World markets are tanking

[Auburn85 432]

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/17/jc-penney-says-which-stores-it-will-close.html

 

 

Quote

 

These are the 138 JC Penney stores that are about to close

Your local JC Penney may be on the chopping block  9 Hours Ago | 00:47

J.C. Penney has released the list of 138 stores it plans to close in an effort to cut costs and grow sales at its strongest locations.

The release comes a few weeks after Penney's said it would close up to 140 stores this year, after similar decisions from Macy's andSears. Between the companies' four biggest chains, which include Sears' Kmart brand, more than 300 big-box stores will go dark this year alone.

The closures highlight the pressures on traditional department stores, which are losing market share to off-price competitors andAmazon. They also underscore the deteriorating economics at lower-quality shopping centers, whose risk of failure rises when an anchor tenant exits.

 

"We believe closing stores will allow us to adjust our business to effectively compete against the growing threat of online retailers," J.C. Penney CEO Marvin Ellison said in a statement in February.

The company said at that time that most of its closures would occur in the second quarter. Liquidations will start April 17, it said Friday.

Penney's expects to save roughly $200 million a year by exiting these locations, which contributed less than 5 percent of its annual sales. It plans to invest in its best stores and digital operations while whittling down $4.3 billion in long-term debt.

Roughly 5,000 jobs will be affected by the closures, Penney's said Friday. At the time of its initial announcement, the company said it would provide some 6,000 employees with a "voluntary early retirement program," depending on their age and tenure. Eligible employees have until March 31 to decide whether they will accept the package, a spokeswoman said.

In addition to that offer, Penney's said Friday that it is trying to relocate certain leaders and will provide outplacement support services for eligible workers.

The moves will result in a pretax charge of roughly $225 million in the first half of fiscal 2017.

In addition to its store closures, Penney's is shutting down one supply chain facility in Lakeland, Florida, and relocating another in Buena Park, California.

Wall Street is already speculating that more closures could be ahead. At a recent meeting with analysts in New York City, Penney's said it is testing the rollout of Sephora beauty shops and home appliances in its smaller stores. Those categories have been fueling sales growth at the company's bigger locations.

Cowen and Co. analyst Oliver Chen warned if the tests are not successful, Penney's may need to close additional stores in the future.

More closures are already expected at Macy's. The chain has so far announced just 68 of the 100 locations it plans to exit, and said last month that the remainder of those stores will go dark "over the next few years."

