Macy’s: Adding Same-Day Delivery Would Cost Us Next To Nothing

Written by Frank Hayes
August 15th, 2012

The big news from Macy’s earnings call on August 8 isn’t that the department store giant might someday offer same-day delivery if customers ever show a desire for it. The real news is that same-day would require almost no capital outlay, nor will expanding Macy’s current store-to-door delivery program beyond the currently planned 290 stores, according to the person who should know: Macy’s CFO.

By not building out its delivery capabilities according to some grand plan, the 800-store chain has put itself in a position to do almost anything it wants. And because the CapEx is so low, the ROI is essentially instantaneous.

Adding a store to the store-to-door effort involves “a small amount of capital,” said CFO Karen Hoguet, responding to an analyst’s question. “It is more expense, obviously, to have these people available to fulfill throughout the store.”

Part of the reason there’s little capital expenditure required to add a store to store-to-door is that Macy’s isn’t doing anything fancy in the back room where orders are filled. Orders come in, mostly from other stores (“The lion’s share of what they’re fulfilling are orders from other stores, not from dot-com,” Hoguet said). Then the associates assigned to store-to-door collect the merchandise, and pack and ship it from previously unused back-room space.

There’s no fancy automated pick-and-pack, no special technology involved. The whole effort does depend on a major IT project—a chain-wide view of inventory and a fulfillment algorithm that picks the best store to ship an order from, based on whose inventory is moving slowly. But aside from that, it has been done on the cheap.

The result: The original, small-scale store-to-door project had something very close to instant ROI. (Well, except for the odd Loss Prevention issue.) And expanding it cost very little per store, so the payback on that was very fast, too.

Then, once store-to-door was in place, bolting on E-Commerce fulfillment was almost zero-cost. Nothing changed in the stores—an order that originated online was just another order to pick, pack and ship. The fulfillment logic for the online orders was the same as that for store-to-door orders.

No grandiose plan, little risk, fast payback.

According to Hoguet, “By and large, our fulfillment rates coming out of the stores are getting very close to the same accuracy and on-time rate as that in the distribution center,” she said, adding, “In total, we are doing a spectacular job in fulfilling the orders out of the stores, frankly better than I thought we could do. So it’s really quite encouraging.”

Hoguet probably really is surprised. Maybe she shouldn’t be.


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.