Walgreens cited shoplifting as rationale for closing 5 stores in San Francisco, but..

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by Crawford

It's so "unlivable" that far more people live there than any other state...

SF has to be the most absurdly caricatured city in the U.S. If you only followed alt-right media you'd think it were some mashup of the Warriors and Soylent Green.

I think Portland has taken it from SF these days. Any mention of Portland on the internet, and things just go to shit.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by edale

Some people seem to applaud the erosion of basic societal norms. There's nothing 'bougie' about objecting to routine looting of drug stores. It's absurd that people are even defending it.

And the whole notion that no one is harmed by this theft because there's insurance or businesses budget for 'shrinkage' or whatever is just rationalizing this shitty behavior. Those costs are passed on to the other consumers, and theft absolutely plays a role in determining store closures. It's not the sole reason, but it's definitely a factor that the company considers when looking to close stores. If the store stays open, everything gets locked up and you have to call an employee over to unlock the case just so you can buy some toothpaste. Who wants to live like that? I guess if you're cool buying stolen goods in front of a BART station, that's a way around the hassle. Give me a break.

Prop 47 is a disaster and needs to be repealed.

Say it louder for the ones in denial

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I knew this somehow didn't jibe with me... Corporations dictate the narrative after all, especially in the US.

Walgreens is everywhere in San Francisco. If a few of them are closing, it's because there are too many of them.

From Yahoo! News/Business Insider:

Walgreens cited shoplifting as rationale for closing 5 stores in San Francisco, but local officials, data, and experts cast doubt on that explanation

Morgan Keith
Sun, October 17, 2021, 5:09 PM | 3 min read

-Walgreens said it's closing some San Francisco stores because of an increase in retail theft.

-Police data obtained by the Chronicle did not show high rates of shoplifting reports at the closing stores.

-One expert said people moving out of the city during the pandemic could've hurt Walgreens' business.

Walgreens announced Tuesday it would be closing five of its San Francisco locations due to "organized retail crime," but police department data, local officials, and policy experts are casting doubt on that reasoning, according to a report published by the San Francisco Chronicle on Saturday.

While the report said the chain has experienced retail theft, other factors like the COVID-19 pandemic and oversaturation of stores were cited as potential factors behind the decision to close the stores.

Walgreens spokesperson Phil Caruso said retail theft across its San Francisco locations has increased in the past few months to five times the chain's average, SFGate reported.

However, San Francisco Police Department data obtained by the Chronicle contradicts Walgreens' claims, with one of the stores slated to close reporting only 23 shoplifting incidents since 2018. Some incidents of shoplifting likely go unreported, but the closing stores had on average less than two shoplifting reports per month since 2018.

"Organized retail crime continues to be a challenge facing retailers across San Francisco, and we are not immune to that," Caruso told SFGate. "During this time to help combat this issue, we increased our investments in security measures in stores across the city to 46 times our chain average in an effort to provide a safe environment."

San Francisco Mayor London Breed pushed back against Walgreens' stated reasoning for closing the stores.

"They are saying (shoplifting is) the primary reason, but I also think when a place is not generating revenue, and when they're saturated - SF has a lot of Walgreens locations all over the city - so I do think that there are other factors that come into play," she told reporters last week.

Dean Preston, supervisor of San Francisco's 5th district, which will be impacted by a store closure, said the pharmacy chain is "abandoning the community" and has "long planned to close stores," the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

"Odd that some are so offended that I would suggest that a massive corporate chain might be closing retail locations for the exact reason they told investors they would close locations, rather than the reasons stated in their external PR," Preston said in a tweet on Friday.

In a 2019 Security and Exchange Commission filing, Walgreens announced it would launch a "Transformational Cost Management Program" that would shutter 200 stores in the US in order to save $1.5 billion in annual expenses by 2022.

A May study published by Stanford economist Nicholas Bloom found 15% of residents left San Francisco during the pandemic and have not returned, which he told the Chronicle could explain Walgreens' waning customer base in the city.

San Francisco does have relatively high rates of property crime, which criminal justice researcher Magnus Lofstrom told the Chronicle could be due in part to the Bay Area's vast income equality.

