“When I look back at the number of times I’ve shopped at Target in Woodland, it was virtually never for an item I could just as easily have purchased in downtown. The last time I checked, the Mustard Seed doesn’t sell 100-count boxes of jumbo paper clips. Neither does Union Bank.”
So let me get this straight Bob, nowhere in Downtown do they sell jumbo paper clips? Is that what you are saying? I’m sure some of the shops who do set that product would be interested to know that. But Bob, might have trouble figuring that out if he’s looking for office supplies in a restaurant or a bank.
I’m fairly certain that what Bob actually meant is that he couldn’t buy products like that in bulk in the Davis Downtown. And Bob that is exactly the point—the Davis downtown businesses cannot compete for bulk sales with Target. Thus building a Target in Davis puts them at a competitive disadvantage.
Dunning also argues that Target will be “attracting those who would have shopped at an out-of-town Target anyway,” thus “having little or no effect on the health and attractiveness of downtown Davis… Trust me on this.” Nonsense.
Those who argue that all we are really doing is redirecting those shoppers from Davis who have to travel to Woodland are missing a point—Target would not build here and go through the heavy and expensive effort to win a ballot measure if they expected a mere transfer of the existing market.
Let’s think about this—first of all there are the one-time expenses including a $300,000 political campaign just get approval to build a Target. There are also the large construction costs. Finally, there are the ongoing costs of hiring additional employees to staff the new Target.
Nope, if Target just believed that the construction of the new store would transfer the Davis share of the Woodland Target market, they would not have built a new store. It would not make any sense for them to do so. So obviously, they are expecting to make more money by having a new Target store. And if they expect to make more money, they must be expecting to take market share from existing businesses and transfer it to Target because of the new convenience of shopping in Davis.
They won’t be taking away that business from the Mustard Seed or Union Bank, but they make take away business from downtown stores that actually sell similar products as Target—you know like the baby store, stationary and office supply stores, clothing shops, etc. How many businesses have overlapping products? Doesn’t Target believe they would capture a lot of this market share? They must otherwise they would again not expend the resources to build a new store.
It is true that for some of Davis, the Target in Woodland is not much further than the new Target will be, there is something about driving out of town that acts as a barrier to some shoppers. For instance, I go to Mace Avenue in Davis quite frequently but I rarely go to Woodland. And when I do go to Woodland it is usually on my way to the airport for a specific reason—departure or arrival.
At the end of the day it is hard to know what impact the new Target will have on downtown, but it is naïve and/or dishonest to suggest that the impact will be minimal since the same people who went out of town will be the ones who shop at the in-town Target. If that were actually the case, Target would have had no incentive to build a new location in Davis. We can assume that their marketing gurus determined that there would be substantial additional revenue to Target by opening a new location.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
“Information”/rumor that was floating around during the Measure K campaign had to do with corporate tax right-offs that Target accrues by building new stores. This tax incentive reportedly expires in about 5 years and Target, again reportedly, has a history of moving on and building another new store. The rezoning and general plan amendments for this 17 acre site make this property very valuable for another big box to move in. Wal-Mart?, whatever, the city of Davis has little or no say now in who Target leases their property to if and when they decide to leave Davis. The corporate bottom line for Target may be much more complicated than simple local market share. Anyone have the real story on this rumor?
“Information”/rumor that was floating around during the Measure K campaign had to do with corporate tax right-offs that Target accrues by building new stores. This tax incentive reportedly expires in about 5 years and Target, again reportedly, has a history of moving on and building another new store. The rezoning and general plan amendments for this 17 acre site make this property very valuable for another big box to move in. Wal-Mart?, whatever, the city of Davis has little or no say now in who Target leases their property to if and when they decide to leave Davis. The corporate bottom line for Target may be much more complicated than simple local market share. Anyone have the real story on this rumor?
“Information”/rumor that was floating around during the Measure K campaign had to do with corporate tax right-offs that Target accrues by building new stores. This tax incentive reportedly expires in about 5 years and Target, again reportedly, has a history of moving on and building another new store. The rezoning and general plan amendments for this 17 acre site make this property very valuable for another big box to move in. Wal-Mart?, whatever, the city of Davis has little or no say now in who Target leases their property to if and when they decide to leave Davis. The corporate bottom line for Target may be much more complicated than simple local market share. Anyone have the real story on this rumor?
“Information”/rumor that was floating around during the Measure K campaign had to do with corporate tax right-offs that Target accrues by building new stores. This tax incentive reportedly expires in about 5 years and Target, again reportedly, has a history of moving on and building another new store. The rezoning and general plan amendments for this 17 acre site make this property very valuable for another big box to move in. Wal-Mart?, whatever, the city of Davis has little or no say now in who Target leases their property to if and when they decide to leave Davis. The corporate bottom line for Target may be much more complicated than simple local market share. Anyone have the real story on this rumor?
“Nope, if Target just believed that the construction of the new store would transfer the Davis share of the Woodland Target market, they would not have built a new store. It would not make any sense for them to do so.”
That is true.
“So obviously, they are expecting to make more money by having a new Target store.”
That is true, too.
“And if they expect to make more money, they must be expecting to take market share from existing businesses and transfer it to Target because of the new convenience of shopping in Davis.”
That is true, too.
However, those existing businesses that Target hopes to be capturing market share from are not necessarily (or even principally) small downtown Davis businesses.
They will be taking some business from Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Gottschalks and Cost Plus, all of which now have residence in Davis, though none in downtown. They will also take some business from Davis Ace (which will be the most affected downtown business, though not in its sales of hardware and lumber or in its “yard” sales) and a few others, as you point out.
But altogether, that will be small potatoes for Target. The vast majority of the market share that Target in Davis will capture (beyond the dollars that are currently going to Target in Woodland) will be from their competitors in Sacramento, Vacaville, Woodland, West Sac and so on.
(They may even be taking some market share from online sellers.)
The people of Davis currently buy almost all of their clothes, almost all of their furniture, almost all of their housewares, almost all of their toys, almost all of their shoes, almost all of their appliances, and almost all of their home electronics from non-Davis businesses. When Target opens shop on Second Street, their hope will be to capture a lot of this business. Not all of it — but a lot of it.
Target competes regionally with all of the large department stores (such as Sears, JC Penney, etc.) and all of the large discount retailers (Wal-Mart, Costco, etc.) and many of the large specialty retailers (Circuit City, Fry’s, etc.) and of course with many online merchants. Davis people are now buying a lot of merchandise from those retailers, none of which operates in Davis or provides sales tax dollars to our city.
So the biggest financial losers from having Target in Davis will be the other big companies in our region that do not have stores in Davis.
I suspect that the vast majority of shoppers at the new Target will be Davisites (though hopefully not, for their sake, the “davisite” who posts on this blog). However, some will be (as the anti-Target mob said) freeway shoppers. That is, people who drive from West Sac to Vacaville and back might on occassion stop off at the Target in Davis for convenience.
Those Davisites who now drive to Vacaville to shop will now be able to do that shopping in Davis. Same with those thousands of Davisites who work in Sacramento and stay there after work to do their family’s shopping. And the same with those tens of thousands of Davisites who live and work here, but drive over to Woodland to shop at Target or K-Mart or Orchard Supply or Grocery Outlet.
“Nope, if Target just believed that the construction of the new store would transfer the Davis share of the Woodland Target market, they would not have built a new store. It would not make any sense for them to do so.”
That is true.
“So obviously, they are expecting to make more money by having a new Target store.”
That is true, too.
“And if they expect to make more money, they must be expecting to take market share from existing businesses and transfer it to Target because of the new convenience of shopping in Davis.”
That is true, too.
However, those existing businesses that Target hopes to be capturing market share from are not necessarily (or even principally) small downtown Davis businesses.
They will be taking some business from Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Gottschalks and Cost Plus, all of which now have residence in Davis, though none in downtown. They will also take some business from Davis Ace (which will be the most affected downtown business, though not in its sales of hardware and lumber or in its “yard” sales) and a few others, as you point out.
But altogether, that will be small potatoes for Target. The vast majority of the market share that Target in Davis will capture (beyond the dollars that are currently going to Target in Woodland) will be from their competitors in Sacramento, Vacaville, Woodland, West Sac and so on.
(They may even be taking some market share from online sellers.)
The people of Davis currently buy almost all of their clothes, almost all of their furniture, almost all of their housewares, almost all of their toys, almost all of their shoes, almost all of their appliances, and almost all of their home electronics from non-Davis businesses. When Target opens shop on Second Street, their hope will be to capture a lot of this business. Not all of it — but a lot of it.
Target competes regionally with all of the large department stores (such as Sears, JC Penney, etc.) and all of the large discount retailers (Wal-Mart, Costco, etc.) and many of the large specialty retailers (Circuit City, Fry’s, etc.) and of course with many online merchants. Davis people are now buying a lot of merchandise from those retailers, none of which operates in Davis or provides sales tax dollars to our city.
So the biggest financial losers from having Target in Davis will be the other big companies in our region that do not have stores in Davis.
I suspect that the vast majority of shoppers at the new Target will be Davisites (though hopefully not, for their sake, the “davisite” who posts on this blog). However, some will be (as the anti-Target mob said) freeway shoppers. That is, people who drive from West Sac to Vacaville and back might on occassion stop off at the Target in Davis for convenience.
