Area Soldier Killed In Fort Hood Rampage
Stroger Makes Hollywood Play
Put Down Your Nanowrimo And Leave The House
Sox Shuffle Continues
Chicagoist isn't above telling you "we told you so." While we disagree whether Chicagoans should go or not go to the State Street Macy's, we never agreed with the decision to change the Marshall Field's landmark on State Street to a Macy's. The reasons were tenuous at best — brand cohesiveness and the strength of the Macy's name. So, we were not surprised when Federated's chief financial officer, Karen Hoguet, said that the Chicago flagship is "doing badly."
We remember that the State Street store wasn't a huge success before the changeover, why anyone thought that inciting boycotts and protests would help bolster sales at the store is beyond us. You would think maybe a last-minute announcement that the name is staying would have engendered some sort of affection for the store that had already been run by Federated for years. But when the black awnings unfurled on State Street, it had the ominous foreboding of a hackneyed poem.
What will save the black symbiote, aside from Peter Parker? The chief financial officer says that they could do more to drive traffic to the store, which is floundering like MJ's stage career. They plan on increasing advertising and adding more sales events like the current 50% discount off clearance items.
Also, in the continuing effort to rid the corporation of brand diversity, Federated is changing its own name to to Macy's Incorporated.
Image via rpatrickmohrphotography.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I would prefer that Federated/Macy's sell off at least the flagship location to a company that would operate it as Marshall Field's and make it a viable department store. To me shopping at Marshall Field's under Macy's ownership is no different than the current scenario. Well, slightly better, but not much different.
But they, at Macy's, to put it bluntly, are idiots.
Field's had not been owned by Federated "for years" they had previously been owned by Target and then May and Co (whose purchase of said Field's is pretty much what but them near bankruptcy). It was just after the May and Co. purchase that Field's became Macy's. Chicago isn't the only one that lost its hometown store, though. Everywhere else did as well -- although for some town's (like Atlanta) the transition was more gradual (first it was called Macy's Rich -- or some silly combination.) The West Coast back in the 1980s was the first to lose all their brands -- Broadway, Emporium, etc. -- to the Macy's name.
The biggest issue for Field's (and perhaps why the backlash) is that the Macy's name was a step down. Macy's generally for the other stores was a step up. They should have made the downtown store a Bloomingdale's (if not others as well) that would have at least kept the aspirational quality. Macy's is a strong store, but it's NOT anything anyone aspires to.
I don't like Macy's over Fields, but aren't there better things to get upset about? Fields has been floundering for years, getting upset about a name change seems pretty ridiculous. I'm sure all those people who picket over the name change were shopping in Fields everyday trying to revive it too, right?
Who care's. It's just a department store! Not like it a band or some great rock group that broke up. It's just a store to go buy goods that are sold at tons of other stores. It's silly really to even care. If you don't like the store don't shop there.
I think the current state of our country and the war is much bigger issue. btw - all dept stores and stores are changing with the internet.
1. Does anybody else think the Macy's logo (red star on white background) looks vaguely communist? Is this unintentional irony?
2. Macy's is basically just another mall store, and people don't come downtown for a mall store. They come downtown for an experience, even if it is a fake experience wrapped up in the sentimentality of a familiar name over a green awning. Eliminate that, and people no longer have any reason to fool with the hassle. They'll just go someplace with a free parking lot.
My prediction: Within five years, either the Fields name will return, or the store will shut down.
give me a break who cares
it's just a store that sells the same stuff other stores sell
it's not like it was a great rock band that broke up or something.
the internet is going to change retailing anyway
They are on their heels, time to demand some innovative concessions.
Attention you New York bastards: take back Trump and all is forgiven.
Take him back to New York or Jersey or wherever he is from, and I'll shop at Macy's.
deal?
They are on their heels, time to demand some innovative concessions.
Attention you New York bastards: take back Trump and all is forgiven.
Take him back to New York or Jersey or wherever he is from, and I'll shop at Macy's.
deal?
...it's not like it was a great rock band that broke up or something.
Yes, because now that really would be something to get worked up over. What are you, in high school??
it's not like it was a great rock band that broke up or something.
Like a great rock band that's been around for 100 years?
it's not like it was a great rock band that broke up or something.
Like a great rock band that's been around for 100 years?
No I am not the one in H.S. it's the people that give a damn about Fields. There are much more important things to worry about than Fields being Macy's or the communist star. Mercedes Benz was more communist than that star and a part of Hitler and a lot of Jews drive MB's.
Who cares it's just a store with the internet today people in North Dakota that don't have a Macy's, Fields or a Saks can buy all the stuff on the internet. So these stores as destinations are becoming less and less of a tourist attraction all the time. In 1990 certain stores carried certain merchandise today all you have to do is Google what you are looking for if you local store doesn't carry it.
Nothing changed from it being Fields to Macy's it's still the same crappy store it was in the last few years it was Macy's.
Gotta love, though, that they're giving out free Frango mints until May 31.
Maybe that'll bring some people back into the store.
Chicagoans: GET A LIFE! These protests are silly and counterproductive and show that you cannot adapt to necessary change.
Marshall Field's was declining for years and now Macy's has stepped up to the plate and invested millions in the place, and you repay them through boycotts? I bet when they close the store, then you'll be having another protest because they closed the store.
No I am not the one in H.S. it's the people that give a damn about Fields. There are much more important things to worry about than Fields being Macy's or the communist star. Mercedes Benz was more communist than that star and a part of Hitler and a lot of Jews drive MB's.
Who cares it's just a store with the internet today people in North Dakota that don't have a Macy's, Fields or a Saks can buy all the stuff on the internet. So these stores as destinations are becoming less and less of a tourist attraction all the time. In 1990 certain stores carried certain merchandise today all you have to do is Google what you are looking for if you local store doesn't carry it.
Nothing changed from it being Fields to Macy's it's still the same crappy store it was in the last few years it was Macy's.
Gotta love, though, that they're giving out free Frango mints until May 31.
Maybe that'll bring some people back into the store.
I guess that's what happens when you treat the locals like crap.
...and now Macy's has stepped up to the plate and invested millions in the place, and you repay them through boycotts? I bet when they close the store, then you'll be having another protest because they closed the store.
You're the one who needs to get a life, poor, pathetic Macy's apologist. We never asked them to shutter Field's (an important facet of Chicago's history), so why in the hell do you think we owe them anything??!
Chicagoans have voted with their dollars and the boycott is obviously working. Trust me when I say that when the Macy's on State Street closes down (which it most certainly will), there will be no more protesting (except maybe by you), only celebrating...
You, Chicagoist, remember that the State Street store wasn't a huge success? Uh, didn't State Street move over $250 million worth of merchandise a year? You don't consider that successful? Oh, and I love the sweatheart who commented that Macy's invested millions in State Street. Dear, Macy's just changed the awnings.
Just FYI Ross, North Dakota had several Marshall Field stores, as they were Dayton stores before that. Yes, Ross, even out in the wild lands of North Dakota they had high end shopping in Fargo, Grand Forks, Bismark and Minot.
And of course, now you can go just about anywhere in the US and find a Macy's store. Which, takes away any desire to go to the New York store, or the downtown Chicago store, or the downtown Minneapolis store (the original Daytons), or the West Acres Mall store in Fargo, or anywhere else becasue they are ubiquitous. So there is a good chance that its not just Chicagoans who are not shopping at the old Fields, but tourists because, since they now have a Macy's of their own, well there is just no interest in going to another one with even higher sales taxes.
