JC Penney > jcp? | Ron Johnson done as CEO
Is a slow certain death better than a likely quick one, but with the latter you still have a chance to escape the executioner’s ax?
Or is that view, that the classic version of JC Penney will slowly wither and die, completely tainted by the bias of a guy who likes his clothes to fit a little closer and look a little more polished than most?
Ron Johnson is done at JC Penney. The New CEO is the old CEO, Myron Ullman, who was at the helm from 2004-2011. So back to the old ways. Or, maybe not entirely. Perhaps a few high points from the Ron Johnson period of radical change might end up sticking to JC Penney? It was, afterall, the XFL that popularized the use of the sky cam during football games.
Well hell. Now what?
Maybe worth a revisit:
- Is JC Penney Doomed?
- In Person: The Nick Wooster led 2013 Spring collection
- In Person: The Fall 2012 jcp collection
- The Stafford Wingtip Boot, and the Claiborne Suede Wingtip
Many thanks to Gravien, Chris L., Jeff H., Bryan S., and all of the others who sent in the tip about the news.
Yes! Back to billowy shirts, loose/drape-y pants, and wall to wall sale racks!
The flame that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Can somebody please link to “Candle In The wind”. I’m just too choked up to embed right now.
Hmm, these chino shorts were originally $70 and now only $14. I guess that means it’s a good deal!
Ha!
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/breakout/end-near-jcpenney-144258981.html
Yeah, I was just going to forward this on to Joe. I fear its time to stock up on OCBDs and Stafford shoes while you can.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_saUN4j7Gw
There are so many fashion ignorant people in this world that cause this sort of thing. I have spent more money at JCP in the past 3 months than I have in my entire life combined. Hopefully not a lot changes.
It all depends on whether or not the quality of the stuff in the stores goes back to how it was. If they still have a lot of the things that have been featured here over the past year, it just means an adjustment on when to go into the place to shop.
So is Wooster gonna leave too or what? I got the impression that Wooster was the one driving the newer, trendier designs.
This sucks but is not surprising. I sure hope they don’t go back to the awful styling of their previous clothes.
Looks like I’ll be in jcp this weekend picking up the stuff I’ve been debating over for the past month.
Unfortunately the OCBDs have already been jacked up to $40 in-store and online. Better wait for a sale and stack it with a coupon! *sigh*
I thought so as well… maybe I am mistaken?
Menswear was never going to save JCP. The problem is a dying business model with too much overhead, too much inefficiency, and too little value to the customer. And by customer, I mean the women who do most of the shopping there.
That’s true, but the big issue is within the company. As was said earlier, too much overhead and a bad business model. Horrid website as well.
If the world wants red paint, is it smarter to run a massive ad campaign to convince them to buy your blue paint, or should you just make red paint?
Same here. Of course, I spent $11 on a shirt, vs. the $0 I had ever spent before, but still…it was a step in the right direction.
Not a surprise. JCP clothes suck — notwithstanding the recent love affair this site has had with them. Next up – LEC.
I would argue that one of the problems JC Penney had was that the new line of JCP clothes didn’t “suck” enough. At least, not enough to appeal to the customer base they had developed over the last few decades, who along with the stylistic switch, left in droves after the no-sales debacle.
It was too much, too soon, with no patience (or cash reserves to ride out the change).
Your comment seems a little black and white, even in the face of so many leaving positive remarks about their new clothes in this very comments section.
I do agree with you, to some extend about Lands’ End Canvas. It feels like they’re fading further into the background. I still love, and wear, at least 3 items from LEC (Crosby Moc Toe boots, one of their OCBDs, and the madras blazer from last year). Need to grab me a pair of their Made in the USA jeans soon too. But from the business side, despite being owned by Sears, LEC/Lands’ End is not a department store, and could probably weather downturns/slumps a lot easier than a traditional department store like JC Penney.
But sadly, that’s the primary demographic that shops there. I’ve been to JCP more in the past three months than in the past 10 years, but the clientele really hasn’t changed. It’s mostly women, who shop for themselves and their husbands/boyfriends and tend to be on the unfashionable and heavier side. I admit it’s mean, but that’s what I primarily saw. And they couldn’t attract new customers fast enough to make up for the losses from their base.
LEC started off so strong too. I still wish I had picked up that khaki peacoat from way back.
Perhaps bringing in a CEO from a cutting edge company like Apple was not the right financial move based on JCPs mostly conservative existing customer base. I set foot in the store for the first time in over a decade under Johnson though.
I agree because I have spend a ton of money at JCP. I hope that they don’t change the direction of clothes.
I was there a couple weeks back to buy a coffee maker. Didn’t actually have time to look in menswear (it was a coffeemaker emergency), but my local store looked absolutely awful. Pretty thin stock of everything, what was there was just kind of scattered. The kitchen department kind of looked like Tj Maxx. It really had the look of someplace about to go out of business.
