Minor things that bother you

[Scott5114]

The idea with changing Planograms is that it necessitates searching the store (whether you want to or not).  The theory is that by getting lost looking for something that you might pick up a couple extra items along the way.  Apparently it generally yields a net positive in items sold and tapers off gradually until the next Planogram change.

I generally take a dim view of doing business with companies who think their needs as a company are more important than mine as a customer.

[JayhawkCO]

The idea with changing Planograms is that it necessitates searching the store (whether you want to or not).  The theory is that by getting lost looking for something that you might pick up a couple extra items along the way.  Apparently it generally yields a net positive in items sold and tapers off gradually until the next Planogram change.

I generally take a dim view of doing business with companies who think their needs as a company are more important than mine as a customer.

Is that why you worked for casinos? 

[Rothman]

Target = Walmart but with slightly better presentation.

[JayhawkCO]

Target = Walmart but with slightly better presentation.

Clearly you haven't been in their snack aisle lately. Those everything cashews? Delightful.

[Rothman]

Target = Walmart but with slightly better presentation.

Clearly you haven't been in their snack aisle lately. Those everything cashews? Delightful.

Target = Walmart, but with everything cashews.

[Scott5114]

The idea with changing Planograms is that it necessitates searching the store (whether you want to or not).  The theory is that by getting lost looking for something that you might pick up a couple extra items along the way.  Apparently it generally yields a net positive in items sold and tapers off gradually until the next Planogram change.

I generally take a dim view of doing business with companies who think their needs as a company are more important than mine as a customer.

Is that why you worked for casinos? 

Touché.

Enshittification of casinos tends to look like 6:5 blackjack, triple zero roulette. I don't make a habit of playing either of those; the only situation in which I've played 6:5 blackjack is to get a chip from a casino about to close down. I guess the ultimate endgame there would be rows of bill acceptors that don't do anything else.

[roadman65]

In Family Dollar today. No one in store as I walked in. Went to the pet food aisle and grabbed what I needed plus water for myself in another aisle.

Now all of a sudden three people are in the store checking out at the register. One is elderly with arthritis taking her time as her body allows her to. The second a young woman with a few items. The third, and directly ahead of me, is a middle aged obese man in a scooter buying $25 worth of junk food to keep his figure, who happens to forget his PIN.

It is not major, but common being in an empty store where others are not around until checkout when we all arrive at the same time with one customer having some sort of issue that is a little annoying.

[jeffandnicole]

Walmart is not intended to be fancy, just a place to economically get stuff that you might need.

My biggest complaint about them is their constantly moving and rearranging that stuff, making it harder and more time-consuming to find.  Their Appleton, WI area locations are relatively remote from where I live here in the downtown area, but that is generally not a factor in my above thoughts.

Mike

There are reasons items get moved around and rearranged all the time. First reason is any time there are new products coming in, aisles or departments get reset to make room for the new items. Second, is many items are seasonal, so every time a new season comes along, it's out with the old, in with the new. And probably not the least of the reasons is psychological. The longer you have to look for the items you need or want, the more you'll see you want or need and the more you'll buy. Walmart isn't the only store that rearranges the setup of items on the shelves.

Thing is, by them chasing $5 in extra profit out of me by playing stupid mind games, I am incentivized to take my $200/week in grocery money somewhere else so I don't have to deal with that nonsense. So how exactly is that an effective business strategy?

My grocery store in Oklahoma rearranged once over the six years or so that I was going there. And that was only because state law changed to where they could carry more alcohol, so they had to make room for that. They never had to rearrange for seasonal stuff because they had...a seasonal aisle. What a concept.

I probably spent something like $75,000 at that store over the years just because they made a conscious decision to not be obnoxious. They keep opening new stores so it's clearly working for them.

Walmart had revenue of $648 Billion in FY2024, $611 Billion in FY2023, and that year-over-year pattern occurs nearly every year.  Clearly they're idiots that don't know what they're doing.

By rearranging their stores, they're picking up the customers that only shop there occasionally, but buy higher profit merchandise.  Those customers spend $200 on a single item, or hundreds of dollars on gifts because they're a few cents cheaper than elsewhere.  Then they hit up a few other items since they're in the store, adding to the revenue total.

Every business knows they're not going to attract everyone, and they're not going to keep every customer that walks in the door. If they lose 10 customers but gain 50, it's the cost of doing business.  You no-doubt saw it during your casino days - there's customers that walk in thinking they're big spenders with a few hundred dollar bills scoring a free beer.  The next time the comps roll in, they get fewer offers, and wonder why the casino is so cheap.  In the meantime, the casino execs don't even see them as they greet the customers walking in with 10k.

