You can't even read about how well big-ticket items are selling at Sam's Club without the comments quickly becoming a rehash of the same, tired, standard Walmart debate. (To be fair, writer Ann Zimmerman herself encouraged this when she made the WWE crack. Honestly. These white trash jokes have been around for years and people still bother to type them out as if it's all somehow original and clever.)
This is the interesting part though: "Sales of groceries and other consumable products—life’s necessities—account for more than 40% of Wal-Mart’s sales....Target Corp. is also a discounter, but its sales last month slipped 4.8%.... more than 40% of Target sales come from apparel and home furnishings, products that shoppers have decided they can live without in these tough and uncertain economic times."
Numbers confuse me. But wouldn't have been helpful to note what percentage of Walmart sales come from apparel and home furnishings. It could be as much as 60% right? Why can shoppers live without Target's non-necessities but not Walmart's? What does all this mean for Target designer collaborations? I'm still going to be able to get tattoo-print fabrics, right?
No comments:
Post a Comment