I loved to go to the old State Street store, even if I wasn't spending big bucks there. But anyone who thinks it is all the same old overpriced stuff doesn't know labels. The Field Gear label was of a better quality that the crap that Macy's is selling.
For those of you that think the name change of a department store isn't important, well have fun eating at your local Applebees/Fridays/Olive Garden and shopping at your local Gap/Old Navy/A&F. That is part of the problem with the change -- you lose any regional flavor that makes where you live different and special, because it is exactly like every place else in the country. What fun is that? It's the homoginizaton of America that annoys me.
This proves one thing to me there are lot of hillbillies in Chicago. Specifically those that care about Fields. You would think we lived in Smalltown, USA and the local store was run out of town square because the big bad Fields store came to town.
Thanks for writing about how Chicagoans are hitting back hard at Macy's.
This is not like other cities. Marshall Field's was not like other stores. Macy's will continue to suffer, deservedly so, until they do the right thing.
To Chicagoist, I hope that you will remove inflammatory posts written by children, including the one above that includes "...Mercedes Benz was more communist than that star and a part of Hitler and a lot of Jews drive MB's."
"My prediction: Within five years, either the Fields name will return, or the store will shut down."
Sure Clint,
MashallFields V- at this very momment is sitting on his island- the size of Cuba -in deep regret that he SOLD his corporation to another corporation. I’m sure he will have a change of heart, buy it back so a bunch of 40 something year old suburban losers who act like they’re 90, and a few 95 year old ladies can go back to the “wall NUT” room around Christmas to gum some green pea soup while reminiscing about the little match girl.
Gawd you people are so pathetic! Can you imagine what the life is like for the rabid women in the front of the “protest”? “Hey Margie its Saturday night, lets get a little wild and have a one Bud lite at Bennigans down the road. Maybe that cute second hand car salesmen will be back intown!” “No Suzie I’m driving to Cha-ca-go tomorrow to protest Macys!”
And what’s up with the "number two" in line, the one in the yellow shirt with the gimpy walk? I’m betting she’s representing the great Township of Wheeling ! Then there is the women in the pink pants suit. Isn’t their a law against than kinda outfit? Come on Chicagoist post some more photos!
This proves one thing to me there are lot of hillbillies in Chicago. Specifically those that care about Fields. You would think we lived in Smalltown, USA and the local store was run out of town square because the big bad Fields store came to town.
"My prediction: Within five years, either the Fields name will return, or the store will shut down."
Sure Clint,
MashallFields V- at this very momment is sitting on his island- the size of Cuba -in deep regret that he SOLD his corporation to another corporation. I’m sure he will have a change of heart, buy it back so a bunch of 40 something year old suburban losers who act like they’re 90, and a few 95 year old ladies can go back to the “wall NUT” room around Christmas to gum some green pea soup while reminiscing about the little match girl.
Gawd you people are so pathetic! Can you imagine what the life is like for the rabid women in the front of the “protest”? “Hey Margie its Saturday night, lets get a little wild and have a one Bud lite at Bennigans down the road. Maybe that cute second hand car salesmen will be back intown!” “No Suzie I’m driving to Cha-ca-go tomorrow to protest Macys!”
And what’s up with the "number two" in line, the one in the yellow shirt with the gimpy walk? I’m betting she’s representing the great Township of Wheeling ! Then there is the women in the pink pants suit. Isn’t there a law against those sorts of outfits?
"My prediction: Within five years, either the Fields name will return, or the store will shut down."
Sure Clint,
MashallFields V- at this very momment is sitting on his island- the size of Cuba -in deep regret that he SOLD his corporation to another corporation. I’m sure he will have a change of heart, buy it back so a bunch of 40 something year old suburban losers who act like they’re 90, and a few 95 year old ladies can go back to the “wall NUT” room around Christmas to gum some green pea soup while reminiscing about the little match girl.
Gawd you people are so pathetic! Can you imagine what the life is like for the rabid women in the front of the “protest”? “Hey Margie its Saturday night, lets get a little wild and have a one Bud lite at Bennigans down the road. Maybe that cute second hand car salesmen will be back intown!” “No Suzie I’m driving to Cha-ca-go tomorrow to protest Macys!”
And what’s up with the "number two" in line, the one in the yellow shirt with the gimpy walk? I’m betting she’s representing the great Township of Wheeling ! Then there is the women in the pink pants suit. Isn’t there a law against those sorts of outfits?
Ross - Tell me, is your name really Rumplestiltskin? Do you steal babies?
"My prediction: Within five years, either the Fields name will return, or the store will shut down."
Sure Clint,
MashallFields V- at this very momment is sitting on his island- the size of Cuba -in deep regret that he SOLD his corporation to another corporation. I’m sure he will have a change of heart, buy it back so a bunch of 40 something year old suburban losers who act like they’re 90, and a few 95 year old ladies can go back to the “wall NUT” room around Christmas to gum some green pea soup while reminiscing about the little match girl.
Gawd you people are so pathetic! Can you imagine what the life is like for the rabid women in the front of the “protest”? “Hey Margie its Saturday night, lets get a little wild and have a one Bud lite at Bennigans down the road. Maybe that cute second hand car salesmen will be back intown!” “No Suzie I’m driving to Cha-ca-go tomorrow to protest Macys!”
And what’s up with the "number two" in line, the one in the yellow shirt with the gimpy walk? I’m betting she’s representing the great Township of Wheeling ! Then there is the women in the pink pants suit. Isn’t there a law against those sorts of outfits?
sorry about the double post
p.s Vinny, you’re the best thing since the Rail Splitter! A man to lead this divided city!
Brilliant New York takes back Tump and we keep Macy’s, how bout it? Let’s call it the great Trump Compromise of 2007
Now Chicagoist can you post some more photos of the protest, We all promise not to laugh!
Uh-oh, "Ethan" got so angry, he quadruple posted...
Ross, Ross, Ross...
Why are you getting your panties in such a bunch? Let me guess...you work at the State Street Macy's, and unless the bottom line starts improving, you can kiss that sweet promotion to asst. manager (50 cents more an hour, dude!) of the women's shoe department good-bye, right?
Just lighten up, Al Bundy. I see a promising career in fast food for you...
It is fun to read the snobby posts by the cranky Macy's lovers in this thread. The rest of us are enjoying the slow death of Macy's on State. Ahhh, success!
Have you folks ever checked out the Macy's in Herald Square? It's really not that bad.
In my opinion, Macy's in Herald Square is pretty grim - rickety, narrow wooden escalators, restrooms that wouldn't be out of place in Penn Station, elevators at the end of corridors that look as if they've been abandoned for years, etc.
I've only lived in Chicago for a couple years, so can someone explain to me the ties to Marshall Fields? I understand it's been there for over 100 years, but the building's still there, right? If all that's changed is the occupant, it should still be a landmark. Is the Sears Tower less iconic because Sears is no longer headquartered there?
I'm ignorant. Please inform.
Ontology -
Search Marshall Field's on Wikipedia, and you will see that the history of the city and the department store are hopelessly intertwined. The name itself has almost become synonymous with Chicago to many of us who grew up here. And despite what some of the more vocal and simple-minded detractors would have you believe, it's not the loss of a retail store that we are lamenting, but rather a great symbol and tradition of this city. Yes, the building itself has even become an icon, which makes it even more insulting to see the name of an inferior department store with New York roots grace its awnings and signage...
See, my beef is that Chicagoans do little to save stores like Carson's and Field's - and then lament their loss.
Kind of like complaining about political corruption, then not voting. It's quite frustrating.
Amazing that the love affair that Chicagoans have is for a department store that was based in Minneapolis for many, many years!
