topic Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE? in Q Talk

IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

Spurt — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 04:57:28 GMT

Interesting reading about Mary Campbell from Linda Moss's Blog. And you will get a good laugh at this from CEO Mike George,

"Mary has been a driver of our success over the past two decades and instrumental in delivering a seamless, consistent and engaging experience to QVC customers,”. Really??? ENGAGING??? More and more customers and getting disgusted and many are reducing the time they spend watching or making purchases from QVC. More like a dull and boring experience....And the only reason e-commerce has increased is due to the fact that QVC's programming is so boring and more and more people don't want to watch, so the few products customers still like are purchased online instead of calling Customer Service.

http://homeshoppingista.wordpress.com/2014/10/23/is-mary-campbell-the-new-claire-watts-at-qvc/#comment-43284

HOMESHOPPINGISTA BY LINDA MOSS-

Is Mary Campbell The New Claire Watts At QVC?

QVC has promoted Mary Campbell to Executive Vice President of U.S. Commerce Platforms, reporting directly to QVC Inc. top banana Mike George.

We asked QVC, and never got an answer, as to whether Campbell is the replacement for Claire Watts, the QVC U.S. CEO who abruptly exited the channel in September.

It sounds like Campbell is, and if so, it sounds like another case where a woman gets a promotion but doesn’t get the title she really deserves. Just sayin’.

Wednesday’s press release said that Campbell is responsible for guiding the strategic direction of the company’s TV, web, mobile, tablet and social while translating the QVC brand across all platforms to drive customer engagement and e-commerce sales.

“Mary has been a driver of our success over the past two decades and instrumental in delivering a seamless, consistent and engaging experience to QVC customers,” George said in a canned statement. “Through her continued leadership and guidance, we’ll remain at the forefront of innovation in commerce by expanding our TV programming and maintaining our leadership in e-commerce and mobile.”

QVC’s mobile commerce business has grown steadily year over year, currently accounting for 37 percent of U.S. e-commerce revenue in the second quarter 2014. Additionally, QVC is the third-largest mobile commerce player among multicategory retailers according to the 2015 Internet Retailer Mobile 500.

Since joining QVC in 1991, Campbell has held leadership roles across the business, including Merchandising, Planning and Commerce Platforms.

In her most recent role as senior vice president of commerce pPlatforms, Campbell led the expansion of QVC’s broadcast by launching two new TV distribution channels, over-the-air and QVC Plus.

QVC Plus, which now reaches 47 million homes, offers the same programming as the main QVC channel with a three-hour delay along with unique live and pre-produced programming.

Campbell was also instrumental in enhancing QVC’s digital experience through the creation of the company’s first social shopping community, toGather, the redesign of the QVC for iPad application, and the implementation of responsive design for QVC’s website.

Campbell will continue to be based at QVC’s global headquarters in West Chester, Pa.

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

MJDinVegas — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 06:38:05 GMT

Holy cow! If the website has been/is under her domain, the Q is in bigger trouble than I thought. In the best of worlds, she hadn't been tainted by the policies of the previous regime.

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

Remee — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 10:37:33 GMT

I totally agree !! So Mike George is announcing that everything is hers to blame !!! Ha Ha , he's good at hanging out women to dry while the buck is supposed to stop with him!

Just one bad problem after another. I see things only getting worse after New Year's as well. Diet food, exercise and gym equipment, Weight Watchers, and all of the other in-home diet food programs, BORING,BORING, BORING.

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

Spurt — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 14:10:26 GMT

MJD and REMEE---

And since QVC's parent company is separating out QVC's (and the portion they own in HSN) stock it will be interesting to see the results and what the stockholders think.....

"The QVC Group tracking stock allows investors to more closely track QVC’s strong performance, including its leadership in mobile ecommerce and its visionary innovations that provide customers with a seamless, integrated shopping experience across all digital platforms.

It also provides greater clarity and visibility into QVC’s operational and financial results, according to a press release."

And yet another HILARIOUS quote from Mike George......

“Our multichannel approach provides an engaging and immersive shopping experience that fosters meaningful relationships and customer loyalty. The QVC tracking stock is a testament to both our progress and future growth potential. As we build upon our track record of top-line expansion, industry-leading margins, and prudent capital allocation, we look forward to delivering increasing value to our shareholders.”

