Let me guess. The stores they closed tried to unionize, so they made up some shit about shoplifting.
This, with a generous side of pushing right wing narratives about urban crime panic because they think it will help Republicans win.
I thought it was just because real estate is expensive af now
You mean that Target wasn’t closing stores because of theft after all?! I’m shocked.
That was just the coverup so they didn’t get backlash from laying everyone off after another round of C-Suite bonuses.
They probably closed the stores trying to unionize.
You don’t understand what it’s like for them. They don’t like sacking people for bonuses but they just can’t come up with any other ways to increase profit. What are they supposed to do? Get creative? Build a strong respectful work culture? Not take a bonus? You see. It’s not as easy as you think. Timmy can miss out on his toy train this Christmas. Besides, it’s just business
When little Timmy got a train
"twas put beneath a tree
Christmas day had fin’lly come,
Such fun for all to seeThe poor were done, they knew no fun All stolen by some jerk(s)
Their patience done, their time had come
And quickly went to workTimmy’s dad had been quite bad
He stole, and cheated and lied
When they burned the system down,
Little Timmy fucking died.Added context: “Little Timmy” is 35, has a cushy VP job in his dad’s company, and is lined up to be the next ceo. It was his suggestion to cut 50,000 jobs so he could collect a finders fee for “finding” unnecessary expenses.
This is the content I miss from Reddit
Timmy doesn’t need an entire full sized private “toy” train. Just get him some Lego ;)
I’ll give Target a bit of lee at here because they were only there first to admit they were wrong, they also shared a bunch of data about how their shrink calculation methodology, which much of the retail sector shares, is flawed.
I have worked for target. Their logistics methodology is incredibly on point. They are highly invested in getting things right, if no other reason, for the sake of their own profitability.So as there are being open, they have some credibility here, I would say, especially given that others here are so closed. This interest certainly serves their profit motive as much as it services our our motive.  There is, at least, for now, no reason to distress them.
Let’s practice this together, folks. “Corporations never put their employees or customers ahead of profits.”
If you believed them at their word, you’d be wrong.
Probably doesn’t help though
Theft clearly doesn’t affect their overall profits considering how many chains have had record profits.
Looking at you Walmart
Of course it affects it.
Not meaningfully
Depends where you set the bar. Does it make it more likely that certain locations are closed? Probably.
Yeah but they’re only closing because they’re not bringing in maximum profits.
They’re still making profits they’re just butthurt they’re not making more and that was my original point.
If you can lose $3b in theft and still make record billions then no, theft does not affect you at all.
With all that said though if the store is legitimately being robbed to the point of affecting profits that much then yeah go ahead and close. But the companies that claim theft as the reason for closing stores are bullshitting you.
If you can lose $3b in theft and still make record billions then no, theft does not affect you at all.
But it does. You are using “at all” wrong lol.
ITT: People who haven’t been on the internet long enough to know what BoingBoing is.
I’m old.
If you know what BoingBoing is, your knees probably crackle when you squat and stand.
Yup. I also groan when I sit down. You just had to call me out, didn’t you?
Damn you had to come for me like that
I feel seen
I wonder how Slashdot is doing…
Looks like it’s still going strong, but each article has like 15 comments. And the poll has a CowboyNeal option…
3 digit UID here, I still visit daily but rarely comment
I have a 5 digit UID, and I just checked that I can still log in. Looks like my most recent comment was in November of 2015, which is a lot later than I would have guessed.
I visited a few times right after the reddit blowup, while checking out other options for this sort of thing. I might have to go back more.
Oh wow, forgot about Slashdot…
Fark, Slashdot, and BoingBoing were pretty much my daily go-to in the pre-Digg/reddit internet
I skipped the Digg era. I didn’t join reddit until probably 2015, after I kept coming across extremely useful information there that wasn’t available elsewhere. I think it was the advice on what to do with asbestos that finally tipped it over for me.
I was an early reddit adopter. I preferred its hyper minimalist style, as well as the type of conversations I saw, to Digg at the time. Well before the whole Digg 2.0 debacle.
Remember when Cracked was good?
Fuck Auntiememe
If you liked that and aren’t aware of Some More News channel on YouTube, then… well you’re welcome I guess?
I’m tired, boss.
I remember getting something I did linked to on BoingBoing back in the day and I felt like I was famous for a little while.
Yeah I think i was visiting Boing Boing on the regular a couple decades ago or nearly so.
This turning out to be true is unsurprising, but if it were, follow it to its logical conclusion and you would see large retailers lobbying the government to increase wages. Like, we live in a fucking police state, the problem is not that we’re suddenly an outlaw country, the problem is that people don’t make enough money or have enough safety nets to live. It’s the same with all of the “Americans feel bad about the economy even though the dow is up, why?” Well, because we can’t afford housing and groceries. Simple fucking problem.
I was looking at Bidens approval rating compared to other presidents on 538 and it’s crazy seeing the last time this really was so bad, aside from Trump, was the Great Depression…which says alot about the disconnect today spouting Dow successes but normal people struggling to stay afloat.
No one is going to do that, because if the peasants have more then the nobility can’t mock them for being lesser.
They’re all insured for these kinds of losses anyway (I used to work in big box retail operations).
Don’t worry, people will completely ignore the retraction and continue to blame their fellow poor people (just not themselves) for the outrageous behavior of our corporations.
Kind of like how any game developer who says that piracy is the reason that they failed financially, even though some of the greatest games of all time are the ones that get pirated the most.
Does this qualify as a news article?
They are talking about organized retail theft. Individuals stealing still could make up a large amount of loss. Article doesn’t seem clear to me on that point.
Stores have insurance to protect them against theft.
Having insurance isn’t a free money glitch. Insurance companies wouldn’t be able to operate if the insurance didn’t cost more than the claim payouts.
And the more they use the coverage, the more it costs.
Have you ever filed claims against your home or auto insurance? Even when it was fully in policy and not your fault, your rates likely spiked.
That type of knee jerk conjecture is really weak. The data collected on shrinkage, as noted in the linked Reuter’s article, is noisy. You can’t differentiate lose due to theft or shipping mistakes or cliericsl error.
More importantly, and not mentioned directly in the boingboing article, was the cited number of rising organized theft was based upon an analyst from a security firm. The report was created in partnership with that firm. With the recent redaction, there is no mention of that firm.