Those Davisites who now drive to Vacaville to shop will now be able to do that shopping in Davis. Same with those thousands of Davisites who work in Sacramento and stay there after work to do their family’s shopping. And the same with those tens of thousands of Davisites who live and work here, but drive over to Woodland to shop at Target or K-Mart or Orchard Supply or Grocery Outlet.
“Nope, if Target just believed that the construction of the new store would transfer the Davis share of the Woodland Target market, they would not have built a new store. It would not make any sense for them to do so.”
That is true.
“So obviously, they are expecting to make more money by having a new Target store.”
That is true, too.
“And if they expect to make more money, they must be expecting to take market share from existing businesses and transfer it to Target because of the new convenience of shopping in Davis.”
That is true, too.
However, those existing businesses that Target hopes to be capturing market share from are not necessarily (or even principally) small downtown Davis businesses.
They will be taking some business from Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Gottschalks and Cost Plus, all of which now have residence in Davis, though none in downtown. They will also take some business from Davis Ace (which will be the most affected downtown business, though not in its sales of hardware and lumber or in its “yard” sales) and a few others, as you point out.
But altogether, that will be small potatoes for Target. The vast majority of the market share that Target in Davis will capture (beyond the dollars that are currently going to Target in Woodland) will be from their competitors in Sacramento, Vacaville, Woodland, West Sac and so on.
(They may even be taking some market share from online sellers.)
The people of Davis currently buy almost all of their clothes, almost all of their furniture, almost all of their housewares, almost all of their toys, almost all of their shoes, almost all of their appliances, and almost all of their home electronics from non-Davis businesses. When Target opens shop on Second Street, their hope will be to capture a lot of this business. Not all of it — but a lot of it.
Target competes regionally with all of the large department stores (such as Sears, JC Penney, etc.) and all of the large discount retailers (Wal-Mart, Costco, etc.) and many of the large specialty retailers (Circuit City, Fry’s, etc.) and of course with many online merchants. Davis people are now buying a lot of merchandise from those retailers, none of which operates in Davis or provides sales tax dollars to our city.
So the biggest financial losers from having Target in Davis will be the other big companies in our region that do not have stores in Davis.
I suspect that the vast majority of shoppers at the new Target will be Davisites (though hopefully not, for their sake, the “davisite” who posts on this blog). However, some will be (as the anti-Target mob said) freeway shoppers. That is, people who drive from West Sac to Vacaville and back might on occassion stop off at the Target in Davis for convenience.
Those Davisites who now drive to Vacaville to shop will now be able to do that shopping in Davis. Same with those thousands of Davisites who work in Sacramento and stay there after work to do their family’s shopping. And the same with those tens of thousands of Davisites who live and work here, but drive over to Woodland to shop at Target or K-Mart or Orchard Supply or Grocery Outlet.
“Nope, if Target just believed that the construction of the new store would transfer the Davis share of the Woodland Target market, they would not have built a new store. It would not make any sense for them to do so.”
That is true.
“So obviously, they are expecting to make more money by having a new Target store.”
That is true, too.
“And if they expect to make more money, they must be expecting to take market share from existing businesses and transfer it to Target because of the new convenience of shopping in Davis.”
That is true, too.
However, those existing businesses that Target hopes to be capturing market share from are not necessarily (or even principally) small downtown Davis businesses.
They will be taking some business from Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Gottschalks and Cost Plus, all of which now have residence in Davis, though none in downtown. They will also take some business from Davis Ace (which will be the most affected downtown business, though not in its sales of hardware and lumber or in its “yard” sales) and a few others, as you point out.
But altogether, that will be small potatoes for Target. The vast majority of the market share that Target in Davis will capture (beyond the dollars that are currently going to Target in Woodland) will be from their competitors in Sacramento, Vacaville, Woodland, West Sac and so on.
(They may even be taking some market share from online sellers.)
The people of Davis currently buy almost all of their clothes, almost all of their furniture, almost all of their housewares, almost all of their toys, almost all of their shoes, almost all of their appliances, and almost all of their home electronics from non-Davis businesses. When Target opens shop on Second Street, their hope will be to capture a lot of this business. Not all of it — but a lot of it.
Target competes regionally with all of the large department stores (such as Sears, JC Penney, etc.) and all of the large discount retailers (Wal-Mart, Costco, etc.) and many of the large specialty retailers (Circuit City, Fry’s, etc.) and of course with many online merchants. Davis people are now buying a lot of merchandise from those retailers, none of which operates in Davis or provides sales tax dollars to our city.
So the biggest financial losers from having Target in Davis will be the other big companies in our region that do not have stores in Davis.
I suspect that the vast majority of shoppers at the new Target will be Davisites (though hopefully not, for their sake, the “davisite” who posts on this blog). However, some will be (as the anti-Target mob said) freeway shoppers. That is, people who drive from West Sac to Vacaville and back might on occassion stop off at the Target in Davis for convenience.
Those Davisites who now drive to Vacaville to shop will now be able to do that shopping in Davis. Same with those thousands of Davisites who work in Sacramento and stay there after work to do their family’s shopping. And the same with those tens of thousands of Davisites who live and work here, but drive over to Woodland to shop at Target or K-Mart or Orchard Supply or Grocery Outlet.
“For instance, I go to Mace Avenue in Davis quite frequently but I rarely go to Woodland.”
You go to Mace Avenue frequently? I’ve lived in Davis since 1965, and I’ve never heard of Mace Avenue. Perhaps you meant 5th Avenue, the street (that does not exist) where the woman claimed that the Davis Police abused her? Or perhaps you meant Mace Boulevard?
FWIW, way too much is named for Bruce Mace in Davis. Bruce Mace is the man for whom Mace Boulevard is named, Mace Ranch is named, El Macero is named, and El Macero Vista is named.
To me, as someone who knows Davis history, I find the name “Mace Ranch” most questionable of all. Before Bruce Mace bought that property in 1950, it was the Chiles Ranch for 100 years. It rightfully ought to be called Chiles Ranch, today.
The Chiles family was and is the first family of Davis. (Jerome C. Davis himself only had a ranch here because his father-in-law, Colonel Joseph Ballinger Chiles, sold him the western half of that ranch.) Even worse, Isaac Skinner Chiles built a beautiful 19th Century ranch-style house on his property, and Bruce Mace tore the old place down as soon as he purchased the ranch from the Chiles family. Because of that unnecessary demolition, we lost an important part of Davis history. All that exists is the rather ordinary 1950s ranch-style house on 5th Street, where Explorit was, which Mace built in place of the much more elegant Chiles house.
“For instance, I go to Mace Avenue in Davis quite frequently but I rarely go to Woodland.”
You go to Mace Avenue frequently? I’ve lived in Davis since 1965, and I’ve never heard of Mace Avenue. Perhaps you meant 5th Avenue, the street (that does not exist) where the woman claimed that the Davis Police abused her? Or perhaps you meant Mace Boulevard?
FWIW, way too much is named for Bruce Mace in Davis. Bruce Mace is the man for whom Mace Boulevard is named, Mace Ranch is named, El Macero is named, and El Macero Vista is named.
To me, as someone who knows Davis history, I find the name “Mace Ranch” most questionable of all. Before Bruce Mace bought that property in 1950, it was the Chiles Ranch for 100 years. It rightfully ought to be called Chiles Ranch, today.
The Chiles family was and is the first family of Davis. (Jerome C. Davis himself only had a ranch here because his father-in-law, Colonel Joseph Ballinger Chiles, sold him the western half of that ranch.) Even worse, Isaac Skinner Chiles built a beautiful 19th Century ranch-style house on his property, and Bruce Mace tore the old place down as soon as he purchased the ranch from the Chiles family. Because of that unnecessary demolition, we lost an important part of Davis history. All that exists is the rather ordinary 1950s ranch-style house on 5th Street, where Explorit was, which Mace built in place of the much more elegant Chiles house.
“For instance, I go to Mace Avenue in Davis quite frequently but I rarely go to Woodland.”
You go to Mace Avenue frequently? I’ve lived in Davis since 1965, and I’ve never heard of Mace Avenue. Perhaps you meant 5th Avenue, the street (that does not exist) where the woman claimed that the Davis Police abused her? Or perhaps you meant Mace Boulevard?
FWIW, way too much is named for Bruce Mace in Davis. Bruce Mace is the man for whom Mace Boulevard is named, Mace Ranch is named, El Macero is named, and El Macero Vista is named.
To me, as someone who knows Davis history, I find the name “Mace Ranch” most questionable of all. Before Bruce Mace bought that property in 1950, it was the Chiles Ranch for 100 years. It rightfully ought to be called Chiles Ranch, today.
The Chiles family was and is the first family of Davis. (Jerome C. Davis himself only had a ranch here because his father-in-law, Colonel Joseph Ballinger Chiles, sold him the western half of that ranch.) Even worse, Isaac Skinner Chiles built a beautiful 19th Century ranch-style house on his property, and Bruce Mace tore the old place down as soon as he purchased the ranch from the Chiles family. Because of that unnecessary demolition, we lost an important part of Davis history. All that exists is the rather ordinary 1950s ranch-style house on 5th Street, where Explorit was, which Mace built in place of the much more elegant Chiles house.