Walgreens did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.

Link: https://news.yahoo.com/walgreens-cit...000957839.html

Walgreens in San Francisco doesn't even bother to report shoplifting so the stats mean nothing. I have personally watched people fill shopping bags with stuff and walk out of the stores. I looked at the store employees: No response. One store did have a security guard--I pointed out the guy walking out of the store to him and he shrugged. Nobody called the cops.

And it's not just Walgreens. In spite of often seeing it happening in those stores, I've also watched has people come into Safeway and fill thermos jugs with the hot soup on sale and walk out. Nobody cares: It's now a misdemeanor so everybody knows there will be no prosecution and probably even no police would show up if called.

As to the number of Walgreen's in the city, just about all of them anywhere near downtown are gone or going. Maybe in the single-family-zoned (egad!!!) western half of the city they are thriving. I wouldn't know. But I do know of the 3 closest to me that are gone or going and I'm not sure about the next closest 3.

No, there are not too many. Interestingly, with Walgreen's gone, CVS opened very near my place and it's so much better run. If CVS thinks the areas needs more pharmacies, I doubt Walgreen's is leaving because the locations weren't once profitable before the wave of shoplifting by professional gangs (which is what it is: Nobody needs dozens of tubes of toothpaste). They fence the stuff which is then sold on the internet.

Finally: Dean Preston, District 5 Supervisor. Dean Preston is the poster boy for a San Francisco ultra-progressive. He never met an honest tax-paying, citizen who is so stupid as to pay for merchandise at Walgreens that he liked as much as his favored constituents living in subsidized Tenderloin housing and voting the way he and the non-profit "advocacy groups" he loves tell them.

Naturally, none of this bothers him. As far as he's concerned, poor thief needing money to support a drug habit = good, corporate victim like Walgreens = bad, even though as long as it persisted trying to do business in the city Walgreens jacked up its prices charged to "regular folks" to cover the losses to crime. So those crimes are NOT victimless.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

Say it louder for the ones in denial

The concept of "luxury beliefs" certainly applies to this situation. https://quillette.com/2019/11/16/tho...status-update/

There's a reason why pizza places stopped delivering to low-income buildings and entire neighborhoods decades ago. Because the people...completely suck. People from the "luxury belief class" never have to deal with these people in a consequential way.

[Acajack]

I think there comes a point where corporations balance potential profits vs. the pain-in-the-ass factor.

Even if some of the official stats may not fully back it up, I think that there is enough anecdotal evidence that things have reached this point in at least certain parts of San Francisco, for specific businesses like Walgreens.

[dimondpark]

I agree its half BS, however...
some mentally ill folks seem to hang around Walgeens' parking lots in Oakland too. I was standing in a long line and this guy walks in and starts waving his hands like a musical conductor, mouthing lyrics silently at us like we are part of this imaginary choir...after no one sings along, he gets mad, cusses us out in Russian(I think)(he's black btw) and then storms out, but not before knocking over a pile of hair color dye boxes. We all just shrugged it off.

[urban_encounter]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I think some people are only choosing to connect some dots and not connecting ALL the dots.

No offense, but I think you should include yourself in this.

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I'm sure when people get desperate, they'll steal things like toothpaste or mouthwash, or shaving razors or shampoo.

The problem of large scale shoplifting isn’t because people need a gargle, a shampoo or a shave, that’s just silly.

[urban_encounter]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Walgreens in San Francisco doesn't even bother to report shoplifting so the stats mean nothing. I have personally watched people fill shopping bags with stuff and walk out of the stores. I looked at the store employees: No response. One store did have a security guard--I pointed out the guy walking out of the store to him and he shrugged. Nobody called the cops.

And it's not just Walgreens. In spite of often seeing it happening in those stores, I've also watched has people come into Safeway and fill thermos jugs with the hot soup on sale and walk out. Nobody cares: It's now a misdemeanor so everybody knows there will be no prosecution and probably even no police would show up if called.

