General Retail News

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Harley613

The yellow area is going to be developed into an appealing commercial park with greenspace.

Greenspace! Of course! Why didn't someone think of that sooner? Step 1: Plant some grass and flowers and shrubs! Step 2. Step 3: PROFIT!

[bikegypsy]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Saks closest Canadian competitor would be Holt Renfew. If you've ever been to the Ottawa Holt Renfrew, that would pretty much explain why Ottawa will not see a Saks. Simons should be OK, but even Nordstrom may find that it's pushing against the reality of the Ottawa consumer.

Retailers don't stay open unless there's business and are making a profit. Period.

And I'm sure Nordstrom is capable of doing their market research.

[YOWflier]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in terms of how up scale these stores are, Nordstrom is somewhere between Hudson's Bay and Saks, Simons is between Hudson's Bay and Nordstrom and Target is one level above Walmart, which isn't saying much.

So except maybe for Nordstrom, how would Hudson's Bay figure there is too much competition for Saks in Ottawa? If anything, the opening of Nordstrom would encourage HBC to bring in a competitor. I'm not expecting a full sized store, but I don't see how they can't open a smaller Saks or at least a Saks department within Hudson's Bay.

My perception is that Nordstrom is equivalent to Saks, but that's based on a very unscientific comparison of their offerings at stores in Chicago (Michigan Avenue - "Magnificent Mile").

We now have conflicting speculation regarding Saks in Ottawa, but until we hear something firm from HBC, I'm inclined to park my "trust" with Retail-Insider, whose information seems to suggest a Saks in Ottawa, as opposed to this OBJ analyst.

Time-to-market is a huge factor in business and I've read that HBC thinks it can deploy the Saks brand in Canada "quickly". It sounds like they'll carve out Saks space from existing HBC department stores before (or in parallel with) developing stand-alone stores. If true, they would beat Nordstrom to the ribbon cutting.

Anyway, if at some point we see all three here in Ottawa (Holt, Nordstrom, Saks), I'd be concerned about Holt's longevity.

[toaster]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in terms of how up scale these stores are, Nordstrom is somewhere between Hudson's Bay and Saks, Simons is between Hudson's Bay and Nordstrom and Target is one level above Walmart, which isn't saying much.

So except maybe for Nordstrom, how would Hudson's Bay figure there is too much competition for Saks in Ottawa? If anything, the opening of Nordstrom would encourage HBC to bring in a competitor. I'm not expecting a full sized store, but I don't see how they can't open a smaller Saks or at least a Saks department within Hudson's Bay.

Have you ever been to Simons? It is trendy, but I wouldn't consider it upscale. Definitely below Hudson's Bay, in my opinion. In terms of pricing, it is more similar to Sears, although more trendy.

[miketoronto]

The fact is that most American stores including Nordstroms and Saks are just not that classy or upscale in most of their locations.
The original Saks in Manhattan is. But all these cheap small branch locations just are parading around as upscale stores.

I would say that overall Holt Renfrew is more upscale, although even they have gotten caught in the idea that they need all these small branch stores, which dilute the brand.

If you want to see upscale go to Europe. I was just in London, and they have outstanding high end shops. And unlike here they only have one location in the centre of the city, and that location is a destination.

Here places like Nordstroms and Saks are just too common now to be special or upscale.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by toaster

Have you ever been to Simons? It is trendy, but I wouldn't consider it upscale. Definitely below Hudson's Bay, in my opinion. In terms of pricing, it is more similar to Sears, although more trendy.

I haven't been to Simons since 2005. So what you're saying is that Simons is the young man's Sears, targeting a young, hip generation with limited income?

[OTSkyline]

I think Saks and Holt Renfrew specialize in high end while Simon's is kind of all over the place. Last time I was there you could find anything from a $10 shirt to a $5,000 coat. But you usually don't find $10 shirts at Saks or Holt Renfrew.

I think Ottawa has the potential to have these stores open and survive in this market. Has anyone ever been to the Holt Renfrew in Ottawa? It is VERY small, very limited hours and is smack down in the middle of government office neighbourhood, therefore bad location. Nobody goes to Holt during their lunchbreak for a quick shopping trip. If our Holt was twice as big and on Rideau or the Market for example I'm sure it would do much better. I'm sure everyone in Ottawa who wants to buy high-end buys in MTL, TO or NYC. Once we get nice, sizeable stores like the Saks and Nordstrom I think these people will start shopping here again... My opinion and experince anyways.

[miketoronto]

I don't see why people say Ottawa can't support high end stores.
Ottawa is always listed as having the highest incomes in Canada. Surly there is money in the Ottawa region for high end.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by miketoronto

I don't see why people say Ottawa can't support high end stores.
Ottawa is always listed as having the highest incomes in Canada. Surly there is money in the Ottawa region for high end.