I guess I just don't understand the perceived connection between a department store and the future of Chicago icons. Marshall Fields also use to own the Merchandise Mart. Was there a boycott when they sold it to the Kennedy family? The Union Stockyards were certainly as - if not more - important to the history of the city as Marshall Fields, yet no one bemoans their loss anymore (other than the most grizzled of old-folk). Eventually, Studs Terkel will die. Seems to me that everything, even community icons, changes over time. Did shoppers really believe Fields would be there forever? If not, what would have been an acceptable replacement?
The clocks are still there. They still decorate the windows at Christmas. Why does the name on the awning inspire such passion?
Amazing that the love affair that Chicagoans have is for a department store that was based in Minneapolis for many, many years!
Again...you just don't get it (nor do I expect you to). It has long ceased to matter where it was based or who owned it. It originated with Marshall Field, the man, here in Chicago...before the Chicago Fire, before the Columbian Exposition of 1893, before the Civil War even. We may have lent the brand to other cities and states, but make no mistake, it has always belonged to us. And if some of us seem a little overzealous over the whole issue, then I would chalk that up to the fact there are but only a few other cities in the U.S. whose residents are so passionate about its history. It was visionaries like Potter Palmer, Harrison Carter, Daniel Burnham and yes, Marshall Field, who saw great possibilities in a frozen marsh that allegedly reeked of wild onions and laid the foundation for the world-class city that Chicago is today...
To be honest, I'd get upset if Superdawg were bought out by some super-mega-ultra hot dog conglomerate.
But then again, the hot dogs at Superdawg are one-of-a-kind.
1. I too have been fascinated by Macy's use of the giant red star as its logo. Every time I pass one of them I think that the Red Army has taken it over & I wouldn't be surprised to see a T-34 tank as the centerpiece of a display.
That logo just makes no sense, does anyone know what year Macy's first used it?
2. Macy's is a massive step lower in quality & image from Field's. That's their biggest problem, compounded by Macy's dumping many of Field's brand name merchandise for Macy's private label goods. Much higher profits on private labels over name brands. I think that Lundgren thought that the good will from "Miracle On 34th Street" would somehow transfer to the name change.
3. The Field family hasn't had any ownership in Marshall Field's for decades.
4. One of the reasons that Field's was so iconic to Chicago is that the Field family & its executives funded the Field Museum, Shedd Aquarium [John Shedd was Field's president] and was a major donor to the Art Institute.
Coincidently, Julius Rosenwald founded the Museum of Science & Industry and his VP, Felix Adler funded the Adler Planetarium.
So most of Chicago's museums were the results of two retail empires.
5. Watch for the sales figures this Xmas season. If they're bad at the former Field's, watch for Terry Lundgren to get dumped as the Federated/Macy's boss & for at least the Chicago area stores get the Field's name back.
Every expert in retail branding has been amazed at this renaming. Not only did it cost tens of millions of $$$, but it's been a failure.
6. The only thing they're getting out of renaming Federated to Macy's is the letter "M" as their stock symbol. "M" had been held back by the NYSE for years in the hope that Microsoft would move its stock to the NYSE, but obviously that's not happening. A few years ago Martha Stewart was really pissed off that she couldn't get the "M" for her company, she had to settle for MSO!
I love it when a bunch of hipster Iowans tell Chicagoans what they should and should not hold dear about their city.
If you grew up here, going to Field's meant something special - and not just because it was large or located downtown. To see it replaced with a New York name is particularly depressing.
"Is the Sears Tower less iconic because Sears is no longer headquartered there?"
It would be if they changed the name to the Wal-Mart Tower.
If growing up here and going to a department store ment something special you had a pretty sad childhood. I guess you didn't get to vacation much or go to museums.
I guess you didn't get to vacation much or go to museums.
You mean the same museums that the Fields family funded and/or founded?
You are becoming increasingly irrelevant on this site. Go back to whatever crummy little town whence you shook the dust off your feet, where people might actually give a damn about what you have to say.
So is this really just about the name? Even if the Macy's brand gets dumped in the next few years, Fields' products aren't coming back - from what I can find, no one bought them anymore either. In two years, if it's the same store under the Fields' name, is that deemed "improvement"?
To Nut Job I mean Nut Goggles:
If I am so irrelevant on this site you seem to be keeping me relevant. What do you consider a little crummy town by the way? Where are you from Winfield? Like where you are from is what matters it's where you are going that matters Nut Job.
There must be something in a name, otherwise why would Federated/Macy's bother to change it? In any case, it is about more than simply what name is affixed to the door. It's about the homogenization of America and Chicago, in particular. Federated's strategy is to grab market share and reduce advertising costs. Rather than build a store in a given metropolitan area, it's far easier to simply buy the competition. Bank of America is trying to do exactly the same thing with their pending purchase of LaSalle Bank. BoA could not compete on their own merits locally and build their business in Chicago. Instead, much like Macy's, BoA's strategy is to deep-six competing brands, thereby resulting in few choices for consumers and job cuts in the acquired entity. The great irony is that, by buying into a market in such a way, Macy's, BoA and the rest are undermining the local economies they seek to tap into.
To Nut Job I mean Nut Goggles...
LMFAO! I am sorry Ross, I did indeed underestimate you. Far be it from an ambitious career in fast food, with that razor-sharp wit, you might want to try your shtick on the comedy club circuit instead!
And lest you worry any further about your self-proclaimed relevancy, this cat is growing bored of batting around the hapless mouse.
In my experience, the people who say "Who cares?" are either from out of state or are from a suburb on the fringe of exurbia. To the rest of us, the "Who cares?" crowd's understanding is not needed. We will simply never set foot in Macy's.
Also, with over 50 comments already, this thread has WAY more comments than 90 per cent of topics on Chicagoist.com. That is just one tiny measure of the significance of Marshall Field's to Chicagoans. Macy's is learning the hard way that Chicago is different from other cities. The boycott is working!
Hey all... quit picking on Iowans. I'm a transplanted Chicagoan living in Iowa now. Believe there are a lot of people out here that are just as upset by the name change as us "Chicago" Fields fans. I'm with most of the people that want Fields back. The quality, the service, etc. Macy's just can't cut it. And yes, I realize that people will lose their jobs, etc. if things get worse, BUT did that matter when they took the Papyrus paper store out of State Street and replaced it and my Aunt lost her job as the manager of Papyrus because of Federated. Naw... no big deal right. I'm for Fields, always have been, always will be. It's one place that I ALWAYS thought would be there. Especially since my mom passed away this past Christmas - it would be great to go back there and take my children, tell them this is where Grandma used to take me to shop. That was OUR place (State St. store & Schaumburg) to visit. Some of my happiest memories. I don't think the East coast realizes how nostalgic Midwesterners can be. I mean hey... we still love the Bears. We would fight fiercely for that team. I've seen it every year when we all talk about it's gonna be this year they go to the Super Bowl.
London is famous for having individual location department stores like Harrod's with GREAT success.
What a shame we could not follow that here in the U.S.
You mark my words....that bitch's next words will be they are closing the State Street store.
Terry's little flunky...
Try as I might, I will never understand the deep emotional ties people have to products and stores. Guess I am not a good capitalist.
Yes, I would have the same feeling if we were talking about "beloved" stores in the town where I grew up.
Ah, yes back when the A&P closed in Muskego, we were all shook up. There was a small sit-in, some minor protests, we discussed it at Bingo at the Catholic church down the street. Darn that Roundy's Foods for coming in with their crazy Pick 'n Save Warehouse Foods. That was the decline of a great city, I tell you. After Pick n Save moved in, Hardees closed. Valu Village shut down. The Dairy Queen became a frickin; Arbys! The First Wisconsin got bought by some big Chicago bank. You know, the big city types coming in with their nice suits and gelled hair.