List of JC Penney upcoming store closures

Mall/Shopping Center	City	State
Auburn Mall	Auburn	AL
Tannehill Promenade	Bessemer	AL
Gadsden Mall	Gadsden	AL
Jasper Mall	Jasper	AL
Military Plaza	Benton	AR
Chickasaw Plaza	Blytheville	AR
Riverview Mall	Bullhead City	AZ
Downtown Bishop	Bishop	CA
Sunwest Plaza	Lodi	CA
The Village at Orange	Orange	CA
Hilltop Mall	Richmond	CA
Fort Morgan Main St.	Fort Morgan	CO
Glenwood Springs Mall	Glenwood Springs	CO
St. Vrain Centre	Longmont	CO
Broadway Plaza	Sterling	CO
Connecticut Post Mall	Milford	CT
Jacksonville Regional Shopping Center	Jacksonville	FL
Palatka Mall	Palatka	FL
Dublin Mall	Dublin	GA
Macon Mall	Macon	GA
Milledgeville Mall	Milledgeville	GA
Gateway Plaza	Thomasville	GA
Tifton Mall	Tifton	GA
Downtown Decorah	Decorah	IA
Crossroads Mall	Fort Dodge	IA
Penn Central Mall	Oskaloosa	IA
Quincy Place	Ottumwa	IA
Snake River Plaza	Burley	ID
Eastland Mall	Bloomington	IL
Fulton Square	Canton	IL
Village Square Mall	Effingham	IL
Freestanding	Macomb	IL
Peru Mall	Peru	IL
Northland Mall	Sterling	IL
Centerpointe of Woodridge	Woodridge	IL
FairOaks Mall	Columbus	IN
Connersville Plaza	Connersville	IN
Huntington Plaza	Huntington	IN
Jasper Manor Center	Jasper	IN
Logansport Mall	Logansport	IN
Chanute Square	Chanute	KS
Downtown Great Bend	Great Bend	KS
Hutchinson Mall	Hutchinson	KS
Freestanding	Lawrence	KS
Winfield Plaza	Winfield	KS
Cortana Mall	Baton Rouge	LA
Park Terrace	DeRidder	LA
North Shore Square	Slidell	LA
Berkshire Mall	Lanesborough	MA
Easton Marketplace	Easton	MD
Rockland Plaza	Rockland	ME
Lakeview Square Mall	Battle Creek	MI
Delta Plaza	Escanaba	MI
Westshore Mall	Holland	MI
Copper Country Mall	Houghton	MI
Birchwood Mall	Kingsford	MI
Midland Mall	Midland	MI
Cascade Crossings	Sault Ste. Marie	MI
Central Lakes Crossing	Baxter	MN
Five Lakes Centre	Fairmont	MN
Faribo West Mall	Faribault	MN
Irongate Plaza	Hibbing	MN
Hutchinson Mall	Hutchinson	MN
Red Wing Mall	Red Wing	MN
Downtown Thief River Falls	Thief River Falls	MN
Freestanding	Winona	MN
Maryville Center	Maryville	MO
Leigh Mall	Columbus	MS
Southgate Plaza	Corinth	MS
Greenville Mall	Greenville	MS
Bonita Lakes Mall	Meridian	MS
Oxford Mall	Oxford	MS
Capital Hill Mall	Helena	MT
Sidney Main Street	Sidney	MT
Albemarle Crossing	Albemarle	NC
Boone Mall	Boone	NC
Eastridge Mall	Gastonia	NC
Blue Ridge Mall	Hendersonville	NC
Monroe Crossing	Monroe	NC
Becker Village Mall	Roanoke Rapids	NC
Prairie Hills Mall	Dickinson	ND
Buffalo Mall	Jamestown	ND
Downtown Wahpeton	Wahpeton	ND
Fremont Mall	Fremont	NE
Downtown McCook	McCook	NE
Platte River Mall	North Platte	NE
Rio Grande Plaza	Rio Grande	NJ
The Boulevard	Las Vegas	NV
Dunkirk-Fredonia Plaza	Dunkirk	NY
Westfield Sunrise	Massapequa	NY
Palisades Center	West Nyack	NY
Findlay Village Mall	Findlay	OH
New Towne Mall	New Philadelphia	OH
Richmond Town Square	Richmond Heights	OH
St. Mary's Square	St. Marys	OH
Altus Plaza	Altus	OK
Ne-Mar Shopping Center	Claremore	OK
Ponca Plaza	Ponca City	OK
Pioneer Square Shopping Center	Stillwater	OK
Astoria Downtown	Astoria	OR
Grants Pass Shopping Center	Grants Pass	OR
La Grande Downtown	La Grande	OR
Downtown Pendleton	Pendleton	OR
The Dalles Main Street	The Dalles	OR
Columbia Mall	Bloomsburg	PA
Clearfield Mall	Clearfield	PA
King of Prussia Mall	King of Prussia	PA
Philadelphia Mills	Philadelphia	PA
Bradford Towne Centre	Towanda	PA
Lycoming Mall	Pennsdale	PA
Willow Grove Park	Willow Grove	PA
Citadel Mall	Charleston	SC
Town 'N Country	Easley	SC
Palace Mall	Mitchell	SD
Northridge Plaza	Pierre	SD
Watertown Mall	Watertown	SD
Yankton Mall	Yankton	SD
Greeneville Commons	Greeneville	TN
Knoxville Center	Knoxville	TN
County Market Place	Union City	TN
Athens Village Shopping Center	Athens	TX
Borger Shopping Plaza	Borger	TX
Heartland Mall	Early	TX
El Paso Downtown	El Paso	TX
Marshall Mall	Marshall	TX
McAllen Downtown	McAllen	TX
University Mall	Nacogdoches	TX
King Plaza Shopping Center	Seguin	TX
Bosque River Center	Stephenville	TX
New River Valley Mall	Christiansburg	VA
Tanglewood Mall	Roanoke	VA
Pilchuck Landing	Snohomish	WA
Pine Tree Mall	Marinette	WI
Marshfield Mall	Marshfield	WI
Richland Square Shopping Center	Richland Center	WI
Rapids Mall	Wisconsin Rapids	WI
Foxcroft Towne Center	Martinsburg	WV
Downtown Sheridan	Sheridan	WY

 

 

[augolf1716 21,162]

Penny's has been on its death bed for a while. Hate it for their associates but the majority of the locations are in mid size cities and malls. Malls are also on the death circle at the moment. Not so sure its the world markets tanking poor Auburn losing its Penny's

[Auburn85 432]

Ford warns first quarter profits will drop 50%

http://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2017/03/23/ford-warns-first-quarter-profits-drop-50-over-same-period-2016/99532932/

 

Quote

 

Ford said Thursday its first-quarter profit will fall by more than 50% to about 30 cents to 35 cents per share because of higher costs and lower vehicle sales as it briefed Wall Street on its view of market conditions and various public policy issues.

Analysts, on average, were expecting Ford to earn 47 cents per share for the quarter, according to Thomson Reuters.

Last year, the automaker earned  68 cents per share for the first quarter and had a record quarterly pre-tax profit of $3.8 billion, calling that quarter one of its best quarters ever.

Ford said it still expects to earn an adjusted pre-tax profit of $9 billion in 2017, down from $10.4 billion it earned last year.

 

That forecast for the year is unchanged from January. Still, the automaker's first-quarter profit warning sent its stock price down 27 cents per share, or 2.2%, to a low of $11.50 per share in morning trading. Ford's stock rebounded to close at $11.67 per share, down .89%.

The automaker made the disclosure in a securities filing Thursday ahead of a talk hosted by Bob Shanks, Ford's chief financial officer.

Shanks told Wall Street analysts that Ford's first-quarter profits would fall because sales of cars and trucks are declining slightly, costs of commodities such as steel are increasing, engineering costs will increase and warranty costs will increase for the quarter.

Adam Jonas, analyst for Morgan Stanley, said in a report last month that there are growing concerns that Ford's profit margin in North America peaked at 10% in 2013 and could fall in the coming years because industry sales are likely to fall slightly and incentives are increasing.

But Shanks said the automaker's earnings will improve in 2018 and  pre-tax profits will exceed 2016 levels after several key product launches. Ford earned a profit in Europe last year and is likely to see continued improvement there, he said.

 Trade issues

Shanks also sought to assure analysts that Ford is in a better position than most when it comes to a possible restructuring of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

This year, the Trump administration wants to pursue a number of policy issues that could impact the auto industry. Ford, Shanks said, is closely watching today's vote on the Republican health care plan.

