Stay in Touch
Get sneak previews of special offers & upcoming events delivered to your inbox.
11-09-2019 01:35 PM
11-09-2019 01:36 PM
I completely agree. I do not believe Target corporation would make such a bad business decision, and I also wholeheartedly agree that it only takes one employee making one bad decision to create a PR nightmare.
This past week I had to get an antibiotic prescription filled at CVS. I went to my usual CVS, two blocks from my office, and they didn't have it. There was another CVS 3 miles away, over the bridge, that had it in stock. I made the drive and it was quite the eye opener.
The second CVS was just so different from my normal store. Huge shoplifting mirrors in the corners; much of the merchandise was security locked. I felt uncomfortable the minute I walked in. The store had almost a prison vibe. This second CVS is in an older, lower income neighborhood and I'm sure they feel like they have their reasons for the measures they've taken......the over all feeling though was extremely oppressive.
I ended up having to wait about half an hour for the prescription refill so I picked up some Essie polish and D cell batteries (had to get the store clerk, they were locked) and then sat in the back pharmacy area to wait. I met the nicest elderly gentleman (he was following his wife's orders and there for his flu shot lol), another female getting her prescriptions before leaving on a church trip, and another friendly young lady. I watched the pharmacist and her staff interact with all of them and they were so caring. A complete opposite from how the store's environment made you feel.
The whole thing has really been on my mind ever since, and I'm not exactly sure why. I'm not so naive not to know that poorer areas are not going to be the same as suburbia....heck I've lived in poorer areas before. I guess it was just a harsh reminder of how different a routine task can be, depending on which side of the bridge you're on.
11-09-2019 01:37 PM
This sounds to me like a fabricated urban rumor. I don't believe it.
Hi @Kachina624 !! 👋
I don't know what the truth of the matter is, but I have decided to wait until the dust settles and more info comes out before I come to a conclusion.
We see these things posted on social media and in the news a lot, and sometimes they aren't what they seem. Tomorrow it could come out that this was orchestrated. Or not. No way to know yet.
11-09-2019 01:47 PM
Seems odd there is only one lone picture being retweeted.
One retail store (Target).
One retail store location (not identified)
I have a hunch it was very limited.
That particular manager at that 1 store probably did this and
the entire corporation is being dragged as a result.
Lots of people are replying saying they've seen the same thing,
but no additional pictures have been shown.
11-09-2019 01:53 PM - edited 11-09-2019 03:54 PM
From a retailers point of view, they would place anti thief stickers on products that tend to "walk away." Some items are stolen more than others. In grocery store in my area, baby formula is tagged, while other baby foods are not.
If pink panties go missing, but the white granny panties, do not, the pink panties would be tagged.
A retailer should not have to be concerned with hurting people's feelings about what is and what is not tagged. If they have a problem with thief of certain products, they have a right and obligation to tag them for anti thief.
There is no reading between the lines here. A retailer is trying to protect their bottom line.
This whole thing sounds silly.
11-09-2019 02:09 PM
@indoor kitty wrote:
Stores have ways of tracking sales and inventory. Is it possible only some shades were unaccounted for? If so, they did what they needed to do. Honestly, this is a head shaker. This is a financial issue pure and simple.
@stevieb So as not to discriminate, if there's a theft issue, put the darn stickers on ALL shades. It's just not right. There are enough issues like this already.
I totally agree, what were they thinking ?
Probably that they would try to limit theft of the actual items being stolen...
11-09-2019 02:14 PM - edited 11-09-2019 02:26 PM
I do think it is probably an isolated incident (I hope so). Regardless - bad decision IMO. If theft is such an issue - lock it all up.
Locking it up is both inconvenient for customers and for store staff and costs money both for the cases and in staff time to go and unlock the case when customers want to see an item. Doing so would also lead to an increase in price to consumers and greater time spent trying to obtain an item. Again, if all choices aren't being stolen, why inconvenience everyone or create higher costs for everyone? Past a poiint, we need to be reasonable and accept that a retailer has the right to protect their merchandise. Loss prevention tags in retail are almost always assigned to items most likely to be stolen. There's nothing unusual about it. Their use is most likely based on data. One has to believe that no retailer is going to use these labels if there's no demonstrated reason for their use.
11-09-2019 02:44 PM
Putting the stickers on all of the bottles would raise the price all of about $0.0006. So fine, do that. Cost benefit analysis would indicate that being consistent would be overwhelmingly worthwhile.
Still hoping it's just a mistake or a stocking or shelving issue of some sort.
11-09-2019 03:26 PM
QVC is not responsible for the availability, content, security, policies, or practices of the above referenced third-party linked sites nor liable for statements, claims, opinions, or representations contained therein. QVC's Privacy Statement does not apply to these third-party web sites.
© 1995-2019 QVC, Inc. All rights reserved Trademark Notice