I agree with you there and people are willing to spend. However, Ottawa certainly can't support more than one of each brand though. That strongly suggests that the Rideau Centre area is about to become the true hub of Ottawa...

[McC]

Originally Posted by miketoronto

I don't see why people say Ottawa can't support high end stores.
Ottawa is always listed as having the highest incomes in Canada. Surly there is money in the Ottawa region for high end.

As others have already explained, Ottawa has very high average incomes because we have a lot of well paid professionals in the public service (upper middle class wages) and we are not a first stop for very many economic migrants from hinterland Canada and overseas (very little underclass), and have little in the way of factory-type working class employment. But our senior executives are government executives who make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, not bank and company executives who make millions of dollars a year, and we don't get much high-roller tourism like Montreal does for the Grand Prix and Jazz Festival, or Toronto does for TIFF and Fashion Week, or Vancouver does because it's always a good time to go to Vancouver.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by miketoronto

I don't see why people say Ottawa can't support high end stores.
Ottawa is always listed as having the highest incomes in Canada. Surly there is money in the Ottawa region for high end.

While Ottawa has high average incomes, the number of super-rich is very low. Lots of people in the $60k-$100k range that drive up the average, but very few in the $250k+ range that is more the target of upscale stores.

[harls]

I think Target got off easy with the translation thing because, well.. Tar-jhay..

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by harls

I think Target got off easy with the translation thing because, well.. Tar-jhay..

Ironically, I have never heard anyone in Quebec refer to them as Tar-jhay. Everyone says Target the English way (sort of - with the accet of course).

Ironically (2), you will have Americans in Minnesota and Nebraska saying Tar-jhay the faux French way, and people in Quebec speaking in French and saying Target...

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

While Ottawa has high average incomes, the number of super-rich is very low. Lots of people in the $60k-$100k range that drive up the average, but very few in the $250k+ range that is more the target of upscale stores.

Ottawa's 2010 median household income was $94k. Meaning HALF of the 350,000+ households or 175,000ish households made upwards of $100,000. Compare that to Toronto: 68,000, Montreal: 67,000, Vancouver: 67,000 or even Calgary: 89,000 and Edmonton 87,000. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/famil107a-eng.htm

Nothing even comes close, really. Don't underestimate the juicy middle. If you read the Globe and Mail's weekend edition feature on new department stores in Canada: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on...or-canadas-big-spenders/article13585542/ you'll see that unlike many of the comments in this thread, the retailers want to compete, want to be in the same markets, and are willing to lose some battles in a competitive marketplace. This ought to be the norm and it's strange that we seem find it strange.

It reminds me of an example from a microeconomics class in university.Hotdog vendors want to be at the same corner to maximize their market share. Not by spreading out, but by being next to each other so that they draw on the largest area because leaving a space means ceding market share.

So it's even in HBC's best interest to locate both an upscale Hudson's Bay and very upscale Saks on the same street as Nordstrom and Simons because HBC tries to capture the whole middle class and up market in two stores, covering all the territory of Nordstrom, whereas Nordstrom is more mixed bag, capturing the middle and high end of Hudson's Bay as well as the ultra high end of Saks.

Hudson's Bay has every reason to want both stores there, and it's in every department store's interest to want to be both in the same district and in the same city, because not being here means ceding the territory and market share, even if they won't all be the best performing stores in the chain.

It's also important to remember that despite the really high price tags on some items, most of their trade is done much lower than they let on. If you look at the infographic on the G&M story, fully 49% of the luxury retail trade is made of fragrances, cosmetics, tableware and accessories, excluding jewellery and watches. This is the stuff any middle class person can attain.

But even if we are just looking at the $250,000+ households, if you look here: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2007109/article/10350-eng.pdf you can see on Chart C that there are 8 metro areas with a higher than average proportion of families over $250k, Ottawa ranking 5th. Then on Chart D you can see that Ottawa is the 4th largest marketplace of total number of households with incomes above 250k, representing about 5% of the total market of those families, Toronto is 30% of the market, Montreal around 12%, and Vancouver and Calgary around 10% each. What self-respecting company would giveaway 5% of their market share?

In short, they'll locate, they'll compete. Some may lose, but that's business and competition.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by gjhall

Ottawa's 2010 median household income was $94k. Meaning HALF of the 350,000+ households or 175,000ish households made upwards of $100,000. Compare that to Toronto: 68,000, Montreal: 67,000, Vancouver: 67,000 or even Calgary: 89,000 and Edmonton 87,000. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/famil107a-eng.htm

Nothing even comes close, really. Don't underestimate the juicy middle. If you read the Globe and Mail's weekend edition feature on new department stores in Canada: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on...or-canadas-big-spenders/article13585542/ you'll see that unlike many of the comments in this thread, the retailers want to compete, want to be in the same markets, and are willing to lose some battles in a competitive marketplace. This ought to be the norm and it's strange that we seem find it strange.

