Target Boycott Discussion Thread. Discuss your thoughts and how it is effecting your store

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sales are horrible, our store hours have to be cut drastically and our DSL has come in and had a talk with our STL about having to lay off people.

:rolleyes:
 
we had a local church group call in and state that they were going to start sending in members to fill up carts, walk them to the front of the store, and then leave. because clearly that's an appropriate, not at all childish response.

shitty thing is they've actually been doing it. yesterday, two full carts of frozen and perishables, with a bunch of other stupid little things that they knew would take forever to put back. tonight, a woman came through a register with over $500 worth of merchandise, made the cashier scan the whole thing, then proudly announced that she forgot her card and walked out without any further comment.

childish, and petty, and ultimately a pointless gesture. how is that doing anything other than making people mad at you? furthermore, it doesn't seem very 'Christian' to me. if only it were a bannable offense so we could hold you to your stupid little boycott.
I guess they weren't making a big enough impact on sales so they've resorted to destroying merchandise.
That reeks of desperation.
If I were you, I start taking their pics with your phone whenever they pull these antics & turn them over to AP.
Maybe they'll catch a few of them doing it enough times to charge them with destruction of merchandise.
Maybe we should visit a christian chain like Hobby Lobby (sorry, Loki) & order cut yardages of some of their most expensive fabrics before walking out.
At least cut fabrics can still be sold.
 
I guess they weren't making a big enough impact on sales so they've resorted to destroying merchandise.
That reeks of desperation.
If I were you, I start taking their pics with your phone whenever they pull these antics & turn them over to AP.
Maybe they'll catch a few of them doing it enough times to charge them with destruction of merchandise.
Maybe we should visit a christian chain like Hobby Lobby (sorry, Loki) & order cut yardages of some of their most expensive fabrics before walking out.
At least cut fabrics can still be sold.

there's no crime here. ap should be installing locks on all freezer doors and spider wrapping perishable items if they want to positively effect shrinkage. their job loss prevention, not prosecuting people who have a bad memory or forget their means of payment.
 
I guess they weren't making a big enough impact on sales so they've resorted to destroying merchandise.
That reeks of desperation.
If I were you, I start taking their pics with your phone whenever they pull these antics & turn them over to AP.
Maybe they'll catch a few of them doing it enough times to charge them with destruction of merchandise.
Maybe we should visit a christian chain like Hobby Lobby (sorry, Loki) & order cut yardages of some of their most expensive fabrics before walking out.
At least cut fabrics can still be sold.


Not all...

"Excuse me, I need 200 5" wide and 50' long pieces of fabric. I'm making banners, that's it banners..."
 
there's no crime here. ap should be installing locks on all freezer doors and spider wrapping perishable items if they want to positively effect shrinkage. their job loss prevention, not prosecuting people who have a bad memory or forget their means of payment.
'Bad memory'.....really?
If AP has vid of the same people doing it repeatedly, it's willful destruction of merchandise & it wouldn't take much to link it to the 'church' that was exhorting their followers to commit what amounts to vandalism.
 
Find out what church it is and visit them on Sunday for a little worship. Be sure to dress appropriately. It probably would have no effect on them, but it might be fun to watch them explaining to their angelic children why all those guys were wearing dresses and heels and standing in line for the church restroom.
 
Not all...

"Excuse me, I need 200 5" wide and 50' long pieces of fabric. I'm making banners, that's it banners..."

no problem sir but since we do not operate our business in a half hazard manner we are going to require a 10 percent deposit for materials to show us you are serious. cutting 200 pieces of fabric on faith would be like opening 133 stores in another country all at once!
 
'Bad memory'.....really?
If AP has vid of the same people doing it repeatedly, it's willful destruction of merchandise & it wouldn't take much to link it to the 'church' that was exhorting their followers to commit what amounts to vandalism.

they would probably switch it up and have people do it only once.
 
'Bad memory'.....really?
If AP has vid of the same people doing it repeatedly, it's willful destruction of merchandise & it wouldn't take much to link it to the 'church' that was exhorting their followers to commit what amounts to vandalism.

Would never hold up in court. They could possibly be charged with vandalism, but they would have a hell of a time proving intent. If they really just forgot, they aren't doing anything wrong, and innocent until proven guilty.

That being said...
They need to mandate transgender restrooms, or more unisex restrooms. Problem solved.

If someone has had sex reassignment surgery, then it would be OK for them to go into the bathroom that they identify with IMO. I just think that without clear definitions, the current policy opens up the possibility of abuse. Theoretically anyone can "say" how they identify and go into whichever restroom they want --- there was a guy in Canada who used this to his advantage to gain access to Women's Shelters and sexually assault women.