"Whatever comes out of that ... could have a big impact on all of the other things the administration wants to accomplish," Shanks said.

One of President Donald Trump's first priorities is to renegotiate NAFTA and, potentially, impose a steep border tax on goods imported from Mexico.

Tha, "would be a drag on our business,"  Shanks said, "but again on a relative basis, we are not one of the biggest players (in Mexico)."

In 2016, 80% of the vehicles Ford sold in the U.S. were made in the U.S. while 13% were made in Mexico and 7% were made in Canada. Ford makes the Ford Fusion and Ford Fiesta in Mexico and, starting in 2018, will make the Ford Focus at its plant in Hermosillo.

But Shanks reminded analysts that car sales in North America continue to decline and, on a per-unit basis, are less profitable than trucks and SUVs.

"Seventy-three percent of our business is trucks and utilities in the U.S.," he said.

 Fuel efficiency

Shanks also said Ford remains committed to improving fuel economy and reducing emissions of its products, even though the Trump administration has restarted a review process of auto regulations and has signaled it favors easing regulations that will go into effect from 2021-25.

"We are not asking for, or seeking, any kind of rollback in terms of the direction we want to head," Shanks said. "We just want to have a conversation around how one gets to the levels we want to achieve ... given what we see is a very different set of factors in the real world vs. what we saw back in 2011."

 

[Auburn85 432]

http://fortune.com/2017/04/07/hhgregg-bankruptcy-2/

 

HHGregg Will Close All 220 of Its Stores After Failing to Find A Buyer

[AU64 10,122]

Yep its a shame that all of these heretofore profitable companies mentioned in the linked article just all of sudden found themselves in dire straits immediately after the election.....well actually when I read the entire piece I learned that they had been in the process of going out of business for more than the past 2 years despite what we have been assured was a robust US economy. ..mostly victims of Amazon.  

Bad for the store employees and their investors...but also bad for the towns where these stores are located ...though I guess the winners will be Target and Walmart in most cases, as they continue the retail war to see who will be the "last man standing" in their communities.

[SaltyTiger 7,808]

1 hour ago, AU64 said:

Yep its a shame that all of these heretofore profitable companies mentioned in the linked article just all of sudden found themselves in dire straits immediately after the election.....well actually when I read the entire piece I learned that they had been in the process of going out of business for more than the past 2 years despite what we have been assured was a robust US economy. ..mostly victims of Amazon.  

Bad for the store employees and their investors...but also bad for the towns where these stores are located ...though I guess the winners will be Target and Walmart in most cases, as they continue the retail war to see who will be the "last man standing" in their communities.

Well said 64. New day and time. I would think that all of the anchor stores are realizing the change in consumer shopping

[japantiger 4,051]

You'll see at least ~250 mall close  in the next 5 years.... maybe as many as 400....so up to 1/3 of all malls....there's just  glut of  retail space capacity that has to go....US has ~2x the retail space per capita of any other developed nation....

[Auburn85 432]

"Gov’t sector bleeding jobs in Connecticut

http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/20170403/PRINTEDITION/303319956/1002

 

The government sector lost the most jobs in Connecticut last year and has been one of the hardest hit employment sectors since the Great Recession in 2008 — and the bleeding appears far from over.

The future for the sector — which includes federal, state, local and public higher education jobs, plus jobs in casinos run by tribal governments — looks bleak with budget challenges clouding state and local governments, in particular. The state has said 4,200 jobs could be lost if it can't win $700 million in labor concessions next fiscal year.

Job reductions at the state's two tribal casinos, Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun, have accounted for the lion's share of losses in local government, in which casino jobs are grouped. From 2008 through the first quarter of 2016, the state lost about 7,000 gambling jobs, according to the latest data available from the U.S. Census. Those declines accounted for about 60 percent of local government job losses in the state since 2008 and 38 percent of the 18,400 total government sector losses, including federal, state and public higher education.

The tribes say that without a third casino — proposed for East Windsor to counter the nearly $1-billion casino complex MGM plans to open by fall 2018 in Springfield — job losses will only continue, and casino and other revenues to the state will plunge. The tribes say 9,300 direct and indirect gaming jobs will be lost.

Andrew Doba, a spokesman for the MMCT Foxwoods-Mohegan joint venture planning the third casino, said he wasn't surprised by the government-sector job losses considering the casino competition that has sprung up around Connecticut.

"It shows what happens when we don't compete," Doba said. "When New York launched its gaming enterprise, we sat back and did nothing. When Rhode Island got in the game, we sat back and did nothing."

There's a clear record of what will happen if the state doesn't compete to keep the industry's good-paying jobs and benefits, he said. At their peak, the tribes employed about 23,000 people combined versus about 14,000 now by tribal estimates.

The General Assembly is considering a bill to grant a third casino to MMCT and another bill to open up casino bidding to others. Critics say a third casino, particularly one located just 13 miles from MGM's Springfield venue, will do little to curb job losses and only add to an oversaturated gaming market.

Local government headaches

With Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's proposed budget calling for municipalities to cover a third of teachers' state pension costs, about $400 million, and other education cost shifts, towns are facing the prospect of higher property taxes or more cuts to balance their budgets, neither popular. Almost everyone agrees, though, that Malloy's budget faces significant revisions.

"At the local government level, there's an overdependence on the property tax and residents don't want to pay anymore in property taxes than they already have been paying," said Kevin Maloney, spokesman for the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities (CCM).