“For instance, I go to Mace Avenue in Davis quite frequently but I rarely go to Woodland.”
You go to Mace Avenue frequently? I’ve lived in Davis since 1965, and I’ve never heard of Mace Avenue. Perhaps you meant 5th Avenue, the street (that does not exist) where the woman claimed that the Davis Police abused her? Or perhaps you meant Mace Boulevard?
FWIW, way too much is named for Bruce Mace in Davis. Bruce Mace is the man for whom Mace Boulevard is named, Mace Ranch is named, El Macero is named, and El Macero Vista is named.
To me, as someone who knows Davis history, I find the name “Mace Ranch” most questionable of all. Before Bruce Mace bought that property in 1950, it was the Chiles Ranch for 100 years. It rightfully ought to be called Chiles Ranch, today.
The Chiles family was and is the first family of Davis. (Jerome C. Davis himself only had a ranch here because his father-in-law, Colonel Joseph Ballinger Chiles, sold him the western half of that ranch.) Even worse, Isaac Skinner Chiles built a beautiful 19th Century ranch-style house on his property, and Bruce Mace tore the old place down as soon as he purchased the ranch from the Chiles family. Because of that unnecessary demolition, we lost an important part of Davis history. All that exists is the rather ordinary 1950s ranch-style house on 5th Street, where Explorit was, which Mace built in place of the much more elegant Chiles house.
Here we go again–back to the avenues and streets and boulevards…
I understand that Target will possibly take business from other areas as well, but the question is for our downtown–will Target take away business from the downtown merchants who sell similar products? I think the answer is undoubtedly yes. Will that cause them to leave or close? I think the answer to that is also yes, unfortunately.
Here we go again–back to the avenues and streets and boulevards…
I understand that Target will possibly take business from other areas as well, but the question is for our downtown–will Target take away business from the downtown merchants who sell similar products? I think the answer is undoubtedly yes. Will that cause them to leave or close? I think the answer to that is also yes, unfortunately.
Here we go again–back to the avenues and streets and boulevards…
I understand that Target will possibly take business from other areas as well, but the question is for our downtown–will Target take away business from the downtown merchants who sell similar products? I think the answer is undoubtedly yes. Will that cause them to leave or close? I think the answer to that is also yes, unfortunately.
Here we go again–back to the avenues and streets and boulevards…
I understand that Target will possibly take business from other areas as well, but the question is for our downtown–will Target take away business from the downtown merchants who sell similar products? I think the answer is undoubtedly yes. Will that cause them to leave or close? I think the answer to that is also yes, unfortunately.
“‘Information’/rumor that was floating around during the Measure K campaign had to do with corporate tax right-offs that Target accrues by building new stores.”
Target gets no “right-offs” that are exclusive to Target or exclusive to any other large retailers.
Any time any company builds and owns a retail building, that builder will depreciate the value of the building stock (not the value of the land) from its income. I would guess that the depreciation would take at least 20 years.
“This tax incentive reportedly expires in about 5 years and Target, again reportedly, has a history of moving on and building another new store.”
Reportedly? Where was this reported?
“The rezoning and general plan amendments for this 17 acre site …”
The site is actually 19 acres. Maybe you should check your reporter’s credentials?
“… make this property very valuable for another big box to move in.”
What kind of dimwitted logic is that?
“Wal-Mart?, whatever, the city of Davis has little or no say now in who Target leases their property to if and when they decide to leave Davis.”
Look, genius, a second company cannot depreciate building or equipment values that have been previously depreciated by another company. If you don’t understand anything about accounting or economics, then maybe you ought to ask someone who does.
“The corporate bottom line for Target may be much more complicated than simple local market share.”
Now you are pretending that you are an expert on corporate finance? Maybe you should stick to what you know best — slandering Davis Enterprise columnists.
“Anyone have the real story on this rumor?”
You are raising your calumny to the level of a rumor? What chutzpah!
“‘Information’/rumor that was floating around during the Measure K campaign had to do with corporate tax right-offs that Target accrues by building new stores.”
Target gets no “right-offs” that are exclusive to Target or exclusive to any other large retailers.
Any time any company builds and owns a retail building, that builder will depreciate the value of the building stock (not the value of the land) from its income. I would guess that the depreciation would take at least 20 years.
“This tax incentive reportedly expires in about 5 years and Target, again reportedly, has a history of moving on and building another new store.”
Reportedly? Where was this reported?
“The rezoning and general plan amendments for this 17 acre site …”
The site is actually 19 acres. Maybe you should check your reporter’s credentials?
“… make this property very valuable for another big box to move in.”
What kind of dimwitted logic is that?
“Wal-Mart?, whatever, the city of Davis has little or no say now in who Target leases their property to if and when they decide to leave Davis.”
Look, genius, a second company cannot depreciate building or equipment values that have been previously depreciated by another company. If you don’t understand anything about accounting or economics, then maybe you ought to ask someone who does.
“The corporate bottom line for Target may be much more complicated than simple local market share.”
Now you are pretending that you are an expert on corporate finance? Maybe you should stick to what you know best — slandering Davis Enterprise columnists.
“Anyone have the real story on this rumor?”
You are raising your calumny to the level of a rumor? What chutzpah!
“‘Information’/rumor that was floating around during the Measure K campaign had to do with corporate tax right-offs that Target accrues by building new stores.”
Target gets no “right-offs” that are exclusive to Target or exclusive to any other large retailers.
Any time any company builds and owns a retail building, that builder will depreciate the value of the building stock (not the value of the land) from its income. I would guess that the depreciation would take at least 20 years.
“This tax incentive reportedly expires in about 5 years and Target, again reportedly, has a history of moving on and building another new store.”
Reportedly? Where was this reported?
“The rezoning and general plan amendments for this 17 acre site …”
The site is actually 19 acres. Maybe you should check your reporter’s credentials?
“… make this property very valuable for another big box to move in.”
What kind of dimwitted logic is that?
“Wal-Mart?, whatever, the city of Davis has little or no say now in who Target leases their property to if and when they decide to leave Davis.”
Look, genius, a second company cannot depreciate building or equipment values that have been previously depreciated by another company. If you don’t understand anything about accounting or economics, then maybe you ought to ask someone who does.
“The corporate bottom line for Target may be much more complicated than simple local market share.”
Now you are pretending that you are an expert on corporate finance? Maybe you should stick to what you know best — slandering Davis Enterprise columnists.
“Anyone have the real story on this rumor?”
You are raising your calumny to the level of a rumor? What chutzpah!
“‘Information’/rumor that was floating around during the Measure K campaign had to do with corporate tax right-offs that Target accrues by building new stores.”
Target gets no “right-offs” that are exclusive to Target or exclusive to any other large retailers.
Any time any company builds and owns a retail building, that builder will depreciate the value of the building stock (not the value of the land) from its income. I would guess that the depreciation would take at least 20 years.
“This tax incentive reportedly expires in about 5 years and Target, again reportedly, has a history of moving on and building another new store.”
Reportedly? Where was this reported?
“The rezoning and general plan amendments for this 17 acre site …”
The site is actually 19 acres. Maybe you should check your reporter’s credentials?
“… make this property very valuable for another big box to move in.”
What kind of dimwitted logic is that?
“Wal-Mart?, whatever, the city of Davis has little or no say now in who Target leases their property to if and when they decide to leave Davis.”
Look, genius, a second company cannot depreciate building or equipment values that have been previously depreciated by another company. If you don’t understand anything about accounting or economics, then maybe you ought to ask someone who does.
“The corporate bottom line for Target may be much more complicated than simple local market share.”
Now you are pretending that you are an expert on corporate finance? Maybe you should stick to what you know best — slandering Davis Enterprise columnists.
“Anyone have the real story on this rumor?”
You are raising your calumny to the level of a rumor? What chutzpah!
“Target take away business from the downtown merchants who sell similar products? I think the answer is undoubtedly yes.”
The most affected will be the home store at Davis Ace. Jennifer Anderson sells ordinary merchandise at extraordinarily high prices. Her only reason for doing this profitably has been because she has had a relative monopoly on such wares inside Davis. While I feel sorry for her as an individual, that she will lose a lot of this business, I don’t feel sorry for Davis consumers who will get essentially the same products at lower prices at Target.
Beyond Davis Ace, there are very few other downtown merchants that principally sell ordinary merchandise. Most of the others are specialists, and most of them offer a lot of service to go along with their highly specialized wares. Insofar as Davis consumers prefer higher quality and better service, they will continue to shop at those locally owned stores.
Nevertheless, the vast, vast majority of businesses in downtown Davis — I would guess more than 90% — won’t compete with Target at all. Downtown Davis, as you know, is no longer the home of Wingers or Montgomery Ward or the Quessenberry’s or the various Five and Dimes that used to exist there. It is now mostly offices, restaurants, cafes, theaters, bars, boutiques, service businesses (like insurance and real estate companies) and high-end retailers. They will not lose money or market share due to Target.
“Target take away business from the downtown merchants who sell similar products? I think the answer is undoubtedly yes.”