Meaningful relationships and customer loyalty......that is indeed laughable......if QVC cared any thing about customer retention, relationship and loyalty they would certainly provide more diversity in products and programming.....CLUELESS!!! As for growth I guess he's talking about the growth in the international markets and opening QVC France in 2015....and possibly Brazil and other places....meanwhile QVC USA appears stagnant and not doing all that well....

Here's the link to the full article...

http://homeshoppingista.wordpress.com/2014/10/22/pure-play-qvc-group-tracking-stock-starts-trading/

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

stevieb — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 14:59:50 GMT

Well, I suppose this answers all the questions about hoped for change and the future of QVC. Pretty clearly there isn't going to be any, or at least not much, change that is... I think some of us had hoped that with Watts' departure George would seize this opportunity to bring in someone fresh, who could take a gander at this mess with fresh eyes and implement fresh ideas that hopefully included fresh products and who would deep-six some of what is so very annoying about the current operation. Normally, I'm a big fan of promoting from inside and of hence rewarding long-term staff. In this instance, given the dire need for 'new and different' and given what I'm seeing here appears on this woman's resume, well, I'm saddened and underwhelmed.

Personally, the whole 'title', 'what would they have called her had she been a man' thing couldn't matter less to me. It's all overwhelmingly secondary to the core issue, which is what this change means, or could have meant to QVC. What this says to me is that it's going to be business as usual. What it also says to me, for several reasons, is that George is pretty firmly the man in charge.

I know some of us have been speculating as to whether the problems we feel exist with QVC were the result of Watts, George or the combination. I've long felt that no one person could have created this land-fill and that the 'fault' was with both of them. But let's face it, it would appear that Georgie-boy is here to stay. Otherwise, he'd likely not have been allowed to make this decision, as the board would probably have permitted any replacement to make their own choice. Not only that, but by picking someone who's clearly been part and party to this ongoing fiasco, what he's essentially telling us is that he and the board are just fine with the way things are... and that implies more of the same.

Oh Q, another opportunity missed. What a shame.

And I think we're pretty much done here.

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

Spurt — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 16:59:07 GMT

On 10/24/2014 stevieb said:
Well, I suppose this answers all the questions about hoped for change and the future of QVC. Pretty clearly there isn't going to be any, or at least not much, change that is... I think some of us had hoped that with Watts' departure George would seize this opportunity to bring in someone fresh, who could take a gander at this mess with fresh eyes and implement fresh ideas that hopefully included fresh products and who would deep-six some of what is so very annoying about the current operation. Normally, I'm a big fan of promoting from inside and of hence rewarding long-term staff. In this instance, given the dire need for 'new and different' and given what I'm seeing here appears on this woman's resume, well, I'm saddened and underwhelmed.

Personally, the whole 'title', 'what would they have called her had she been a man' thing couldn't matter less to me. It's all overwhelmingly secondary to the core issue, which is what this change means, or could have meant to QVC. What this says to me is that it's going to be business as usual. What it also says to me, for several reasons, is that George is pretty firmly the man in charge.

I know some of us have been speculating as to whether the problems we feel exist with QVC were the result of Watts, George or the combination. I've long felt that no one person could have created this land-fill and that the 'fault' was with both of them. But let's face it, it would appear that Georgie-boy is here to stay. Otherwise, he'd likely not have been allowed to make this decision, as the board would probably have permitted any replacement to make their own choice. Not only that, but by picking someone who's clearly been part and party to this ongoing fiasco, what he's essentially telling us is that he and the board are just fine with the way things are... and that implies more of the same.

Oh Q, another opportunity missed. What a shame.

And I think we're pretty much done here.

Stevie....I think you hit the nail on the head.....with this assignment it appears that the Q is content to remain status quo and our high hopes for a bit more diversity has vanished....SIGH!!!! Our only slightly last thread of hope is that Q's future financials continue in their stinky ways and the stockholders take notice!!!! They can no longer hide behind Liberty Interactive's other companies....

