spread the virus at home to older, more vulnerable relatives. If local officials don’t track what’s happening in schools, they may miss the seeding of a much more dangerous outbreak in the neighborhood. 'We’re going to have thousands and thousands of local experiences, which will not be comparable, and I’m afraid we’re going to have a lot of anecdotes and no useful data,” said Irwin Redlener, director of the Pandemic Resource and Response Initiative at Columbia University.'"
Emailed the superintendent today that I used to work with. Here’s a snippet of what he sent back
“Today has sucked. All I do anymore is quarantine staff or students and write letters to the community to inform them.”
So I guess where I live our superintendents must be doing a lot
Yeah same here. We have 12 schools in our district and it is one or two cases here and there. Individual classes have been quarantined but so far no schools have shut down. Thanksgiving is gonna be the real test.
I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
0
Options
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 30,625
So they started classes in person this week for the first time since March. They just announced that next week will be the last of in school for 2020. Full remote again starting on the 30th.
I'm sure some parents are going to go on the warpath. Wouldn't want to be the administration folks here.
So they started classes in person this week for the first time since March. They just announced that next week will be the last of in school for 2020. Full remote again starting on the 30th.
I'm sure some parents are going to go on the warpath. Wouldn't want to be the administration folks here.
So they started classes in person this week for the first time since March. They just announced that next week will be the last of in school for 2020. Full remote again starting on the 30th.
I'm sure some parents are going to go on the warpath. Wouldn't want to be the administration folks here.
God that sucks. Why even start them up?
Yeah, right? They announced they had 36 next cases in kids and then out them in. A week later they announce they are out.
Comments
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
(worked for me!)
I'm not in retail so I'll believe what you said, but the following has been my perception about malls, and things I've heard repeated by many.
Malls are struggling, are you disputing that? Stores like JC Penney had over 2000 locations in the 80s and now they are down to under 900. Others like Mervins have completely closed. So while the mall itself may be open and running, many of the locations inside are struggling and many of the staples of the mall are gone forever. Toys R Us close for good a couple years ago. The big retails stores have closed hundreds, if not thousands, of locations in the last 20 years, they are struggling.
I meant to say I have 10,000 stores that are closer than the mall, not necessarily between here and the mall. What I wrote and what I pictured in my head were not the same. So that gives me about a 10 mile radius, or 300 square miles, so there probably are 10,000 stores that are closer than the nearest mall. Actually, probably a whole lot more than that.
The big malls of the 70s and 80s with huge department stores are dying. I'm not including promenades or big outlets or even giant parking lots with major retail chains spread throughout that are not connected as my definition of a mall. But just one giant building with JC Penny on one corner and a Dillards on another, and 2 empty corners that used to be Mervins and Toys R Us and a bunch of small stores inside with stores like Hot Topic and Lids. Promenades with boutique stores and chain stores seem to be doing pretty well actually. Of all the places I've lived in the last 10 years they do better than malls, the promenade in Santa Monica is always busy, busy enough to film The People's Court there with the dude from TMZ. Downtown Colorado Springs does better with shopping than the nearby malls. And now in the Denver area, the outdoor shopping, even in bad winter months, seems to be doing better than the one giant building concept of a mall. But I don't consider those outdoor shopping areas part of a mall.
That would be awesome! You take car as well!
www.headstonesband.com
From the World Health Organization: "Considering that many countries are starting to slowly lift restrictions on activities, the longer-term effects of keeping schools open on community transmission are yet to be evaluated. Some modelling studies suggest that school re-opening might have a small effect on wider transmission in the community, but this is not well understood. Further studies are underway on the role of children in transmission in and outside of educational settings. WHO is collaborating with scientists around the world to develop protocols that countries can use to study COVID-19 transmission in educational institutions."
From EdWeek: "More than 70,000 new cases of COVID-19 were identified among U.S. children in the last week of August and first week of September, as schools began to reopen. But there was no systematic way for education leaders to know whether sick children or their ill adult peers ended up on campus—or for district leaders to get a handle on when to close schools to curb an outbreak . . . Nationwide, fewer than half of states collect and provide (or are preparing to provide) any public data on COVID-19 infections related to schools."
From Politico: "The data on how coronavirus is spreading at schools and colleges is inconsistent, erratic — and sometimes purposely kept out of the public’s reach. . . . Federal rules don’t specifically require tracking or reporting the numbers by school or college, despite pressure from President Donald Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos to open schools and colleges for in-person classes. The result is a distorted picture of how and where the virus may be spreading, not just for parents, teachers, students and professors, but the cities and towns where campuses are located. . . . The data about cases and testing in education settings is crucial to determining whether students are to blame if there is a sudden rise in the broader community. Researchers have found that kids infected with the virus are more likely than adults not to display symptoms and can still transmit the disease. If those children aren’t tested, they could spread the virus at home to older, more vulnerable relatives. If local officials don’t track what’s happening in schools, they may miss the seeding of a much more dangerous outbreak in the neighborhood. 'We’re going to have thousands and thousands of local experiences, which will not be comparable, and I’m afraid we’re going to have a lot of anecdotes and no useful data,” said Irwin Redlener, director of the Pandemic Resource and Response Initiative at Columbia University.'"
www.headstonesband.com
“Today has sucked. All I do anymore is quarantine staff or students and write letters to the community to inform them.”
So I guess where I live our superintendents must be doing a lot
I'm sure some parents are going to go on the warpath. Wouldn't want to be the administration folks here.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Author of the above founded the website below:
https://explaincovid.org/
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
A week later they announce they are out.