The most affected will be the home store at Davis Ace. Jennifer Anderson sells ordinary merchandise at extraordinarily high prices. Her only reason for doing this profitably has been because she has had a relative monopoly on such wares inside Davis. While I feel sorry for her as an individual, that she will lose a lot of this business, I don’t feel sorry for Davis consumers who will get essentially the same products at lower prices at Target.
Beyond Davis Ace, there are very few other downtown merchants that principally sell ordinary merchandise. Most of the others are specialists, and most of them offer a lot of service to go along with their highly specialized wares. Insofar as Davis consumers prefer higher quality and better service, they will continue to shop at those locally owned stores.
Nevertheless, the vast, vast majority of businesses in downtown Davis — I would guess more than 90% — won’t compete with Target at all. Downtown Davis, as you know, is no longer the home of Wingers or Montgomery Ward or the Quessenberry’s or the various Five and Dimes that used to exist there. It is now mostly offices, restaurants, cafes, theaters, bars, boutiques, service businesses (like insurance and real estate companies) and high-end retailers. They will not lose money or market share due to Target.
“Target take away business from the downtown merchants who sell similar products? I think the answer is undoubtedly yes.”
The most affected will be the home store at Davis Ace. Jennifer Anderson sells ordinary merchandise at extraordinarily high prices. Her only reason for doing this profitably has been because she has had a relative monopoly on such wares inside Davis. While I feel sorry for her as an individual, that she will lose a lot of this business, I don’t feel sorry for Davis consumers who will get essentially the same products at lower prices at Target.
Beyond Davis Ace, there are very few other downtown merchants that principally sell ordinary merchandise. Most of the others are specialists, and most of them offer a lot of service to go along with their highly specialized wares. Insofar as Davis consumers prefer higher quality and better service, they will continue to shop at those locally owned stores.
Nevertheless, the vast, vast majority of businesses in downtown Davis — I would guess more than 90% — won’t compete with Target at all. Downtown Davis, as you know, is no longer the home of Wingers or Montgomery Ward or the Quessenberry’s or the various Five and Dimes that used to exist there. It is now mostly offices, restaurants, cafes, theaters, bars, boutiques, service businesses (like insurance and real estate companies) and high-end retailers. They will not lose money or market share due to Target.
“Target take away business from the downtown merchants who sell similar products? I think the answer is undoubtedly yes.”
The most affected will be the home store at Davis Ace. Jennifer Anderson sells ordinary merchandise at extraordinarily high prices. Her only reason for doing this profitably has been because she has had a relative monopoly on such wares inside Davis. While I feel sorry for her as an individual, that she will lose a lot of this business, I don’t feel sorry for Davis consumers who will get essentially the same products at lower prices at Target.
Beyond Davis Ace, there are very few other downtown merchants that principally sell ordinary merchandise. Most of the others are specialists, and most of them offer a lot of service to go along with their highly specialized wares. Insofar as Davis consumers prefer higher quality and better service, they will continue to shop at those locally owned stores.
Nevertheless, the vast, vast majority of businesses in downtown Davis — I would guess more than 90% — won’t compete with Target at all. Downtown Davis, as you know, is no longer the home of Wingers or Montgomery Ward or the Quessenberry’s or the various Five and Dimes that used to exist there. It is now mostly offices, restaurants, cafes, theaters, bars, boutiques, service businesses (like insurance and real estate companies) and high-end retailers. They will not lose money or market share due to Target.
“Nevertheless, the vast, vast majority of businesses in downtown Davis — I would guess more than 90% — won’t compete with Target at all.”
I’m guessing the 53 retailers who signed the letter opposing Target would disagree with your assessment, Rich.
Target competes directly with nearly every retailer in town. When the Chamber of Commerce decided to list Target in their online directory (last spring, before Target has even purchased their site) they included them in nine different retail categories.
Many of those specialty stores that you mention also sell non-specialty items (non-plant items make up 40% of my business, for example). Target will compete with secondary product lines for many of us. More to the point, they will have a huge advantage in location, parking, and an ad budget of $3/4 million per year per store.
Retailers expect sales losses ranging from 20% to 60% or more, depending on their product lines. We understand that we can focus on service, professionalism, unique product lines, and so on. And we can work together to develop effective local marketing campaigns and promote the benefits of shopping locally. We’re doing that. But I’d expect to see several store closures, significant staff reductions, shorter business hours, and other effects as we all adapt to the damage Target will do.
The smallest stores in high-lease situations, with the smallest number of employees, will be the first to go.
By the way, Davis Ace sells most of their products at perfectly normal retail markup. It’s just that many people have grown to expect big-box discounting, and now consider that normal. And independents’ starting wholesale cost is higher than what the big-box stores pay, because those stores go directly to the manufacturer or negotiates special pricing with the vendor. I have an advantage, being in a business and a region which has a lot of smaller vendors from whom I can purchase. That is not an option for many retail categories, particularly books, music, housewares, gift lines, etc.
“Nevertheless, the vast, vast majority of businesses in downtown Davis — I would guess more than 90% — won’t compete with Target at all.”
I’m guessing the 53 retailers who signed the letter opposing Target would disagree with your assessment, Rich.
Target competes directly with nearly every retailer in town. When the Chamber of Commerce decided to list Target in their online directory (last spring, before Target has even purchased their site) they included them in nine different retail categories.
Many of those specialty stores that you mention also sell non-specialty items (non-plant items make up 40% of my business, for example). Target will compete with secondary product lines for many of us. More to the point, they will have a huge advantage in location, parking, and an ad budget of $3/4 million per year per store.
Retailers expect sales losses ranging from 20% to 60% or more, depending on their product lines. We understand that we can focus on service, professionalism, unique product lines, and so on. And we can work together to develop effective local marketing campaigns and promote the benefits of shopping locally. We’re doing that. But I’d expect to see several store closures, significant staff reductions, shorter business hours, and other effects as we all adapt to the damage Target will do.
The smallest stores in high-lease situations, with the smallest number of employees, will be the first to go.
By the way, Davis Ace sells most of their products at perfectly normal retail markup. It’s just that many people have grown to expect big-box discounting, and now consider that normal. And independents’ starting wholesale cost is higher than what the big-box stores pay, because those stores go directly to the manufacturer or negotiates special pricing with the vendor. I have an advantage, being in a business and a region which has a lot of smaller vendors from whom I can purchase. That is not an option for many retail categories, particularly books, music, housewares, gift lines, etc.
“Nevertheless, the vast, vast majority of businesses in downtown Davis — I would guess more than 90% — won’t compete with Target at all.”
I’m guessing the 53 retailers who signed the letter opposing Target would disagree with your assessment, Rich.
Target competes directly with nearly every retailer in town. When the Chamber of Commerce decided to list Target in their online directory (last spring, before Target has even purchased their site) they included them in nine different retail categories.
Many of those specialty stores that you mention also sell non-specialty items (non-plant items make up 40% of my business, for example). Target will compete with secondary product lines for many of us. More to the point, they will have a huge advantage in location, parking, and an ad budget of $3/4 million per year per store.
Retailers expect sales losses ranging from 20% to 60% or more, depending on their product lines. We understand that we can focus on service, professionalism, unique product lines, and so on. And we can work together to develop effective local marketing campaigns and promote the benefits of shopping locally. We’re doing that. But I’d expect to see several store closures, significant staff reductions, shorter business hours, and other effects as we all adapt to the damage Target will do.
The smallest stores in high-lease situations, with the smallest number of employees, will be the first to go.
By the way, Davis Ace sells most of their products at perfectly normal retail markup. It’s just that many people have grown to expect big-box discounting, and now consider that normal. And independents’ starting wholesale cost is higher than what the big-box stores pay, because those stores go directly to the manufacturer or negotiates special pricing with the vendor. I have an advantage, being in a business and a region which has a lot of smaller vendors from whom I can purchase. That is not an option for many retail categories, particularly books, music, housewares, gift lines, etc.
“Nevertheless, the vast, vast majority of businesses in downtown Davis — I would guess more than 90% — won’t compete with Target at all.”
I’m guessing the 53 retailers who signed the letter opposing Target would disagree with your assessment, Rich.
Target competes directly with nearly every retailer in town. When the Chamber of Commerce decided to list Target in their online directory (last spring, before Target has even purchased their site) they included them in nine different retail categories.
Many of those specialty stores that you mention also sell non-specialty items (non-plant items make up 40% of my business, for example). Target will compete with secondary product lines for many of us. More to the point, they will have a huge advantage in location, parking, and an ad budget of $3/4 million per year per store.
Retailers expect sales losses ranging from 20% to 60% or more, depending on their product lines. We understand that we can focus on service, professionalism, unique product lines, and so on. And we can work together to develop effective local marketing campaigns and promote the benefits of shopping locally. We’re doing that. But I’d expect to see several store closures, significant staff reductions, shorter business hours, and other effects as we all adapt to the damage Target will do.
The smallest stores in high-lease situations, with the smallest number of employees, will be the first to go.
