What does kid tables have to do with the tables that Ive is talking about?
They were both discussing the tables in the Apple Stores. I took it to mean Ron saw them as like tables you see, but on a smaller scale, in kindergartens ... clean, simple and functional. Jony had selected these tables for his lab, for his own reasons but I suspect for those exact same reasons. As an industrial designer he probably came across similar tables in art school, I know I did. I can't say why exactly but they make you feel good and feel creative, well they do me anyway.
Retail on the Internet is a complete mess, akin to the state of tv. Only when the web has been truly commercialised and capitalised will it come of age.
As it stands now, it's still the Wild West in need of civilisation.
Wh... how do you commercialize retail? I’m having trouble with these words, as well as the analogy. There’s already a single system of payment used universally. The fact that it’s handled by every company rather than a single entity is meaningless.
What I'm saying is that the web needs appifying for retail.
In other words, we need an Apple App Store for everything else. That is, a unified structure that consumers can browse in. That way, there is room for as much individuality as retailers need, but a safe walled garden for consumers.
Is there any evidence that Johnson was pivotal to the turnaround and growth at Target? He was VP of merchandising there, not the CEO and it is usually the CEO who is responsible for strategy and making sure it's executed. Jony Ive is an EVP at Apple, but he doesn't set the direction of the company, for example.
He launched the Michael Graves product line which is considered one of the primary reasons that Target's image changed with consumers. He attempted to do the same at JCPenny but frankly JCP sucked too much.
He launched the Michael Graves product line which is considered one of the primary reasons that Target's image changed with consumers. He attempted to do the same at JCPenny but frankly JCP sucked too much.
No matter what he decides to do in his future endeavors, he's certainly not hurting financially.
From his Wikipedia page: "On October 31, 2007 Johnson exercised 700,000 stock options in Apple stock with a strike price of $23.72, and then sold the stock later that day for $185 to $185.21 apiece netting him a $112m profit. It has been reported that Johnson earned $400 million during his seven and a half years at Apple."
Of course, if he had simply held onto that stock he'd be nearly a billionaire by now.
Many people including John Browlett? I can't really agree. Ron already showed that he understood retail, and the younger shopping market. What he did at Target was masterly. Let's not pretend to ourselves that these stores were totally Jobs's doing.
What he wanted to do with Penny was a very good idea, but he just didn't get what Penny's customer was. Older, and only interested in buying on sales. He was reforming the company for more upscale customers who were also younger, and who, he thought, would be happier with low everyday pricing, and small upscale " stores" rather than the constant sales Penny had been holding. It didn't work.
The main problem with J.C. Penny was the name. A century old reputation of low quality. It was and is impossible to change that cultural mindset and make it cool, young and hip. What they should have done is open some smaller stores under a different name and carry young adult apparel, cosmetics, trendy housewares, make some hip TV ads and website just like Target. Once the stores built up a good reputation ditch the J.C. Penny name and scale up to fill the old stores with the new modern design. Let the old people go shopping at Sears.
I don't agree with what he said about reviews entirely. They don't always tell the whole story but they often do let you know about problems with products that sales people would try to avoid mentioning.
I have found the reviews I read on Amazon to be extremely helpful, but they may not answer a question I have in my mind, so there is a gap there... that siad, I've found sales people are remarkably unfamiliar with what they have to sell. I don't think Ron Johnson can fix stupid.
I am curious to know why you think so. Are you speaking only from your British and Australian experiences, respectively?
The reason I ask is, I find Internet shopping in the US to be a (mostly) remarkably seamless experience. Indeed, I often have more troubles when I have to deal with help from employees at physical stores! (You'd be amazed at how many Best Buy-types populate this vast land).
The key phrase there is "in the US".
Speaking, from Australian point of view, we rarely see first, and sometimes not at all, some of the more clever implementations that you see in the US.
We have small product ranges, items are generally more expensive (even digital items that require no delivery), and when it comes to physical stores the opening hours border on ridiculous.
It's surprising when you think about it. It's not complicated.
Let the consumer buy what they want, when they want, as easily as possible.
It's surprising how many businesses still don't understand that in this day and age.
OT - I was over in Brisbane just a couple of weeks ago. I'd never been to that mall at Chermside. F me that Apple Store there was rock'n. Seriously there around 50 blue shirts with customers about 5 - 8 to the genius. Just amazing. Per sq m, easily the busiest store by miiiiiles in the whole mall.