[Scott5114]

Walmart is not intended to be fancy, just a place to economically get stuff that you might need.

My biggest complaint about them is their constantly moving and rearranging that stuff, making it harder and more time-consuming to find.  Their Appleton, WI area locations are relatively remote from where I live here in the downtown area, but that is generally not a factor in my above thoughts.

Mike

There are reasons items get moved around and rearranged all the time. First reason is any time there are new products coming in, aisles or departments get reset to make room for the new items. Second, is many items are seasonal, so every time a new season comes along, it's out with the old, in with the new. And probably not the least of the reasons is psychological. The longer you have to look for the items you need or want, the more you'll see you want or need and the more you'll buy. Walmart isn't the only store that rearranges the setup of items on the shelves.

Thing is, by them chasing $5 in extra profit out of me by playing stupid mind games, I am incentivized to take my $200/week in grocery money somewhere else so I don't have to deal with that nonsense. So how exactly is that an effective business strategy?

My grocery store in Oklahoma rearranged once over the six years or so that I was going there. And that was only because state law changed to where they could carry more alcohol, so they had to make room for that. They never had to rearrange for seasonal stuff because they had...a seasonal aisle. What a concept.

I probably spent something like $75,000 at that store over the years just because they made a conscious decision to not be obnoxious. They keep opening new stores so it's clearly working for them.

Walmart had revenue of $648 Billion in FY2024, $611 Billion in FY2023, and that year-over-year pattern occurs nearly every year.  Clearly they're idiots that don't know what they're doing.

By rearranging their stores, they're picking up the customers that only shop there occasionally, but buy higher profit merchandise.  Those customers spend $200 on a single item, or hundreds of dollars on gifts because they're a few cents cheaper than elsewhere.  Then they hit up a few other items since they're in the store, adding to the revenue total.

Every business knows they're not going to attract everyone, and they're not going to keep every customer that walks in the door. If they lose 10 customers but gain 50, it's the cost of doing business.  You no-doubt saw it during your casino days - there's customers that walk in thinking they're big spenders with a few hundred dollar bills scoring a free beer.  The next time the comps roll in, they get fewer offers, and wonder why the casino is so cheap.  In the meantime, the casino execs don't even see them as they greet the customers walking in with 10k.

just because people make money doing something doesn't mean I think they should. thanks for coming to my TED talk

[jeffandnicole]

Walmart is not intended to be fancy, just a place to economically get stuff that you might need.

My biggest complaint about them is their constantly moving and rearranging that stuff, making it harder and more time-consuming to find.  Their Appleton, WI area locations are relatively remote from where I live here in the downtown area, but that is generally not a factor in my above thoughts.

Mike

There are reasons items get moved around and rearranged all the time. First reason is any time there are new products coming in, aisles or departments get reset to make room for the new items. Second, is many items are seasonal, so every time a new season comes along, it's out with the old, in with the new. And probably not the least of the reasons is psychological. The longer you have to look for the items you need or want, the more you'll see you want or need and the more you'll buy. Walmart isn't the only store that rearranges the setup of items on the shelves.

Thing is, by them chasing $5 in extra profit out of me by playing stupid mind games, I am incentivized to take my $200/week in grocery money somewhere else so I don't have to deal with that nonsense. So how exactly is that an effective business strategy?

My grocery store in Oklahoma rearranged once over the six years or so that I was going there. And that was only because state law changed to where they could carry more alcohol, so they had to make room for that. They never had to rearrange for seasonal stuff because they had...a seasonal aisle. What a concept.

I probably spent something like $75,000 at that store over the years just because they made a conscious decision to not be obnoxious. They keep opening new stores so it's clearly working for them.

Walmart had revenue of $648 Billion in FY2024, $611 Billion in FY2023, and that year-over-year pattern occurs nearly every year.  Clearly they're idiots that don't know what they're doing.

By rearranging their stores, they're picking up the customers that only shop there occasionally, but buy higher profit merchandise.  Those customers spend $200 on a single item, or hundreds of dollars on gifts because they're a few cents cheaper than elsewhere.  Then they hit up a few other items since they're in the store, adding to the revenue total.

