<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: saks gets it; bloomie&#8217;s not so much</title>
	<atom:link href="http://deniseleeyohn.com/bites/2008/09/08/saks-gets-it-bloomies-not-so-much/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://deniseleeyohn.com/bites/2008/09/08/saks-gets-it-bloomies-not-so-much/</link>
	<description>stuff for your brain to chew on</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 14:50:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Ilves</title>
		<link>http://deniseleeyohn.com/bites/2008/09/08/saks-gets-it-bloomies-not-so-much/comment-page-1/#comment-31</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Ilves</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 20:51:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deniseleeyohn.com/bites/?p=293#comment-31</guid>
		<description>Isn&#039;t the issue here which strategy will drive more consumers to buy their products? Both have strong respected brands, so the investment here isn&#039;t to further build brand stickiness (both work in my view) as to sell merchandise. It seems both are valid strategies. Bloomie&#039;s angle is that the live music will drive consumers into the store, where they can touch and feel (and smell) the merchandise, and hence bring them closer to a buying experience. Saks&#039; strategy also makes sense, but doesn&#039;t necessarily engage the consumer to visit the store as much (but that might be arguable. Bloomie&#039;s strategy also reflects the importance of having a brick and mortar store, and the overhead that goes with that including sales staff, and you can&#039;t engage consumers with that investment unless you get them into the store. Saks may appeal to a different consumer as well, than Bloomie&#039;s does. While the online videos and catalogs are great in concept, that may or may not get consumers into the store -- and they can order online. While if that works it supports the goal of selling merchandise, but doesn&#039;t address the personal engagement in the store.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Isn&#8217;t the issue here which strategy will drive more consumers to buy their products? Both have strong respected brands, so the investment here isn&#8217;t to further build brand stickiness (both work in my view) as to sell merchandise. It seems both are valid strategies. Bloomie&#8217;s angle is that the live music will drive consumers into the store, where they can touch and feel (and smell) the merchandise, and hence bring them closer to a buying experience. Saks&#8217; strategy also makes sense, but doesn&#8217;t necessarily engage the consumer to visit the store as much (but that might be arguable. Bloomie&#8217;s strategy also reflects the importance of having a brick and mortar store, and the overhead that goes with that including sales staff, and you can&#8217;t engage consumers with that investment unless you get them into the store. Saks may appeal to a different consumer as well, than Bloomie&#8217;s does. While the online videos and catalogs are great in concept, that may or may not get consumers into the store &#8212; and they can order online. While if that works it supports the goal of selling merchandise, but doesn&#8217;t address the personal engagement in the store.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