As to the number of Walgreen's in the city, just about all of them anywhere near downtown are gone or going. Maybe in the single-family-zoned (egad!!!) western half of the city they are thriving. I wouldn't know. But I do know of the 3 closest to me that are gone or going and I'm not sure about the next closest 3.

No, there are not too many. Interestingly, with Walgreen's gone, CVS opened very near my place and it's so much better run. If CVS thinks the areas needs more pharmacies, I doubt Walgreen's is leaving because the locations weren't once profitable before the wave of shoplifting by professional gangs (which is what it is: Nobody needs dozens of tubes of toothpaste). They fence the stuff which is then sold on the internet.

Finally: Dean Preston, District 5 Supervisor. Dean Preston is the poster boy for a San Francisco ultra-progressive. He never met an honest tax-paying, citizen who is so stupid as to pay for merchandise at Walgreens that he liked as much as his favored constituents living in subsidized Tenderloin housing and voting the way he and the non-profit "advocacy groups" he loves tell them.

Naturally, none of this bothers him. As far as he's concerned, poor thief needing money to support a drug habit = good, corporate victim like Walgreens = bad, even though as long as it persisted trying to do business in the city Walgreens jacked up its prices charged to "regular folks" to cover the losses to crime. So those crimes are NOT victimless.

Well said.

Walgreens has closed at least one store in the Sacramento area due to shoplifting as well (or at least that was the stated reason). Now whether that means losses, staffing and building leases didn’t pencil out, I have no idea.

I do know, that when retailers are forced to lock more and more simple products behind plexiglass; it requires more staff to respond to assist paying customers.

Too many people seemingly want to excuse theft if it happens to a corporate chain, not releasing that the costs get passed on to those who can least afford it.

[mhays]

Between high volumes of theft, the liability related to any attempts to combat it it, and the higher staffing required (including expensive rent-a-cops), I certainly believe they can lose money in some places.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by urban_encounter

Well said.

Walgreens has closed at least one store in the Sacramento area due to shoplifting as well (or at least that was the stated reason). Now whether that means losses, staffing and building leases didn’t pencil out, I have no idea.

I do know, that when retailers are forced to lock more and more simple products behind plexiglass; it requires more staff to respond to assist paying customers.

Too many people seemingly want to excuse theft if it happens to a corporate chain, not releasing that the costs get passed on to those who can least afford it.

It's weird how challenging the narrative gets twisted into excusing theft. Nobody appears to be excusing theft. The thread is questioning the official reason provided by Walgreens for closing stores.

Retailers are ALWAYS going to close the worst performing stores when they reduce their footprint. It's just common sense under any circumstance. But Walgreens is leading us to believe that the theft is the reason for the closure. I really doubt that.

[Acajack]

An example from Ottawa, Canada's traditionally placid capital city.

McDonald's on the city's main downtown drag scaled back its overnight hours due to the "pain in the ass" factor.

I am pretty sure they were still making money in the overnight hours (it was pretty busy) but it just wasn't worth the hassle any more.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...fety-1.5102415

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

And it's opinions and attitudes like this that play into and perpetuate that corporate narrative. People with these opinions seem to WANT to believe the corporations more than actual substantive facts.

Perceptions >>>>> Fact, I have spoken to many former bay area residents that will point to things like this for why they left or wont go back.

You are the one who is in denial

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

The concept of "luxury beliefs" certainly applies to this situation. https://quillette.com/2019/11/16/tho...status-update/

There's a reason why pizza places stopped delivering to low-income buildings and entire neighborhoods decades ago. Because the people...completely suck. People from the "luxury belief class" never have to deal with these people in a consequential way.

This is nothing really new, before you would pay your tithe to the church and get VERY involved or pay for an event in the city (which historically are almost all religious) or start a charity etc etc.

In our "atheistic" age and for all those wealthy that aren't in a position to start a non profit how does one demonstrate their grand moral standing?

Politics, primarily by demonstrating they have the "good, moral and caring" left wing politics that gets accolades in school, your bougie neighbors and in Social Media/media.

Same human impulse but channeled into what currently acts as our religious infrastructure as the Christian world fades in high status, culture defining cities (ie left wing places)

Now this happens in right wing online communities too but that is not the mainstream, those are siloed communities so its a smaller scale.

