Target’s Too-Clever Site Fails (Or Does It?): Inside Missoni Tuesday

Written by Frank Hayes
September 15th, 2011

Target’s E-Commerce inventiveness is coming back to bite it. When the chain’s three-week-old Web site crashed early Tuesday morning (Sept. 13) in the face of a ravening hoard of shoppers looking for Missoni products, the site truly was down. By noon Eastern time, the site was back up—but many would-be customers continued to think the site was offline throughout the rest of the day. Those who did reach the site to shop reported issues at checkout time that might (or might not) have been true IT glitches. The problem: Even when works, it doesn’t work the way customers expect. And, as a practical matter, that can be as bad as the site simply not working.

That compounded the problems of “Missoni Tuesday,” which a Target spokesman said saw “greater item demand than we do on a typical Black Friday.” But the crush of customers, and the fact that so many items sold out, masked a serious issue: Even though made buckets of money that day, the result left a bad taste in the mouths of many Target customers—and the site’s nonconformist challenges are still there.

What did happen on Tuesday? Target will only confirm that the site was down for about three hours in the morning and then “inaccessible at times.” That inaccessibility to customers may have been due to’s unusual design, which appears to allow only a limited number of customer sessions on the site at once.

According to several Web monitoring services, the site ground almost to a halt just before 8:00 AM (New York time). If customers were patient enough (the error page took more than two minutes to load, according to Pingdom), they saw a picture of Target’s mascot dog Bullseye in a repairman’s suit, with the words “Oh no, something went wrong when we tried to (load this page/process your request). Please try again. If the problem persists, please feel free to contact Target help.”

Nothing unusual about that—except, instead of also sending a typical HTTP error code such as 500 (internal server error) or 503 (service temporarily unavailable), the page reported code 200: everything OK.

By about 8:30 AM, the “Oh no” page was replaced by a different error page—same dog, but this time the message said: “Hello, we are hard at work making the site better. Sorry for the inconvenience—we’ll be back up and running shortly.”

At 11:15 AM (according to AlertBot), that page was replaced by yet another—still the same dog—with the message: “Woof! We are suddenly extremely popular. You may not be able to access our site momentarily due to unusually high traffic. Please stay here and we’ll try to get you in as soon as we can! We’re up and running here.” AlertBot—and many potential customers—concluded that the site was still down.

But it wasn’t. That was Target’s innovative idea for preserving site performance. Once the number of customers in the online store reached a predefined limit, new customers just had to wait for someone else to leave. As a later version of the “Woof” page put it, “You will be automatically moved into the site when a spot is available. Please do not refresh this page or else you will lose your place in line.” Still later versions explained that the site would automatically retry the homepage every 30 seconds.

In short, the site was working exactly as it was designed to. The “Woof” page lets customers in only as space is available; the fact that each session times out after 30 minutes, as we noted when we first looked at the new site, makes room by clearing out inactive customer sessions. (On a normal day, the pop-up message that indicates the timeout appears to have no effect. On Tuesday, it kicked inattentive customers back to the “Woof” page.)

Unfortunately for Target, that carefully managed queue is not what customers expect.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

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...

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.