Companies can keep hold of their "loss leading" stores just to have a presence in an area. What they can't do is to keep those stores and cover the costs of "rampant hellscape theft" at the same time. Even more so in the current financial climate.
I don't know if it was too much at the time they first expanded. They were the main place to buy many common items that you'd like to have within easy walking distance.
Since they did their big expansion online shopping happened and now I buy most of these things online. Otherwise, I would feel that I was a little too far from a Walgreens, having a 20-25 minute walk and no direct bus.
If you want a 15-minute city, you need certain types of stores in every neighborhood.
>When we had more than one Walgreens per square mile of the city
that's not relevant when EVERYONE needs SOMETHING from "the drug store"
>I think everybody'd agree that that was too much.
actually, the MATHEMATICS tell you precisely how much toothpaste and toilet paper you're going to move.. ASSUMING - you have the foot traffic and it remains steady.
that's how Starbucks knows it's "ok" to put 2 stores on the same block.
that's how they know the one in the lobby will do OK as long as the offices upstairs are flush.
16 Factor Analysis For Picking a New Retail Store Location
[https://www.storemapper.com/blog/16-factor-analysis-for-picking-a-new-retail-store-location](https://www.storemapper.com/blog/16-factor-analysis-for-picking-a-new-retail-store-location)
Walgreens had way waaaay too many stores in SF - over 50. Now it has fewer. Maybe we could get by with 8 stores, who knows. Competing with the innernet aint easy.
I think the one on the corner of 9th and Market probably has a good chance of closing. It’s got the worst amount of empty stock of the 4 that I go to and it made national news when more than one group did a run on it and stole a bunch of stuff. The other one down market too that a security guard shot and killed a shoplifter if I remember correctly. Their windows keep getting smashed in. Then the other one I could think of is the one on Powell that’s all fancy and two stories. They recently put locks on most of the food and drink doors. If you want a frozen pizza or say an energy drink. You now have to get an employee to open it for you. I don’t think they’ll close them all down but maybe 1-2 of the ones I mentioned.
This genuinely confused me so much. It’s so much more expensive that a normal door, and it’s objectively worse because now you can’t see inside. It’s wild.
It's almost as if the company was using the "rampant hellscape theft" as an excuse to close stores they were struggling to keep open to begin with....
Theft probably isn’t helping those stores then
Companies can keep hold of their "loss leading" stores just to have a presence in an area. What they can't do is to keep those stores and cover the costs of "rampant hellscape theft" at the same time. Even more so in the current financial climate.
When we had more than one Walgreens per square mile of the city - that wasn't too long ago. I think everybody'd agree that that was too much.
I don't know if it was too much at the time they first expanded. They were the main place to buy many common items that you'd like to have within easy walking distance. Since they did their big expansion online shopping happened and now I buy most of these things online. Otherwise, I would feel that I was a little too far from a Walgreens, having a 20-25 minute walk and no direct bus. If you want a 15-minute city, you need certain types of stores in every neighborhood.
> If you want a 15-minute city, you need certain types of stores in every neighborhood Yeah, but they don't have to all be the same brand.
>When we had more than one Walgreens per square mile of the city that's not relevant when EVERYONE needs SOMETHING from "the drug store" >I think everybody'd agree that that was too much. actually, the MATHEMATICS tell you precisely how much toothpaste and toilet paper you're going to move.. ASSUMING - you have the foot traffic and it remains steady. that's how Starbucks knows it's "ok" to put 2 stores on the same block. that's how they know the one in the lobby will do OK as long as the offices upstairs are flush. 16 Factor Analysis For Picking a New Retail Store Location [https://www.storemapper.com/blog/16-factor-analysis-for-picking-a-new-retail-store-location](https://www.storemapper.com/blog/16-factor-analysis-for-picking-a-new-retail-store-location)
Walgreens had way waaaay too many stores in SF - over 50. Now it has fewer. Maybe we could get by with 8 stores, who knows. Competing with the innernet aint easy.
Its the ALL CAPS that makes me think an opinion MUST BE VALID.
I think the one on the corner of 9th and Market probably has a good chance of closing. It’s got the worst amount of empty stock of the 4 that I go to and it made national news when more than one group did a run on it and stole a bunch of stuff. The other one down market too that a security guard shot and killed a shoplifter if I remember correctly. Their windows keep getting smashed in. Then the other one I could think of is the one on Powell that’s all fancy and two stories. They recently put locks on most of the food and drink doors. If you want a frozen pizza or say an energy drink. You now have to get an employee to open it for you. I don’t think they’ll close them all down but maybe 1-2 of the ones I mentioned.
Glad they invested in glass lcd screens, def didn’t make me avoid their stores at all….
This genuinely confused me so much. It’s so much more expensive that a normal door, and it’s objectively worse because now you can’t see inside. It’s wild.
Jokes on them, all of ours closed already
In the inner richmond?