As for her "lack of title" it doesn't matter to me either, it appears it's just a way for them to offer her less money, which is all part of what appears to be their cost cutting ways.....so they can put that money into their international plans perhaps?...

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

cosmic1 — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 17:08:28 GMT

I guess when they find themselves on the JCP path, they will wonder how they got there. Too bad, there was a great deal of potential to improve, which would translate into an improved bottom line. It seems like they are too tone deaf at the top to realize that they have issues and it will be too late when they figure it out.

It will be interesting to see what they find once they start looking at the business separated out from the rest of their holdings.

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

stevieb — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 18:41:14 GMT

On 10/24/2014 SPURT said:
On 10/24/2014 stevieb said:
Well, I suppose this answers all the questions about hoped for change and the future of QVC. Pretty clearly there isn't going to be any, or at least not much, change that is... I think some of us had hoped that with Watts' departure George would seize this opportunity to bring in someone fresh, who could take a gander at this mess with fresh eyes and implement fresh ideas that hopefully included fresh products and who would deep-six some of what is so very annoying about the current operation. Normally, I'm a big fan of promoting from inside and of hence rewarding long-term staff. In this instance, given the dire need for 'new and different' and given what I'm seeing here appears on this woman's resume, well, I'm saddened and underwhelmed.

Personally, the whole 'title', 'what would they have called her had she been a man' thing couldn't matter less to me. It's all overwhelmingly secondary to the core issue, which is what this change means, or could have meant to QVC. What this says to me is that it's going to be business as usual. What it also says to me, for several reasons, is that George is pretty firmly the man in charge.

I know some of us have been speculating as to whether the problems we feel exist with QVC were the result of Watts, George or the combination. I've long felt that no one person could have created this land-fill and that the 'fault' was with both of them. But let's face it, it would appear that Georgie-boy is here to stay. Otherwise, he'd likely not have been allowed to make this decision, as the board would probably have permitted any replacement to make their own choice. Not only that, but by picking someone who's clearly been part and party to this ongoing fiasco, what he's essentially telling us is that he and the board are just fine with the way things are... and that implies more of the same.

Oh Q, another opportunity missed. What a shame.

And I think we're pretty much done here.

Stevie....I think you hit the nail on the head.....with this assignment it appears that the Q is content to remain status quo and our high hopes for a bit more diversity has vanished....SIGH!!!! Our only slightly last thread of hope is that Q's future financials continue in their stinky ways and the stockholders take notice!!!! They can no longer hide behind Liberty Interactive's other companies....

As for her "lack of title" it doesn't matter to me either, it appears it's just a way for them to offer her less money, which is all part of what appears to be their cost cutting ways.....so they can put that money into their international plans perhaps?...

Is QVC even publicly traded? I'm not sure it is. I know they have a board of directors, who must either be rich as Croesus and hence not really care about the level of profit here or have been utterly hoodwinked by all the corporate hype and obfuscating verbiage... I think any savings at the executive level is being funneled into the budget to pay someone to write all this tripe... And hey, at the end of the day, I'd be pretty happy with the title of Executive VP... I'm sure it's compensated nicely, you know, for however long this lasts... until, well, glub... glub... glub...

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

stevieb — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 18:49:07 GMT

On 10/24/2014 cosmic1 said:
I guess when they find themselves on the JCP path, they will wonder how they got there. Too bad, there was a great deal of potential to improve, which would translate into an improved bottom line. It seems like they are too tone deaf at the top to realize that they have issues and it will be too late when they figure it out.

It will be interesting to see what they find once they start looking at the business separated out from the rest of their holdings.

I've long maintained that this organization, as it currently operates, is arrogant with a capital A. They think they're Teflon and maybe they are, but you know, even Teflon wears down over time. Should anyone ever wake up and realize the engineer has been asleep at the wheel for the past half decade, it might well be too little to late. And you know, I don't much care anymore.

Personally, I think they've got trouble ahead. No one was ever more a fan of QVC than I was at one time. At this point, I almost never watch, and while I do still buy, I do so reluctantly because I really just don't like QVC, at any level, any more. It seems there is a growing list of customers who feel much the same way.

