I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For

I remember when my hometown library first replaced the trusty old card catalogue with a computer version. I looked up - fittingly enough - books on computers, and I discovered that the system had three related categories: One was just "computers," another was "electronic computers," and then there was "digital computers." Of course, "electronic computers" only rules out the abacus and Charles Babbage's difference engine. But "digital" includes all modern computers, save for some curiosities. So essentially the three categories are the same, and if you're looking up a book on computers, it could be in any of them, you have no idea which.

I bring up this tale from the library of the nineties because I'm amazed at how often the same sort of problems come up. No, not in libraries, but in stores.

You'd think that a modern e-tail store would be able to do better than my nineties small town library. After all, they have decades more technology, millions more in their budget, and they only have to categorize a limited selection of products, not all of humanity's knowledge.

But still, they have the same inability to clarify things. Similar to that nineties librarian, whose classification system was technically correct, but worse than useless, they have difficulty classifying their wares in a way that helps people find things.

Again, I'm having difficulty shopping for an external hard drive. Hard drives can be internal or external. They can also be solid state or, um, the spinny kind. So you'd think I'd just have to make my choice on those two dimensions and look at what fits the category. But often there are weird, imaginary dichotomies, like they have categories for solid-state drives or external drives. So if I want a solid-state, internal drive, I don't know where to look.

(And this is fun: when I typed, "spinny" into my phone, it interpreted it as "spiny" and suggested the hedgehog emoji.)

Another weird aspect of that early computer catalogue were the dates. See, on a lot of old manual typewriters, there were keys for digits "2" through "9," but no "1" key, since that was identical to the lower-case "L" in the old Courrier-like font they used, and apparently keys were incredibly expensive. So I would occasionally see that a book was published in "l985," because it was typed by someone who was still used to those old typewriters. Those entries must have been fun for anyone who had to search for a book by year.

But even today, we're at the mercy of whoever types in the information, just hoping they get it right, and are consistent. When I was looking for the game controller previously, I found Walmart had only four Xbox controllers. Actually, they have hundreds, but there were only four where the underpaid stock boy who enters the info had bothered to add the Xbox tag.

And when I went looking for earbuds, I found that when filtering the brands, there was an entry for "Sony" and another for "SONY" from someone who must have thought it was an acronym. Or I suppose the problem could have been they just didn't know their caps-lock was on, but that just adds to the 90's computer system ambiance.

I'd like to think that we will eventually build up a better understanding of how to organize things. Like maybe once databases are as old and commonplace as that card catalogue was to the librarians in the l990's. Maybe then the understanding will be so innate that people will just naturally organize things in a nice efficient way, and when I'm shopping for my nanobot farm, I'll only have to think "indoor nanobot farms" into my neural interface, and not worry that it will exclude the new transquantum nanites just because the warehouse cyborg entered them separately.

It Can't Possibly Be Da Shoes

I remember a time in my teens when I was at a friend's house, and his mother arrived home from shopping and announced she had bought him new running shoes. I was amazed: when I bought new shoes, I needed to try on at least six pairs to find one that fit comfortably. The idea of just buying shoes based on nothing but the size and then assuming that's it, the transaction is done? That was mind-blowing.

The point is, there are two types of people when it comes to shoes: picky, and not picky. Okay, I guess "picky" then subdivides into picky for fit and picky for style, so, um, that wasn't as neat as I'd hoped.

Our current retail world is really not good for people like me. For most people and most products, ordering things online is great. Essentially, the plus is that you have incredible choice because the whole world is available to you. But the disadvantage is that you can't inspect anything before buying. Oh, there's the whole lack of human interaction too, if you're into that sort of thing. For most products, that's a reasonable trade off: you don't really need to feel a new iPad before buying. But for me, it's trying on the shoes that I miss.

If you find comfortable shoes easily, this world is great for you: type your size into Amazon and you're done. If you're in that choosy-about-styles subgroup,  it's not perfect, but you might trade the ability to try on shoes for the increased selection. But for me, it really sucks. When it comes to casual shoes, there's just Wal-Mart, Foot Locker, and a few locally-owned stores. Previously, I would have gone to Zellers, Target, Sears, Payless for the sweet spot of cheap but with some quality. But they're all gone in Canada. So I'm stuck with super cheap or super expensive. It's the first time I've come up against this problem. I've bemoaned the lack of bricks and mortar options in modern retail before, but this is the first time I've had the experience where I need to buy something, but I'm not really sure where to get it.

Get The Parity Started

It’s amazing how the colour of a product makes such a difference in price. In our world where there’s often not much differentiating one product from another, the colour can make all the difference. Of course, I’m going to use examples from cars and technology, but you can find examples everywhere.