It reminds me of an example from a microeconomics class in university.Hotdog vendors want to be at the same corner to maximize their market share. Not by spreading out, but by being next to each other so that they draw on the largest area because leaving a space means ceding market share.

So it's even in HBC's best interest to locate both an upscale Hudson's Bay and very upscale Saks on the same street as Nordstrom and Simons because HBC tries to capture the whole middle class and up market in two stores, covering all the territory of Nordstrom, whereas Nordstrom is more mixed bag, capturing the middle and high end of Hudson's Bay as well as the ultra high end of Saks.

Hudson's Bay has every reason to want both stores there, and it's in every department store's interest to want to be both in the same district and in the same city, because not being here means ceding the territory and market share, even if they won't all be the best performing stores in the chain.

It's also important to remember that despite the really high price tags on some items, most of their trade is done much lower than they let on. If you look at the infographic on the G&M story, fully 49% of the luxury retail trade is made of fragrances, cosmetics, tableware and accessories, excluding jewellery and watches. This is the stuff any middle class person can attain.

But even if we are just looking at the $250,000+ households, if you look here: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2007109/article/10350-eng.pdf you can see on Chart C that there are 8 metro areas with a higher than average proportion of families over $250k, Ottawa ranking 5th. Then on Chart D you can see that Ottawa is the 4th largest marketplace of total number of households with incomes above 250k, representing about 5% of the total market of those families, Toronto is 30% of the market, Montreal around 12%, and Vancouver and Calgary around 10% each. What self-respecting company would giveaway 5% of their market share?

In short, they'll locate, they'll compete. Some may lose, but that's business and competition.

Good find there with some interesting stuff.

The moral of the story (if decisions are based on this type of data) is go to Ottawa for sure. But after Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Calgary - roughly in that order.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by gjhall

So it's even in HBC's best interest to locate both an upscale Hudson's Bay and very upscale Saks on the same street as Nordstrom and Simons because HBC tries to capture the whole middle class and up market in two stores, covering all the territory of Nordstrom, whereas Nordstrom is more mixed bag, capturing the middle and high end of Hudson's Bay as well as the ultra high end of Saks.

Hudson's Bay has every reason to want both stores there, and it's in every department store's interest to want to be both in the same district and in the same city, because not being here means ceding the territory and market share, even if they won't all be the best performing stores in the chain.

It's also important to remember that despite the really high price tags on some items, most of their trade is done much lower than they let on. If you look at the infographic on the G&M story, fully 49% of the luxury retail trade is made of fragrances, cosmetics, tableware and accessories, excluding jewellery and watches. This is the stuff any middle class person can attain.

It is also the same reasons why cities have downtown CBDs or Financial districts where all big business, financial institutions and lawfirms set up shop or why car dealerships are built next to each other. When people go out shopping and want to compare product and services, it it easier for the consumer to stick to one area. That is why the Rideau Centre is the undsputed hub of high end retail and why the few who aren't in the area (Holt Renfrew) want to be despite beign next door to the competition.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Ironically, I have never heard anyone in Quebec refer to them as Tar-jhay. Everyone says Target the English way (sort of - with the accet of course).

Ironically (2), you will have Americans in Minnesota and Nebraska saying Tar-jhay the faux French way, and people in Quebec speaking in French and saying Target...

You realize that the "Tar-jhay" pronunciation is a joke? Nobody in anglo-Canada or the States calls it that without knowing that it's really Target.

I have a small retail question for you, Acajack. Can you still buy "weed and feed" fertilizer and other weed killers in Quebec or have herbicides been banned there as they have been in Ontario? Down here, lots of people are sneaking products in from the States, but I thought maybe the next time I drive up to Ottawa....... I am getting fed-up with trying to maintain a traditional lawn down here without the products on which it depends.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

You realize that the "Tar-jhay" pronunciation is a joke? Nobody in anglo-Canada or the States calls it that without knowing that it's really Target.

.

I actually though it was faux pomposity (and not necessarily sarcastic) put on by the chain or perhaps its customers.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I have a small retail question for you, Acajack. Can you still buy "weed and feed" fertilizer and other weed killers in Quebec or have herbicides been banned there as they have been in Ontario? Down here, lots of people are sneaking products in from the States, but I thought maybe the next time I drive up to Ottawa....... I am getting fed-up with trying to maintain a traditional lawn down here without the products on which it depends.

I am not that knowledgeable on the topic but I do believe Quebec banned all of this stuff even before Ontario. I seem to remember a few years people from Gatineau crossing over to Ottawa to buy the stuff, but then Ontario banned it as well a few years ago.

[Norman Bates]

Mother says that Quebec is often more progressive than the other provinces.