Under pressure to restrain tax hikes, but with cuts to state aid and President Donald Trump's proposed federal budget portending possible federal aid cuts, "that puts towns between a rock and a hard place, and they have to make cuts because they don't have the revenues to pay for everything," Maloney said.

Maloney said he wasn't surprised by the jobs lost in the government sector last year, 4,400 from Jan. 2016 to Jan. 2017, according to the latest data from the state Department of Labor. That was the largest job loss in raw numbers, not percentage terms, for any sector.

CCM has tracked local government closely and there have been cutbacks and layoffs, and moves not to significantly replace people as they retire, Maloney said.

A court decision calling for a better way to fund local public education presents additional funding uncertainties for cites and towns, he said.

"That's also in the mix in terms of the pressures that are going to come to bear on the state budget and local budgets, so that's another sort of question mark that hasn't landed yet in terms of a defined answer," Maloney said.

East Hartford has felt the money pinch as far back as 1991, cutting 76 non-public safety jobs since then, said Mayor Marcia Leclerc.

"Providing a variety of valuable services like leaf collection, road plowing, senior transportation and emergency response with fewer employees has been a challenge and other communities will be impacted just as East Hartford was," Leclerc said.

East Hartford's total town employment stands at 1,712 full-time employees, including the board of education. The board is down 68 employees since 2014, a response to stagnant aid from the state, and it's trying to raise test scores with fewer teachers, tutors and student aides, Leclerc said.

"So you can see how we're impacted and state and federal aid in the future looks even more tenuous," she said.

Going forward, the town remains concerned about state aid cuts because expenses grow, even if only by inflation, the mayor said.

"We have made program restructurings and we understand the taxpayers have been saturated, so it's a difficult and never-ending job balancing the community's need for services and their ability to pay," Leclerc said.

State budget constraints

At the state level, if $700 million can't be saved through concessions, money will have to be found somewhere in major spending categories, said Chris McClure, spokesman at the Office of Policy and Management.

"I doubt there's an appetite that takes a $700 million lapse out of a major category like Medicaid or municipal aid, so it's likely going to come from personal services, staff salaries, staff benefits, which means layoffs," McClure said.

A concession package, though, may not necessitate any workforce reductions, he said, adding that it's possible the state could achieve $700 million in cuts without any appreciable changes to overall state staffing, with savings reached exclusively through a concession package.

While not speaking for unions, "it's possible that some of these concessions could force retirements because people would no longer want to work and contribute or take part in a system that they don't find as beneficial as they used to," McClure said.

The state reported 2,662 retirements last year, or about 550 more than in 2015, adding to cost savings from layoffs that also occurred last year.

"The layoff separations had an impact, most certainly, but the volume of retirements we saw was really high last year," McClure said.

Two unions with heavy representation among state workers, the Connecticut AFL-CIO and 1199 New England SEIU, which represents 7,000-plus healthcare workers in state agencies helping those that include the disabled, mentally ill, drug addicted and abused children, resent being the fallback position for budget cuts.

"State workers have proven time and time again that they are willing to come to the table and to help come to a resolution together," said Lori Pelletier, president of the state AFL-CIO. "They don't mind being partners, they just don't want to be prey."

Pelletier and Jennifer Schneider, spokeswoman for 1199, called for addressing issues like large corporations that pay their employees so little that their workers have to utilize state services, essentially subsidizing the businesses' low wages.

There has to be a discussion about revenue, including issues like raising the capital gains tax, Schneider said.

"There is a view that state workers are the only solution to a problem, which is just so myopic," she said.

State services and workers keep getting reduced, but the deficit keeps growing, Schneider said.

"The only real solution … is to really address the revenue side of it," she said.

Private-sector concerns

Pete Gioia, an economist for the Connecticut Business and Industry Association, said government employment has probably peaked for at least the next five or six years.

Private-sector employment is nothing to brag about either, and overall, employment was flat last year, down 200 jobs, according to 2016 revisions from the state.

"The numbers were awful, I mean we had a net 200 job loss," Gioia said. "We should have added 12,000 to 15,000 jobs last year."

Contributors include a lack of skilled manufacturing workers in the state and proposed negative, anti-business legislation such as a $15 minimum wage and new paid family and medical leave program in Connecticut, Gioia said.

"All that has done is driven a lot of firms in the retail, construction, medical and particularly food-service businesses … screamingly into automation and robots," he said. "That, I think, has been going on with a vengeance for at least the last 10 months."

"I think we have the opportunity to add thousands and thousands of workers, but we've got to find a way to deal with the skills gap," Gioia said.

Connecticut also has to find a way to encourage more companies to expand here, he said.

"I think both of those are possible and doable, but it really needs to move up in the priority schedule of the policymakers," Gioia said."

•  

[icanthearyou 4,463]

22 hours ago, japantiger said:

You'll see at least ~250 mall close  in the next 5 years.... maybe as many as 400....so up to 1/3 of all malls....there's just  glut of  retail space capacity that has to go....US has ~2x the retail space per capita of any other developed nation....

Perhaps the real problem is not a glut of retail space but rather, a lack of the ability to consume?  

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

41 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Perhaps the real problem is not a glut of retail space but rather, a lack of the ability to consume?  

Not really.  Consumer spending is still very high.  As someone stated earlier, the way people shop has drastically changed. 