Most of us (including myself) don't have a problem sharing a restroom with a transgendered individual -- what we have a problem with is people who are "pretending" to be transgender to carry out their perversions. The current policy does nothing to prevent this.
 
Last edited:
Funny you didn't give two shits before it was made public or even while you worked for spot..

Link to that Canadian news story?
 
Transgender restrooms come with their own problems, namely singling out a portion of the population that would rather stay below the radar.
Can you imagine how pissed some mom with kids would be if the family restroom were occupied & she was denied use of the transgendered one?
The Canada case was their own fault because they didn't stop him after the first occurrence. Assaults of ANYONE in a shelter shouldn't be tolerated no matter the gender.
Guy was also a career assailant.
 
Transgender restrooms come with their own problems, namely singling out a portion of the population that would rather stay below the radar.
Can you imagine how pissed some mom with kids would be if the family restroom were occupied & she was denied use of the transgendered one?
The Canada case was their own fault because they didn't stop him after the first occurrence. Assaults of ANYONE in a shelter shouldn't be tolerated no matter the gender.
Guy was also a career assailant.

Well, why even have Mens and Womens restrooms then if we are singling people out based on gender? Let's be all inclusive and just have one restroom.

And yes we are in agreement on the assailant in Canada -- however I linked it because it shows that there are people who will abuse the policy of allowing people to "self identify" their gender and use facilities as such.
 
Sexual predator jailed after claiming to be ‘transgender’ to assault women in shelter



Honestly I don't care enough about the issue to boycott Target, however I think there is some validity to both sides on this issue.


Do keep in mind this happened two years ago and while you will find this story posted in every right leaning journal on the web as proof that that this will happen so we need to 'protect our children', the fact is that it's the only case you will find out there.
The law wasn't the problem, a known sexual predator who managed to slip through the system twice prior to the time he arrested was.
 
just because you guys are busy doesn't mean you are meeting your sales goals. and even if your stores are meeting your sales goals it doesn't mean you are turning a profit. it will clearly take some time to see how bad this effects target.
We are up 6%this week, exceeding redcard goal. Up 4.5%for the quarter. Pretty sure i can say we are turning a profit...once you subtract all the call outs to save payroll it's simple math.
 
We are up 6%this week, exceeding redcard goal. Up 4.5%for the quarter. Pretty sure i can say we are turning a profit...once you subtract all the call outs to save payroll it's simple math.

as a team member you really have no idea, people could only be buying stuff on clearance, they could be buying stuff on sale with no margin, they could be buying stuff that has been handled so many times it is no longer profitable to sale, people could be stealing so much from your store you aren't turning a profit.
 
as a team member you really have no idea, people could only be buying stuff on clearance, they could be buying stuff on sale with no margin, they could be buying stuff that has been handled so many times it is no longer profitable to sale, people could be stealing so much from your store you aren't turning a profit.
And I could be a unicorn farting glitter. We all have fantasies.
 
as a team member you really have no idea, people could only be buying stuff on clearance, they could be buying stuff on sale with no margin, they could be buying stuff that has been handled so many times it is no longer profitable to sale, people could be stealing so much from your store you aren't turning a profit.
Yeah, nope. I know our shortage numbers. Well within margin.

And do you really think even on 70% we don't turn profit? Unless it's a TV we at least break even. Gauranteed. Average margin is 100% up to 600%.
 
This is like arguing with Jack. When you prove him wrong, instead of owning up to it or arguing his point he just quotes a useless statistic like a petulant child. The number of signatures on that petition is completely useless because all that is required to sign it is a valid email address, and the only things required for that is a letter before and after the @ symbol and a valid extension (.com, .gov, .me, etc) along with a valid ZIP code, so none of the "signatures" are verifiable. It means literally nothing. I'm certain that there are bots signing that petition over and over again, it'd be extremely easy to automate with a simple script.

If you were to look at the list of "signatures" on that petition, you would notice a lot of the emails are rubbish like "a1b87e338a@gmail.com" simply because there is no verification process.
 
This is like arguing with Jack. When you prove him wrong, instead of owning up to it or arguing his point he just quotes a useless statistic like a petulant child. The number of signatures on that petition is completely useless because all that is required to sign it is a valid email address, and the only things required for that is a letter before and after the @ symbol and a valid extension (.com, .gov, .me, etc) along with a valid ZIP code, so none of the "signatures" are verifiable. It means literally nothing. I'm certain that there are bots signing that petition over and over again, it'd be extremely easy to automate with a simple script.

If you were to look at the list of "signatures" on that petition, you would notice a lot of the emails are rubbish like "a1b87e338a@gmail.com" simply because there is no verification process.

and further more, there could be 10 times the amount of boycotters who don't feel like signing the petition because they don't want their business known.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top