That’s the reason why cars have taken a turn for the gray in recent decades. It’s affected by what car buyers desire in their own cars, but also their concern for resale value. So they’ll prefer an inoffensive gray car that they can easily flip a few years later, not the green one that might turn off other buyers. I suspect it’s also that car companies know people are very choosy, and colour won’t win them many sales unless it’s absolutely perfect, but an offensive colour will lose them many, so they stay neutral. Personally, I think that’s a shame; I like colours, but I’m not married to any in particular. So I’d like to have a nice colour for the sake of some colour in my life, even if it’s not my favourite. But I seem to be in the minority on that, so gray it is.

I’ve also seen the colours having an effect on prices in the technology business. I’ve been looking for an external hard drive, and Samsung makes their external drives in traditional black, but also in blue and red. I’ve noticed that one colour is sometimes on sale, but not the others. They’re identical other than the colours, so I’m assuming that when one falls behind in sales, some algorithm somewhere decides it’s time for a discount. It’s hard to believe that colour can have that kind of effect on the purchase of something few others are going to see, but apparently it does.

But then I went looking for a game controller. They’re traditionally gray or black, but often available in other colours. So after my experience with the hard drives, I wasn’t surprised to find that the red XBox controller was five dollars less than the original black. I was set to order it and congratulate myself on my colourful frugality, but then I saw it: A pink controller, for fifteen dollars less than the original.

That’s ironic, because of this concept called, the “Pink Tax.” That’s the phenomenon where products aimed at women are more expensive than similar products aimed at men, even though they hardly differ. Often, the only difference is that they’re pink, hence the name. They aren’t really more expensive because they’re pink. After all, pink paint and dye is not particularly expensive. Instead, it’s factors like how much consumers want and need products. I’m assuming that because women are under more pressure to look good, their hygiene products are more expensive because of higher demand.

So in other contexts, pink might cost more, but the roles have been reversed here. You might be surprised to see them even trying to sell something pink in the world of video games, but let me remind you: 

1. Surveys show female gamers are now close to 50% of the market.
2. We are just coming out of The Year Of Barbie. 

Having said that, it appears things weren’t working out the way Microsoft marketing wanted, and the pink controllers were deeply discounted. I don’t know, maybe the Barbie-gaming crossover wasn’t as much as they’d hoped. But I suspect the real reason is that female gamers may choose the black or the pink, while the males will only buy the black.

(And if you’re wondering, I only saw one colour that was more expensive than the original black controller: a dark purple. Purple seems to be having a moment right now.)

For me, even when I put aside traditional symbols of masculinity, pink is not one of my favourite colours. I don’t mind it, as long as it’s taken in reasonable quantities. You know, less than the Barbie-aisle-at-Toys-R-Us levels. And whatever need I have to reaffirm my masculinity is tiny compared to my desire not to over-spend on electronics, so: I ordered the pink controller.

It’s not much of a consolation for high-priced women’s products, but there are times when the Pink Tax turns into, let’s say, the Pink Subsidy. And I’m pleased to be gaming with both confidence in my masculinity, and an extra fifteen dollars in my pocket.

The Stylus Counsel

I have an iPad, and I've been interested in buying a stylus for it. (That’s the pen-like thing you can draw on the screen with.) Of course, Apple will gladly sell you one, but like most of their accessories, it's shockingly overpriced. I realize it has a lot of impressive technology, and it works quite well, but still, it is a pen that costs $130. Well, it doesn't even have ink, it really is just something to touch the screen with. So even worse, it's a stick that costs $130.

But I'm not going to rant about Apple products being overpriced; everyone knows about that. What I'm finding frustrating is trying to find a reasonably-priced alternative. 

I'm amazed at how bad people are at giving advice. it sounds simple: I’m looking for a cheaper alternative. Yes, I know that means compromising on features. I’m looking for a balance of features and price. That shouldn't be so complicated; it's what people have been doing for years.

But every comparison article just tells you that the Apple pen is the best. Really? The most expensive option is the best? Next you're going to tell me that the Bugatti Chiron is superior to a Kia Rio. And yes, I do understand everything in car analogies; after all, it did make this easier to understand the basic point that in more mature industries, we understand these concepts. But for some reason, the tech industry approaches the situation with the simplistic attitude of a five-year-old. 

You’d think there would be at least some discussion of whether the superior features are worth the extra money compared to buying a Chinese knockoff from Amazon. And I did find a lot of discussions in which people ask the seemingly-obvious question: What's a cheaper alternative to the Apple pencil. And so often the advice from other people is to buy the Apple pencil anyway, because it's worth it.