I've worked in consumer electronics retail for the better part of 6 years now.  The amount of online sales and the competition it has spurred basically killed the big box stores.  10 years ago, if you wanted a new TV, you had to go price compare at a few stores and then make a purchase.  Now you can do that from your couch and get free shipping + price matching.  Trying to keep up with Amazon has become an obsession in the industry, thus why you're seeing places like Wal-Mart, Dell.com, and others offering every incentive imaginable for free (i.e. no prime membership needed) to keep customers from migrating.  Heck, video games can be downloaded to your console now, eliminating the need to go to store at all.

When you combine that trend with a generation of shoppers who grew up making purchases on the internet gaining more and more buying power, the results become pretty obvious for the fate of traditional retail.

[homersapien 11,374]

12 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

Not really.  Consumer spending is still very high.  As someone stated earlier, the way people shop has drastically changed. 

I've worked in consumer electronics retail for the better part of 6 years now.  The amount of online sales and the competition it has spurred basically killed the big box stores.  10 years ago, if you wanted a new TV, you had to go price compare at a few stores and then make a purchase.  Now you can do that from your couch and get free shipping + price matching.  Trying to keep up with Amazon has become an obsession in the industry, thus why you're seeing places like Wal-Mart, Dell.com, and others offering every incentive imaginable for free (i.e. no prime membership needed) to keep customers from migrating.  Heck, video games can be downloaded to your console now, eliminating the need to go to store at all.

When you combine that trend with a generation of shoppers who grew up making purchases on the internet gaining more and more buying power, the results become pretty obvious for the fate of traditional retail.

So true.  Amazon is amazing. 

And I also find that I am now frequently using the on-line sites for stores such as Walmart and Home Depot.  Just pick up your order at the store, no shipping costs.  Also, the "electonic inventory" is much more extensive in variety than their store inventories.

 

[icanthearyou 4,463]

1 minute ago, Brad_ATX said:

Not really.  Consumer spending is still very high.  As someone stated earlier, the way people shop has drastically changed. 

I've worked in consumer electronics retail for the better part of 6 years now.  The amount of online sales and the competition it has spurred basically killed the big box stores.  10 years ago, if you wanted a new TV, you had to go price compare at a few stores and then make a purchase.  Now you can do that from your couch and get free shipping + price matching.  Trying to keep up with Amazon has become an obsession in the industry, thus why you're seeing places like Wal-Mart, Dell.com, and others offering every incentive imaginable for free (i.e. no prime membership needed) to keep customers from migrating.  Heck, video games can be downloaded to your console now, eliminating the need to go to store at all.

When you combine that trend with a generation of shoppers who grew up making purchases on the internet gaining more and more buying power, the results become pretty obvious for the fate of traditional retail.

I can appreciate what you are saying.  However, I think the view is too narrow.  How much of consumer spending is a function of credit?  How much is a result of disposable income?  

The competition you are using to define all of retail is relative yet, not completely.  Electronics do not represent all of retail.  What I do believe is significant is,,,this intense competition is actually resulting in concentration.  Ultimately, it leads to fewer consumer choices.

The current manifestation of the global economy leads to this amazing phenomenon of consumers feeling empowered as prices go down for discretionary items.  Yet, consumers are also feeling squeezed by stagnant wages and rising costs of many necessities.

The paradigms for competition and consumer choices are being redefined in a fairly complex way.

I can buy two new televisions or, pay my healthcare premium for the month.  Which one will give me greater satisfaction?  Which one would I be more likely to utilize credit to obtain?  Which one holds a disincentive?

So, I would argue that consumer spending being up in the near-term does not reflect the real economic picture.  Wages remain relatively low.  Choices, discretionary income are actually declining.  GDP is still relatively flat.  The real gains are in profitability and the stock market.  Loose consumer credit or, real economic improvement?

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

31 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

I can appreciate what you are saying.  However, I think the view is too narrow.  How much of consumer spending is a function of credit?  How much is a result of disposable income?  

The competition you are using to define all of retail is relative yet, not completely.  Electronics do not represent all of retail.  What I do believe is significant is,,,this intense competition is actually resulting in concentration.  Ultimately, it leads to fewer consumer choices.

The current manifestation of the global economy leads to this amazing phenomenon of consumers feeling empowered as prices go down for discretionary items.  Yet, consumers are also feeling squeezed by stagnant wages and rising costs of many necessities.

The paradigms for competition and consumer choices are being redefined in a fairly complex way.

I can buy two new televisions or, pay my healthcare premium for the month.  Which one will give me greater satisfaction?  Which one would I be more likely to utilize credit to obtain?  Which one holds a disincentive?

So, I would argue that consumer spending being up in the near-term does not reflect the real economic picture.  Wages remain relatively low.  Choices, discretionary income are actually declining.  GDP is still relatively flat.  The real gains are in profitability and the stock market.  Loose consumer credit or, real economic improvement?

I don't disagree with the comment of a narrow view, but my point of a younger and increasingly economically powerful customer base across the U.S. still stands.  Late Gen-Xers and Millennials are much more likely to purchase other goods online, including clothing and even groceries.  Think about it in this respect.  I'm 33 and most of my friends are around the same age.  We are the first generation entering prime earning years where shopping online and navigating the web is native to us.  In fact, our generation probably wouldn't know what to do without the internet and the ability to have things shipped to our house via clicking a button.  It stands to reason that our generation and one's to follow will become increasingly more comfortable with buying everyday products online.  On a personal note, I can't tell you the last time I bought a shirt in an actual store.  I'm afforded more variety and often better pricing if I shop on something like JC Penny's website vs actually walking into their store.