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

cosmic1 — Sat, 25 Oct 2014 00:07:06 GMT

I agree with you, StevieB. Once they wake up, it will be too late.

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

Spurt — Sat, 25 Oct 2014 15:30:32 GMT

On 10/24/2014 stevieb said:
On 10/24/2014 SPURT said:

Is QVC even publicly traded? I'm not sure it is. I know they have a board of directors, who must either be rich as Croesus and hence not really care about the level of profit here or have been utterly hoodwinked by all the corporate hype and obfuscating verbiage... I think any savings at the executive level is being funneled into the budget to pay someone to write all this tripe... And hey, at the end of the day, I'd be pretty happy with the title of Executive VP... I'm sure it's compensated nicely, you know, for however long this lasts... until, well, glub... glub... glub...

I could be wrong, but it appears it is publicly traded....this is what info I found---

QVCis a publicly traded company. PrivCo specializes in private companies, but includes records on public companies like QVCsolely for their private market activity ...

According to the press release it's on NASDAQ under QVC Group and under the symbols QVCA and QVCB and has started trading.....

Hey Stevie, so how many shares are you purchasing

Analyst Robert Routh gave the reminder that "Although some may be concerned about the upcoming Holiday season and how well the home shopping entities as a group will fare during that time, it is important to remember that historically the fourth quarter is the best quarter operationally for both QVC and HSN, which is 38 percent owned by QVC."

In conclusion, Routh saw "QVC as an entity with real operating businesses and a well-recognized name that religiously repurchases shares that is almost a must own as the risk reward profile seems highly favorable at present levels."

Hey Mr. Routh, I'd b concerned too---

Read more:http://www.benzinga.com/analyst-ratings/analyst-color/14/10/4936811/national-alliance-securities-see-liberty-interactive-cor#ixzz3HAS4omHH

http://www.benzinga.com/analyst-ratings/analyst-color/14/10/4936811/national-alliance-securities-see-liberty-interactive-cor

http://homeshoppingista.wordpress.com/2014/10/22/pure-play-qvc-group-tracking-stock-starts-trading/

http://homeshoppingista.wordpress.com/2014/10/04/qvc-to-be-spun-off-as-its-own-stock/

http://homeshoppingista.wordpress.com/2012/02/24/in-recapitalization-qvc-becomes-part-of-tracking-stock-liberty-interactive/

I love this comment from blog reader Zachary--

Let’s see: Slice, Dice, Consolidate, Spin, Dosey Doe, Repeat…. It’s still the same company it has been for decades, selling the same products only now at higher prices and with clueless management. Got to love these guys.

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

Spurt — Sat, 25 Oct 2014 16:26:49 GMT

On 10/24/2014 cosmic1 said: I agree with you, StevieB. Once they wake up, it will be too late.

Hi cosmic you make some excellent points....I just don't understand these retailers---they ignore what customers want, and when it's too late THEN they start listening to their customers .....

OMG HILARIOUS---See if any of this sounds familiar --

THERE ARE PATTERNS IN ONLINE RETAIL FAILURE-SIX OF THE MOST COMMON THINGS THAT LEAD TO FAILURE-

1. LOUSY AND/OR NOT ENOUGH PRODUCTS-

Commerce hasn’t changed much in the past … umm … thousand of years. The basic concept is simple: you buy a product from the manufacturer, bring it to the customer, get something in return. Of course – the customer needs / wants to be provided with the best merchandise he or she can afford.

Failing to put the product first is the one biggest mistake retailers make. It’s easy to believe that it’s all marketing and you can sell anything. You can’t. At least you can’t do it for a prolonged period of time. Eventually people will start asking for their money back. They will post bad reviews. Your store will fail.

So focus on the product. Find manufacturers that will deliver upon high standards.

Having great products is not enough, though – they have to be plenty. Customers need choices. Of course – you might think Apple does not need variety but the industry Apple is in does. There are plenty of PC’s, laptops and smartphones out there. All at the right price.

2. THE WRONG PRICE

Pricing is one of the areas most sensitive to error because it can swing both ways. You can either charge too much or not enough.

You can be charging too much and there is nothing wrong with selling expensive products but make sure they’re worth it. Remember – online, anyone can track prices. Customers can feel cheated if your markup is too large.