By the way, Davis Ace sells most of their products at perfectly normal retail markup. It’s just that many people have grown to expect big-box discounting, and now consider that normal. And independents’ starting wholesale cost is higher than what the big-box stores pay, because those stores go directly to the manufacturer or negotiates special pricing with the vendor. I have an advantage, being in a business and a region which has a lot of smaller vendors from whom I can purchase. That is not an option for many retail categories, particularly books, music, housewares, gift lines, etc.
rich rifkin said… They will be taking some business from Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Gottschalks and Cost Plus, all of which now have residence in Davis, though none in downtown.
This is EXACTLY what we said in the DBBD campaign. I am one of the 48% that did not want big-box in our town and I will not be shopping at Target (I haven’t shopped there since the pre-ap and I don’t miss it one bit!). This is also EXACTLY what pisses me off about Measure K passing. The Longs and Rite-Aids will suffer and I won’t have a choice on where to shop.
Target was issued a monopoly in our town; “this one-time fix will only happen with this development” they said. EXACTLY. It’s an unfair monopoly over the other merchants (ACE, Rite-Aid, RWB&N, Mother Baby Source, Alphabet Moon…) who have built stores within our general plan (including Safeway). No one else can compete with that and that is absolutely not fair to every merchant in town (corporate or small business).
As Ruth Asmundson said, “You all are stupid for voting for (against in the case of CV) this measure.” Stupid and lazy. It’s absurd for Dunning to claim that Davis is the *only* town in America that will escape the local big-box effect. FWIW, I would have remained a local Target shopper if Target wouldn’t have been such an asshole corporation and agreed to build a 50,000 sq.ft store that was more centrally located.
As evidence of the vote and the contentious city council meetings, this Target is not for Davis, it’s for the I-80 business. They don’t give a crap about Davis. If they did, they would have looked at the sentiment and the vote and built in Dixon.
rich rifkin said… They will be taking some business from Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Gottschalks and Cost Plus, all of which now have residence in Davis, though none in downtown.
This is EXACTLY what we said in the DBBD campaign. I am one of the 48% that did not want big-box in our town and I will not be shopping at Target (I haven’t shopped there since the pre-ap and I don’t miss it one bit!). This is also EXACTLY what pisses me off about Measure K passing. The Longs and Rite-Aids will suffer and I won’t have a choice on where to shop.
Target was issued a monopoly in our town; “this one-time fix will only happen with this development” they said. EXACTLY. It’s an unfair monopoly over the other merchants (ACE, Rite-Aid, RWB&N, Mother Baby Source, Alphabet Moon…) who have built stores within our general plan (including Safeway). No one else can compete with that and that is absolutely not fair to every merchant in town (corporate or small business).
As Ruth Asmundson said, “You all are stupid for voting for (against in the case of CV) this measure.” Stupid and lazy. It’s absurd for Dunning to claim that Davis is the *only* town in America that will escape the local big-box effect. FWIW, I would have remained a local Target shopper if Target wouldn’t have been such an asshole corporation and agreed to build a 50,000 sq.ft store that was more centrally located.
As evidence of the vote and the contentious city council meetings, this Target is not for Davis, it’s for the I-80 business. They don’t give a crap about Davis. If they did, they would have looked at the sentiment and the vote and built in Dixon.
rich rifkin said… They will be taking some business from Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Gottschalks and Cost Plus, all of which now have residence in Davis, though none in downtown.
This is EXACTLY what we said in the DBBD campaign. I am one of the 48% that did not want big-box in our town and I will not be shopping at Target (I haven’t shopped there since the pre-ap and I don’t miss it one bit!). This is also EXACTLY what pisses me off about Measure K passing. The Longs and Rite-Aids will suffer and I won’t have a choice on where to shop.
Target was issued a monopoly in our town; “this one-time fix will only happen with this development” they said. EXACTLY. It’s an unfair monopoly over the other merchants (ACE, Rite-Aid, RWB&N, Mother Baby Source, Alphabet Moon…) who have built stores within our general plan (including Safeway). No one else can compete with that and that is absolutely not fair to every merchant in town (corporate or small business).
As Ruth Asmundson said, “You all are stupid for voting for (against in the case of CV) this measure.” Stupid and lazy. It’s absurd for Dunning to claim that Davis is the *only* town in America that will escape the local big-box effect. FWIW, I would have remained a local Target shopper if Target wouldn’t have been such an asshole corporation and agreed to build a 50,000 sq.ft store that was more centrally located.
As evidence of the vote and the contentious city council meetings, this Target is not for Davis, it’s for the I-80 business. They don’t give a crap about Davis. If they did, they would have looked at the sentiment and the vote and built in Dixon.
rich rifkin said… They will be taking some business from Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Gottschalks and Cost Plus, all of which now have residence in Davis, though none in downtown.
This is EXACTLY what we said in the DBBD campaign. I am one of the 48% that did not want big-box in our town and I will not be shopping at Target (I haven’t shopped there since the pre-ap and I don’t miss it one bit!). This is also EXACTLY what pisses me off about Measure K passing. The Longs and Rite-Aids will suffer and I won’t have a choice on where to shop.
Target was issued a monopoly in our town; “this one-time fix will only happen with this development” they said. EXACTLY. It’s an unfair monopoly over the other merchants (ACE, Rite-Aid, RWB&N, Mother Baby Source, Alphabet Moon…) who have built stores within our general plan (including Safeway). No one else can compete with that and that is absolutely not fair to every merchant in town (corporate or small business).
As Ruth Asmundson said, “You all are stupid for voting for (against in the case of CV) this measure.” Stupid and lazy. It’s absurd for Dunning to claim that Davis is the *only* town in America that will escape the local big-box effect. FWIW, I would have remained a local Target shopper if Target wouldn’t have been such an asshole corporation and agreed to build a 50,000 sq.ft store that was more centrally located.
As evidence of the vote and the contentious city council meetings, this Target is not for Davis, it’s for the I-80 business. They don’t give a crap about Davis. If they did, they would have looked at the sentiment and the vote and built in Dixon.
I wrote: Nevertheless, the vast, vast majority of businesses in downtown Davis — I would guess more than 90% — won’t compete with Target at all.
“I’m guessing the 53 retailers who signed the letter opposing Target would disagree with your assessment, Rich.”
Again, I didn’t say 90% of retailers. I said 90% of downtown businesses would not be impacted by Target.
“Target competes directly with nearly every retailer in town.”
Insofar that is true, it is true whether Target is inside of Davis or just outside of it.
I recall that Bogey’s Books was an opponent of Target. I did not realize that Target sells used books, which is, I believe, Bogey’s primary business.
Also, The Avid Reader was a principal opponent. While Target does carry a small number of new books, that is not the business The Avid Reader is in. The Avid Reader attracts customers for its very large selection of all sorts of books and for its setting and for its special book events, such as speakers. I know that Borders took away a lot of The Avid Readers business (in larget part because Borders is a very nice store; not because it offers any price advantages). But I cannot imagine that The Avid Reader will lose business to Target, where they only have a small, small selection of books. Probably Amzazon.com is the biggest threat to a business like The Avid Reader.
Also, the various bike shops in town were on the list — at least Ken’s Bike & Ski was. While Target sells crappy low-end bikes, it doesn’t compete with the high-end stuff that the locals sell, nor does it repair bikes. I bought a junky bike a decade ago at K-Mart in Woodland. And then when I had some more money, I bought a new, great bike at B&L. And for all my bikes I’ve taken them to B&L for repairs. And when I’ve needed small things — like a water botel rack — I’ve likewise shopped at the quality bike shops. I’m sure most families in town are the same way. They sometimes need a low-end bike, and for those they will shop at a big box store. But when they need or want a good bike, they will go to Ken’s or B&L or Wheelworks.
Another of the opponents of Target, among the downtown retailers, was Becky Hibbert. I must be missing something, but I cannot see how Hibbert’s Lumber would lose out any business to Target. I shop at Hibbert’s all the time (when I know that Davis Lumber is more expensive), and I couldn’t imagine buying the same kind of things at Target. From what I can see, Hibbert’s mainly services local contractors and people doing home repairs and renovations (which is what I am always doing). Target doesn’t meet the needs of either group. Now, Hibbert’s certainly would be in trouble if Home Depot came to town. But they probably have nothing to worry about with Target, even if Hibbert’s is on that list.
“By the way, Davis Ace sells most of their products at perfectly normal retail markup. It’s just that many people have grown to expect big-box discounting, and now consider that normal.”
Not counting special sales items, I’ve found Davis Lumber to be more expensive than Hibbert’s and of course way higher than places like Home Depot or Yardbird’s.
Deb Westergaard said… : “As evidence of the vote and the contentious city council meetings, this Target is not for Davis, it’s for the I-80 business.”
If Target were simply “for the I-80 business,” then it would have no impact on downtown or other merchants in Davis. That is, Target simply would be collecting customers who drove by and saw it on the freeway. It would not be attracting customers who are now driving, walking, and biking downtown. It would not be attracting customers who are now driving Road 98 or Highway 113 or Pole Line Road/Road 102 to Woodland. Is that your point? And if it is, then it is diametrically opposed to the points made by Don Shor and other downtown activists.
The bottom line for me is this: 1) our downtown will be fine with Target. Some local retailers may have some struggles, a few may go out of business. But the vast majority of existing businesses in Davis, and in downtown Davis, will do just fine once Target opens; and 2) the reason for the existence of any business is not to serve the needs or interests of the owner of that business. It is always to serve the needs and interests of the customers. If the customers in Davis vote with their dollars for Target over some other stores, then that is just the way it is. That is the customers’ choice.