Every business knows they're not going to attract everyone, and they're not going to keep every customer that walks in the door. If they lose 10 customers but gain 50, it's the cost of doing business.  You no-doubt saw it during your casino days - there's customers that walk in thinking they're big spenders with a few hundred dollar bills scoring a free beer.  The next time the comps roll in, they get fewer offers, and wonder why the casino is so cheap.  In the meantime, the casino execs don't even see them as they greet the customers walking in with 10k.

just because people make money doing something doesn't mean I think they should. thanks for coming to my TED talk

We're not talking about drugs here.  Clearly they have a good strategy that works.

[Scott5114]

Walmart is not intended to be fancy, just a place to economically get stuff that you might need.

My biggest complaint about them is their constantly moving and rearranging that stuff, making it harder and more time-consuming to find.  Their Appleton, WI area locations are relatively remote from where I live here in the downtown area, but that is generally not a factor in my above thoughts.

Mike

There are reasons items get moved around and rearranged all the time. First reason is any time there are new products coming in, aisles or departments get reset to make room for the new items. Second, is many items are seasonal, so every time a new season comes along, it's out with the old, in with the new. And probably not the least of the reasons is psychological. The longer you have to look for the items you need or want, the more you'll see you want or need and the more you'll buy. Walmart isn't the only store that rearranges the setup of items on the shelves.

Thing is, by them chasing $5 in extra profit out of me by playing stupid mind games, I am incentivized to take my $200/week in grocery money somewhere else so I don't have to deal with that nonsense. So how exactly is that an effective business strategy?

My grocery store in Oklahoma rearranged once over the six years or so that I was going there. And that was only because state law changed to where they could carry more alcohol, so they had to make room for that. They never had to rearrange for seasonal stuff because they had...a seasonal aisle. What a concept.

I probably spent something like $75,000 at that store over the years just because they made a conscious decision to not be obnoxious. They keep opening new stores so it's clearly working for them.

Walmart had revenue of $648 Billion in FY2024, $611 Billion in FY2023, and that year-over-year pattern occurs nearly every year.  Clearly they're idiots that don't know what they're doing.

By rearranging their stores, they're picking up the customers that only shop there occasionally, but buy higher profit merchandise.  Those customers spend $200 on a single item, or hundreds of dollars on gifts because they're a few cents cheaper than elsewhere.  Then they hit up a few other items since they're in the store, adding to the revenue total.

Every business knows they're not going to attract everyone, and they're not going to keep every customer that walks in the door. If they lose 10 customers but gain 50, it's the cost of doing business.  You no-doubt saw it during your casino days - there's customers that walk in thinking they're big spenders with a few hundred dollar bills scoring a free beer.  The next time the comps roll in, they get fewer offers, and wonder why the casino is so cheap.  In the meantime, the casino execs don't even see them as they greet the customers walking in with 10k.

just because people make money doing something doesn't mean I think they should. thanks for coming to my TED talk

We're not talking about drugs here.  Clearly they have a good strategy that works.

profit and drugs are indistinguishable to lame people

[Bruce]

I only go to Walmart out of necessity because they've driven out several other retail options (including the locally-owned stores that offered much, much better service).

It's just not a pleasant experience at all from being eyed by security all over (and having been falsely accused before, fuck them), having to beg for things out of the cabinets at an ever-increasing number of sections (even in rural stores), and now the recent strategy of turning off the self checkout for most of the day and forcing me back into the annoyingly long and understaffed cashier lines.

I primarily do my shopping at Costco (where they seem to realize that employees treated well creates a lot of goodwill), WinCo, or Grocery Outlet. The latter two have prices comparable to Walmart but a poorer selection, so I might have to slog over to another store anyway but it does reduce the number of seconds I spend inside of there.

[J N Winkler]

Those of us who dislike frequent planogram changes are not necessarily disagreeing with the proposition that they can lead to short-term increases in profit from the shopper population as a whole.  We are only arguing that they create a disincentive for us to shop at the stores that engage in them.

In any event, this is just one dimension in which the retail tug-of-war plays out between consumers on the one hand and retailers and manufacturers on the other.  Another is the cycle of building and then running down brand equity.  I've seen this happen with trousers, where a given brand will sell thick, tough fabric with good tailoring almost at cost for several years to build a reputation, and then cash out by offshoring to Nicaragua or Thailand, where sweatshop workers put together an only superficially identical product out of thin schlocky cloth.