It's a store, people. Get over it. Really. If you got as angry about poverty and homelessness and violence as you do about branding and nostalgia and name changes, this city would be a safer and nicer place.
Amen Sparky!
If you got as angry about poverty and homelessness and violence as you do about branding and nostalgia and name changes, this city would be a safer and nicer place.
Homelessness, and quite often violence, are the direct results of poverty. Poverty is an essential component of capitalism--you can't have one without the other. Since I don't see this country doing an about-face anytime soon, what does one do?
You pick the battles you can win, which is better than nothing at all...
to Am I Wrong:
Are you saying you are going to win against Macy's? If so what are you going to win? Macy's will pull out of State Street before they will ever call it Fields again. I am wondering why weren't so many people up in arms when Target owned Fields and Hudsons and re badged all the Hundson's Fields? The Fields chain was losing under Target and has continued to lose ground with the other two owners since. So it doesn't surprise me they aren't doing that well. I think it's more about where the Fields stores are located than the names.
Am I wrong:
Since the country doesn't seem to be doing an about-face about funding cancer research, or HIV research, or fundamental science research, what are we to do?
Since the city isn't doing an about-face in reducing corruption in the local government, what are we to do?
Since fighting poverty is a "losing" battle, what should we do?
Let's bitch and moan about a store that you may shop at, what--once a week, once a month, a few times a year?
If that is the case, this world is fucked.
If that is the case, this world is fucked.
Unfortunately, I would be inclined to agree with that sentiment. Greed rules the day. One only need to read the daily newspaper or listen to the 10 o'clock news to see that much.
There are two types of people in Illinois
Those that don’t care about Fields/Macy’s are from the city because they have more important and interesting things to occupy their time.
The people “who care”i.e protesting a ridiculous store are from the burbs because they’re
easily brainwashed and easily influenced by big corporations and care about stupid materialistic stuff like that. That’s part of the reason that they live in the burbs.
People who care are also from Iowa because they want to seem like they are from Chicago, but lack the sophistication to understand that it’s not urbane to spend time protesting the sale of corporate stores.
You can also tell that protesters are from the burbs and Iowa because of the way they dress. LOOK AT THOSE PICTURES! Where was the Chicago Police! Why weren’t Art Institute students out in force pelting those suburbanites with eggs!
Sparky, you don't seem to realize that during the time you have written your multiple posts about why Field's supporters should be working on more important things, YOU could have been working on other things.
Oh, the irony.
On top of that, from what I have seen first-hand of pro-Field's activists, these people are busy with volunteer work for various causes. When you think about it, people who volunteer for one thing are often the same people will volunteer for something else.
I shopped at Macy's today on State. If it's called Simpsons next month I will still shop there if it is convenient. They pretty much carry the same shit every where anyway.
Mike, though your idea of irony is rather weak, I agree with your point about the activists involved with other causes.
One gentleman was involved with a civil disobience campaign whose goal was to reopen at least one of the area's old typewriter factories.
A charming young lady had kicked off a (paper) letter writing campaign in support of horseless carriages.
Still others were pissed off about the decline from the marketplace of Jordache jeans, while a handful of angry old men were lobbying McDonald's to make the McRib a daily menu offering.
Finally, one old hippie, who still seemed stoned, could not get over the fact that Jefferson Airplane had morphed (badly) into Starship. I tried to tell him that, as far as I knew, Starship was no more, either, but I found it hard to look into his sad eyes.
I love the analysis of where the Field's supporters live and/or are from.
It's obviously written by some very, very hip. The problem is that the guess is 100 per cent wrong. The main people behind the pro-Field's campaign were all born and raised within the city. Same goes for a majority of the protesters. How do I know? Because I know them personally.
The crabbing about the dress of the lady in yellow carries a cooler-than-thou attitude of the insecure hipster. Meanwhile, she is in no contest to feel hip. She is out there doing something. And you know what? She is succeeding at what she is doing. Macy's sales are in the toilet. She is winning, big yellow pants and all.
Ah, Mike. You are correct. But, I guess I could have been doing something different. But see, all. I am waiting for my serum samples of prostate cancer patients to spin down so I can aliquot them and run various tests on them to see if their disease has come back or if the things we have given them have slowed the progression of their disease. I am taking a brief break.
On my lunch break, I also sent an e-mail to Blago requesting more money for the RTA. Was that time well spent?
Tonight, after my full day at work, I will be volunteering my time at the homeless organization I work for. Until midnight.
Is that okay with you?
There are things worth fighting for. Working hard for. I just do not understand why people are fighting so hard over a store.
What have you been up to, Mike, besides making yourself look like a real asshole?
"Fields has been floundering for years, getting upset about a name change seems pretty ridiculous"
That doesn't jive with the facts. Macy's replaced all the upscale merchandise like Armani with Alfani. Their sales were up. They weren't up like at Target but State St. Field's was doing very well. Field's had merchandise for everyone. This is what is missing. Macy's is a downmarket store with no vision other than they know better than their customers.
If you cannot tell the difference, perhaps you should read RedEYE and post somewhere else.
The Merchandise Mart's ownership has nothing to do with Field's It's a wholesale outlet.
Chicago needs strong institutions to keep it relevant. If it loses them, then we are in trouble. We need vision. We need to look forward and to a higher standard. That's not Macy's. Macy's is a disaster about to unfold. Wait until they announce they're closing 80 or 90 stores this summer.
Great thinking, Mike, about the geography angle.
I don't know either way where these people are from, but here is what I do know: The hick town downstate where I came from lost a lot of "brands" when I was growing up, yet people weren't so nostalgic to protest endlessly for the return of the retail brands. I mean, they had better things to worry about.
What I don't understand about native Chicagoans--well, one of the many things--is the never-say-die nostalgia over this and other retail memories. I guess that is city sophistication or something?
Good for the protesters, though. They love their city so much they apparently would rather see an empty store than a profitable business on State. Sounds logical to me.
Wm:
People that buy high end are not going to be shopping at a Department store. If they want Armani they will go the Armani store.
I wish I could show Federated CEO Terry Lundgren all my receipts for things I used to buy at Marshall Field's, but now buy at Nordstrom. He will go down in history as one of the biggest fools in retailing history.
Once again, Vise considers his personal experiences the equal of universal truths. If you can't understand why people don't want to be homogenized by one corporate entity, read Ursula LeGuin's The Lathe of Heaven.
The inability of people in this thread to understand the idea of multitasking (as in fighting for several causes ALL AT THE SAME TIME!) and to stereotype people as fossils from the burbs who want to stop corporate take-over of everything leads me to believe that y'all had substandard schooling and just make up the world as you go along.
I walked through Macy's on State Street today. In case you haven't seen it, they are asking anyone who happens to be in the store to fill out an electronic survey. If you do, you get a free box of Frangos. The survey takes about ten minutes and starts with the question "Are you shopping at the State Street location more or less since the name change?; If less, why?, etc. I've had the impression for some time now that sales are hurting big time and they seem to be making at least a superficial effort to learn why.
In addition, I've noticed that they've toned down the somewhat tacky red in the store and the urban/dance/R&B music on the store-wide loudspeaker (prevalent after the name change) seems to have been replaced with more sedate jazz/standards music, etc. Finally, it seems as if they are trying to place some of the emphasis back on higher-end brands rather than their own made-up "exclusive" stuff.