But I did get my coffee maker
Exactly. I can see the impulse to get new customers, especially when your base tends to trend old, but you can’t just abandon one and hope a new one shows up.
I’ve been sort of underwhelmed with them, to be honest. Everything I’ve bought was on pretty deep discount, and a good deal at the clearance price ( I got three pairs of their jeans a couple years ago for 14 bucks a pop), but the quality wasn’t there for their full retail price (or even small discounts). I think the Jeans had originally been 70 bucks, and there was nothing making them worth that (these aren’t the USA ones). I got a few shirts, and the quality seemed to be step up from Old Navy, but again, at original retail of double to triple. Sure, they have sales, but often not enough, especially after their prices seem to have drifted up. I keep browsing, but rarely pull the trigger
I shop for my groceries at Wegman’s. What a great grocery store, but an even better marketing machine. They communicate with customers via emails and mailers/magazines to showcase their produce with all sorts of recipes. They also have a great prepared food section featuring their $6 meals that inspire you to make it yourself with their products.
My point is, they should showcase their products like Joe did on April 3 in his “Style Scenario”. Sort of like how Andrew Snavely does it at http://www.Primermagazine.com with his “Getup” posts. Today you need to engage your customers to keep them loyal.
The new, better fitted and designed clothes aren’t the problem. It was the whole “no sale” thing. Shoppers want to hunt for bargains and they want to think they are getting a great deal.
Reminds me of Zara marking up their stuff before having their “sale,”
Interesting to see what’s going to happen with not only the inhouse brands, but their designer pop up stores. Michael Graves said it himself that he “believed in Ron Johnson.” I wonder with the new (old) CEO if well known and upcoming designers will want to associate themselves with JCP further more? It’s too bad Johnson didn’t have the opportunity to be at the helm for 3 years as of planned. Lets see how long it takes for Wooster to jump ship, or possibly be thrown off…
I agree to an extent. I think it was a combination of the two. The no-sale thing alienated the old customer base, as did the new products. And they couldn’t bring in new customers fast enough. So many people are pointing at the no-sale thing and saying “yup, that was it, that did them in” when I think it’s more complicated than that. Not only was the stuff “not on sale” it was different stuff. Had a different feel/look.
BR is perpetually on sale. We all get that. But if they were to do away with codes and sales and priced their blazers in the low $100s? I think most of us would be just fine with that. If they started selling boxy fit blazers in poly at the same time (a reverse scenario of the jcp product switch) we’d head for the exits too.
I think this is dead on. I think the concept of “everyday low prices” could work for clothes just the same as it works for the Walmarts and Targets of the world. I mean why not? No logical consumer actually prefers the cat and mouse sales game do they? (Or do they?)
I was very excited at the concept, even more so than the new, far more stylish clothes after years of dealing with the traditional department store tactic (like Macy’s) who have perpetual sales, which, let’s be honest, is simply a means of price discrimination. I honestly don’t think I’d ever buy a full priced item at Macy’s, nor JCrew or Banana for that matter….but people do. And they make a larger margin off those sales, and gain some market perception of a higher quality good, which readers of this sight know is nonsense.
Seems like every article or analysis of JC Penney just pointed to the no sales idea as THE blunder, but that’s just lazy. I think Joe has a good point, and if JC Penney had kept everything the same and not tried to switch its target market while implementing the no sales tactic, it would have fared much better. We also probably wouldn’t even be talking about it here since the men’s clothes prior to the switch were well…let’s just say we weren’t the target market.
Disclosure: I work in marketing and advertising, though for medical devices and pharmaceuticals and not fashion.
I agree it’s the combination of the 2 effects (alienating the existing customer base, and then alienating customers in general) but how much each contributed to the overall failure makes for interesting technical discussion.
There is extensive research that customers prefer the cat and mouse game, just like they prefer pulling a slot machine or buying lottery tickets rather than saving their money. It’s the same model that propels the profits of Zara, Lululemon, and other fast-fashion/limited supply stores. People want to check things out because they want a bargain or they want a limited edition item. It stirs the competitive spirit and also the positive emotions that occur when someone thinks they got something special (in this case, a bargain that happens for a limited time) . People are not logical. If we were, we’d be machines.
The second blunder about not transitioning people over to the new product is a mistake, but not that big. If you offered “Sale sale sale!” then people would come in to look at the new wares and be impressed with the new quality of the product. By changing the product and not having anything to grab the customer off the street (for example), you end up not selling anything… or close to nothing in this case 😛
My opinion: If they kept everything the same and removed the sales, they would have lost money — they would have fared better, but they would have lost money from the previous quarters/years. The change in product without proper transition as well as the no-sale tactic sealed their fate.
Edited for errors and flow.
There’s a big difference between BR sales and the old JCP sales. BR sales are simple – e.g. 30% off everything with a few exclusions. JCP sales were a maze built for bargain trolls. Pants start at $50, are marked down to $30, then you have a two day %20 off sale and a $5 coupon, so the final price is $19.