[GaryV]

I made an online donation to a charity today. When I printed the receipt, I saw that they charged $9.75 for me using my credit card. I don't recall seeing a line item for that - most online donations have a "would you like to cover our $2.00 costs" line. Remind me not to donate to that charity again.

[hbelkins]

Around here, it's Walmart or nothing.

The nearest Walmart to me is not a supercenter. It's in Jackson, where my office is located.

Within an hour of me, there's a number of Walmart Supercenters (Richmond, Winchester, Mt. Sterling, Paintsville, Hazard, and London). The nearest Meijer is an hour away, in Richmond. The nearest Target is 90 minutes away, in Lexington.

This recent strand of discussion on Walmart has been interesting.

Personally, I don't go there for the decor.  I don't think it's bad, as such, but the color scheme emphasizes whites (linoleum floor), gray (section dividers), and various shades of blue (accent features), so it comes across to me as chilly.  Except in the grocery section (for those stores that have one), lighting levels are also lower, in sharp contrast to Target, which almost feels overlit to me.

My experience is just the opposite. I find Target to be not well-lit at all. Walmart is much brighter than Target.

[thenetwork]

Walmart was good in the early 90's when they were on the "Made In The USA" ad bandwagon and had signs all over the store saying that.  Then it became "Made In The USA* (*-- using foreign materials)". 

[Max Rockatansky]

Those of us who dislike frequent planogram changes are not necessarily disagreeing with the proposition that they can lead to short-term increases in profit from the shopper population as a whole.  We are only arguing that they create a disincentive for us to shop at the stores that engage in them.

In any event, this is just one dimension in which the retail tug-of-war plays out between consumers on the one hand and retailers and manufacturers on the other.  Another is the cycle of building and then running down brand equity.  I've seen this happen with trousers, where a given brand will sell thick, tough fabric with good tailoring almost at cost for several years to build a reputation, and then cash out by offshoring to Nicaragua or Thailand, where sweatshop workers put together an only superficially identical product out of thin schlocky cloth.

A lot of the retail practices I watch from afar as Loss Prevention are alien and vexing to me.  While I understand the "theory" behind Planogram shifting I tend to question how effective of a strategy it is.  Then again, my wife loves to shop at stores that have shuffled things around.  I likely am not the customer those shifts are intended to attract.

One more plus for Target that I just thought of is that they really don't play music.  Apparently the vanilla music most stores play is something intended to induce sensory deprivation and reduce your sense of how much time you spend shopping.  I prefer quiet over bland music regardless of the shopping theory.

[vdeane]

My apartment complex got bought out by a large company with dozens of properties, so I've shifted from having local management to having a corporate landlord.  But what's really annoying me right now is that I don't know what I'm going to do for paying rent going forward.  They took away the option to send a check to the local office, which is what I've been doing (via my bank's online bill pay system).  The only supported option seems to be to make a payment via their resident portal, which requires me to either give them my bank account information or pay a "convenience fee" to pay via credit or debit card.  Just setting up something via my bank's online bill pay like I do for every other bill does not appear to be an option.  I do not want to have to authorize direct withdrawal from my bank account for any reason ever (in fact, I have extra amounts withheld from my paychecks specifically so I can avoid this scenario while still filing electronically federally), but neither am I a type to pay extra fees when I can avoid it, so I don't know what I'm going to do.  It should be mandatory to offer a way to pay that doesn't involve authorizing direct bank account withdrawal or paying extra fees.

[webny99]

My apartment complex got bought out by a large company with dozens of properties, so I've shifted from having local management to having a corporate landlord.  But what's really annoying me right now is that I don't know what I'm going to do for paying rent going forward.  They took away the option to send a check to the local office, which is what I've been doing (via my bank's online bill pay system).  The only supported option seems to be to make a payment via their resident portal, which requires me to either give them my bank account information or pay a "convenience fee" to pay via credit or debit card.  Just setting up something via my bank's online bill pay like I do for every other bill does not appear to be an option.  I do not want to have to authorize direct withdrawal from my bank account for any reason ever (in fact, I have extra amounts withheld from my paychecks specifically so I can avoid this scenario while still filing electronically federally), but neither am I a type to pay extra fees when I can avoid it, so I don't know what I'm going to do.  It should be mandatory to offer a way to pay that doesn't involve authorizing direct bank account withdrawal or paying extra fees.

Agreed regarding your last point. It's a lot more logical for the payee to give out their bank account information and allow the payer to set things up on their end than to force the payer to give out their information. Will they not allow you to send a check to a different address?