I wrote: Nevertheless, the vast, vast majority of businesses in downtown Davis — I would guess more than 90% — won’t compete with Target at all.
“I’m guessing the 53 retailers who signed the letter opposing Target would disagree with your assessment, Rich.”
Again, I didn’t say 90% of retailers. I said 90% of downtown businesses would not be impacted by Target.
“Target competes directly with nearly every retailer in town.”
Insofar that is true, it is true whether Target is inside of Davis or just outside of it.
I recall that Bogey’s Books was an opponent of Target. I did not realize that Target sells used books, which is, I believe, Bogey’s primary business.
Also, The Avid Reader was a principal opponent. While Target does carry a small number of new books, that is not the business The Avid Reader is in. The Avid Reader attracts customers for its very large selection of all sorts of books and for its setting and for its special book events, such as speakers. I know that Borders took away a lot of The Avid Readers business (in larget part because Borders is a very nice store; not because it offers any price advantages). But I cannot imagine that The Avid Reader will lose business to Target, where they only have a small, small selection of books. Probably Amzazon.com is the biggest threat to a business like The Avid Reader.
Also, the various bike shops in town were on the list — at least Ken’s Bike & Ski was. While Target sells crappy low-end bikes, it doesn’t compete with the high-end stuff that the locals sell, nor does it repair bikes. I bought a junky bike a decade ago at K-Mart in Woodland. And then when I had some more money, I bought a new, great bike at B&L. And for all my bikes I’ve taken them to B&L for repairs. And when I’ve needed small things — like a water botel rack — I’ve likewise shopped at the quality bike shops. I’m sure most families in town are the same way. They sometimes need a low-end bike, and for those they will shop at a big box store. But when they need or want a good bike, they will go to Ken’s or B&L or Wheelworks.
Another of the opponents of Target, among the downtown retailers, was Becky Hibbert. I must be missing something, but I cannot see how Hibbert’s Lumber would lose out any business to Target. I shop at Hibbert’s all the time (when I know that Davis Lumber is more expensive), and I couldn’t imagine buying the same kind of things at Target. From what I can see, Hibbert’s mainly services local contractors and people doing home repairs and renovations (which is what I am always doing). Target doesn’t meet the needs of either group. Now, Hibbert’s certainly would be in trouble if Home Depot came to town. But they probably have nothing to worry about with Target, even if Hibbert’s is on that list.
“By the way, Davis Ace sells most of their products at perfectly normal retail markup. It’s just that many people have grown to expect big-box discounting, and now consider that normal.”
Not counting special sales items, I’ve found Davis Lumber to be more expensive than Hibbert’s and of course way higher than places like Home Depot or Yardbird’s.
Deb Westergaard said… : “As evidence of the vote and the contentious city council meetings, this Target is not for Davis, it’s for the I-80 business.”
If Target were simply “for the I-80 business,” then it would have no impact on downtown or other merchants in Davis. That is, Target simply would be collecting customers who drove by and saw it on the freeway. It would not be attracting customers who are now driving, walking, and biking downtown. It would not be attracting customers who are now driving Road 98 or Highway 113 or Pole Line Road/Road 102 to Woodland. Is that your point? And if it is, then it is diametrically opposed to the points made by Don Shor and other downtown activists.
The bottom line for me is this: 1) our downtown will be fine with Target. Some local retailers may have some struggles, a few may go out of business. But the vast majority of existing businesses in Davis, and in downtown Davis, will do just fine once Target opens; and 2) the reason for the existence of any business is not to serve the needs or interests of the owner of that business. It is always to serve the needs and interests of the customers. If the customers in Davis vote with their dollars for Target over some other stores, then that is just the way it is. That is the customers’ choice.
I wrote: Nevertheless, the vast, vast majority of businesses in downtown Davis — I would guess more than 90% — won’t compete with Target at all.
“I’m guessing the 53 retailers who signed the letter opposing Target would disagree with your assessment, Rich.”
Again, I didn’t say 90% of retailers. I said 90% of downtown businesses would not be impacted by Target.
“Target competes directly with nearly every retailer in town.”
Insofar that is true, it is true whether Target is inside of Davis or just outside of it.
I recall that Bogey’s Books was an opponent of Target. I did not realize that Target sells used books, which is, I believe, Bogey’s primary business.
Also, The Avid Reader was a principal opponent. While Target does carry a small number of new books, that is not the business The Avid Reader is in. The Avid Reader attracts customers for its very large selection of all sorts of books and for its setting and for its special book events, such as speakers. I know that Borders took away a lot of The Avid Readers business (in larget part because Borders is a very nice store; not because it offers any price advantages). But I cannot imagine that The Avid Reader will lose business to Target, where they only have a small, small selection of books. Probably Amzazon.com is the biggest threat to a business like The Avid Reader.
Also, the various bike shops in town were on the list — at least Ken’s Bike & Ski was. While Target sells crappy low-end bikes, it doesn’t compete with the high-end stuff that the locals sell, nor does it repair bikes. I bought a junky bike a decade ago at K-Mart in Woodland. And then when I had some more money, I bought a new, great bike at B&L. And for all my bikes I’ve taken them to B&L for repairs. And when I’ve needed small things — like a water botel rack — I’ve likewise shopped at the quality bike shops. I’m sure most families in town are the same way. They sometimes need a low-end bike, and for those they will shop at a big box store. But when they need or want a good bike, they will go to Ken’s or B&L or Wheelworks.
Another of the opponents of Target, among the downtown retailers, was Becky Hibbert. I must be missing something, but I cannot see how Hibbert’s Lumber would lose out any business to Target. I shop at Hibbert’s all the time (when I know that Davis Lumber is more expensive), and I couldn’t imagine buying the same kind of things at Target. From what I can see, Hibbert’s mainly services local contractors and people doing home repairs and renovations (which is what I am always doing). Target doesn’t meet the needs of either group. Now, Hibbert’s certainly would be in trouble if Home Depot came to town. But they probably have nothing to worry about with Target, even if Hibbert’s is on that list.
“By the way, Davis Ace sells most of their products at perfectly normal retail markup. It’s just that many people have grown to expect big-box discounting, and now consider that normal.”
Not counting special sales items, I’ve found Davis Lumber to be more expensive than Hibbert’s and of course way higher than places like Home Depot or Yardbird’s.
Deb Westergaard said… : “As evidence of the vote and the contentious city council meetings, this Target is not for Davis, it’s for the I-80 business.”
If Target were simply “for the I-80 business,” then it would have no impact on downtown or other merchants in Davis. That is, Target simply would be collecting customers who drove by and saw it on the freeway. It would not be attracting customers who are now driving, walking, and biking downtown. It would not be attracting customers who are now driving Road 98 or Highway 113 or Pole Line Road/Road 102 to Woodland. Is that your point? And if it is, then it is diametrically opposed to the points made by Don Shor and other downtown activists.
The bottom line for me is this: 1) our downtown will be fine with Target. Some local retailers may have some struggles, a few may go out of business. But the vast majority of existing businesses in Davis, and in downtown Davis, will do just fine once Target opens; and 2) the reason for the existence of any business is not to serve the needs or interests of the owner of that business. It is always to serve the needs and interests of the customers. If the customers in Davis vote with their dollars for Target over some other stores, then that is just the way it is. That is the customers’ choice.
I wrote: Nevertheless, the vast, vast majority of businesses in downtown Davis — I would guess more than 90% — won’t compete with Target at all.
“I’m guessing the 53 retailers who signed the letter opposing Target would disagree with your assessment, Rich.”
Again, I didn’t say 90% of retailers. I said 90% of downtown businesses would not be impacted by Target.
“Target competes directly with nearly every retailer in town.”
Insofar that is true, it is true whether Target is inside of Davis or just outside of it.
I recall that Bogey’s Books was an opponent of Target. I did not realize that Target sells used books, which is, I believe, Bogey’s primary business.
Also, The Avid Reader was a principal opponent. While Target does carry a small number of new books, that is not the business The Avid Reader is in. The Avid Reader attracts customers for its very large selection of all sorts of books and for its setting and for its special book events, such as speakers. I know that Borders took away a lot of The Avid Readers business (in larget part because Borders is a very nice store; not because it offers any price advantages). But I cannot imagine that The Avid Reader will lose business to Target, where they only have a small, small selection of books. Probably Amzazon.com is the biggest threat to a business like The Avid Reader.
Also, the various bike shops in town were on the list — at least Ken’s Bike & Ski was. While Target sells crappy low-end bikes, it doesn’t compete with the high-end stuff that the locals sell, nor does it repair bikes. I bought a junky bike a decade ago at K-Mart in Woodland. And then when I had some more money, I bought a new, great bike at B&L. And for all my bikes I’ve taken them to B&L for repairs. And when I’ve needed small things — like a water botel rack — I’ve likewise shopped at the quality bike shops. I’m sure most families in town are the same way. They sometimes need a low-end bike, and for those they will shop at a big box store. But when they need or want a good bike, they will go to Ken’s or B&L or Wheelworks.
