COMPANY CaseTarget: From “Expect Mo

COMPANY Case
Target: From “Expect More”to “Pay Less”
When you hear the term discount retail, two names that usually come to mind: Walmart and Target. The two have been compared so much that the press rarely covers one without at least mention-ing the other. The reasons for the comparison are fairly obvious. These corporations are two of the largest discount retailers in the United States. Category for category, they offer very similar merchandise. They tend to build their stores in close proximity to one another, even facing each other across major boulevards.
But even with such strong similarities, ask consumers if there’s a difference between the two, and they won’t even hesitate. Walmart is all about low prices; Target is about style and fashion. The “cheapchic” label applied by consumers and the media over the years perfectly captures the longstanding company positioning: “Expect More. Pay Less.” With its numerous designer product lines, Target has been so successful with its brand positioning that for a number of years it has slowly chipped away at Walmart’s massive market share. Granted, the difference in the scale for the two companies has always been huge. Walmart’s most recent annual revenues of $408 billion are more than six times those of Target. But for many years, Target’s business grew at a much faster pace than Walmart’s. In fact, as Walmart’s samestore sales began to lag in the mid2000s, the world’s largest retailer unabashedly attempted to become more like Target. It spruced up its store environment, added more fashionable clothing and housewares, and stocked organic and gourmet products in its grocery aisles. Walmart even experimented with luxury brands. After 19 years of promoting the slogan, “Always Low Prices. Always.” Walmart replaced it with the very Targetesque tagline, “Save Money. Live Better.” None of those efforts seemed to speed up Walmart’s revenue growth or slow down Target’s. But oh what a difference a year or two can make. As the global recession began to tighten its grip on the world’s retailers in 2008, the dynamics between the two retail giants reversed almost overnight. As unemployment rose and consumers began pinching their pennies, Walmart’s familiar price “rollbacks” resonated with consumers, while Target’s image of slightly better stuff for slightly higher prices did not. Target’s wellcultivated “upscale discount” image was turning away customers who believed that its fashionable products and trendy advertising meant steeper prices. By mid2008, Target had experienced three straight quarters of flat samestore sales growth and a slight dip in store traffic. At the same time, Walmart was defying the economic slowdown, posting quarterly increases in samestore sales of close to 5 percent along with substantial jumps in profits.

Kết quả (Việt) 1:

Trường hợp công tyMục tiêu: từ "Mong đợi hơn" để "Trả ít hơn"Khi bạn nghe thấy thuật ngữ giảm giá bán lẻ, hai tên đó thường đến để tâm trí: Walmart và mục tiêu. Hai đã được so sánh với rất nhiều rằng báo chí ít khi bao gồm một mà không có tối thiểu đề cập đến-ing khác. Lý do cho việc so sánh là khá rõ ràng. Các công ty này là hai trong số các nhà bán lẻ giảm giá lớn nhất tại Hoa Kỳ. Thể loại cho mục, họ cung cấp hàng hóa rất giống nhau. Họ có xu hướng để xây dựng các cửa hàng gần với nhau, thậm chí đối mặt với nhau trên đại lộ chính. But even with such strong similarities, ask consumers if there’s a difference between the two, and they won’t even hesitate. Walmart is all about low prices; Target is about style and fashion. The “cheapchic” label applied by consumers and the media over the years perfectly captures the longstanding company positioning: “Expect More. Pay Less.” With its numerous designer product lines, Target has been so successful with its brand positioning that for a number of years it has slowly chipped away at Walmart’s massive market share. Granted, the difference in the scale for the two companies has always been huge. Walmart’s most recent annual revenues of $408 billion are more than six times those of Target. But for many years, Target’s business grew at a much faster pace than Walmart’s. In fact, as Walmart’s samestore sales began to lag in the mid2000s, the world’s largest retailer unabashedly attempted to become more like Target. It spruced up its store environment, added more fashionable clothing and housewares, and stocked organic and gourmet products in its grocery aisles. Walmart even experimented with luxury brands. After 19 years of promoting the slogan, “Always Low Prices. Always.” Walmart replaced it with the very Targetesque tagline, “Save Money. Live Better.” None of those efforts seemed to speed up Walmart’s revenue growth or slow down Target’s. But oh what a difference a year or two can make. As the global recession began to tighten its grip on the world’s retailers in 2008, the dynamics between the two retail giants reversed almost overnight. As unemployment rose and consumers began pinching their pennies, Walmart’s familiar price “rollbacks” resonated with consumers, while Target’s image of slightly better stuff for slightly higher prices did not. Target’s wellcultivated “upscale discount” image was turning away customers who believed that its fashionable products and trendy advertising meant steeper prices. By mid2008, Target had experienced three straight quarters of flat samestore sales growth and a slight dip in store traffic. At the same time, Walmart was defying the economic slowdown, posting quarterly increases in samestore sales of close to 5 percent along with substantial jumps in profits.