You can also be charging too little – remember, prices are not weapons, unless you’re the market leader. Even then – prices should be used as a last resort. A cheap product remains a cheap product. Do the math – see if your supply chain and procurement can handle low prices. If not – differentiate with services, a curated selection of products and great customer service.

3. NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO CUSTOMER CARE

Actual Zappos Call-Center

As an online store there aren’t too many points of contact between you and your customer. Probably the most important is the customer care team. Operators answering the phone are one of online retail’s biggest assets. Or liabilities.

For every Zappos-like company that thrives on great customer care, there are thousands of online retailers ignoring it.

Having a customer satisfaction – oriented team can work wonders for online retailers.

4. IGNORING LOGISTICS

Quick – do you know what makes Walmart the largest retailer in the world (both online and offline)? Prices? Sure, but that’s just part of it.

The answer is logistics. Walmart was not always the company we know today. Between 1980 and 1990 the company started a quick expansion program to enable it to match its competitors. In 1981 they tied their stores through a satellite communications system that would enable real-time reporting, as soon as products were purchased. By 1988 90% of all stores were using barcode readers to handle inventory tracking. It doesn’t seem like much now but back then there was no internet to connect the stores and barcode reading was only just taking off.

Now, Walmart is an astonishing logistics company. This is the key to keeping the company well supplied and one of the most important factors in keeping the prices down.

Amazon, too, is much more than meets the eye. Between the print on demand options, huge warehouses, robotic warehouse management and integrated supply and demand – Amazon means logistics. Retailers failing to improve their logistics will have problems staying afloat.

5. OUTDATED OR LIMITED TECHNOLOGY

You wouldn’t be expecting technology to be an issue when it comes to online retailers. After all – online stores are … well … technology based – right? Indeed, but there is much more than a front end when it comes to online retail technology.

Here are a few things retailers need to invest in, if they are to expect to stand a chance:

CRM software – you need to know as much as possible about customers and make sure they are satisfied with your service
Inventory management – this is a combination between hardware, software and know-how. Online retailers need to know in real time what’s in stock, what is expected to go out-of-stock and where are the slow movers. For starters.
Supply chain management – dealing with suppliers is not always easy. Technology can help streamline the relationship between suppliers, retailers and end-consumers. Automated order placement and processing, barcodes, RFID readers and tags to help track packages, inventory inflow and outflow management – these things sound boring and complicated. They are, however, necessary for any online retail

6. BAD MANAGEMENT

No technology will save a company lead by bad management. And as you might expect this is a combination of factors. There is no single individual usually guilty of sabotaging the company.

One can notice in failing online retailers some patterns – a combination between managers focusing too much on marketing or PR, a rigid organizational structure and the lack of senior expertise.

There is little data on the impact of rigid and poorly prepared management when it comes to online retail. This is due to the fact that online retail is still in it infancy and performance indicators can be misguiding. It is, nevertheless, one of the most important factors in failing online retail companies.

So there you have it – the 6 big things that you need to focus on. Notice there are no tips on marketing, website design, search engine positioning and such. These are not critical problems. Marketing, design, accessibility – they can all be easily spotted and fixed.

http://netonomy.net/2014/04/09/why-do-online-retailers-fail/

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

stevieb — Sat, 25 Oct 2014 17:16:18 GMT

Hmmm... six strikes and you're out... Head on over to that dugout, QVC...

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

SHOPR — Sat, 25 Oct 2014 23:01:11 GMT

Oh no, looks like she created toGather. Enough said.

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

stevieb — Sun, 26 Oct 2014 01:24:35 GMT

On 10/25/2014 SHOPR said:
Oh no, looks like she created toGather. Enough said.

Isn't THAT the truth... and that has gone exactly nowhere... No matter how hard they push it, it doesn't seem to take off. It makes no sense for an entity offering only a finite number of products to have gone in this direction. The universe of items available in order to make something like this worthwhile needs to be far larger.

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

jackthebear — Fri, 23 Jan 2015 13:37:54 GMT

Focusing on extraneous things like Togather when they could use Pinterest, focusing on Facebook to the extent that the personal lives of the hosts become a distraction,when it should be driving the business.

