Hacker News Reader

Comment by donatj | Hacker News Reader

I feel like they would have been better off officially sanctioning the event and making a big PR stunt out of it.

As the article mention, they used to allow it but had to ban it since 2015. No details as to why except for vague PR speak of safety, my guess is they can't get insurance coverage for the events, at least not at reasonable price.

People take things too far. They'll climb on things which shouldn't be climbed on. Some dork might hide in sealed fridge. They'll go back to the warehouse section and hide where forklifts are operating. Not to mention the general destruction of the floor models.

Maybe after hours, but paying people to manage that situation after hours probabbly isn't worth the PR.

In the meantime the Ikea near me is packed as it is and they're busy selling stuff.

I don't think Ikea needs that kind of PR.

Probably cheaper than TV/mail advertising per-customer-acquisition or per-additional-dollar-o-profit.

Until someone injures themselves climbing up a storage rack, or someone hides in a refrigerator and suffocates. The liability is massive.

Refrigerators are safer now

How?

The ones that fall on people have been outcompeted by friendlier ones after the prey learned. Just evolution as usual.

They have a limit on how much force it takes to open them from the inside

Older refrigerators (50's/60's) had a locking handle

You are correct. It has long been a secret in the advertising industry that adult players of "hide and seek" games are among the most profitable and sought after demographics for purchasing of interior home furnishings. [1]

The only problem has been how to narrowly target this highly sought after group of customers. Because they are notoriously difficult to locate.

I think OP means IKEA doesn't need any advertisement. Who isn't aware of IKEA? And every IKEA I've ever been in has been so packed that I don't think encouraging more people to shop there is their primary worry.

IKEA is heavily advertised in Europe, and I suspect it has better name recognition here than in the USA.

Could just as well turn off real customers who head home when the store has turned into a playground.

"We prefer the usual no holds barred madhouse where there are no rules. I mean, in hide and seek you're not allowed to ram full speed into someone with your cart with a passive aggressive 'sorry'!"

hahahahaha best comment all night

The article points out this has been common in Europe and that Ikea originally supported the idea until it got out of hand.

Another case of “why we can’t have nice things”. In moderation things work. People start abusing liberties and they have to be taken away cuz people forget how to behave.

Hell, what is the fire-code max occupancy of an Ikea? I know it feels like there are 3000 people in line ahead of you, but I wouldn't be surprised if 3000 was well above the occupancy, not even including the actual customers.

Space wise, 3000 people should be fine for most IKEA stores, they're huge and retail occupancy is about 60 square feet per person [1]. However, ability to egress is probably the limiting factor; there might not be enough emergency exit capacity for that many people.

[1] https://up.codes/s/occupant-load see mercantile in TABLE 1004.1.2 MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA ALLOWANCES PER OCCUPANT, but note warehouse requires 500 square feet per person, which is about half the area of the IKEAs I'm familiar with.

I'm pretty sure half the reason why they do it is to inconvenience/disturb the other customers there.

A fair part of the attraction is going to be that it’s not sanctioned.

Dealing with health and safety would be a nightmare.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com