This is because they had completely different customer bases, who wanted different and mutually exclusive things from their store. JCP’s customers cared about price, and fit, quality, etc. were all secondary. And when your customers want to pay $12 for a shirt, that shirt’s going to be polyester and the size of a parachute so that body shape doesn’t matter. Furthermore, JCP trained them for decades that the way to get a good price at JCP was lots of sales, and you can’t undo that training.
BR caters to more style oriented customers, and these were customers JCP tried to attract. They’re not going to buy a tent sized polyester shirt regardless of price. They also don’t want to navigate a maze of sales – hence why BR, J.Crew, and the like have much simpler sales and pricing. This is a much more profitable customer than the bargain trolls, hence why JCP wanted them.
You simply can’t build a store that attracts both crowds. Places like BR and the old JCP were basically not even competitors – there was zero chance of any customer defecting from one store to the other.
I agree with a lot of what you guys have said in this thread. As illogical as it must seem, people (most) love the bargain hunt. I don’t clip coupons or buy the cheapest option available, but even I will get excited trying to play the tiered discount game with retailers (that JCF Gilt coupon should go well with the polo and shorts sale they are running). There is a reason most places do it.
The old JCP, from what I understand, took it to a whole other level beyond the 30% off everything sale. Macys runs similarly complicated sales with their one-day, family & friends, etc., etc. that tier one after another.
Add onto that the typical JCP customer is a middle-aged woman responsible for most of the household purchases. For the men and boys in the family she is looking to get them basic clothes, as cheap as possible without looking Walmart-ish, and does not want to deal with returns on something that is “too tight” or “flashy.” She wants to avoid buying things that will not fit after the first trip through the dryer (I am not in marketing or demographics, but this is my basic understanding of how most household purchases are made).
So first you take away the tiered sales. The current customer is probably upset but will still take a look at what you are trying to do. They see bold colors/patterns, the words “slim fit”, and shirts with even a slight taper and they are gone. Too many other options. They only chose JCP over Kohls or Sears or wherever because they could get some really cheap and relatively safe, unobjectionable clothes. What is JCP offering to them now? A halfway updated product display that doesn’t even display things of interest to them?
Then you have the new customers. JCP did a horrible job getting the word out they were changing. If not for this site, I would have had no idea. I went into the store and was mildly impressed. The clothes were nothing special other than the good fit on the oxfords (and a few other pieces). It was still pretty obvious the clothes were cheaply made, they just fit better. Don’t get me wrong, I have a bunch of the oxfords that I wear for layering and such because they fit me perfectly, but I prefer other options. And I suspect that is where most new customers ended up, if JCP was even able to get them in the door with their non-existent marketing.
Plus, the majority of the mens section was organized in a way that made absolutely no sense no matter how I tried to break it down. I attempted to try on blazers and suit separates, and I am still not sure how to find a size, color, style other than blind luck. Maybe it was just the 2 or 3 stores I went to, but it was basically chaos.
I walked around the rest of the store and from what I could tell the womens stuff had not been overhauled as quickly as the mens (there was signage indicating new stuff/store-within-store was coming soon). Let’s break that down. You alienate the core of your shopping demo (middle-aged women) and try to make up for it by luring in a group that has never had any interest in your store and is a small percentage of total available customers (younger budget-conscious fashion-conscious males). I only made it through 6 credits of an MBA, but I know that is trouble.
Kudos to JCP for trying something new but their implementation was awful. They needed to do something because their old way was not working. It certainly seems like Johnson had a huge ego and just assumed his vision would work. And maybe it would have with a few tweaks to walk the fine line between keeping old customers and getting new ones, but Johnson ignored the old adage that it is easier/cheaper to retain a customer than get a new one.
When it comes down to it, though, mens clothing is a minor player in this whole fiasco. It is easy to point to and probably had an effect, but the massive overhead they were carrying and their aging consumer demo is what drove this thing off the cliff.
I want to think the fact that they sell their jcp OCBD’s like hotcakes until they’re gone would convince them to DO MORE OF THAT. I’m probably just being optimistic.
I was there on Tuesday and they were still $15.
The new (spring) JCP OCBDs were never $15. They were $25. You were probably looking at the discontinued fall JCP shirts or a Stafford shirt.
The single best move they made was getting Wooster. Thanks jcp
Yeah, the two or three times I’ve been to my “local” (30 mins away) JCP store in the past few months, the main customers in the men’s section were 50 year old women leading their grumbling husbands around. I think younger men (35 and under) these days are more inclined to shop for themselves, think about their clothes as things they want vs things they need, and so forth, but the JCP demo is still composed of a lot of guys who hate the idea of shopping for clothes.
I’m jealous that you’re able to shop at Wegmans. I grew up in Rochester and now I live in the Midwest.