Should be focusing on this website and the search function to be improved.

Focusing on driving down the costs of ordering more that one item an order.

On screen graphics: show more product information while the hosts are chatting such as fabric content size, product dimensions.

Is that enough?

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

cosmic1 — Fri, 23 Jan 2015 14:45:56 GMT

On 10/24/2014 stevieb said:
Well, I suppose this answers all the questions about hoped for change and the future of QVC. Pretty clearly there isn't going to be any, or at least not much, change that is... I think some of us had hoped that with Watts' departure George would seize this opportunity to bring in someone fresh, who could take a gander at this mess with fresh eyes and implement fresh ideas that hopefully included fresh products and who would deep-six some of what is so very annoying about the current operation. Normally, I'm a big fan of promoting from inside and of hence rewarding long-term staff. In this instance, given the dire need for 'new and different' and given what I'm seeing here appears on this woman's resume, well, I'm saddened and underwhelmed.

Personally, the whole 'title', 'what would they have called her had she been a man' thing couldn't matter less to me. It's all overwhelmingly secondary to the core issue, which is what this change means, or could have meant to QVC. What this says to me is that it's going to be business as usual. What it also says to me, for several reasons, is that George is pretty firmly the man in charge.

I know some of us have been speculating as to whether the problems we feel exist with QVC were the result of Watts, George or the combination. I've long felt that no one person could have created this land-fill and that the 'fault' was with both of them. But let's face it, it would appear that Georgie-boy is here to stay. Otherwise, he'd likely not have been allowed to make this decision, as the board would probably have permitted any replacement to make their own choice. Not only that, but by picking someone who's clearly been part and party to this ongoing fiasco, what he's essentially telling us is that he and the board are just fine with the way things are... and that implies more of the same.

Oh Q, another opportunity missed. What a shame.

And I think we're pretty much done here.

StevieB, I think you very eloquently summed it up. I can think of nothing else to add. So sad.

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

stevieb — Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:48:50 GMT

Interesting that this thread should resurface, probably as part of the robo-troll hitting the boards earlier in the week, but timely nonetheless, based on the apparent decision to retool and rethink 'togather' announced earlier this week... I'll stand by my earlier assessment that it's largely superfluous drivel that would only make sense if a larger pool of products were being highlighted. They aren't and it doesn't... But yes, of course, let's give it's champion even more room to mess things up...

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

TY — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:54:20 GMT

On 1/23/2015 stevieb said:
Interesting that this thread should resurface, probably as part of the robo-troll hitting the boards earlier in the week, but timely nonetheless, based on the apparent decision to retool and rethink 'togather' announced earlier this week... I'll stand by my earlier assessment that it's largely superfluous drivel that would only make sense if a larger pool of products were being highlighted. They aren't and it doesn't... But yes, of course, let's give it's champion even more room to mess things up...

Sounds like QVC dumped their Canadian customers for no real reason that I could tell back in 2012. I wonder why QVC doesn't want us back? And Spurt's post about why retailers fail describes Target's venture into Canada perfectly -- which is a total failure by any measurement...Target lost about 7 billion dollars.

Re: IS THIS MARY CAMPBELL TAKING OVER FOR CLAIRE?

stevieb — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:41:25 GMT

On 1/26/2015 TY said:
On 1/23/2015 stevieb said:
Interesting that this thread should resurface, probably as part of the robo-troll hitting the boards earlier in the week, but timely nonetheless, based on the apparent decision to retool and rethink 'togather' announced earlier this week... I'll stand by my earlier assessment that it's largely superfluous drivel that would only make sense if a larger pool of products were being highlighted. They aren't and it doesn't... But yes, of course, let's give it's champion even more room to mess things up...

Sounds like QVC dumped their Canadian customers for no real reason that I could tell back in 2012. I wonder why QVC doesn't want us back? And Spurt's post about why retailers fail describes Target's venture into Canada perfectly -- which is a total failure by any measurement...Target lost about 7 billion dollars.

I don't get that either... They'll court France, Italy, China, The UK and so on, but can't include Canada as part of their North American market?