I think there's a couple of problems here. One is that there's very little understanding of financial realities. A lot of people can afford to spend a hundred dollars on a luxury, so it's not a big deal to spend that to get the best available option. But there are also a lot of people that can't spare a hundred dollars. If you're in that boat then telling you that it's the best option is not a real justification for buying the hundred-dollar stick, even if it is the best.

Also, I've noticed for a while now that techy people are really not good at giving advice on which products are best for others. Specifically, the problem is that they're bad at understanding another person's requirements and adjusting their priorities accordingly. They'll always recommend  the most sophisticated, powerful, configurable option, because that's what they would want. That's why your nerdy cousin convinced your tech-phobic aunt that Linux would be just perfect for her. I've seen the same pattern repeated over and over through the years and across different market segments. Just be glad they don't recommend buying a Koenigsegg Gemera because of the cool valve technology. Oh, there I go again.

Anyway, I did buy a much cheaper stylus from a company I hadn't heard of, after I did find some reviews that said it wouldn't be that bad, I guess. And so far, it seems to be the reasonable compromise I was looking for. But no, this doesn't mean I'm buying my next car from an anonymous online company.

Merry Mac’s

Where I grew up, the nearest store was a Mac's convenience store. Back then, they went by the name, "Mac's Milk," I suppose because in those days milk was the big draw for convenience stores. My dad would always call it, "Mac's the Milk," in reference to the song, Mack the Knife, famously recorded by Bobby Darrin in the 50's, but — and I didn't know this — written in 1928. Not the greatest pun, but, well, it's a dad joke. I wonder if I inherited that need to make misunderstood pop-cultural puns. (looks at blog post titles) Sigh.

Anyway, I — being a youngster — didn't understand the reference, and thus also referred to the store as "Mac's the Milk," thinking that was the actual name. My friends thought there was something wrong with me, since they also didn't get the joke, and of course, when you hear a young person saying something so nonsensical, you assume he's a little slow, not that he's the victim of a corny joke about music from a couple of decades back. And I should clarify that, in my childhood's memory, my dad 'always' said that. He probably did the joke like, twice, but in my early perception of time, it seemed like a lot.

My reason for going through this awkward, possibly deformed memory, is that the Mac's convenience store chain is mostly gone now, having been bought, and then rebranded out of existence. As the picture illustrates, they’ve all become Circle K. A brand that, fittingly, sounds like an old west cattle brand.

Of course, bygone brands are hardly news: I've already written about disappearing brands. But what's interesting is that brands disappear for different reasons. They might simply go out of business, or they might be bought out by a rival. But it gets a little more complicated when you find that the same company might operate in different places under different names. Perhaps they bought a local company and decided to operate with the name that locals already knew. For instance, the European food delivery firm Just Eat has bought some local services and used their names in those markets. So it goes by "Just Eat" in Europe, but it's known as "Skip The Dishes" in Canada, and "Menulog" in Australia & New Zealand. Yes, local branding is so important to them that they seriously made Katy Perry sing that jingle three times for the European, Canadian, and Australian & New Zealander markets.

(How much do I care about this blog? Enough to watch that commercial three times. Well, two-and-a-half.)

But in our globalized world, it often doesn't make sense to have different brands in different places anymore. After all, it's expensive to make specialized advertising, and people see advertising from different countries through the Internet, or international sports events, or movie product placements. And here in Canada, we're used to seeing our brands replaced by American ones, like Circle K. What's frustrating is that in this case, it's a Canadian company doing it. Quebec's Couche-Tard (or, "night owl") is a convenience store behemoth, owning lots of brands around the world, including Mac's. But Circle K is the most numerous, so when they decided to use one brand for all their English-language stores, they went with Circle K. I can understand the logic behind it, but it still feels like in Canada, even when we win, we lose.

All I Used To Want For Christmas

 If I’m reviving my blog, I guess I will also have to do another of my annual complaints about Christmas overload. I’d do my usual attempt to prove that I’m not some hateful curmudgeon who rejects all the spirit of the holiday, that it’s not me, it’s just unreasonable to for anyone to be expected to have a holiday force-fed into your brain for two months like something out of A Clockwork Orange. Wait, have I already used that analogy to describe it? Dang, I used it in 2016.

This year, I can get across the concept by telling the anecdote of how I had a wonderful stroll through the Wal-Mart Christmas department, revelling in the fun, low-pressure enjoyment of exploring all the decorations. I don’t even care that it’s mass-manufactured, commercialized cheapness; that’s part of the magic of Christmas. I walked out feeling full of Christmas spirit, but also feeling like I’d had my fill. And then I remembered that it was only mid-November. 