I also fundamentally disagree with your contention that consumer choice is going down.  If anything, we have more choices of where to spend money than ever before thanks to the internet.  If you want something, you can find it pretty quickly now.  The internet has done a much better job of actually serving a wider audience than the traditional brick-and-mortar sector.  A great example would be a site like Etsy.

 

As an aside, here are some interesting articles about overall online shopping and it's growth.

http://www.mintel.com/press-centre/technology-press-centre/nearly-70-of-americans-shop-online-regularly-with-close-to-50-taking-advantage-of-free-shipping

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-surprising-demographics-of-who-shops-online-and-on-mobile-2014-6

 

[icanthearyou 4,463]

16 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

I don't disagree with the comment of a narrow view, but my point of a younger and increasingly economically powerful customer base across the U.S. still stands.  Late Gen-Xers and Millennials are much more likely to purchase other goods online, including clothing and even groceries.  Think about it in this respect.  I'm 33 and most of my friends are around the same age.  We are the first generation entering prime earning years where shopping online and navigating the web is native to us.  In fact, our generation probably wouldn't know what to do without the internet and the ability to have things shipped to our house via clicking a button.  It stands to reason that our generation and one's to follow will become increasingly more comfortable with buying everyday products online.  On a personal note, I can't tell you the last time I bought a shirt in an actual store.  I'm afforded more variety and often better pricing if I shop on something like JC Penny's website vs actually walking into their store.

I also fundamentally disagree with your contention that consumer choice is going down.  If anything, we have more choices of where to spend money than ever before thanks to the internet.  If you want something, you can find it pretty quickly now.  The internet has done a much better job of actually serving a wider audience than the traditional brick-and-mortar sector.  A great example would be a site like Etsy.

 

As an aside, here are some interesting articles about overall online shopping and it's growth.

http://www.mintel.com/press-centre/technology-press-centre/nearly-70-of-americans-shop-online-regularly-with-close-to-50-taking-advantage-of-free-shipping

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-surprising-demographics-of-who-shops-online-and-on-mobile-2014-6

 

I do not disagree with the overall point you are making.  Still, it is limited to those with disposable income and, who are fortunate enough to enjoy the optimism of wage growth.  It is all correct but, I do not believe it represents the complete economic picture.  I am not sure that we are truly seeing a "younger and increasingly economically powerful customer base all across the U.S.".  

You do not believe the economy is narrowing?  Paradigms are definitely changing.  I think it would be wrong to believe that all of the implications are so easily explained.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 hour ago, icanthearyou said:

I do not disagree with the overall point you are making.  Still, it is limited to those with disposable income and, who are fortunate enough to enjoy the optimism of wage growth.  It is all correct but, I do not believe it represents the complete economic picture.  I am not sure that we are truly seeing a "younger and increasingly economically powerful customer base all across the U.S.".  

You do not believe the economy is narrowing?  Paradigms are definitely changing.  I think it would be wrong to believe that all of the implications are so easily explained.

I can certainly see the economy narrowing, especially with regards to wage disparities and income gaps.  However, the impetus of this was that places like Sears, JCP, and malls were shutting down in favor of online purchasing.  Traditionally, those were places for the middle class with disposable income.I also see more traditional brick-and-mortar places taking hold in some lower class areas, specifically with regards to discount grocery stores (i.e. off-brand) and clothing options, thus servicing a needed market.

Still, the driving force behind a strong economy is the middle class, which is unquestionably shrinking.  But I guess I see it a little differently in that many of those traditional middle-class jobs have been replaced with high-paying professional roles.  The amount of people making $80K+ per year is higher than ever.  In lieu of manufacturing line jobs, we now have people with different skill sets to fit a more technologically advanced world, thus commanding higher salaries.  Personally, I went from a middle-class salary to an upper-middle class salary in about four years.  Yet the competition for each of those roles was astounding in terms of number of qualified applicants.  Essentially, our work-force is almost too skilled from a white-collar perspective. 

What I would love to see is a government focus on driving kids towards vocational colleges as I'm not a believer in four-year schools for everyone.  There are many jobs out there waiting to be filled for welders, surveyors, etc, but we currently have very few who can fill them.  These gigs pay anywhere between $40K-$80K per year depending on where one lives.  If we can get more young people and even older ones (former factory workers, for example) to see that a new, long-term career options can be had with a year or two year of cheap/free school, I think we could have a middle class renaissance in this country.

[japantiger 4,051]

Online shopping is growing across all demographics...without regard to age or income; more people are buying online now; it grows mid-teens each year.  Millieneals buy more per person than any other group.   88% of all US consumers have bought online.  The most popular categories are electronics (83%), fashion, apparel, books, music and appliances (~half)....least popular, groceries (at least in the US; in China nearly 90% buy groceries online).  Choice has exploded; the average Super Center stocked ~15k products in the 90's; WMT/Tesco/Target, etc.,  now offers over 45k items thru their stores and sites.  The majority of eCommerce growth is being driven by "marketplaces"....85% of AMazon's growth is driven by it's marketplace; not its stock and sell business....again, this is a function of great variety and choice...they basically sell anything offered by anyone....hence, too much retail space.

[AU64 10,122]

5 minutes ago, japantiger said:

Online shopping is growing across all demographics...without regard to age or income; more people are buying online now; it grows mid-teens each year.  Millieneals buy more per person than any other group.   88% of all US consumers have bought online.  The most popular categories are electronics (83%), fashion, apparel, books, music and appliances (~half)....least popular, groceries (at least in the US; in China nearly 90% buy groceries online).  Choice has exploded; the average Super Center stocked ~15k products in the 90's; WMT/Tesco/Target, etc.,  now offers over 45k items thru their stores and sites.  The majority of eCommerce growth is being driven by "marketplaces"....85% of AMazon's growth is driven by it's marketplace; not its stock and sell business....again, this is a function of great variety and choice...they basically sell anything offered by anyone....hence, too much retail space.