The main problem with J.C. Penny was the name. A century old reputation of low quality. It was and is impossible to change that cultural mindset and make it cool, young and hip. What they should have done is open some smaller stores under a different name and carry young adult apparel, cosmetics, trendy housewares, make some hip TV ads and website just like Target. Once the stores built up a good reputation ditch the J.C. Penny name and scale up to fill the old stores with the new modern design. Let the old people go shopping at Sears.
In a sense Ron Johnson did much of what you suggest. He changed the name to the letters "JCP" in a red box. It was no longer J. C. Penny in the ads or on more and more buildings. Ron was also working within some HUGE financial constraints, so he "opened up small stores within the larger stores with products aimed at younger, more trendy shoppers. Finally, he did let the old people go shopping elsewhere - and sales plummeted. He was trying to do too much too quick with too little money to work with. The old guard on the JCP board pissed themselves in fear.
I think we are both correct really. I always liked Ron and what he did, I am just saying he was dealt a winning hand, to coin a metaphor. Could others have f%%^^d up? Well obviously but Steve would have fired them before they did too much damage. My original point that got lost along the way I guess, is he should have stayed but I suspect he bought too much into thinking it was he that had achieved the success, a little more than was the case, and so far he hasn't be dealt such good cards again, to totally, overuse the metaphor.
In an interview where he was asked why he would leave Apple, he said that he always wanted to run a company himself, be the CEO. I get that. But not everyone is suited to that task.
But something needs to be gotten out of the way about Jobs. People seem to think that every success at Apple was directly due to his vision. Not true! There were a number of things that he fought against, but his people insisted upon. One fairly early thing involved the iPod and iTunes. Remember that in the beginning it was Mac only. Eddie Cue and one other, I forget whom now, went to Jobs and insisted that it should also be for Windows. According to Eddie and others, Jobs railed against that, but Eddie stood fast, and in the end, Jobs threw up his hand and told them to do "whatever you want" but that it was on their heads. We all know the result of that.
But that wasn't the only incident where that happened. It happened a number of time. We don't know what happened between Jobs and Ron with the store. how much of that was Jobs, and how much Ron. No doubt Jobs had the original vision, and the vision of how he wanted to to go, as well as his obsessing over some details. But how did Ron contribute? I think he contributed a lot to this. Jobs was no retail expert, but Ron had proven that he was, and I believe that Jobs was smart enough there too, to allow Ron his head on this.
Is there any evidence that Johnson was pivotal to the turnaround and growth at Target? He was VP of merchandising there, not the CEO and it is usually the CEO who is responsible for strategy and making sure it's executed. Jony Ive is an EVP at Apple, but he doesn't set the direction of the company, for example.
All I can tell you is that every business article about Target gave Ron the credit for that. Other than that, what can be said?
The main problem with J.C. Penny was the name. A century old reputation of low quality. It was and is impossible to change that cultural mindset and make it cool, young and hip. What they should have done is open some smaller stores under a different name and carry young adult apparel, cosmetics, trendy housewares, make some hip TV ads and website just like Target. Once the stores built up a good reputation ditch the J.C. Penny name and scale up to fill the old stores with the new modern design. Let the old people go shopping at Sears.
It was more that just the name. There were areas in Penny that had high quality products, stores within stores, as all large retailers have. Ron simply made a number of major mistakes. He tried to turn the entire ship around, when he should have made smaller course correction. One major blunder was with the Marths Stewart lines. He negotiated a deal with her company that was in conflict with a deal she already had with Kmart. Kmart sued Penny, and a lot of time and money was wasted on that, taking time from more pressing matters.
All I can tell you is that every business article about Target gave Ron the credit for that. Other than that, what can be said?
Without doing further research into the matter, evidence that Johnson has any clue about how to run a business is scant in his post-Apple career and from firsthand knowledge I happen to know how corporate executives love to broadcast their "achievements" using the media and in interviews. In other words, don't believe everything you read. I've dealt with my share of executives who looked like geniuses but couldn't find their way around the real world to save their life.
I have found the reviews I read on Amazon to be extremely helpful, but they may not answer a question I have in my mind, so there is a gap there... that siad, I've found sales people are remarkably unfamiliar with what they have to sell. I don't think Ron Johnson can fix stupid.
Sure you can. Though stupid isn't a fair thing to say. I hired a lot of people over the decades, and when I did, the quality of the people I hired was my responsibility. But, in addition, there is the little thing called training. You can hire someone who isn't familliar with what they need to know and do, and turn out someone who does.
Something that people don't know, or like to forget, is that it's totally the responsibility of the people in charge to insure that the company is working properly. The success or failure of that company, aside for outside issues that can derail a business, is always the the responsibility of those in charge
I know it's sometimes popular, in some circles, to say that a businesses succes is due to the employees, and to a certain extent that's true. But only to the point of their operating within the parameters management sets up for them. If I don't pay well enough, and don't give decent benefits, then I can't expect to get an overwhelming percentage of people applying for jobs who are above average. Then, the working conditions, and what's expected of them, as well as pride in working for a particular organization, matters greatly too.