Anyway, that’s what I would have written, except that, I don’t really feel overwhelmed by Christmas this year. I’m not haunted by cheap plastic decorations everywhere. My brain isn’t involuntarily reciting carols every waking hour.

And it’s not hard to see why: I’m just not out in public as much. Doing more things online, and more shopping online in particular, I’m not exposed to mandatory Christmas cheer anymore. And is it just my imagination, or is it less ubiquitous now? It seems like decorations are more restrained now. Maybe all of society has turned down the intensity after Covid. Or maybe it’s another part of the Great Resignation: if a company can’t find enough under-paid workers to do the basic work of the business, then they definitely can’t spare the hours to have someone hunt down the inflatable Santa out of the storage room.

So this is a case of the modern world fulfilling its promise: More activities on the Internet allow us more freedom to create a life for ourselves that is unique to our needs and desires. Is it worth the hollowing-out of the retail sector? No, but it’s something to be thankful for the next time you’re browsing Amazon listening to your own music.

With The Price Cut, It's Less Frivolous

Yesterday, I strolled through The Bay. Do people still call it that? The store wants to be called "Hudson's Bay," so I don't know if any normal people call it that. Anyway, I often do this, even though I never buy anything. I guess I find it relaxing; I can go through looking without pressure, knowing I probably won't find anything tempting enough to force a difficult decision.

I can't remember the last time I bought something there. For one thing, the prices are pretty high. I find that when they have a sale, all it does is reduce the prices down to what would sound like a good starting price.

And then there's the brands. I think I've made clear that I don't really understand rich-people brands. Surely buying explicitly expensive stuff makes you look desperate. Buying a brand that everyone knows is associated with wealth? That's something poor people would do. So it doesn't make sense for them to exist. But apparently, lots of people will pay big bucks for Ralph Lauren, game theory be damned.

But on this day, I did find a shirt which met all the criteria I was looking for:

• reasonable price
• looked good
• non-bourgeois brand
• doesn't make me look retired

So I took it off the last-chance clearance rack and headed for the fitting rooms.

And they were locked, with no one in sight. Of course, there's no bell like there was at Sears. I wondered around for a bit looking for an employee, but couldn't find one. In retrospect, I suppose I could have just gone back to the cosmetics department at the entrance; there's always plenty of people waiting there to pounce. But of course, that would have been futile. One of the many perks of masculinity is being invisible to them.

So in the end, I gave up and went home, with my never-buying-anything-at-the-Bay streak intact. But on my way out of the store, I happened to notice another shirt on a sale rack, which I took a photo of for posterity:

I'm sure I've seen that pattern before somewhere. Now where could it be?

Not cool, Hudson's Bay. My generation doesn't have much, don't commoditize our touchstones. I should have gone to the women's section to see if they were selling the anarchist cheerleader outfits from the video.

Hey, does this count as cultural appropriation? Excuse me while I call some human rights lawyers.

Survival Of Whoever

Evolution and Capitalism have a lot in common. They can produce highly efficient solutions to problems, they're ruthless, and they act slowly. It's also weird what they each choose to hone to ultimate efficiency. Did you know that an eagle's eyeball is warped slightly so that whatever is at the centre of its field of vision appears magnifed? But on the other hand, manatees.

And what about peacocks? Five million years ago, one female had a tail-feather fetish; now look at them. Meanwhile, they're are so many living things that obviously need fixing. You just have to look at your own body for examples (asuming my blog is only read by humans.) As any sports fan can tell you, the human knee could use a good redesign.

But it's the same with capitalism. It can produce efficient solutions to problems. There are companies like Amazon and Walmart that have developed highly efficient systems to move items around the world. But then there's that phone cases and printer cartriges kiosk at the mall that no one ever seems to buy anything from. It's capitalism's panda, eating one plant, not really interested in breeding, yet somehow hanging on and surviving.

And both capitalism and evolution can be agonizingly slow. A lot of human health problems, from knee injuries to sinus infections, are a result of our bodies not being adapted to walking upright, even though we started doing that five million years ago. And there are so many products that need work. Like, when you buy a package of six muffins at the local grocery store, they come in a plastic tray. The label has a sticker wrapped around it. But because the plastic case doesn't have flat sides, the sticky side of the label is exposed in several places. That means it ends up sticking to any bread or produce bags that come near it.