Will this all be enough to salvage "Macy's on State Street"? IMO, probably not. The store was mostly empty at 11:30 am. My sense was that those in the store were passing through, like me; those intending to purchase a certain item, etc. I've been through several times now since the rebranding and the tourist crowd seems to have stayed away, which stands to reason. If you have a Macy's in Des Moines or Lafayette or Appleton, what would compel you to visit Macy's on State? I think that's what's upsetting most Chicagoans. The loss of that location as an iconic destination. If Macy's has chosen to exist alongside Marshall Field's, rather than supplant it, we would not be having this debate.
Spook... I am from Chicago. :) I have a ton of friends out here that are from Chicago. And as for stupid people that live in the burbs... maybe some of them can't afford to live in the city. It's not exactly cheap ya know.
And Mike M. - I'm with you and Jim all the way!
Macy's sucks.
sparky -
That's great that you work in a cancer-related medical field, but I believe that's called a job, and one that probably pays considerably better than what the vast majority of Chicagoans make. Positioning your career choice as anything else just makes you sound like a sanctimonious asshole. It's not like you're slumming it in Africa working pro bono...
And Sparky... some of us can manage to multi-task and be involved in other things ALONG with boycotting a store.
"People that buy high end are not going to be shopping at a Department store. If they want Armani they will go the Armani store."
Your comments are not based in fact.
Neiman Marcus, Nordstroms and Saks all offer Armani and other high-end merchadise that Field's used to offer. They are all having excellent financial results.
Field's State St. sales are off 40% because they don't carry the merchandise that people wan to buy. The boycott is frosting on the cake.
I can but the same Macy's merchandise at Marshall's or TJ Maxx for much less money.
Remember, the boycott represents a small percentage of those who feel that Macy's doesn't offer them anything.
Field's gave Chicago a great deal and people are loyal to that. BUt in the end Macy's merchandise to nothing special so people like myself now spend our money elsewhere. Shopping locally is better for the economy so if the State St. Store were to become independent, it would be good for the local economy.
It's all about what the market wants and it isn't Macy's. Field's State St was making money before they bought them. And it can again under management that has a clue.
My personal feelings are that Macy's is akin to Carson Pirie. An average department store; you wouldn't stop in to pick up a designer suit or a nice outfit. Every time I go in there, I'm more and more disappointed at the state of affairs there. The piecemeal changeover has resulted in white signs covering old Field's sings that haven't been repainted.
Field's used to fill this gap. You could pick up some really nice stuff at Field's, but since it became a Macy's, it feels about as upscale as a Kohl's.
I'm not lamenting the loss of a nameplate, because to me, the fact that the building is still there is enough of a landmark, that I can go somewhere else to find the stuff I need.
Any future owners would be ignorant to stop doing Christmas windows displays or keeping the Walnut Room classy.
However, the giant department store seems to be on its way out in America. Small to Large towns are losing their once prominent commercial centers. They don't have the magical allure they once had in exchange for cheaper goods and mass market appeal.
The change sucked, but it was inevitable. I have a feeling that with in the next 10 years we see the old Marshall Field's location turn into a sort of mall, with mixed, business and residences (like Neiman's on Michigan, and the mall attached). Block 37 will offer the same retail, business mix that is probably going to be the only way to keep the locations profitable.
Let's be happy that a landmark building is still there, it just won't contain the same magic that it once held for many Chicagoans.
My favorite thing left at Field's is Frontera Fresco on 7 and the Thomas Pink store, when those are gone, I have no need for anything else there.
Those of you involved in the "boycott" - can you explain to me the ends you hope to achieve? Is the goal a return of the Fields name, Fields products, Fields traditions, etc. - a complete and total return to Marshall Fields? Or is this about the name/branding (in other words, the store can carry the same stuff as long as it's under the Marshall Fields name)? Do you just dislike Macy's so much that you'd rather it just went away, whatever replaces it being insignificant?
What's the endgame? I'm just asking.
What's the endgame?
I think the majority of Chicagoans would be happy just to see the name and branding return to the State Street location. There was briefly talk on the table about keeping the flagship location intact as a destination store (i.e. MARSHALL FIELD'S on State Street prominently displayed on the signage, with perhaps a Macy's Store or a Federated Department Store in smaller lettering below...
Think about the $$$ potential that idea had--the last Marshall Field's store left standing in the country not to mention the only location in the entire world, in the city where it all started. But in the end, Lundgren's hubris got the better of him, as he underestimated Chicagoans. And as others have pointed out, why should tourists go out of their way to shop at Macy's in Chicago when they can shop at the one back home in Wyoming?
I just don't like the way this merger went Down. First they tell the Public "The name will NOT Change". Then May 2006, "oops we changed our minds, we WILL Change the Name to Macy's" Then they released "Everything WILL remain the same" ! Then they specified no Store Closing and No Layoffs. They DID Close Stores and Warehouses & they DID Layoff THOUSANDS and Counting.
AND "Oh by the way, we will No Longer carry the Name Brands you KNOW and LOVE at Macy's" We will re-educate you on, "How to Shop". If I DO NOT Like what this Macy's sells..WHY MUST I BUY AT THESE STORES?? I will spend my money at Von Maur,where they know how to treat a Guest.
Because of this Merger, Chicago and Macy's has suffered Tourist's Revenue. Michigan Ave has ALWAYS had shopper's carrying Marshall Field's Bags! Why don't I see that anymore ? Come to think of it, I can count on one hand how many Macy's Bags I see. What does that tell you ? People are Not Shopping there ! That's HUMAN BEHAVIOR ! As much as they TRY, Macy's can't change a Loyal Marshall Field Shopper into a BLAH Macy's Shopper ! This Boycott is not ONLY in the Windy City, it IS Coast to Coast ! 60,000 people signed the Petition "Keep it Field's" and they filed it in the Garbage Can. Macy's has INSULTED the American Public. Macy's has devastated Family's and devastated Company's throughout the USA. Why ?? So that Mr Lungren can put MONEY in his pocket ! When a CEO makes 1.2 million a year, then get a 15% raise, with Stock options, to pay his taxes, use of Corp. Jet, and many other PERKS you never hear about.
Its all about POWER & MONEY ! Well, he's NOT getting Mine !
Inside word is that there is absolute turmoil going on right now in Macy's North (MF) division. Linda Piephoe and Ralph Hughes are at each others throats over this disaster, but ultimately the blame lays squarely with Terry Lundgren who simply refuses to listen to reason. The man continues delude himself into believeing the name change and subsequent boycott didn't cause the problems, and that now tinkering with the product mix and even the store color palate will somehow make everything all better. Linda Piephoe, against other execs, fought hard to bring back "Field Gear" but, alas, initially planned with a bastardized red label. Sales figures for 111 State now show an approximately 75 per-cent decline in sales since the MF conversion and Macy's North senior management has been desperately battling with Macy's corporate to enact changes to halt the slide. Most MF-now-Macy's stores' sales have dropped severely, especially the "lowest grade" Tier 1 stores like Joliet and Strattford Square. Water Tower is showing stable sales. If the overall system-wide bleeding doesnt stop, the worst off stores may be shuttered. Beautiful Lake Forest will not renew Macy's lease (good riddance) and some other malls like Oak Brook may be gearing up for the same. Macy's is just bad for business at more upsacle malls. A few other "exciting changes" are also in the works. More later....
I am one of the organizers of the ongoing leafleting and series of protests of Macy's.
Marshall Field's is something very different than most every other department store. If Macy's had taken over Carson's, I think they would have had a lot less trouble. Myself and my family never worked for Field's--we worked for Sears and Kmart actually. If Sears and Kmart went away in a few years--a real possibility--there would be some sad feelings and nostalgia but I don't plan to be out there protesting.