Another of the opponents of Target, among the downtown retailers, was Becky Hibbert. I must be missing something, but I cannot see how Hibbert’s Lumber would lose out any business to Target. I shop at Hibbert’s all the time (when I know that Davis Lumber is more expensive), and I couldn’t imagine buying the same kind of things at Target. From what I can see, Hibbert’s mainly services local contractors and people doing home repairs and renovations (which is what I am always doing). Target doesn’t meet the needs of either group. Now, Hibbert’s certainly would be in trouble if Home Depot came to town. But they probably have nothing to worry about with Target, even if Hibbert’s is on that list.
“By the way, Davis Ace sells most of their products at perfectly normal retail markup. It’s just that many people have grown to expect big-box discounting, and now consider that normal.”
Not counting special sales items, I’ve found Davis Lumber to be more expensive than Hibbert’s and of course way higher than places like Home Depot or Yardbird’s.
Deb Westergaard said… : “As evidence of the vote and the contentious city council meetings, this Target is not for Davis, it’s for the I-80 business.”
If Target were simply “for the I-80 business,” then it would have no impact on downtown or other merchants in Davis. That is, Target simply would be collecting customers who drove by and saw it on the freeway. It would not be attracting customers who are now driving, walking, and biking downtown. It would not be attracting customers who are now driving Road 98 or Highway 113 or Pole Line Road/Road 102 to Woodland. Is that your point? And if it is, then it is diametrically opposed to the points made by Don Shor and other downtown activists.
The bottom line for me is this: 1) our downtown will be fine with Target. Some local retailers may have some struggles, a few may go out of business. But the vast majority of existing businesses in Davis, and in downtown Davis, will do just fine once Target opens; and 2) the reason for the existence of any business is not to serve the needs or interests of the owner of that business. It is always to serve the needs and interests of the customers. If the customers in Davis vote with their dollars for Target over some other stores, then that is just the way it is. That is the customers’ choice.
Chill-Rifkin.. I can smell the testosterone rage all the way over here.. I was INQUIRING if anyone had any solid information about the issue of a tax write-off and Target’s history of building and then moving on. As to the comment about the property being valuable, I was referring to the fact that the 19 acres are now the only property zoned for big box general retail and as long as another big box, like Wal-Mart, meets the city’s Measure K requirements, Target has a free hand to lease9or sell?) to anyone they choose. Since the premise of Measure K was that it only applied to this 19 acres and did not open Davis up to future big box,I would like to see the council now re-amend the general plan back to its original form. Target and its 19 acres would be immune and this pro-measure K argument would be validated.
Chill-Rifkin.. I can smell the testosterone rage all the way over here.. I was INQUIRING if anyone had any solid information about the issue of a tax write-off and Target’s history of building and then moving on. As to the comment about the property being valuable, I was referring to the fact that the 19 acres are now the only property zoned for big box general retail and as long as another big box, like Wal-Mart, meets the city’s Measure K requirements, Target has a free hand to lease9or sell?) to anyone they choose. Since the premise of Measure K was that it only applied to this 19 acres and did not open Davis up to future big box,I would like to see the council now re-amend the general plan back to its original form. Target and its 19 acres would be immune and this pro-measure K argument would be validated.
Chill-Rifkin.. I can smell the testosterone rage all the way over here.. I was INQUIRING if anyone had any solid information about the issue of a tax write-off and Target’s history of building and then moving on. As to the comment about the property being valuable, I was referring to the fact that the 19 acres are now the only property zoned for big box general retail and as long as another big box, like Wal-Mart, meets the city’s Measure K requirements, Target has a free hand to lease9or sell?) to anyone they choose. Since the premise of Measure K was that it only applied to this 19 acres and did not open Davis up to future big box,I would like to see the council now re-amend the general plan back to its original form. Target and its 19 acres would be immune and this pro-measure K argument would be validated.
Chill-Rifkin.. I can smell the testosterone rage all the way over here.. I was INQUIRING if anyone had any solid information about the issue of a tax write-off and Target’s history of building and then moving on. As to the comment about the property being valuable, I was referring to the fact that the 19 acres are now the only property zoned for big box general retail and as long as another big box, like Wal-Mart, meets the city’s Measure K requirements, Target has a free hand to lease9or sell?) to anyone they choose. Since the premise of Measure K was that it only applied to this 19 acres and did not open Davis up to future big box,I would like to see the council now re-amend the general plan back to its original form. Target and its 19 acres would be immune and this pro-measure K argument would be validated.
The overwhelming majority of the 53 businesses who signed that letter were downtown retailers.
Bogey’s sells new and used books. And will be closing or selling his business next year. Why? Because he lost 25% of his sales when Borders opened. Avid Reader lost 30%, and closed her second store. There were five independent bookstores in Davis before Borders announced they would be opening here.
Becky supported us for the same reason other independent retailers supported us. Big box retail will draw traffic and sales away from the downtown and the neighborhood shopping centers.
These peripheral megaretailers are a planning disaster wherever they’ve been allowed to build. Go to Avid Reader and buy Big Box Swindle.
What baffles me is all this armchair analysis when there is plenty of actual analysis out there. We have more than three decades of peripheral development, and it’s been studied very thoroughly.
Downtown merchants ALWAYS suffer when big box is allowed. Target’s own consultant estimated that 20% of the business would come from local retailers. Bay Area Economics, in their independent analysis, estimated 60% loss of sales from local businesses.
It’s a customer’s choice now. Before the election, it was a planning decision in which the voters would decide the future shape of this community. $300,000 bought a 674 vote victory that will have a significant longterm impact on Davis, and a very adverse effect on many local businesses. Store size limitations are the most effective way for a community to shape its own development. They worked in Davis until now. But this major breach in the General Plan means that we will probably be fighting this battle again in 2 – 5 years, and business owners like myself and Becky realize that the next battle may well be a Home Depot or OSH.
The overwhelming majority of the 53 businesses who signed that letter were downtown retailers.
Bogey’s sells new and used books. And will be closing or selling his business next year. Why? Because he lost 25% of his sales when Borders opened. Avid Reader lost 30%, and closed her second store. There were five independent bookstores in Davis before Borders announced they would be opening here.
Becky supported us for the same reason other independent retailers supported us. Big box retail will draw traffic and sales away from the downtown and the neighborhood shopping centers.
These peripheral megaretailers are a planning disaster wherever they’ve been allowed to build. Go to Avid Reader and buy Big Box Swindle.
What baffles me is all this armchair analysis when there is plenty of actual analysis out there. We have more than three decades of peripheral development, and it’s been studied very thoroughly.
Downtown merchants ALWAYS suffer when big box is allowed. Target’s own consultant estimated that 20% of the business would come from local retailers. Bay Area Economics, in their independent analysis, estimated 60% loss of sales from local businesses.
It’s a customer’s choice now. Before the election, it was a planning decision in which the voters would decide the future shape of this community. $300,000 bought a 674 vote victory that will have a significant longterm impact on Davis, and a very adverse effect on many local businesses. Store size limitations are the most effective way for a community to shape its own development. They worked in Davis until now. But this major breach in the General Plan means that we will probably be fighting this battle again in 2 – 5 years, and business owners like myself and Becky realize that the next battle may well be a Home Depot or OSH.
The overwhelming majority of the 53 businesses who signed that letter were downtown retailers.
Bogey’s sells new and used books. And will be closing or selling his business next year. Why? Because he lost 25% of his sales when Borders opened. Avid Reader lost 30%, and closed her second store. There were five independent bookstores in Davis before Borders announced they would be opening here.
Becky supported us for the same reason other independent retailers supported us. Big box retail will draw traffic and sales away from the downtown and the neighborhood shopping centers.
These peripheral megaretailers are a planning disaster wherever they’ve been allowed to build. Go to Avid Reader and buy Big Box Swindle.
What baffles me is all this armchair analysis when there is plenty of actual analysis out there. We have more than three decades of peripheral development, and it’s been studied very thoroughly.
Downtown merchants ALWAYS suffer when big box is allowed. Target’s own consultant estimated that 20% of the business would come from local retailers. Bay Area Economics, in their independent analysis, estimated 60% loss of sales from local businesses.
It’s a customer’s choice now. Before the election, it was a planning decision in which the voters would decide the future shape of this community. $300,000 bought a 674 vote victory that will have a significant longterm impact on Davis, and a very adverse effect on many local businesses. Store size limitations are the most effective way for a community to shape its own development. They worked in Davis until now. But this major breach in the General Plan means that we will probably be fighting this battle again in 2 – 5 years, and business owners like myself and Becky realize that the next battle may well be a Home Depot or OSH.
The overwhelming majority of the 53 businesses who signed that letter were downtown retailers.
Bogey’s sells new and used books. And will be closing or selling his business next year. Why? Because he lost 25% of his sales when Borders opened. Avid Reader lost 30%, and closed her second store. There were five independent bookstores in Davis before Borders announced they would be opening here.
Becky supported us for the same reason other independent retailers supported us. Big box retail will draw traffic and sales away from the downtown and the neighborhood shopping centers.
These peripheral megaretailers are a planning disaster wherever they’ve been allowed to build. Go to Avid Reader and buy Big Box Swindle.