Eventually, the design will be fixed. But that's only motivated by the supermarket losing enough business, just like evolution is only motivated by creatures' survival rates. So our sinuses might cause us pain, but it won't change unless it causes people to die. Say, they get eaten by a lion because they were distracted by pain. But even that might be faster than lost sales causing a change in the muffin tray design. So put some thought into the products you choose; you're helping businesses evolve.

End Me Your Sears

You may know that the Sears department store is officially "Sears-Roebuck." And since my name, Roe, is derived from Roebuck, I had always held out hope that I'd turn out to be an heir to the company fortune. But I later found out that Mr. Roebuck left the company and sold his share early on, so he hardly made any money off the business. So the only thing I might inherit is a poor sense of business timing.

But these days it's actually a relief that I'm not going to be stuck with shares in Sears-Roebuck, since the company isn't doing too well. I recently went to the Sears in Cambridge for the first time in a while, and found that it's going to close. At least, I assume it's closing; everything is on clearance and all sales are final, though I couldn't find any signs saying it was actually closing, and I was too embarrassed to ask such an obvious question.

I wondered if any other Sears stores were closing, so I googled "Sears closing." That wasn't very helpful, since I got links to newspaper and magazine articles announcing one round of store closures after another for the past ten years. One analyst compared it to a slow motion bankruptcy sell off.

So apparently I've ignored the decline of Sears during this time that I've trashed Target and made snide remarks about Wal-Mart. I remember hearing about the company's decline under their current CEO, that he's the sort of real-life Gordon Gekko who hands out copies of Atlas Shrugged to his underlings. But during my search through reports of store closures I got a better picture.

His strategy is to increase profits even if at the expense of sales. That is, to cut back on more flexible expenses like advertising and store decoration - that will inevitably reduce sales, but ideally you'll make more money due to the lowered expenses. I hadn't really thought about it, but I guess Sears stores haven't really changed much over the years. I mean, a time-traveler from the eighties would feel at home in a modern Sears, but they'd freak out when they see what today's McDonald's looks like.

Overall, the strategy doesn't seem to be working. There are a lot of complaints about the state of stores, sales are down, and even elderly demographics are turned off. But hey, as long as the company continues to collapse slowly, there'll be plenty of clearance sales for years to come. I was worried that the disappearance of Target would mean Wal-Mart is our only choice for discount department stores, but apparently we have another option: Your nearest closing Sears.

Reading The Lettuce Leaves

Today, I bought lettuce. The selection was pretty poor, with only a few, wilted heads available. I'm assuming that's a product of the ongoing drought in California. I’m not sure how many people are aware of how much we rely on California for food. We think of it as being all about the entertainment and technology industries, and other than that, it’s all surfing, earthquakes, and mountains. But they also produce half of America’s fruits and vegetables. That makes me wonder: what is the rest of the U.S. doing? If California provides food and ideas, and China makes stuff, what are the other 49 states spending their time on?

But back to dry, dry California. It’s slowly dawning on people that there isn’t going to be an easy solution anytime soon, so they’re going to have to think about where they can cut water use. And a lot of people are looking at agriculture. It uses most of California’s water.

The Economist, for instance, demonizes farmers for taking so much water for something that makes up such a small part of the state’s economy. That sounds good, as long as you don’t remember that it’s providing half the country’s fruits and vegetables, so perhaps that is worth forcing someone in Anaheim to water the lawn every-other week.

We allocate resources in our society with a mixture of capitalism and government policy, and the result often doesn’t make that much sense. In this case, it seems to be the worst of both worlds: water use doesn’t make sense according to cold economic equations, and it’s not exactly environmentally conscious either. This is one of those cases where it becomes hard to tell the political sides apart. Conservatives would point out that deregulating water prices would lead to more efficient use, because water would be too expensive for water-intensive uses. And that would probably lead to reduced water use, and benefit the environment, which liberals would like. But it would also price the poor out the market, which they wouldn’t like. And once that Anaheim suburbanite can’t water the lawn, conservatives will sour on the idea too. So this is one of those frustrating issues where we can’t use a knee-jerk solution, and will actually have to think about it.

Red Red Wine

Rumour has it that once again, the Ontario government may open up sales of alcoholic beverages to supermarkets. You'd think this would be a fairly popular thing outside of the remnants of Canada's temperance movement. But there's actually a lot of criticism: it'll be harder to get alcohol in smaller places, they'll concentrate on main brands, rather than the wide range you get on dedicated wine and beer stores.

Those aren't necessarily bad arguments. But they are arguments that can be made about virtually any product. For example, if we mandated that crackers had to be sold in government-approved stores instead of supermarkets, they'd have a nice selection of imported and craft crackers, and small towns would be assured of basic service from their local C.C.B.O. (Cracker Control Board of Ontario) store. There'd be negatives of course: it would be inconvenient buying your soup and crackers at different stores. And if you don't like the service, you're out of luck.