I will go to my dying day laughing about how the pearl cultures and language police the left used to lambaste for the last 50 years has completely flipped.

the worst downside is the total lack of good comedy

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by Obadno

Perceptions >>>>> Fact, I have spoken to many former bay area residents that will point to things like this for why they left or wont go back.

Let me guess, they are middle-aged white republicans who had no complaints when they cashed in all that equity so they could pull up stakes and move away to complain about liberals blah blah blah. Yawns.

Otherwise the biggest if not ONLY reason for most folks leaving is the cost of living. The other culture bullshit is just that, bull.shit.

[benp]

My experiences in retail as a young lad were that it was the employees that were responsible for most of the stealing that occurred. I saw lots of goods leave the store unscanned, usually the employee serving a family member. I saw lots of goods go out the back door, sometime enough where the individual had their own business with the goods. I worked at a supermarket where one employee had set up an alternate invoice system to ship to restaurants from store inventory, and where the employee would keep the proceeds. I saw managers load up carts with food, sometimes whole carts full of meat, and roll them out the back to their cars. It was common practice for employees to "damage" goods enough to take off the shelf, and then take the "damaged" goods out of the return to supplier inventory to keep for themselves, since returns often just sat for months.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

Let me guess, they are middle-aged white republicans who had no complaints when they cashed in all that equity so they could pull up stakes and move away to complain about liberals blah blah blah. Yawns.

Otherwise the biggest if not ONLY reason for most folks leaving is the cost of living. The other culture bullshit is just that, bull.shit.

Actually no and the "facts" disagree with your perception of who is leaving California.

Id take a moment to breathe, and maybe consider that middle aged republicans are also humans that have valid concerns even if you dont want to address them,

Why am I forced to treat adults like children when it comes to this kind of stuff?

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by benp

My experiences in retail as a young lad were that it was the employees that were responsible for most of the stealing that occurred. I saw lots of goods leave the store unscanned, usually the employee serving a family member. I saw lots of goods go out the back door, sometime enough where the individual had their own business with the goods. I worked at a supermarket where one employee had set up an alternate invoice system to ship to restaurants from store inventory, and where the employee would keep the proceeds. I saw managers load up carts with food, sometimes whole carts full of meat, and roll them out the back to their cars. It was common practice for employees to "damage" goods enough to take off the shelf, and then take the "damaged" goods out of the return to supplier inventory to keep for themselves, since returns often just sat for months.

It used to be. It's not now. At least in "downtown" locations of California cities.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

It used to be. It's not now. At least in "downtown" locations of California cities.

I'd assume that cameras and other technologies have considerably cut down on employee theft.

Shoplifters and other thieves get caught on camera too, but unlike employees you generally don't know their identities.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by Obadno

Actually no and the "facts" disagree with your perception of who is leaving California.

Id take a moment to breathe, and maybe consider that middle aged republicans are also humans that have valid concerns even if you dont want to address them,

Why am I forced to treat adults like children when it comes to this kind of stuff?

He's talking about me except I didn't leave and I'm no more politically correct in Arizona for the 6 months I'm there (much too socially liberal) than I am in downtown San Francisco (much too fiscally and in other ways conservative).

PS: I think he lives in a tony suburb which, while liberal in national terms, spends a lot of time making clear that it is NOT Oakland (especially Oakland which surrounds it--it's probably OK, though incorrect, if people mistake it for San Francisco). If I lived there, I might be able to socialize with the neighbors without any arguments developing.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I'd assume that cameras and other technologies have considerably cut down on employee theft.

Shoplifters and other thieves get caught on camera too, but unlike employees you generally don't know their identities.

We started out talking Walgreen's here. If an employee slips a tube of toothpaste or shampoo in his or her pocket on the way home, it's not an significant economic loss. If some guy walks in off the street and fills several large shopping bags with every tube of toothpaste on the shelf, it is. That's the difference. For a while--it's gotten better because now they lock everything up behind plexiglass barriers--shelves in San Franciso drug stores like Walgreens were literally empty.