Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Lady Celeste

Good news and bad news about Federated Stores.

15 posts in this topic

The new face of Federated

I really dislike mixing good news with really bad news but this article was interesting for Atlanta's growing presence with Federated Dept Stores.

I, Cincinnati-based Federated Department Stores, take you, May Department Stores, to have and to hold in an $11 billion deal.

I don't, however, take all your employees. In fact, let's cut as many as 6,200 nationwide and save some money. I also don't take your Bridal Group of businesses, because we need to focus on Macy's and our other department stores from this day forward.

Yes, the marriage of retailing behemoths Federated and May is official, and on Tuesday the recently combined company announced its integration strategy, along with job cuts and business sales designed to save $175 million in 2006 and $450 million in 2007 and beyond.

Georgia employees won't be among those left at the altar. Federated's operations here are expected to get a boost as offices and departments are consolidated and realigned, giving the Atlanta-based division a territory of 133 stores in the region, up from 70 prior to the merger.

"That basically means the division headquartered in Atlanta will be growing," said Federated spokeswoman Ellen Fruchtman, who could not provide further details on any expansion.

Read the article here:

Federated deal leaves 6,200 jilted.

About the stores:

THEY'RE MARRIED NOW

Meet the new Mr. and Mrs. Federated Department Stores:

FEDERATED DEPARTMENT STORES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


More news on Federated is that they have also bought out Marshall Fields in Chicago and as of next year, the famous department store will be made into a Macy's:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel pretty bad about taking additional jobs at the expense of St Louis & other cities. But they already ripped us a new one 10 years ago, so maybe it's fair.

Macy's sucks...

Besides, soon I'll be a strict Dillard's customer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sick of Federated, probaly Macy's Corp. soon, already. It was bad enough that they killed Rich's without a care, then they killed Marshall Field's and now they're putting 6,000 more people out on the street.

I know Lord & Taylor's a goner now and I have serious doubts about the future of Bloomingdale's now. If you can't save dictinctive regional chains with long histories like Rich's and Field's, why would Bloomingdale's (which didn't really become that great until the '70s) be safe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow that sucks. I used to work for Macys years ago and I was proud to be a part of the company. Now Im not sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a little recap of the past year or so

and what's to come within a year

Became Macy's:

Lazarus, Rich's, Goldsmiths, The Bon Marche, Burdine's

To become Macy's

Robinson's, Famous Barr, Filenes, Foley's, Jones Store, Kauffmann's, LS ayers, Meier/Frank, Strawbridges and Hecht's.

Gobble gobble

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another BAD side effect is they own Lazarus and another department store (Kauffmann's?) which both had big stores in downtown Pittsburgh and the result is this is now closed...

pittslaz015wk.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


If you can't save dictinctive regional chains with long histories like Rich's and Field's, why would Bloomingdale's (which didn't really become that great until the '70s) be safe?

Because Bloomingdale's gives them a chance to compete in the luxury goods market. Plus, having access to shared vendors at that level makes them bigger competitors for smaller chains like Belk's.

Really? why is that?

Federated would like to see Macy's grow as a national brand. A la JCPenny, but with better merchandise and service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because Bloomingdale's gives them a chance to compete in the luxury goods market. Plus, having access to shared vendors at that level makes them bigger competitors for smaller chains like Belk's.

Federated would like to see Macy's grow as a national brand. A la JCPenny, but with better merchandise and service.

The Macy's plan makes sense, but the Bloomingdale's one doesn't. Bloomingdale's is only slightly better than Macy's for the most part. Service levels are identical, so are 95% of the vendors. The only differences worth noting are Bloomingdale's in-store designer shops, which vary by location, the store design itself, which tends to be more distinctive at Bloomie's, and about 25 blocks difference in location in Manhattan. There's very little at Bloomingdale's that couldn't be integrated into Macy's like the other fallen chains. I don't look for Bloomingdale's to still be with us in a few years:

goodbye bloomingdale's (an essay on my blog)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steven........