The fact is, we in Canada have made the general principle that goods and services should be provided by private businesses unless there's a compelling reason for the government to do it. I don't have a problem with re-examining that philosophy: if you think we'd be better off with the government providing all or most services, put that argument forward.

But the fact is that isn't a very popular point of view. So it's frustrating to see this more-or-less decided point re-opened and re-argued. Given how economically conservative our society has become, there shouldn't be this much opposition to deregulating alcohol sales. Or conversely, given how much opposition there is to deregulating alcohol sales, other conservative economic initiatives shouldn't get the wide support they do.

Either way, it seems a lot of us have difficulty recognizing patterns or thinking in the abstract. We have to learn to think through the consequences of of our guiding principles, and use those principles to guide our decisions so that we don't start from scratch in reasoning out every question.

Bay, Leaf

The Bay is rebranding.  Oh, I'm sorry: Hudson's Bay is rebranding.  Yes, they're using their full name now.  No more of that yellow logo... what was that thing, anyway?  I wasn't sure if it was supposed to be a ribbon or a rose.  We'll never know now.

The new look with its dignified black font fits with their upmarket position in the market.  That seems to be working for them, though I'm still surprised.  I didn't think such expensive merchandise would sustain so large a chain of stores.  But apparently we Canadians have a thing for Ralph Lauren.

And that's what's weird about the modern Hudson's Bay.  It's a distinctly Canadian brand - not only is it our last department store chain standing, but it's a company that has been intertwined with European settlement of the country.  And yet, it doesn't seem real Canadian.  There are businesses that we have an affinity for, like Tim Horton's or Canadian Tire, which other countries don't really get.  But Hudson's Bay just sells internationally recognizable look-how-prosperous-I-am brands.  It would fit in pretty much anywhere in the world.

So what would a really Canadian store look like?  That's hard to say.  We really like Walmart and its cheap, practical products. But even after twenty years here, it's hard not to think of them as distinctly American.  Maybe it's the all the Disney stuff and Duck Dynasty t-shirts.  A really Canadian store would have cheap stuff, but just enough style to let you feel like you're above crass commercialism.  Ironically, that would be Target.

Ready, Aim, Fired

So now Target is leaving the Canadian market. That had been suggested by market watchers for months, but I had assumed it was just the paranoia of folks who just look at the short-term bottom line. I didn't think they'd actually do it. And in one final moment of incompetent hubris for old-times-sake, they didn't tell their own employees, leaving them to find out from the media.

It's still hard to believe just how this all went so bad so quickly. Mostly when the media has reported on the company's problems, they've gone straight to the prices as the explanation, noting they aren't as good as the prices at American outlets. Personally I doubt that's a big reason. Canada's news outlets have been banging the cross-border shopping fear drum so long that I think they've greatly overestimated the number of Canadians that have been to an American Target.

The should-be-obvious, but hardly-mentioned truth is that Target's competitor was not American stores, it was Canadian Walmarts. Walmart has established an identity as being cheap and reliable, while Target's image was of nothing but mediocrity. Personally, I didn’t have that much experience with them, but even I found those experiences were mostly negative.

I mentioned my initial disappointment.  Later, I went looking for running shoes, only to find the men's shoe aisle was mostly empty due to their infamous supply problems.  There was another time I tried to buy a shirt, but found (1) they hadn't bothered to put checkouts at the store's mall entrance as well as the outside entrance, and (2) arriving at the checkouts, I found a security guard futily trying to herd people into one big lineup instead of just letting them choose their own checkout. Recently, I was shopping for a new computer, and wondered how prices at department stores measured up to the electronics retailers.  Walmart's web site made it easy to get some prices on laptops.  Target's site didn't give any info on products, other than letting you peruse a scan of their latest fliers.

A lot of the problem goes back to their curious decision to close all the Zellers stores, sell everything off, remodel over the course of months, then reopen. Of course, the remodeling was just painting Target red over Zellers red, and replacing plain shelves with plain shelves, so it was all a big waste. That wasted money may have been a one-off, but I think it really hurt them. It may have framed them as arrogant, but worse, it set everyone up for disappointment. It’s hard to be impressed when someone has taken five months to arrive back where they started.

But besides the repercussions of their poor entry, there’s also the implications it has for things we can’t see. That is, if the publicly visible aspects were so flawed, who knows what was going on behind the scenes. Hopefully a disillusioned executive will write a tell-all book about what went wrong.