Conventional retailing is definitely in the toilet but I'm not seeing that the change in how people acquire things has affected consumption consumption.  I live in a small town where Dollar General is our major retailer aside from an IGA and one drug store.   Nearest major markets are 30 miles one way.   Being able to shop on the internet has sure save me a lot of time and gas for more or less routine purchases.

In some ways, this change of how and where people shop might actually contribute to an increase in per capita consumption (thus the need for more production) since people have access to a much wider variety of consumer products than could /can often be found in local retail sources.  And as noted, Amazon now includes notes on their sites to identify which products are from their stock and which are from secondary suppliers who will ship direct to the consumer......Amazon acting as a broker for them.

The fact that the retail industry is taking a hit is not a good reason for GDP to be in the doldrums the past few years.  I will opine however that when the US became a marketing / service economy it made our economy vulnerable to being damaged by this change in how consumers buy their needs.  

As a nation, we had become accustomed to our products being manufactured elsewhere and our economy had become dependent on importing and distributing what other people made in other countries.   That might have worked for the past 20 or 30 years but I'm thinking that's a bad plan going forward since we can now buy minor electronic gadgets direct from China and don't even need US retailers.

Trump may not be able to turn our manufacturing prospects around but by gosh, someone has to try..... and at least he recognizes what's happening to middle America and has voiced the need to do something to bring manufacturing back.  Who knows how it will work out but I hope people don't just run up the white flag and say it can't be done before we even make a serious effort.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

30 minutes ago, AU64 said:

As a nation, we had become accustomed to our products being manufactured elsewhere and our economy had become dependent on importing and distributing what other people made in other countries.   That might have worked for the past 20 or 30 years but I'm thinking that's a bad plan going forward since we can now buy minor electronic gadgets direct from China and don't even need US retailers.

Trump may not be able to turn our manufacturing prospects around but by gosh, someone has to try..... and at least he recognizes what's happening to middle America and has voiced the need to do something to bring manufacturing back.  Who knows how it will work out but I hope people don't just run up the white flag and say it can't be done before we even make a serious effort.

It's not necessarily a bad thing that goods are being made elsewhere.  Ultimately that has led to cheaper prices for U.S..consumers across a range of products. 

The idea that manufacturing jobs are the be all, end all to saving middle America is a false narrative, which I believe is largely trumpeted by those who were part of a manufacturing boom in the 60s and early 70s.  Again I go back to an earlier statement that there are literally millions trade jobs open in the country right now.  (Welders, plumbers, etc.)   Manufacturing is nothing more than skilled labor, which can also describe and trade job in the country.

For example, one article I read recently stated that America is need of 50,000 new truck drivers.  Wal-Mart is actively advertising that they need more drivers and starting pay is between $70-80K per year (hear it on my radio at least once a week).

[AU64 10,122]

3 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

It's not necessarily a bad thing that goods are being made elsewhere.  Ultimately that has led to cheaper prices for U.S..consumers across a range of products. 

The idea that manufacturing jobs are the be all, end all to saving middle America is a false narrative, which I believe is largely trumpeted by those who were part of a manufacturing boom in the 60s and early 70s.  Again I go back to an earlier statement that there are literally millions trade jobs open in the country right now.  (Welders, plumbers, etc.)   Manufacturing is nothing more than skilled labor, which can also describe and trade job in the country.

For example, one article I read recently stated that America is need of 50,000 new truck drivers.  Wal-Mart is actively advertising that they need more drivers and starting pay is between $70-80K per year (hear it on my radio at least once a week).

Agree on the need for qualified crafts people which were often the products of High Schools and Trade Schools back in the 60s and 70s that you mention....but no longer in most states as Trade Schools became community colleges and "trades" work became unfashionable.  When I speak of  "manufacturing " I'm thinking more in terms of industrial jobs which historically, and even now, have higher pay rates.  But for a couple decades we have gradually shut down manufacturing and replaced those jobs (where they were replaced at all) with lower paid service jobs....the people who used to make textile products and furniture in the US now work at Lowes or Walmart or such. 

Fortunately for our area, BMW moved here and has expanded continuously for 20 years...amazing that they can build their cars profitably in South Carolina and yet Ford or GM have to look to Mexico. 

My point is that I don't know of a single country that prospers as a nation from selling goods that other people make in other countries. 

 

 

 

[homersapien 11,374]

20 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

I can certainly see the economy narrowing, especially with regards to wage disparities and income gaps.  However, the impetus of this was that places like Sears, JCP, and malls were shutting down in favor of online purchasing.  Traditionally, those were places for the middle class with disposable income.I also see more traditional brick-and-mortar places taking hold in some lower class areas, specifically with regards to discount grocery stores (i.e. off-brand) and clothing options, thus servicing a needed market.

Still, the driving force behind a strong economy is the middle class, which is unquestionably shrinking.  But I guess I see it a little differently in that many of those traditional middle-class jobs have been replaced with high-paying professional roles.  The amount of people making $80K+ per year is higher than ever.  In lieu of manufacturing line jobs, we now have people with different skill sets to fit a more technologically advanced world, thus commanding higher salaries.  Personally, I went from a middle-class salary to an upper-middle class salary in about four years.  Yet the competition for each of those roles was astounding in terms of number of qualified applicants.  Essentially, our work-force is almost too skilled from a white-collar perspective. 