There's several things to keep in mind about Field's explaining why it is loved and people are so passionate about it and it's loss--especially to none other than Macy's.
Yes, it's true: no one named Field has led the store in over 100 years. The Field family sold it's last stock in the store in the mid-1960s and Marshall Field V never worked at Field's but did work at Bloomingdale's while in college in the early 1960s.
But Field's is also an international icon of Chicago. Chicago may be second city in a lot of ways but even New Yorkers who know Macy's and also know Field's will tell you Macy's is no match for Marshall Field's.
Marshall Field's is more synonymous with Chicago than it is with the Field family. Although it was the Field family that started it, the store has played a key role throughout its 154 year existence as defining Chicago as an international city. The Musuem of Science & Industry, Art Institute of Chicago, University of Chicago, Shedd Aquarium, and of course the Field Museum all are institutions brought to us in part or wholly because of Marshall Field's department store. Field's played a significant role in Chicago's 1893 Columbian Exposition which catapulted Chicago from a major transportation junction to an internation city that people from around the world would come to visit.
As recently as 2005, Field's was considered to be Chicago's third most popular desitination. If you were visiting Chicago, you would have to visit Field's.
If someone wants to visit the flagship store of Macy's, they aren't going to come to Chicago--they're going to Herald Square in NYC. By removing Field's, Macy's reduces Chicago's prominence and clout in the view of the world. Chicago may not get the Cubs right; some criticize our local politics, but Field's was clearly a sterling gem that mostly got it right and in fact created many standards. Of course, Field's was the orginal modern department store and others like Macy's, Wannamakers, Harrod's and other would copy Field's.
In short, for over 150 years, Marshall Field’s defined Chicago as an international city. More than just a department store and major tourist destination, Field’s set the standards for world-class quality in service, fashion, merchandise, food and culture. The world recognizes Marshall Field’s as synonymous with Chicago at its very best.
For those not familiar, even New Yorkers will tell you the quality of merchandise and service at Macy's doesn't match Field's. As Roger Ebert noted, "There was never one day in the entire history of Macy's when anyone, in New York or anywhere else, thought it was the equal of Field's." The full article is at Ebert's web site.
But what if you are a Chicagoan who doesn't care about shopping? What if you just want to buy stuff? What if you don't even care for Field's? The loss of Field's also impacts you. Field's drew in tourism and now with people preferring to visit the NYC flagship we've lost that. Let's keep in mind there have been plenty of tax breaks to support Field's remodeling on the basis of it bringing in tourist dollars. And then there is jobs. Sure, Macy's is probably going to bring back production of the Frangos sold in the Chicago area to our city; but almost in the same breath they also announced the City of Chicago will lose jobs with the closure of the Diversey & Pulaski warehouse--about 300 by estimates. When Frango production was at 111 N State, about 100 jobs were lost. This means a net loss in jobs really. (A while back I posted here about how Frangos will only be successful in the Chicago market when tied to Field's.) Beyond that, when I would make internet purchases from fields.com they would come from the Chicago warehouse. Now Macy's is talking about how internet orders will be filled from a new warehouse they are planning for Arizona. If Macy's is so committed to Chicago then why not build the new internet orders warehouse here?
For those of you who say there are more important issues in the world, I will agree in a certain way: yes, no one will die because of this change. Yet it is a huge loss to our local community spirit and our international rep. For those of you who say it is a waste of time to protest, I have to ask: do you watch professional sports games? By such standards why isn't it a waste of time to root for the White Sox, the Bears, the Bulls, the Cubs? (Save your jokes about the Cubs--I've heard them before when I've mentioned them in this context.) What's wrong with rooting for the department store equivalent of rooting for a Chicago sports team? And Field's has a way more winning record in the eyes of the world.
We citizens who are active at FieldsFansChicago.org will continue our grassroots efforts to bring back Marshall Field's in all its glory. It's also good to keep in mind that in corporate America, anything can happen. Imperial CEOs, as at Home Depot, can be dethroned. Great brands, like the Ford Taurus, can be resurrected. The Daimler-Chrysler marriage is being undone. In three years, AT&T Wireless became Cingular and now Cingular has become AT&T Wireless. And CEOs can admit they've lost touch with giving their customers the experience they really want, as the CEO of Starbuck's recently did. With the widespread perception that Marshall Field's loss is a huge corporate blunder, we look unflinchingly to the future and keep emphasizing that although Field's is gone for now, it can indeed come back--just as Coke did when consumers rejected New Coke. It is only a matter of time until those visionary business and civic leaders with the needed clout come forward to do what needs to be done in support of our city which is quite great. And Field's contributed significantly and uniquely to making our city great.
I'm a big dumb idiot who likes to call everyone suburbanites like its a dirty word.
I like to throw feces like a monkey in a cage
@hoops:
I don't like "change"! New things scare me! Cameras capture my soul! Ford Taurus is the greatest car ever! Fire bad! Hulk Smash!
I always suspected thunder was a neanderthal. Proof positive - he speaks the language.
@ Lody: I was speaking about my job--only in the context of Mike M's question (he started it, so to speak). You are right--I probably make more than many Chicagoans, but you may be surprised how little academia pays. Those grants under the Bush administration have become less generous over the past few years. And since you bring it up, I've never been to Africa, but I did "slum" it once in Ecuador, pro bono, in case you were wondering. I would like to slum it once in Africa, but I have a ton of student loans to pay off still. But I do hope to get there someday.
I don't care if people don't shop there. There are places that I do not shop at because I don't like their business. Maybe I just don't get it because I have lived in Chicago for a quarter of my life now and I can honestly admit that I have only shopped at Marshall Field's twice, and purchased something there once. I have yest to set foot in Macy's.
The sports anology is apt. But I don't really seriously get behind any sports teams, either, with the exception of taking in an occassional baseball game (more to hang out with people than to support any team) and maybe watching a football game on TV. I have never understood how people can get so worked up about sports either.
So maybe, I guess I just don't get any of it.
Re: "In short, for over 150 years, Marshall Field’s defined Chicago as an international city. More than just a department store and major tourist destination, Field’s set the standards for world-class quality in service, fashion, merchandise, food and culture. The world recognizes Marshall Field’s as synonymous with Chicago at its very best."
If Field's really does define Chicago, then this city is in worse shape than I thought.
Based on my reading in history, other things such as architecture, literature and industrial commerce did more to define Chicago as an international city.
Sorry, but you've done nothing to change my view that the Field's Brigade are fighting an idiotic fight.
Want to keep alive the old-time spirit of Chicago? Fight the ongoing effort by the Daley administration to shut down corner taverns, or fight to keep neighborhoods affordable for working and middle classes. Maybe you are doing so, but I don't see you giving those causes as much attention.
And as we know, Vise can only believe what he personally experiences.
Field's is as worthy of saving as corner taverns. Why is it that the "proletarian" causes are the only ones you care about, Vise?
I will admit I am at Macy's regular on State and I have noticed it a lot quieter than last year.
I also noticed the store is pretty run down. The floors the walls paint on paint. In the elevator there are no directory telling you what is on what floor. Kind of a dump but then so was Fields at State Street.
Ross - It has been under control of Federated since well before the name change, so Federated is still responsible for what you perceive to have been a dump under the Field's name.
You Field's Fans and visionaries better never drink Pepsi either. Or buy Energizer batteries. Or Aramark concession stands. Or shop at Kroger, or buy certain other brands. The Board of Directors at Federated are all connected to those brands, too. If you're going to boycott one company, you should boycott them all. Really stop that evil Federated organization.