[CtrlAltDel]

My apartment complex got bought out by a large company with dozens of properties, so I've shifted from having local management to having a corporate landlord.  But what's really annoying me right now is that I don't know what I'm going to do for paying rent going forward.  They took away the option to send a check to the local office, which is what I've been doing (via my bank's online bill pay system).  The only supported option seems to be to make a payment via their resident portal, which requires me to either give them my bank account information or pay a "convenience fee" to pay via credit or debit card.  Just setting up something via my bank's online bill pay like I do for every other bill does not appear to be an option.  I do not want to have to authorize direct withdrawal from my bank account for any reason ever (in fact, I have extra amounts withheld from my paychecks specifically so I can avoid this scenario while still filing electronically federally), but neither am I a type to pay extra fees when I can avoid it, so I don't know what I'm going to do.  It should be mandatory to offer a way to pay that doesn't involve authorizing direct bank account withdrawal or paying extra fees.

Depending on specific language of your lease, you may be able to continue to pay as you have, at least until you have to renew and they change things. If they say no, just point out the appropriate clause.

Another option, and one I use for my gym, is to set up another account at another bank specifically for the purpose and only put just enough money to pay the rent into it each month. So, while the bank will have access to the account, your main account will be protected, thus minimizing the potential for financial errors or hijinks.

[ZLoth]

I keep a minimal amount (about $200) in my checking account unless I have a large check written just to minimize any damage, and transfer most of my paycheck to my savings account. My credit card and mortgage payment pull from savings. Although I just received a letter earlier this month that my mortgage servicer has been transferred back to my credit union. After July 1st, I have to get new details and re-setup the automatic payments. Of course, I hate paying by check because the account information is right...smark... dab at the bottom and can be easily duplicated.

The only supported option seems to be to make a payment via their resident portal, which requires me to either give them my bank account information or pay a "convenience fee" to pay via credit or debit card.

Convenience fee to pay via credit card.... ugg but understandable. Convenience fee to pay via debit card....  .

[1995hoo]

....

Another option, and one I use for my gym, is to set up another account at another bank specifically for the purpose and only put just enough money to pay the rent into it each month. So, while the bank will have access to the account, your main account will be protected, thus minimizing the potential for financial errors or hijinks.

The one thing as to which I would advise caution is to note that some banks will automatically close an account if the balance is too low or zero, so unless vdeane can verify that the bank would not do that, it would probably be a good idea to put some amount beyond the rent payment in that account and just leave it there.

[SEWIGuy]

My apartment complex got bought out by a large company with dozens of properties, so I've shifted from having local management to having a corporate landlord.  But what's really annoying me right now is that I don't know what I'm going to do for paying rent going forward.  They took away the option to send a check to the local office, which is what I've been doing (via my bank's online bill pay system).  The only supported option seems to be to make a payment via their resident portal, which requires me to either give them my bank account information or pay a "convenience fee" to pay via credit or debit card.  Just setting up something via my bank's online bill pay like I do for every other bill does not appear to be an option.  I do not want to have to authorize direct withdrawal from my bank account for any reason ever (in fact, I have extra amounts withheld from my paychecks specifically so I can avoid this scenario while still filing electronically federally), but neither am I a type to pay extra fees when I can avoid it, so I don't know what I'm going to do.  It should be mandatory to offer a way to pay that doesn't involve authorizing direct bank account withdrawal or paying extra fees.

I have allowed direct debit for years and never had a problem. Sometimes I think people get way too concerned about this kind of stuff.

[SEWIGuy]

Target = Walmart but with slightly better presentation.

Target's higher end selection is better than anything I see at Wal-Mart.

[jeffandnicole]

I have allowed direct debit for years and never had a problem. Sometimes I think people get way too concerned about this kind of stuff.

I'm surprised how people forgot how insecure checks are.

A check often has the person's name, address, account number, bank name, & bank ABA number. It has the person's signature. It's a piece of paper that has everything possible to gather someone's identity and banking information.  Once handed over, it can go thru any number of hands. It can be photocopied and distributed. It can be dropped during transportation to the bank. The bank can enter or scan the info wrong, causing a much larger than intended withdrawal.

If a check was thought of today, it would be crucified as being a magnet for identify and banking theft.

And to top it off, many individuals and businesses have the ability to submit the check electronically for deposit. The banking info that was attempted to be kept off the internet was still submitted via the internet.

Can issues occur with auto withdrawals? Of course. Nothing is fool-proof.