Comments on: Federated (cough, Macy’s) replaces marketing chief after 15 months

By: Daniel

Daniel — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 18:48:51 +0000

Yeah, and from what I understand, the old Fields displays were much better.

By: Nina

Nina — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:36:30 +0000

I’ve always experienced superlative service from every department in Nordstrom, in more than one store, including Michigan Ave. Nordstrom doesn’t need anyone’s seconds. But Macy’s State Street, which is “doing badly,” isn’t doing anything to ingratiate itself with customers who actually go in the store. You would think that Macy’s State St management and employees would be making a special effort, but they aren’t. (Looptopia doesn’t count. Window displays don’t count. African plants don’t count. A survey doesn’t count.) No one in that store gives a badger’s ass.

By: Mollie

Mollie — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 21:48:29 +0000

I agree with Todd. Macy's doesn't carry nearly as much high-fashion as Fields use to. They tried to salvage the image of the '28 shop' by redesigning the actual shop, but what's the point if the only real high-end fashion that's left is Missoni? I wouldn't say Nordstrom is getting sloppy seconds, they just have always had a younger generation of customers. Now instead my grandmother being loyal to Fields, she tags along with my mother who is in her 40's and a frequent Nordstrom shopper.

By: Todd And

Todd And — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 19:43:08 +0000

I don’t think any marketing chief could have saved Macy’s from what happened in Chicago. From an outsider perspective with absolutely no retail marketing experience, I think the position was destined for failure. And it didn’t help that so many high-fashion vendors were upset about the buyout and ultimately left Field’s for competitors like Nordstrom. Nordstrom is getting all the sloppy seconds and loving it.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 01:41:16 +0000

Thanks, Kween. Actually, that was the first time I cracked 100 visitors in one day. Maybe I should clarify that…

By: Mollie

Mollie — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 01:33:48 +0000

It’s not being stuck in the past, it’s the fact that if Fields went to NYC and tried to take over the big Macy’s there, they wouldn’t be too happy either.

By: kweenkong

kweenkong — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 01:10:10 +0000

I don’t know… I just think Chicagoans are a bit stuck in the past sometimes. I couldn’t believe the way people here rejected such a popular brand.

It’s as if people here want it both ways… Always the Second City screaming for 1st place attention, but not really progressive enough to embrace some of the big-time stuff. I can’t say this one was MacDonald’s fault, not the Chicago fiasco.

‘kweenkong’

PS Congrats on your 100th visitor! You’ll have had thousands more very soon. ;0)

By: Mollie

Mollie — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 16:53:05 +0000

I’m glad that woman was fired. I mean, there has to be something wrong if a huge successful store like Macy’s can’t even promote itself to the many Chicago shoppers. When it comes down to it, a store is a store – albeit no Fields – but if Macy’s charmed Chicagoans from the beginning, it would never have lost this many sales.

Not to mention Macy’s would have been able to welcome the ‘abandoned children’ of Fields (including myself) into its new foster home.