I would hope Bloomies doesn't go away. I find it quite different than Macy's. I hope Federated can keep both.

I love your Blog by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Macy's plan makes sense, but the Bloomingdale's one doesn't. Bloomingdale's is only slightly better than Macy's for the most part. Service levels are identical, so are 95% of the vendors. The only differences worth noting are Bloomingdale's in-store designer shops, which vary by location, the store design itself, which tends to be more distinctive at Bloomie's, and about 25 blocks difference in location in Manhattan. There's very little at Bloomingdale's that couldn't be integrated into Macy's like the other fallen chains. I don't look for Bloomingdale's to still be with us in a few years:

goodbye bloomingdale's (an essay on my blog)

Well, Bloomingdale's concentrates more on the higher end contemporary sportswear lines, like Tracy Reese. Whereas Macy's carries more bridge lines. Bloomingdale's is also more edgy than Macy's. Concentrating on contemporary sportswear is common for higher end retailers these days. BG remodeled their 5th floor recently to focus more on contemporary sportswear. NM has for years focused on lines like Seven and COH, which was responsible for increasing sales and profits. Right now, Bloomingdale's is focused on the same market. As are Barneys, Saks, even Bendels. It's that one division -- higher end (largely casual) clothes -- that really seperates Bloomingdale's from Macy's. They do have some over laps, but they've hired some new buyers in recenty years that have changed that. Heck, I once bought a Viktor & Rolf shirt at Bloomingdale's in Orlando. They've seriously diversified.

However, you are right, some areas are so conservative that Bloomingdale's is afraid to introduce edgier lines to those stores. Those offerings can be staid. But I don't think this is true of all Bloomingdale's stores. Especially since the last few years, they've decided to concentrate on slightly edgy designers.

Thanks for the essay, btw. Very interesting reading. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lady Celeste! Thanks for the compliments. The internet has given me a chance to share my fixation on retail with the rest of the world :)

I don't want to see Bloomingdale's go away either. I love their style overall, and it seems like every time I go to Manhattan, I either end up at their 59th Street or Soho stores sometime during my trip. I'm a little tall for many of their clothes, but I dig their shoe department and home store.

girly, thanks as well! :) I have to admit, Bloomingdale's is looking a lot better these days than it used to, especially in the major cities. I was just at the Tysons Corner store, which perennially has been a little bland and dated, and even they had some new departments and fixturing, with some fresher designers and a store environment finally wrestled away from 1979 (you would not believe how that store looked up until a couple years ago!)

I know the contemporary lines are where the focus is these days. We've dressed down as a society and everyone has become more label-conscious. Taking BG and Barneys as examples, I can remember visiting them in 1998 and then revisiting last year and finding substantially more casual, relaxed stores than before. The difference at Bergdorf's was particularly striking.

Despite my doubts about its future, I can see Bloomingdale's potentially becoming a nationwide authority on better casual lines, that is, if Federated doesn't succumb to more "economies of scale."

Here's some more good reading from the Knight-Ridder wire: Shoppers dissatisfied with today's stores

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To expand on your "dress down" comment.

I also agree that society has dressed down so much that it's troubling. Now granted, society is alot more hectic but there are times and places for all attire. People travel on planes as if they are at the beach. Who ever thought the day would come where thongs "flip flops" were appropiate for air travel. Even in traditionally conservative events people will dress down. Last year while I went to see Don Giovanni for the umteenth time. The Atlanta Opera takes great care in presenting a quality production. I was horrified to see that some people thought it was okay to attend in jeans. These same people have the nerve to even roll their eyes because they see someone in a fur. Distressed jeans are not appropiate for the opera. Neither is going braless in a slip dress.

Maybe I'm just really old fashioned.

I find it interesting that in this economy that stores like Target and Walmart are doing well.....and stores like Neiman Marcus and Nordstrom are doing well as well....but stores like JCPenney and Sears are stumbling along. Just an interesting observtion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.