It would be nice if we could put everything back the way it was, resurrecting Zellers.  I see some people are already campaigning for it. I couldn't find any info on Zellers' financial health, but I was under the impression they weren't losing the billion-plus a year that Target was losing.  But I doubt that will happen.  Hopefully someone will step in and provide a competitor to Walmart.  Giant Tiger, you may be our only hope.

Seen One, Seen A Mall

Today was Black Friday.  No, I didn't buy anything.  It wasn't a matter of principle, I just didn't need anything, and the advertised prices at Canadian Black Friday sales just didn't seem trample-worthy to me.  Apparently the concept is spreading to other countries too.  The British started getting into fights over limited quantities in stores today too.  That didn't seem to happen here: I saw a sensationalist news item about consumers camped-out in line waiting for stores to open, but it ended with them all walking calmly into the store without incident.  It was the most Canadian thing I've seen in a long time.

As you can see, I did take note of the news today in a fiendish desire to see the annual customer stampede stories.  But ultimately they were disappointing. Sure, we got to see people yelling at each other, fighting for flashy cardboard rectangles.  But it didn't satisfy even my guilty pleasure of marveling at crazy behaviour.  It's just the same thing over and over, in each city, year after year.  I'm sure that in previous years, I learned that lesson about how disappointing it is. But I forgot over the intervening year.  Ironically, that's probably why the shoppers keep fighting for bargains every year.

Any Given Friday

Black Friday is coming up.  Is it just me, or has this year's edition reached a new level of cultural impact.  It's like in the past, it was just some silly thing that other people do, which you can laugh at from afar.  But now it's harder to ignore.  All businesses are getting involved, it's starting to overflow into Thanksgiving day itself, and it's becoming the universal start of the Christmas shopping season. 

Of course, here in Canada it's just an ordinary Friday.  But the effects are starting to overflow here too, since Canadian retailers are forced to have sales to stop people from heading over the border for bargains.  It's a pity we didn't coordinate things so that we would have our own Black Tuesday on the day after Canadian Thanksgiving.  But instead, the sales join afternoon football as a benefit we get to enjoy as a spillover from American Thanksgiving.

And that brings up the weird thing about Black Friday: how arbitrary it is.  There's no reason why people should all want to go shopping on the same day, other than the foibles of the calendar giving most Americans a Friday off with nothing to do about a month before Christmas.  But that arbitrary swelling of the number of shoppers kicks competition into overdrive, and we reap the benefits of concentrated Capitalism as prices drop.

My point is, there's no reason we couldn't do this any other time of year.  If we could all make an agreement that we'll all concentrate our shopping on the same day.  Say, pick the last Friday in each month; it would be a make-or-break day for retailers, who would have to compete by having big sales.  Okay, it would be inconvenient to camp out in front of stores in the early morning and then fight your way into the store every month instead of just once a year.  But the point is: low prices.

Conspicuous Consumption

I live alone, can get to a number of grocery stores easily, and I don't like to plan. This means that I make a large number of small shopping trips, rather than a big weekly trip like most people. The point is that I often shop at irregular intervals, where I buy odd combinations of things I happen to be running out of.

I became conscious of this a few years ago when I got to the checkout and realised that I was buying pickles and ice cream. No, I wasn't pregnant, nor was anyone in my household, I just happened to need those two things.

That purchase seemed to tell an implied story about me, one so economical Ernest Hemingway would be proud of it.  Even if it wasn't really true. So now I often wonder about what people might assume about my purchases. For instance, at the bulk store, I often purchase spaghetti and semi-sweet chocolate. I feel I should reassure them that I won't be having them together.

All this came to mind recently when I made another potentially suspicious purchase.  I'd like to reassure everyone that I just happened to be running low on toilet paper the week before Halloween.  That's the only reason I was buying it.

Here's A Tip

Business is obsessed with growth.  Making money isn't enough: you have to make more money than last year.  That's unfortunate, since there are many products that are popular and profitable, but aren't successful, because they just bring in the same revenue year after year.  And that leads to bizarre improvements, as they desperately try to make a satisfactory product better.

Today's exhibit is Q-Tips.  It's likely a good money maker: lots of people use them, they don't have any competition other than generics, and they can't cost much to make.  But that's boring, so let's make them better:

Now, they're not your parents' Q-Tips.  Now they have precision tips.  No more accidentally missing your ears with those huge blunt swabs.  Of course, doctors - who tell us not to put them in our ears - will be pretty horrified by that.

And you have to love the shiny point.  They're so pointy, even cotton will glint in the sunlight.

