The average store size in the US is the smallest it's been in at least 17 years
wsj.com
wsj.com
EDIT: I'm not alone. Revenue is up more than 50%, and profit more than 60% in 5 years at $COST. [https://valustox.com/COST]
South San Francisco has a Trader Joe's right behind a Costco parking lot: https://goo.gl/maps/ZakBe7FENqr1ybRm9
Not quite as good as an Aldi, but close.
- croissants ($5.99 for 12)
- artisan burger buns
Basically, when I buy something at a regular store, I'm shocked at the recent inflation.
But at Costco, most things have barely budged at all in the past few years. And that's starting at a lower base as well - at the moment it's simply nuts how much cheaper things are there.
In fact, if you look at their financial statements, their entire profit equals their membership fee income - this means you're buying things at cost price on average. And Costco is known to be brutal to their suppliers, using their market position to force lower prices and larger pack sizes onto the manufacturers.
They don't sell everything though - there are some items you have to buy on Amazon or a regular grocery store. But almost (not entirely) every time that Costco sells something, it's the best deal you can get.
Another downside is you have to buy a LOT of what you're buying. So it only makes sense if you're planning ahead somewhat, and if you have room in your fridge/freezer/garage.
EDIT: actually the main drawback is the hugeness and remoteness of the store, and the immense number of other shoppers. But again, this plays into going every couple of weeks and buying ahead. These things are inherent in their model and I accept it. I actually spend less total time shopping now because I do all of it in 60-80 minutes every two weeks.
Another edit: none of this means that the quality is any lower. Somehow, they're delivering excellent meat, produce, and more at a fraction of the cost.
Maybe I should buy shares in this company. They barely have a profit margin though.
E.g. I needed a shredder. There were two, a smaller one and a bigger one. I got the smaller one without needing to think or comparison shop because I know it will work for me (absolutely no issues in 6 years) and it's a decent to great price.
On the very rare occasion I get a dud, they happily take returns. Last winter I returned a two year old fridge and they didn't even ask for evidence of my issue
I currently spend the same there every month as I did 5 years ago. Inflation has barely touched it except for a few items like beef and fish, which have recently come back down in price.
I don’t understand the complaint some people have that it’s hard to shop there because quantities are too large. I use everything before expiration and end up throwing away very little. For short expiration item like meat, just use your freezer.
What city has one downtown?
Not quite.
Costco's gross margin is ~12% of revenue. That means their average markup (including revenue from membership fees) is over 10%. If membership fees are about 2% of revenue, and other income (e.g. commission from the vendors near the exit), then Costco's markup is in the 8% to 9% range.
If we were buying things at cost price on average, then Costco would not have enough money to pay for rent, staff etc.
If that's the case, then you could do even better: don't shop at profitable retailers. Only shop at places with really low net income. Better still, shop at places that are so badly run that, even though they have high gross margins, waste so much money on overheads that they lose money overall.
(I'm not suggesting Costco is poorly run, or is a bad place to shop. Just trying to illustrate why focusing on total costs instead of COGS can lead to absurd conclusions.)
What does low net income have to do with anything? Profit margin tells you how much the middleman is keeping. The lower the profit margin, the lower the prices, for something as fungible as retailing consumer goods.
A business needs at least a minimal profit margin to survive a little volatility. That is why Walmart/Costco/Kroger have 2% profit margins. If anyone could deliver those goods for cheaper, they would, but they probably cannot as evidenced by competitors going out of business.
>Better still, shop at places that are so badly run that, even though they have high gross margins, waste so much money on overheads that they lose money overall.
Businesses that lose money tend to get shut down by the owners, since people generally do not like to lose money.
Please read the comment to which I was replying. My whole comment was written to explain why we shouldn't focus on net income, and instead focus on COGS. You're making the same point I was.
Below average is fine, you just want to avoid horrific.
A pint of pure vanilla extract for $9.99. Dog treats at about half the price of pet smart or online stores. Kirkland brand Flonase is about 75% less than you can get at a pharmacy. Kirkland brand Claritin is ridiculously cheap, 365 tablets for under $20.