What I would love to see is a government focus on driving kids towards vocational colleges as I'm not a believer in four-year schools for everyone.  There are many jobs out there waiting to be filled for welders, surveyors, etc, but we currently have very few who can fill them.  These gigs pay anywhere between $40K-$80K per year depending on where one lives.  If we can get more young people and even older ones (former factory workers, for example) to see that a new, long-term career options can be had with a year or two year of cheap/free school, I think we could have a middle class renaissance in this country.

A committment to making the conversion to alternative energy and a sustainable economy will spark the next middle-class renaissance.

[AU64 10,122]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

A committment to making the conversion to alternative energy and a sustainable economy will spark the next middle-class renaissance.

That's it ?   That's your plan for our economy?   "sustainable economy"....what does that mean....everyone go back to the land and live off the fruits of their labor?

Meanwhile, the irony of this conversation is that I sound like a 1960s Democrat whereas, modern Dems like HC who used to look after the "working man" now tell them, not to worry that all of their jobs are going overseas or being lost to governmental regulations because she will give them a better Food Stamp plan or something....wasn't that what she promised the coal miners? 

.

[homersapien 11,374]

15 minutes ago, AU64 said:

That's it ?   That's your plan for our economy?   "sustainable economy"....what does that mean....everyone go back to the land and live off the fruits of their labor?

Meanwhile, the irony of this conversation is that I sound like a 1960s Democrat whereas, modern Dems like HC who used to look after the "working man" now tell them, not to worry that all of their jobs are going overseas or being lost to governmental regulations because she will give them a better Food Stamp plan or something....wasn't that what she promised the coal miners? 

.

No, of course that's not "it", as in a comprehensive plan.  I said it would "spark" economic development, which it would.   

A sustainable economy is one that is doesn't deplete critical resources that will cost us in the long run. 

And I don't know what Clinton promised coal minors but letting them believe the coal industry is going to come back is a cruel hoax.

What coal minors need is to find other ways of making a living.  Short term help while doing so - such as food stamps - makes a lot of sense.

[AU64 10,122]

18 hours ago, homersapien said:

No, of course that's not "it", as in a comprehensive plan.  I said it would "spark" economic development, which it would.   

A sustainable economy is one that is doesn't deplete critical resources that will cost us in the long run. 

And I don't know what Clinton promised coal minors but letting them believe the coal industry is going to come back is a cruel hoax.

What coal minors need is to find other ways of making a living.  Short term help while doing so - such as food stamps - makes a lot of sense.

Sorry JMO..but you must live in a dream world.  Try visiting areas of ky and W VA and tell those 40 and 50 year old unemployed people what jobs they should take and where they are ...and that meanwhile  food stamps will keep them alive.  Same for the small textile towns all over the South where their jobs were negotiated away by the government. Government policies destroyed towns all over the southeast.

It is not possible in this world for a country or large populations of people to thrive without a value added economy. Meanwhile,I would like to see some examples of successful large scale sustainable industries.....I still have no idea what you are talking about and I am not sure you do either on this issue.

[homersapien 11,374]

3 hours ago, AU64 said:

Sorry JMO..but you must live in a dream world.  Try visiting areas of ky and W VA and tell those 40 and 50 year old unemployed people what jobs they should take and where they are ...and that meanwhile  food stamps will keep them alive.  Same for the small textile towns all over the South where their jobs were negotiated away by the government. Government policies destroyed towns all over the southeast.

It is not possible in this world for a country or large populations of people to thrive without a value added economy. Meanwhile,I would like to see some examples of successful large scale sustainable industries.....I still have no idea what you are talking about and I am not sure you do either on this issue.

Yeah, just tell them the coal industry is coming back, huh?  

 

http://www.manufacturingglobal.com/top10/365/Top-10:-Sustainable-manufacturing-companies-in-the-world

 

[AU64 10,122]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

Yeah, just tell them the coal industry is coming back, huh?  

 

http://www.manufacturingglobal.com/top10/365/Top-10:-Sustainable-manufacturing-companies-in-the-world

 

I know what you meant but that's basically an environmental policy....has nothing to do with creating a broad based economy to sustain the nation.  It's good that companies adopt operating policies that are environmentally responsible but generally those policies have little to do with the financial viability of those companies. Just a quick look and I note that most are luxury goods companies with high profit margins who can afford the extra cost of their environmental policies.  Meanwhile, the government keeps pushing those regulations on companies who can't afford to comply and they just close down or move.....leaving economic desolation in their wake.

Guess I'm still sticking to my assertion that the only  economically sound economies in the world are based on value-added production of some sort.  The coal industry is not going to be what it once was but to impose a government policy to deliberately shut it down and offer "food stamps" as a replacement is beyond belief.   Back in the day, as the coal industry declined, which it has been doing for decades, the displaced workers went north to the auto and machinery plants and to some extent were absorbed by those old rust belt industries.  But for a number of reasons, those big employers are mostly gone and workers from coal, textiles, furniture,  and even the auto industry,  have no fall back employment opportunities. The standard of living have declined for millions of blue collar workers and almost nothing has been done to take up the slack. 

Some of the things being proposed may not work as hoped .....but to do nothing and just accept the status quo as some in Washington have done...the "new economy" I have heard people say...//that's shameful in my view.