If all of the factors are aligned properly, you will get high quality people applying. You can then pick the best of them for your needs, train them well, and give them a reason to want to do the best they can.
That's all anyone can reasonably expect.
If you go to a store, and the people are hanging around, don't know much about the product lines, and don't seem to care, then that isn't their fault. It's that management has set up that situation, knowingly or not. Even the best people get discouraged if they feel that they are the only one doing a proper job.
Without doing further research into the matter, evidence that Johnson has any clue about how to run a business is scant in his post-Apple career and from firsthand knowledge I happen to know how corporate executives love to broadcast their "achievements" using the media and in interviews. In other words, don't believe everything you read. I've dealt with my share of executives who looked like geniuses but couldn't find their way around the real world to save their life.
There's a difference between running a business, as CEO, and running a division. Ron ran a division at Target that was considered to have been responsible for rearming what Target was, and being successful at it.
When he finally got a chance to "run a business" he did poorly. Perhaps if he went to a company that wasn't already on the ropes, he might have done very well.
Comments
They were both discussing the tables in the Apple Stores. I took it to mean Ron saw them as like tables you see, but on a smaller scale, in kindergartens ... clean, simple and functional. Jony had selected these tables for his lab, for his own reasons but I suspect for those exact same reasons. As an industrial designer he probably came across similar tables in art school, I know I did. I can't say why exactly but they make you feel good and feel creative, well they do me anyway.
What I'm saying is that the web needs appifying for retail.
In other words, we need an Apple App Store for everything else. That is, a unified structure that consumers can browse in. That way, there is room for as much individuality as retailers need, but a safe walled garden for consumers.
Is there any evidence that Johnson was pivotal to the turnaround and growth at Target? He was VP of merchandising there, not the CEO and it is usually the CEO who is responsible for strategy and making sure it's executed. Jony Ive is an EVP at Apple, but he doesn't set the direction of the company, for example.
He launched the Michael Graves product line which is considered one of the primary reasons that Target's image changed with consumers. He attempted to do the same at JCPenny but frankly JCP sucked too much.
The "Apple of Online Retail." I love it and think it will do well.
He launched the Michael Graves product line which is considered one of the primary reasons that Target's image changed with consumers. He attempted to do the same at JCPenny but frankly JCP sucked too much.
No matter what he decides to do in his future endeavors, he's certainly not hurting financially.
From his Wikipedia page: "On October 31, 2007 Johnson exercised 700,000 stock options in Apple stock with a strike price of $23.72, and then sold the stock later that day for $185 to $185.21 apiece netting him a $112m profit. It has been reported that Johnson earned $400 million during his seven and a half years at Apple."
Of course, if he had simply held onto that stock he'd be nearly a billionaire by now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Johnson_(businessman)
Retail is such a sh*ty business.
Many people including John Browlett? I can't really agree. Ron already showed that he understood retail, and the younger shopping market. What he did at Target was masterly. Let's not pretend to ourselves that these stores were totally Jobs's doing.
What he wanted to do with Penny was a very good idea, but he just didn't get what Penny's customer was. Older, and only interested in buying on sales. He was reforming the company for more upscale customers who were also younger, and who, he thought, would be happier with low everyday pricing, and small upscale " stores" rather than the constant sales Penny had been holding. It didn't work.
The main problem with J.C. Penny was the name. A century old reputation of low quality. It was and is impossible to change that cultural mindset and make it cool, young and hip. What they should have done is open some smaller stores under a different name and carry young adult apparel, cosmetics, trendy housewares, make some hip TV ads and website just like Target. Once the stores built up a good reputation ditch the J.C. Penny name and scale up to fill the old stores with the new modern design. Let the old people go shopping at Sears.
"As it stands now, it's still the Wild West in need of civilisation."
Lead the cavalry to get rid of all the Indian IT workers, General Custer. /s
"As it stands now, it's still the Wild West in need of civilisation."
Lead the cavalry to get rid of all the Indian IT workers, General Custer.
Fixed.
I have found the reviews I read on Amazon to be extremely helpful, but they may not answer a question I have in my mind, so there is a gap there... that siad, I've found sales people are remarkably unfamiliar with what they have to sell. I don't think Ron Johnson can fix stupid.
The key phrase there is "in the US".
Speaking, from Australian point of view, we rarely see first, and sometimes not at all, some of the more clever implementations that you see in the US.