You very rapidly get back your yearly fee.
I don’t have to decide between 20 items of same kind, say white bread. There’s usually 1 or 2 of a kind, generally of great quality. You buy it and move on.
We rely on Costco buyers to do the quality due diligence for us.
Also, even if their price is not the best for an item, I trust it’s good enough. Couple that with their return policy, most purchases become a simpler exercise.
Take Fresh Del Monte - I know they do more than just fruit, but their margins are tiny. [https://valustox.com/FDP]
Ironically the bulk store brands also tend to be higher quality. The downside is there’s less variety.
Annual inventory turns: about 12x. (1.5x as fast as Walmart.)
Their profit margin is 2.5% or less for 15+ years. Seems more accurate to use that number, which is also nearly equal their membership cost * number of memberships.
I replied to a comment that said Costco has "barely any markup".
Markup and gross profit measure exactly the same thing. If you know one, you can calculate the other.
A gross profit margin of 12% means Costco's markup is over 10%. (Or 8% to 9% if you don't count membership fees.)
This is low, but it's not nothing.
I've seen this quoted repeated but it's not a useful lens.
While Costco's annual revenue from membership fees is approximately equal to Costco's annual net profit, memberships are only valuable because of the additional services and products Costco offers, which also incur costs and contribute to their overall profits.
So it makes no sense to consider Costco memberships a product with close to 100% gross margin, which is what people normally mean when they say profits primarily come from membership fees.
For some reason brick and mortar shops can resell the product (and often reject returns if not) while e-commerce do not. I feel like Amazon pioneered this for the same reason clothes sellers do, but Amazon is so dominant it could be clouding my memory.
In any case, I think the inexorable downward pressure on pricing will make the overpurchase/free return in clothing too expensive, and it will be dropped. Amazon famously cuts off customers who return too much: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/amazon-permanently-banning-cu...
They are supposedly trying cut the returns cost: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/10/how-amazon-plans-to-fix-its-...
Apparently the term is “reverse logistics”: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/08/21/the-hidden-cos...
I bet the retailer has much lower confidence that the clothes weren't compromised in some way. They have significantly less control of the situation. There's only so much wear and tear or damage that a regular person can do to clothes during a short session in the dressing room.
I'd love to hear some stats from the inside on the condition of the clothes bought online that are returned.
On the one hand, going over the top of big box allows you to establish a direct customer relationship and keep profits.
On the other hand, it removes the quality imprimatur that being stocked in a big box confers.
Ceteris paribus, why take a risk on one of 1,000 new internet brands, when you know better what you're getting with a megabrand?
Which is probably why you see internet brands succeed best in the disposable space (e.g. fast fashion), where quality is not a differentiator.
In addition a lot of what they sell in stores is crap. To the point I would go online to find the same thing to get better quality. The caveat being caveat emptor: DYOR.
I think Walmart does a better job of it than a lot of smaller grocers. "Great Value" whatever will be pretty cheap (in terms of both cost and value), but it won't be garbage in a package.
I want to pay what the people in china is paying + cost of shipping/handling.
* Harry’s razors are now at Target and Costco
* Casper mattresses at Macy’s
* Allbirds sneakers at Nordstrom Rack
Isn't this already the case with electronic intermediaries instead of brick and mortar ones?
Buying an iPhone from Apple: direct
Buying an iPhone from Amazon/Walmart/Target/BestBuy: not direct.
As a highly specialized retailer looking for a very small space, it is incredibly difficult to find. Commercial property owners would rather keep their store fronts vacant than deal with 10 small shops instead of 1 big one.
Something needs to change.
Some retailers actually intentionally make the stores overwhelming and disorienting since they believe that it increases sales.
