advertisement
advertisement

Macy’s Stops Reporting Online Stats, Blames Too Much Channel Blur

Written by Evan Schuman
February 27th, 2013

Arguing that “the line between stores and the Internet is blurring so much,” Macy’s (NYSE:M) has become the first major publicly held retailer to stop reporting its E-Commerce stats. Setting aside the fact that Macy’s would always see less disclosure—especially to rivals—as a nice thing, the move signals an important step for omni-channel/merged-channel retailing.

The day when in-store, mobile and online are so intermixed that they can’t be meaningfully broken out is the same day true merged-channel retailing has happened. For Macy’s, that day happened on Tuesday (Feb. 26).

“Candidly, it’s getting so hard to know what’s a store sale and what’s a mobile sale and what’s Internet. It’s getting harder to figure out the lines between them,” Macy’s CFO Karen Hoguet told analysts on Tuesday. When asked for some E-Commerce projections, she said: “I really can’t give you that number. I mean, I don’t know it. But clearly, the growth is continuing very aggressively. But sometimes, it’s being bought on a mobile device sitting in a store. So I’m not sure how to define that.”

Macy’s itself is doing what it can to help blur those distinctions yet more, as the chain expands its already announced plans to use its stores as E-Commerce distribution centers. The concept is that the inventory for certain stores, considered fulfillment stores, could be leveraged to fulfill any online orders. On Tuesday, Macy’s said it would sharply increase the number of stores participating in that program.

“We currently have 292 stores enabled to fulfill goods, up from only 23 a year ago. And by the fall of this year, we expect to have a total of approximately 500 stores for filling orders, which represents about 85 percent of our business,” the CFO said, adding that such a figure is “a significant number and we may increase it from there. In the future, we expect these fulfillment locations will be key to offering faster and even same-day delivery and also will enable the customer to buy online and pick up in-store.”

A key—and arguably the key—part of this plan involves pricing optimization. The problem is the very nature of the fast-paced apparel segment, where not only are styles short-lived, but demand varies sharply between various geographies. That forces products to be steeply discounted quickly.

The game is keeping up margin by finding any way possible to delay those markdowns for as long as possible. But that idea, which seemed straightforward enough on conference room whiteboards, proved to be much more challenging when deployed. “In terms of price optimization, I think that’s proven to be a lot harder than we had expected it to be, and we’re still working on how to optimize pricing across the company. But that has not been as easy to do as we had hoped early on,” Hoguet said. “We’ve built algorithms to help us determine from where to pull the inventory, and we are learning more each day about how we need to refine these formulas.”


advertisement

2 Comments | Read Macy’s Stops Reporting Online Stats, Blames Too Much Channel Blur

  1. Benjamin Says:

    Most companies that started as strictly brick-and-mortar retailers have not thought of themselves as e-retailers yet, because planning habits and systems have been developed mainly to support strictly retail locations for so long. Then ecommerce forced the brick-and-mortar model to evolve to include ecommerce systems, but it never forced a total redesign of the brick-and-mortar concept to support the ecommerce concept. Macy’s is now supporting its ecommerce model via the brick-and-mortar locations it already has available. Smart move.

  2. David P Himes Says:

    I find this mildly annoying. Because the sales transaction can clearly be categorized based upon the transaction-engine — retail store, web site, mobile device, phone center.

    All sales are influenced by multiple channels of messaging.

    So, I interpret Macy’s decision as a desire to not be comparable to other merchants, except at the top line. It may even be a way of avoiding their own internal debate about channel conflict.

    Whatever their rationale, it’s affect is to cease providing useful information to their external stakeholders, investors, analysts.

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.