We have small product ranges, items are generally more expensive (even digital items that require no delivery), and when it comes to physical stores the opening hours border on ridiculous.
It's surprising when you think about it. It's not complicated.
Let the consumer buy what they want, when they want, as easily as possible.
It's surprising how many businesses still don't understand that in this day and age.
Apple absolutely NAIL the customer experience.
I'd never been to that mall at Chermside. F me that Apple Store there was rock'n.
Seriously there around 50 blue shirts with customers about 5 - 8 to the genius.
Just amazing.
Per sq m, easily the busiest store by miiiiiles in the whole mall.
In a sense Ron Johnson did much of what you suggest. He changed the name to the letters "JCP" in a red box. It was no longer J. C. Penny in the ads or on more and more buildings. Ron was also working within some HUGE financial constraints, so he "opened up small stores within the larger stores with products aimed at younger, more trendy shoppers. Finally, he did let the old people go shopping elsewhere - and sales plummeted. He was trying to do too much too quick with too little money to work with. The old guard on the JCP board pissed themselves in fear.
In an interview where he was asked why he would leave Apple, he said that he always wanted to run a company himself, be the CEO. I get that. But not everyone is suited to that task.
But something needs to be gotten out of the way about Jobs. People seem to think that every success at Apple was directly due to his vision. Not true! There were a number of things that he fought against, but his people insisted upon. One fairly early thing involved the iPod and iTunes. Remember that in the beginning it was Mac only. Eddie Cue and one other, I forget whom now, went to Jobs and insisted that it should also be for Windows. According to Eddie and others, Jobs railed against that, but Eddie stood fast, and in the end, Jobs threw up his hand and told them to do "whatever you want" but that it was on their heads. We all know the result of that.
But that wasn't the only incident where that happened. It happened a number of time. We don't know what happened between Jobs and Ron with the store. how much of that was Jobs, and how much Ron. No doubt Jobs had the original vision, and the vision of how he wanted to to go, as well as his obsessing over some details. But how did Ron contribute? I think he contributed a lot to this. Jobs was no retail expert, but Ron had proven that he was, and I believe that Jobs was smart enough there too, to allow Ron his head on this.
All I can tell you is that every business article about Target gave Ron the credit for that. Other than that, what can be said?
It was more that just the name. There were areas in Penny that had high quality products, stores within stores, as all large retailers have. Ron simply made a number of major mistakes. He tried to turn the entire ship around, when he should have made smaller course correction. One major blunder was with the Marths Stewart lines. He negotiated a deal with her company that was in conflict with a deal she already had with Kmart. Kmart sued Penny, and a lot of time and money was wasted on that, taking time from more pressing matters.
The entire thing was a disaster.
Without doing further research into the matter, evidence that Johnson has any clue about how to run a business is scant in his post-Apple career and from firsthand knowledge I happen to know how corporate executives love to broadcast their "achievements" using the media and in interviews. In other words, don't believe everything you read. I've dealt with my share of executives who looked like geniuses but couldn't find their way around the real world to save their life.
Sure you can. Though stupid isn't a fair thing to say. I hired a lot of people over the decades, and when I did, the quality of the people I hired was my responsibility. But, in addition, there is the little thing called training. You can hire someone who isn't familliar with what they need to know and do, and turn out someone who does.
Something that people don't know, or like to forget, is that it's totally the responsibility of the people in charge to insure that the company is working properly. The success or failure of that company, aside for outside issues that can derail a business, is always the the responsibility of those in charge
I know it's sometimes popular, in some circles, to say that a businesses succes is due to the employees, and to a certain extent that's true. But only to the point of their operating within the parameters management sets up for them. If I don't pay well enough, and don't give decent benefits, then I can't expect to get an overwhelming percentage of people applying for jobs who are above average. Then, the working conditions, and what's expected of them, as well as pride in working for a particular organization, matters greatly too.
If all of the factors are aligned properly, you will get high quality people applying. You can then pick the best of them for your needs, train them well, and give them a reason to want to do the best they can.
That's all anyone can reasonably expect.
If you go to a store, and the people are hanging around, don't know much about the product lines, and don't seem to care, then that isn't their fault. It's that management has set up that situation, knowingly or not. Even the best people get discouraged if they feel that they are the only one doing a proper job.
Well, I hope we will enjoy 'Enjoy'.
There's a difference between running a business, as CEO, and running a division. Ron ran a division at Target that was considered to have been responsible for rearming what Target was, and being successful at it.
When he finally got a chance to "run a business" he did poorly. Perhaps if he went to a company that wasn't already on the ropes, he might have done very well.