I worked at Walmart for one summer during my undergrad. We had to re-shelve a ton of items, moving them from one aisle to another. It made no sense to me. I asked the manager why we are doing this and he said that moving items from one location of the store to another forces customers to stay longer in the store and walk through more aisles while they search for the item that they want. They actually want to make it slightly difficult to find something since it forces people to spend more time in the store. The manager said that the data shows that the longer people are in the store, the more that they buy, so they try to make people spend as much time in the store as possible to increase the likelihood they make an "impulse purchase".
(Granted, this seems to confuse correlation with causation, since time in the store isn't directly leading to people buying more stuff. Surely people who buy a lot of items take more time to get the items, but I personally think forcing people to wander around the store is mostly going to just annoy people, myself included. That said, there is apparently a large enough percentage of people who may buy more because of this, and some retailers make that apparent tradeoff to increase sales.)
Costco being a prime example. Not sure if all of the stores are laid out the same, but the ones I've been into can generally be described as "make it through a gauntlet of novel, ever-changing stuff that attempts to lure you into impulse purchases on your way to the back of the store, where the staples you came for are located, then make your way back to the front of the store, though another orgy of consumer products, and hey, you've already said no to the fleece vest and the shrimp shu mai so you might as well treat yourself to the 3 pound jar of chocolate caramels".
or so I've read, heard or maybe made up some fiction
I personally have changed a lot in 20-30 years. Growing up, it was extreme culture shock moving not really that far in America, from no-place in particular to a suburb of a decent sized city. I have struggled to comprehend how indoor shopping malls, filled with so many goods and so much staff, make a profit. Trying to guess at how much had to be bought & consumed to keep such an inefficient system going scared me. The mall still boggles my mind, and I'm still mildly afraid of it, but these days I also kind of fear for what happens next if we do lose in-person consumerdom. It would be shocking to me to see this institution fade, for the in-person shopping experience to thin out.
If that’s true, there seems to be a large opportunity available to those who can figure out how to transform those buildings in a way cheaper than what’s currently possible.
Main issue with office space to apartment conversions is the deep floor plan that makes access to sunlight difficult. Retofitting plumbing and isolated fireproofing probably adds more complexity. In terms of malls though, it's perhaps less of a problem to turn these into low-rise residential.
But at the end of the day, it's just land waiting for re-use. I'd be happy for these spaces to become parkland and forest. Or maybe there will be something in the future that needs a lot of land but benefits being located somewhat closer to populations?
15 years ago I'd be annoyed when a store was out of my size. Now I literally don't even care -- I'll grab it online and that's one less bag to have to carry home.
Physical locations have an opportunity to discover and create new meaning for customers in person
The phenomenon that cracks me up, tho, is retail stores serving as points of return for Amazon! Kohls is so damn thirsty for foot traffic they’ll accept returns for a direct competitor!
CVS and Autozone I kind of get it. If you need a prescription or hemorrhoid cream or a car battery you’re probably not waiting on Amazon… but when literally everything in your store is also available on Amazon?
Tick tock, business model.
With reputable retailers one doesn't have to worry about getting a fake item, unlike Amazon. And if one really wants a QOWXYZ brand product, it's half the price or less on AliExpress or Temu.
Amazon seems to be in a place where they're getting harder to trust every day, but way more expensive than the dubious direct from China sellers.
LOL I’d love to be a fly on the wall during those discussions at Amazon about why the hell they are allowing those “brands” in their marketplace. I mean, does anyone actually think they are legit? But then again people must buy them and they must make money for Amazon. What a circus!
I don't know if there's a solution. Nearly every place online is inundated by advertisers trying to game the system, and they ooze further into the corners with each passing month.
Reviews can definitely vary - but your perspective is probably useful to other people seeking the kinds of reviews you do
"The average store size in the U.S. is the smallest it’s been in at least 17 years, reflecting profound changes in the way Americans now shop."
I'm also struggling to understand why this is "profound". Things change, business adapts. life goes on.
Compare with pre-Walmart US for a huge shift in size. There were some large stores before that, but they weren't as prolific as Walmart. Or as successful in closing smaller competition.