advertisement
advertisement

Updated: No, Target Won’t Be Slashing Its IT Budget By Two-Thirds Next Year. But Could It?

Written by Frank Hayes
June 24th, 2013

Is Target (NYSE:TGT) about to slash IT spending? No, it turns out, it’s not. An investors’ note from Citi analyst Deborah Weinswig on Friday (June 21) said Target has reached “peak spending” on IT and next year the IT budget will drop from the range of $130 million to $160 million down to between $30 million and $60 million. That would be $100 million, or about two-thirds of Target’s IT spend, chopped from the budget.

But on Thursday (June 27), Citi reissued that investors’ note at Target’s prompting, because in reality Target’s IT spending will actually rise next year. It seems there was a communication problem between Target’s top executives and Citi. The new version of the note reads: “TGT is investing approx. $0.20-$0.25 per share more in technology this year than last year. Next year, the incremental spending on technology is expected to be worth $0.05-$0.10/share YOY.”

No slashed IT budget. No wild swing between investing in new systems and digesting the results. In short, a much more conventional IT budget story.

But wait—what if Citi had gotten it right the first time? Could that even have worked?

Big IT budget cuts are the sort of thing investors love to hear about, because IT is widely viewed as a cost with not much benefit—a truly skewed point of view in a world of merged channel (OK, omnichannel if you truly must) retail, but that’s the Wall Street mindset that retail CEOs and CFOs have to deal with. But how realistic would is it be for Target to do that kind of slashing? Maybe not as unrealistic as it seems, when the other retail-IT reality comes into play: You no longer have to staff up for big projects or lay people off to cut costs.

First, consider Target’s current big projects. Weinswig said, based on briefings with Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel and CFO John Mulligan, that Target is spending 20 to 25 cents per share on IT this year. With about 640 million shares and about $3 billion in profit, that’s between 4.3 and 5.3 percent for IT—a very high budget share for retail IT.

Where’s that money going? One big project is rolling out buy-online-pickup-instore in time for the holiday buying period. “The company is also investing in E-commerce distribution, vendor relationships and predictive analytics/data management,” Weinswig wrote.

Next year, that $100 million chopped from the IT budget would drop Target’s IT spending down to between 1 and just over 2 percent. That’s about half of IT’s typical share for big retailers as recently as a decade ago. It’s reasonable to expect that famine budget will include virtually no major projects.

How much sense does that kind of swing make? In the past it would have been crazy, if only because it would have been a staffing nightmare. Never mind bringing on real employees—even hiring and then dumping that big an army of consultants would have been a paperwork nightmare.

But Target doesn’t need an army of consultants. Target needs certain well-defined capabilities: in-store pickup, predictive analytics, logistics. Building those things would make no sense. Neither would deep integration with existing systems, since that would take too long for the done-by-Holiday schedule and will probably be obsolete within a few years anyway.

But bolting on capabilities built by outsiders to work with Target’s existing systems? That makes sense.


advertisement

Leave a Reply

Readers, specifically those who want to comment on a story:
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 17,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.