What baffles me is all this armchair analysis when there is plenty of actual analysis out there. We have more than three decades of peripheral development, and it’s been studied very thoroughly.
Downtown merchants ALWAYS suffer when big box is allowed. Target’s own consultant estimated that 20% of the business would come from local retailers. Bay Area Economics, in their independent analysis, estimated 60% loss of sales from local businesses.
It’s a customer’s choice now. Before the election, it was a planning decision in which the voters would decide the future shape of this community. $300,000 bought a 674 vote victory that will have a significant longterm impact on Davis, and a very adverse effect on many local businesses. Store size limitations are the most effective way for a community to shape its own development. They worked in Davis until now. But this major breach in the General Plan means that we will probably be fighting this battle again in 2 – 5 years, and business owners like myself and Becky realize that the next battle may well be a Home Depot or OSH.
Bogey’s is closing??? Okay, NOW I’m pissed. I think I’m going to go buy some books next week when I get paid again.
Bogey’s is closing??? Okay, NOW I’m pissed. I think I’m going to go buy some books next week when I get paid again.
Bogey’s is closing??? Okay, NOW I’m pissed. I think I’m going to go buy some books next week when I get paid again.
Bogey’s is closing??? Okay, NOW I’m pissed. I think I’m going to go buy some books next week when I get paid again.
Bogey’s, I suspect, has been hurt by the rise of Amazon.com, too. In the past, when I wanted a book that was out of print or just old and cheap, I would have gone to a store like Bogey’s. However, with the internet, I can find every possible used (or semi-new) book I want and at a better price. In fact, at a much better price than a store like Borders charges.
According to an October 1 Davis Enterprise story, Mark Nemmers, the owner of Bogey’s, said that Borders and the internet were big factors in hurting his business. However, they are not the reasons that he is closing his doors.
If he does, it will be because Nemmers could not find a buyer. He wanted out of Bogey’s for a variety of personal reasons.
These are some quotes from that Enterprise story:
“It’s time for a change in my life,” he said.
“I’m not in a big hurry, I’d like to go through another Christmas season,” Nemmers added. “I’d like to find someone by the spring who would be interested in keeping the store going.”
“There’s no doubt that we’ve taken a hit from Internet and big stores like Borders, but we’re still a going concern,” Nemmers added. “I hope to find someone who will keep it going and reach out to the younger generation and will do whatever it takes to change the trend of young people being what I call screen-addicted.”
He referred to young people focusing on DVD screens, movie screens, TVs, computers, laptops and cell phones instead of books or newspapers.
“We aren’t doing as well as we were in the mid-’90s, but we’ve been able to meet the challenges and thrive.”
“I’m looking for a change in culture,” he said. “I’m going to spend the next year or so traveling.”
Bogey’s, I suspect, has been hurt by the rise of Amazon.com, too. In the past, when I wanted a book that was out of print or just old and cheap, I would have gone to a store like Bogey’s. However, with the internet, I can find every possible used (or semi-new) book I want and at a better price. In fact, at a much better price than a store like Borders charges.
According to an October 1 Davis Enterprise story, Mark Nemmers, the owner of Bogey’s, said that Borders and the internet were big factors in hurting his business. However, they are not the reasons that he is closing his doors.
If he does, it will be because Nemmers could not find a buyer. He wanted out of Bogey’s for a variety of personal reasons.
These are some quotes from that Enterprise story:
“It’s time for a change in my life,” he said.
“I’m not in a big hurry, I’d like to go through another Christmas season,” Nemmers added. “I’d like to find someone by the spring who would be interested in keeping the store going.”
“There’s no doubt that we’ve taken a hit from Internet and big stores like Borders, but we’re still a going concern,” Nemmers added. “I hope to find someone who will keep it going and reach out to the younger generation and will do whatever it takes to change the trend of young people being what I call screen-addicted.”
He referred to young people focusing on DVD screens, movie screens, TVs, computers, laptops and cell phones instead of books or newspapers.
“We aren’t doing as well as we were in the mid-’90s, but we’ve been able to meet the challenges and thrive.”
“I’m looking for a change in culture,” he said. “I’m going to spend the next year or so traveling.”
Bogey’s, I suspect, has been hurt by the rise of Amazon.com, too. In the past, when I wanted a book that was out of print or just old and cheap, I would have gone to a store like Bogey’s. However, with the internet, I can find every possible used (or semi-new) book I want and at a better price. In fact, at a much better price than a store like Borders charges.
According to an October 1 Davis Enterprise story, Mark Nemmers, the owner of Bogey’s, said that Borders and the internet were big factors in hurting his business. However, they are not the reasons that he is closing his doors.
If he does, it will be because Nemmers could not find a buyer. He wanted out of Bogey’s for a variety of personal reasons.
These are some quotes from that Enterprise story:
“It’s time for a change in my life,” he said.
“I’m not in a big hurry, I’d like to go through another Christmas season,” Nemmers added. “I’d like to find someone by the spring who would be interested in keeping the store going.”
“There’s no doubt that we’ve taken a hit from Internet and big stores like Borders, but we’re still a going concern,” Nemmers added. “I hope to find someone who will keep it going and reach out to the younger generation and will do whatever it takes to change the trend of young people being what I call screen-addicted.”
He referred to young people focusing on DVD screens, movie screens, TVs, computers, laptops and cell phones instead of books or newspapers.
“We aren’t doing as well as we were in the mid-’90s, but we’ve been able to meet the challenges and thrive.”
“I’m looking for a change in culture,” he said. “I’m going to spend the next year or so traveling.”
Bogey’s, I suspect, has been hurt by the rise of Amazon.com, too. In the past, when I wanted a book that was out of print or just old and cheap, I would have gone to a store like Bogey’s. However, with the internet, I can find every possible used (or semi-new) book I want and at a better price. In fact, at a much better price than a store like Borders charges.
According to an October 1 Davis Enterprise story, Mark Nemmers, the owner of Bogey’s, said that Borders and the internet were big factors in hurting his business. However, they are not the reasons that he is closing his doors.
If he does, it will be because Nemmers could not find a buyer. He wanted out of Bogey’s for a variety of personal reasons.
These are some quotes from that Enterprise story:
“It’s time for a change in my life,” he said.
“I’m not in a big hurry, I’d like to go through another Christmas season,” Nemmers added. “I’d like to find someone by the spring who would be interested in keeping the store going.”
“There’s no doubt that we’ve taken a hit from Internet and big stores like Borders, but we’re still a going concern,” Nemmers added. “I hope to find someone who will keep it going and reach out to the younger generation and will do whatever it takes to change the trend of young people being what I call screen-addicted.”
He referred to young people focusing on DVD screens, movie screens, TVs, computers, laptops and cell phones instead of books or newspapers.
“We aren’t doing as well as we were in the mid-’90s, but we’ve been able to meet the challenges and thrive.”
“I’m looking for a change in culture,” he said. “I’m going to spend the next year or so traveling.”
Shor’s comment reminded me of where that “rumor” about Target’s
build and move on strategy came from.. I think it may be found in the book, Big Box Swindle.
Shor’s comment reminded me of where that “rumor” about Target’s
build and move on strategy came from.. I think it may be found in the book, Big Box Swindle.
Shor’s comment reminded me of where that “rumor” about Target’s
build and move on strategy came from.. I think it may be found in the book, Big Box Swindle.
Shor’s comment reminded me of where that “rumor” about Target’s
build and move on strategy came from.. I think it may be found in the book, Big Box Swindle.
I’ve been looking for that comment all night, I think I have the book here.
I’ve been looking for that comment all night, I think I have the book here.
I’ve been looking for that comment all night, I think I have the book here.
I’ve been looking for that comment all night, I think I have the book here.
Folks regretfully I had to delete a comment for the first time tonight. I really have one major rule–do not post profanity. I’d prefer that people not name-call, but I will not delete it unless it involves the use of profanity.
Folks regretfully I had to delete a comment for the first time tonight. I really have one major rule–do not post profanity. I’d prefer that people not name-call, but I will not delete it unless it involves the use of profanity.
Folks regretfully I had to delete a comment for the first time tonight. I really have one major rule–do not post profanity. I’d prefer that people not name-call, but I will not delete it unless it involves the use of profanity.
Folks regretfully I had to delete a comment for the first time tonight. I really have one major rule–do not post profanity. I’d prefer that people not name-call, but I will not delete it unless it involves the use of profanity.
I should also explain that I cannot edit posts in the current format that I have this blog set on. So I either have to leave them up or delete them. This was the first post I’ve deleted.
There is a moderation option but it involves putting message in a queue until I can review them. That was not my preference.
I should also explain that I cannot edit posts in the current format that I have this blog set on. So I either have to leave them up or delete them. This was the first post I’ve deleted.
There is a moderation option but it involves putting message in a queue until I can review them. That was not my preference.
I should also explain that I cannot edit posts in the current format that I have this blog set on. So I either have to leave them up or delete them. This was the first post I’ve deleted.
There is a moderation option but it involves putting message in a queue until I can review them. That was not my preference.
I should also explain that I cannot edit posts in the current format that I have this blog set on. So I either have to leave them up or delete them. This was the first post I’ve deleted.
There is a moderation option but it involves putting message in a queue until I can review them. That was not my preference.