Im-male-da

It's always bugged me that Imelda Marcos became so well known for her epic shoe collection that she can still be used as a punchline to this day, at least for people over forty. We don't even remember that her husband, Ferdinand, was dictator of the Philippines, or that her shore collection was not the plaything of a deranged rich woman, but a symbol of excess by exploitive leaders. And it's an affront to feminism of Kournikovian proportions that we remember Imelda for her stereotypical excess, while Corizon Aquino, the woman who led the popular uprising that deposed the Marcoses and brought democracy to the Philippines, is remembered only by historians.

But the reason I'm fixated on shoes today is that a rather unstereotypical thing happened to me: I found a pair of shoes I forgot I had at the bottom of the closet. Like most men, I don't own a lot of shoes. I can't speak for all men, but for me is not that I hate shoes, but I hate buying shoes. Aside from sizing problems, there's the style problem.  Most men's clothing fits into one of three categories:

• Formal, good-looking, uncomfortable
• Casual, comfortable, boring
• Sporty, very comfortable, silly

Or to put out another way, you have to look like your boss, your father, or your son. It's especially bad in shoes, where there's little choice between work and sports shoes.

But these shoes seemed to drop somewhere between those second and third groups. Clean, black canvas, they don't look childish or formal. So I wore them today. They were nice and comfortable to walk in. Though the thick canvas does make them a little warm. I feel like I look good, though my get are sweating a bit. But I do have thick socks. Okay, now the sweat is making my feet squeak as I walk. So maybe they aren't suited to summer. The shallow tread means I can't use them in winter, so I'll have to wait 'til fall to wear them. I'll just throw them in the closet for now; I'm sure I'll remember to get them out again in a few months.

Mall Pall

We've seen plenty of stories in recent years about how shopping malls are dying. But yesterday I saw one from The Guardian, and figured that if even the mall-challenged British are noticing, then it must be a big story.

The article attributes the end of malls to a renascence of urban retail, and the growth of online shopping. Those trends may be real, but it misses the biggest competitor: big box stores. They also claim that young people are rejecting older generations' mall culture. But a look around a mall today shows they make up a big part of the clientèle. Attributing cultural changes to young people being simply different is lazy journalism.  Also, they keep citing examples of dead and dying malls that just happen to be in rust belt communities where pretty much everything is decaying.  But whatever the reasons, shopping malls have hit a wall - many still do a lot of business, but no one is building them. 

Judging by my other tastes and values, I should hate malls. They're ugly temples of conformity, promoting mindless consumption and car-centric cities. But really, I've always had an affection for these retail behemoths. Maybe it's the pseudo-social atmosphere that lets you be private and public at the same time. Maybe it's the weird way it shows-off a community's aspirations. Or it's the fact that for all the external ugliness and internal blandness, it's still the grandest architecture we regularly experience. No matter the reason for my love of malls, it has helped that I came of age after they had become the dominant retail format. Earlier generations watched the mall eat away at beloved civic institutions and never forgave them for it.

Their complaint was that malls replaced downtown shops, as well as town squares. But what they didn't realize was that while malls destroyed those institutions, they also replaced them. The town square may no longer be the meeting place for the city, but at least the mall provided a new meeting place. And that's why I now lament the disappearance of malls. Big box stores have all the same negatives as malls, but without that positive of being a meeting place.  Hopefully something will replace the social function of the meeting place.  Otherwise, the Walmart greeters are going to get really tired of throwing loiterers out of the store. 

A Tall Order

It seems like more stores have those height charts just inside the door.  The idea, I guess, is so that employees can easily estimate the height of a thief running out of the store.  I don't think they've thought this through:  Sure, it makes it easier to catch a criminal, but you have to weigh that against how many customers you scare off by convincing them that the store is in a bad neighbourhood.

I don't really know if they even work that well.  If someone is running out of the store, and probably trying to duck to avoid being seen too, can you really check their height very accurately?  Really, they probably have to go back over the security camera footage to try to estimate the perp's height.  So why have such an obvious height chart?  You could have something more subtle that doesn't remind everyone of crime.  Like put the screws in the door every three inches.

Anyway, the reason I'm thinking about this is that today as I left a store, I noticed something unusual about the height chart.  A possible nominee for that  "You Had One Job" meme:  If you're installing a height chart, the one thing you have to do is put it at the right height.  But as I passed it, I saw the six-foot mark at almost eye-level. I'm five-foot-seven soaking wet, and granted, I was wearing boots, but I don't think their soles are ten inches thick.  So that store should be really easy to rob, since they'll be looking for someone exceptionally tall.