No sweat.
Ferdy, you said to Vise: "If you can't understand why people don't want to be homogenized by one corporate entity, read Ursula LeGuin's The Lathe of Heaven."
If you dig deeper, you realize that the reality of the situation is that few people own and/or run (through boards) a large majority of companies. I don't want to be homogenized, either, but how do you resolve the conflict that Marshall Field's was owned by Target company then, a large corporate entity? You shopped there, then, correct? How is that different?
It's not proletarian causes, Ferdy, only causes that actually mean something more to Chicago.
Seriously, folks, this is a fucking retail brand. This is the crap that sends sparks through your souls? Pathetic--there really is no other word for it. Same type of idiots who went into a panic when Coke changed its formula. Are you really such giddy consumerists, so addicted to brand or product? What weakness.
I understand the connection Fields has to the history of Chicago, but there are more important battles to fight--building perservation, for instance, or neighborhood stability. And no, I don't buy the argument that people who waste hours of time and energy on Fields are spending the same amount of time on these other things. Yeah, yeah, this is so harsh and judgmental of me, and we are not supposed to judge our fellow citizens in our hyper-tolerant society these days, but what the hell.
You guys ever hear of perspective, of picking your battles? And, do you really think you have a chance of winning, or of bringing back the old retail brand? Even if you did, so what? How would that improve Chicago in any significant way? Yes, it would likely boost your egos, but how would this improve the city as a whole?
Why not give two more shits about the disappearing mom-and-pops that also define this city instead of a corporation that apparently did not have enough support from customers to continue? You liked the candy and you liked the Xmas displays? Poor you. Life is just so unfair sometimes when it comes to our precious childhood memories. Instead of moving on, you linger in cheap nostalgia, and protest one retail brand in favor of another retail brand as though your personal or civic identities really have anything to do with the sign over the store window. And let's be honest: This is a battle about the selfish needs of identity, not Chicago's greater economic health.
By the way, Ferdster, you offered nothing that shows Field's really is as important to Chicago's international reputation as the above post tried to claim. I call bullshit. Perhaps you have evidence, though, or deeper travel experience than I. People I've met in the USA and elsewhere know Chicago for Al Capone, architecture, cold winters, hot dogs and other greasy foods,(decreasingly) Jordan and (increasingly) rock/pop music, as well, with some people, literature, both current and not. Field's never enters the conversation, and I suspect it hasn't for a good 30-40 years. I don't doubt tourists went to Field's--I've taken out-of-town visitors there--just that the brand was that vital to the city's image in the latter half of the 20th century.
Vise - I didn't say the comment about the international reputation. Frankly, I think the racing after world recognition is unseemly and unnecessary and has caused certain people in a big building between Washington and Randolph to make some really stupid, costly decisions.
What Field's means to Chicago is identity. It didn't matter that Dayton-Hudson, May Co., owned Field's because they never tried to change the store. The durable traditions of Chicagoans could remain intact. Everything was not about the bottomline, as it is with Lundgren and his raiders.
Ways of life pass, I know, but this part of Chicago life does not have to. You say it's not important, but then you say that local taverns are more worth saving. You acknowledge the need for texture, community, shared experience that can pass from one generation to another. How will we get smarter, better, more humane if everything is open to be wrecked by the highest bidder or in the name of progress?
Fields may seem like just a store, but as I've said numerous times before, merchants, too, are a part of our heritage and important players in history. Field's, in particular, has contributed a lot to charities and the humanities in this city. We're grateful, and we're proud of them. That really shouldn't be so hard to understand. Get over your prejudices and contrarian attitude about this. You've got this one wrong.
Actually Marshal Filed commissioned CHicago's first internationally significant building: the Marshall Field Warehouse in 1886. It was designed by HH RIchardson and is considered by many to be the beginning of the Chicago School of Architecture. It stood at the intersection of Wells and Adams.
Richard Rogers, the English architect, mentions the north quadrant of the Field's building (with the 12 story light court) as one of the most significant American buildings.
Great architecture and even creative research do not exist in a vaccum. And that's why having strong, forward-looking, local visionaries is essential to the City of Chicago's future. What if teh cancer research someone is doing is moved to Califonia based upon quality of life issues. We want to make Chicago an attractive place for investment and development. An independent, successful State St Marshall Field's is part of that strategy.
Wm:
I agree with you that great architecture does not exist in a vacuum. The architecture of the Marshall Fields building on State Street still exists. It has been preserved as a landmark.
I guess I still do not understand how one department store (the inside of the great architectural landmark) will impact the quality of life for residents in Chicago. An improved public transportation system, affordable housing, better schools, and improved healthcare will absolutely keep people here. Isn't that a better strategy?
But how many Chicagoans have left our "world-class" city because one department store left and became another?
I just went shopping at Macy's. Macy's rocks.
This is a clown arena. Adios.
1- Via Con Dios, Ferdy. Don't let the door hit yer ass on the way out.
2- And 101 posts? On this topic? Really? Jesus, it's a fucking store! I can see this for the Olympics, or Oprah or something, but it's a freaking place to buy underwear and overpriced perfume.
For all if you that think us Field's fans are crazy and wasting our time, why are you wasting your precious time reading this site???? Go out there and do something to about the war and "more important things"! Field's was an important icon, and may of us spent our money there! If you don't care about where you spend your money, then that is your problem. Field's was unique, and the fact that their sales are in the toliet shows that the majority of consumers in the midwest were also infuriated!
Field's was unique
Maybe in 1856 or the through the 1970's but it really wasn't that unique in later years.
There are apparantly two camps here.
Camp 1/ Let's save/bring back Marshall Fields
Camp 2/ Who cares, it is just a store.
Can't we all just get along?
Can't the pro-Field's people campaign for something that, for whatever reason, means something to them?
And anti-Fields people, well, while I don't understand you, my feelings towards Fields and Macy's really has no effect on you. You feel Fields has no effect on you.
If you don't have a strong opinion either way on this issue, it isn't going to change because of something you read on Chicagoist.
"An improved public transportation system, affordable housing, better schools, and improved healthcare will absolutely keep people here. Isn't that a better strategy?"
These things happen will a tax base. Compare Skokie to Evanston. Skokie is awash in tax dollars collected from consumer spending from the whole North Shore. Property taxes are low. Evanston doesn't have a retail base and struggles. Property taxes in Evanston are very high.
Marshall Field's can be an attraction that brings in money from all over the world. That's several million dollars a year that otherwise wouldn't be spent in Chicago. It also encorages more tourism. In the new century, local culture is the key to tourism and sustainability. Field's is a great opportunity waiting to happen. More money spent downtown=lower property taxes.
@Wm:
Marshall Field's a worldwide tourist attraction? Really? I work at a major tourist attraction and I can assure you, Chicago is not lacking in having tourist destinations, and most of the people I run across are WAY more interested in Michigan Ave. for shopping than anything in the Loop. ONE store, no matter how large, can possibly rival the critical mass of the commercial zones along Michigan Ave., Clark, and hell, even Milwaukee Ave. Macy's is essentially a mediocre Target with a fancy facade now.
Everything that was supposedly "great" about it has long since passed. The quality of products has declined (I blame China), the level of service has declined (cost cutting), and the "Field's Mythos" (which is probably why everyone is so passionate about this in the first place) has faded beyond repair to all but the most fervent.
Change happens. Sometimes it sucks (architectural gems get bought and destroyed) and sometimes it's awesome (new buildings like "The Spire" or Millennium Park pop up), sometimes you just have to roll with it.
And to the Chicagoist folk in general, what's the record for comments at Chicagoist? What about in the Gothamist family of blogs in general?
Your vague comments about blaming China, etc.. are irrelevant.
I don't think Chicago will lightly kiss off a $250 million revenue generator and an employer of 1000 people between the store and the warehouse. The Field's thing worked before Comrade Lungren and his red star cast a shadow over it and it can work again. The City needs every unique attraction that it has and this one generates millions in sales tax revenue to boot.
A great local store will do the City tremendous good! You should read the studies done about economic advantages of local stores versus national chains. Good local merchants foster the local economy in ways that Macy's cannot. So a local store with its dense vertical selling floors are a unique Chicago advantage that speak volumes about what Chicago is about.
Your vague comments about blaming China, etc.. are irrelevant.
I don't think Chicago will lightly kiss off a $250 million revenue generator and an employer of 1000 people between the store and the warehouse. The Field's thing worked before Comrade Lungren and his red star cast a shadow over it and it can work again. The City needs every unique attraction that it has and this one generates millions in sales tax revenue to boot.
A great local store will do the City tremendous good! You should read the studies done about economic advantages of local stores versus national chains. Good local merchants foster the local economy in ways that Macy's cannot. So a local store with its dense vertical selling floors are a unique Chicago advantage that speak volumes about what Chicago is about.
Wm, your comments about Skokie's taxes are 8.1% may be misleading. Yes, there is less consumer spending in Evanston which may contribute to higher taxes. I am not a tax expert, but perhaps the reason Evanston's property tax is so high is because it is closer to the lake. And many of the north shore cities have higher property taxes. They also have NWU, which pays no taxes but has a lot of property, so they may need to compensate. Also, Evanston's mean home cost is $492,400, while Skokie's is $272,000.
And, Marshall Field's hasn't been a local independent store or a unique attraction in a long time. It was a chain store. There used to be a whole bunch of them in Milwaukee with the Field's name. Same sort of layout. Grand Avenue's Fields comes to mind.
And, if the Fields thing worked so well like a lot of you are saying it does, why the hell was it sold? Maybe because the Field's name was losing a lot of money? Check out old issues of Crain's to look for yourself.
What I don't understand with the people upset about the Fields change is that retailing is changing with the internet. People from Peoria no longer need to drive to Chicago to buy merchandise at any of our stores it is all available on line. So why would drive a few hours when you can just make few clicks and have UPS deliver it. What is the reason to go to the store? Socks are socks, Polo is polo if you have bought the stuff before and you know your size you have no need to step foot in the store. I shop online more and more all the time. I find it’s really nice to shop online and not have to cart shopping bags around with me and the UPS guy comes right to my door.
Fields was innovative when it was founded and through the years but retailing has changed so much with the internet. Field’s or Macy’s don’t need window shoppers they need people with money that are looking to shop and I mean really shop. For the store on State to be profitable it needs a pretty high average sale in the hundreds to be viable and profitable. The department store business model has changed so much in the last 10 years. You see consolidation in all mature industries that are trying to be a viable business model in the age of the internet.
Hoops, may I ask which protester were you? In the pink or yellow pants suit?
OMG Fields is as worth as saving as the corner taverns!!!!!
Ferdy, what are you an old church lady?
Finally hey Gail
Why are you wishing you could show Macy’s CEO Terry Ludgen all your receipts for things you use to by at Fields but now buy at Nordstorms???? I’m sure he'd be willing to set aside a few hours for some one of your caliber.
But in between time, would you be my Sugar Momma? I’m young and in shape
and although my scooter doesn’t do high ways, I could take Metra, or you could just send a car for me!
I'll tell my rabbi that!
Goodbye Marshall Fields - I shopped there when I lived in Chicago lovely store. While having a coffee & changing the battery on my video camera I noticed a woman caressing her own leg in the restaurant- I still have this footage/legage
As for Donald Trump why has that man got no friends? If he did surely they would mark his card & connect him with a good hair/hat/cranial miracle worker.
Macy's is a dump.
The boycott is working.
State Street, Northbrook, Old Orchard, Oak Brook, etc. will close in the next couple of years.
In case anyone is intrested in some easly verified facts... Field's was NOT failing prior to Macy's takeover. Field's average sales per store were higher than Macy's, Bloomingdales and any other May Company brand. Perhaps that's why Field's value grew for each of these owners.
Furthermore, under various ownership, BATUS, Dayton Hudson / Target and even under the May Company (for less than one year) Field's ALWAYS posted profits. Sales declined post 9/11 as they did for Field's competitors, but even in its worst year Field's posted more than $100 Million in profits and sales were trending UP for the entire year prior to Macy's takeoever.
The sales growth would likely continue now for Field's as it has with double digit growth enjoyed by Field's competitors Saks, Neiman Marcus and Nordstrom. Field's often led the category in regional sales growth. Unfortunately, with Macy's changes sales at former Field's locations have taken a nose dive and we all pay the price for Macy's misguided and arrogant takeover expansion strategy. Consumers have fewer choices for high-end goods, generations of Field's customers lost a cherished Chicago tradition, Chicago lost a valuable, iconic and unique brand that helped to build Chicago and promote the city to the world.
What did Macy's get out of all this? Macy's eliminated competition and acquired prominent real estate. Such a shame they didn't simply build their OWN stores like Target, Kohls and most every other national chain the country!
Prior to the takeover, the Field's State Street store attracted more than 9 Million customers each year and was Chicago's third most popular tourist destination. Now as Macy's sales are down by as much as 40% and the State Street store is an embarassment and a constant reminder of Chicago's own landmark Marshall Field's and the traditions that were commandeered by Macy's.
People, get a grip! Just remember, for every ACTION, there is an equal and opposite REACTION! You do realize that human beings, with children, mortgages, etc., are being LAID OFF because of the lack of business. Now I understand fully that the quality of merchandise changed, I'll give you that. But what about the Walnut Room, that has been around for 100 years, and has NOT changed? Some of the workers there have been let go, ladies who have been there for YEARS!!! These people have families who will now suffer because of this. It's just very selfish to think that because the name changed, albeit badly, that everything changed. I'm not fond of Macy's either, but as everyone knows, and has mentioned, Marshall Fields' hasn't been Marshall Field's for quite some time now. If you want to protest with Macy's, demand that they change the merchandise, of course. But being mean spirited just for the sake of it, is just down right mean. I hope you realize this when the unemployment rates for Illinois are at a high.
Oh, and if Macy's closes, do you think Mr. Fields will rise out of his grave and re-open the store? Ummm, let's see, NO!
Broken hearted people everywhere are saddened by MACY'S DESTRUCTION OF MARSHALL FIELD'S ! Read the papers folks,things are happening at the stores that have been hijacked by those Macy's people. Fruit fly infestations, designer brands being kicked to the curb, these things NEVER WOULD HAVE HAPPENED UNDER MARSHALL FIELD'S !
MARSHALL FIELD'S NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT BACK IN QUALITY,STYLE AND MOST OF ALL SERVICE AND CLEANLINESS ! THE TIME IS NOW ! BRING BACK MARSHALL FIELD'S !
The Macy's management has confused 'brand' with 'business,' and given Chicagoans a lot of empty marketing instead of addressing the real, experiential requirements of department store retailing. They're not dumb, though, so I can only guess that they have a strategy other than that of making Field's a success: if they 'follow the book' on branding nonsense, perhaps they can make the case to a potential buyer of the business that they've done what they were 'supposed to do.' The July 19 buyout bid from KKR substantiates this theory. I've written a bit more about the sad state of affairs on my blog, Dim Bulb, if you'd like to check it out: http://dimbulb.typepad.com