Connect with us

News

Target loses cachet with shoppers as inflation and competition bite

Published

on

Target loses cachet with shoppers as inflation and competition bite

The big-box US retailer Target is struggling to return to growth a year after backlash against LGBT+ themed merchandise triggered sharp declines in sales, while arch-rival Walmart is luring more of the affluent customers that form the backbone of its business. 

Target won legions of fans starting in the 1990s with stylish in-house brands and advertising that lent its stores an aura of affordable chic. Annual revenue exploded to more than $100bn after the onset of Covid-19 as cash-rich consumers found they could buy most anything they wanted in a single place, minimising the risk of contagion. 

But sales have faltered as inflation leads shoppers to put fewer items in its iconic red plastic shopping carts. Some observers wonder if Target — affectionately called “Tarzhay” by regulars — is losing cachet. 

“They have a pandemic hangover,” said Chris Walton, a former Target executive who runs Omni Talk, a retail sector-focused media company. Target declined to make executives available for interviews.

In the past week Target announced a series of changes as it tries, in the words of chief executive Brian Cornell, to “get back to growth”. The Minneapolis-based company started a search for a new chief marketing officer less than a year after the current one, Lisa Roath, took the job (she is moving to a new role next year). 

Advertisement

Target also announced a deal to allow some third-party merchants from Shopify, the Canadian ecommerce platform, to sell products through its online marketplace. And it rolled out plans to load a generative AI chatbot on the devices carried by clerks at its nearly 2,000 US stores to improve efficiency. 

To boost sales volumes, Target is cutting prices on thousands of products from sports drinks to laundry soap this summer.

The changes come after a dismal year for Target even as several other mass merchandisers flourish. Comparable sales have declined in each of the past four quarters. Executives predict a modest improvement over the course of the fiscal year, with sales ranging between unchanged and up 2 per cent. 

The sales decline began a year ago, when in addition to the effects of inflation and higher interest rates Target dealt with a backlash — including bomb threats to stores — against LGBT+ oriented merchandise prominently displayed to celebrate Pride month in 2023. Complaints centred on items for children and “tuck-friendly” women’s-style adult swimsuits with extra room for a wearer’s penis.

Comparable sales in the second quarter of 2023 shrank by 5.4 per cent, the most since the global financial crisis, in part due to what an executive called a “strong reaction to this year’s Pride assortment”.

Advertisement

The controversy illustrated how consumer brands endorsing social issues have become enmeshed in American culture wars. On Thursday, Tractor Supply, a farm and garden retailer, eliminated diversity and inclusion goals and said it would stop sponsoring Pride festivals after pressure from rightwing critics began to drive down its share price.

Pride merchandise  at a Target store
Target received negative feedback around its Pride collection © Seth Wenig/AP

Target this year said it would sell Pride month merchandise online and in some, but not all, stores. One store visited by the Financial Times this week contained no signs of it, while another featured a Pride kiosk in the middle of the store with rainbow-adorned dresses, shirts and totes and packs of multicoloured “LED Pride string lights”.

The amount of negative feedback around the Pride collection, both internally and externally, has been significantly lower this year than in 2023, a company representative said.

Steven Shemesh, a retail analyst at RBC Capital Markets, said the financial impact of the Pride controversy was temporary, making the continued softness in sales a sign of deeper issues.

Target was particularly vulnerable to the inflation surge because of its heavy dependence of discretionary items such as linens, home decor and toys, which consumers spent less on as they stretched their dollars on staples. Groceries accounted for 23 per cent of its sales last year compared with 60 per cent for Walmart. “Whenever there’s a macro slowdown, they’re more exposed,” Shemesh said. 

This exposure has been reflected in Target’s share price: up 2 per cent in the past two years, while the S&P 500 index has rallied by 43 per cent and Walmart by 66 per cent.

Advertisement

Cornell’s plan to restore growth includes adding more than 300 stores to increase annual sales by about $15bn in 10 years, while remodelling hundreds of others. New private-label brands will be launched as they “help keep our edges sharp on the newness, discovery and affordability consumers crave in the market and find at Target”, he told an investor event earlier this year. The company aims to return to the 6 per cent operating profit margins it routinely surpassed before the pandemic.

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Survey data from Numerator, a market research group, showed Target customers are more likely to be middle or high income, younger, female and urban or suburban. They include shoppers such as Stacy Irwin, a resident of an affluent suburban New Jersey town who this week dropped into a Target store to buy bedsheets. 

“If there was a Walmart nearby I’d end up there more for its prices, but the vibe here is a little bit . . . cooler,” the mother of two said. 

Walmart has been making inroads with richer consumers, however. The world’s largest retailer’s US sales have been rising, in contrast with Target’s, and it recently flagged households making more than $100,000 a year as a major source of demand. 

“My immediate reaction was, ‘That is bad: they are Target’s bullseye,’ so to speak,” said Toopan Bagchi, a former vice-president at Target who leads Starship Advisors, a retail consultancy. “It’s concerning from Target’s perspective that Walmart saw an increase in traffic from Target’s traditional stronghold of higher-income consumers, because Target’s business model relies on those consumers to buy a lot of discretionary, non-food items with higher margins.” 

Advertisement

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Target’s heavy reliance on in-house private-label brands means that its announced price cuts could cause a bigger sales hit than markdowns where outside vendors share the pain. “Historically, price wars do not benefit retailers’ margins,” said Jodi Love, a portfolio manager at T Rowe Price who holds Walmart but not Target in her funds.

Walmart, Target and other store-based retailers have poured money into ecommerce as Amazon disrupted their brick-and-mortar businesses. Amazon has a 40.4 per cent share of US retail ecommerce, far surpassing Walmart’s 7.8 per cent and Target’s 1.7 per cent, according to Emarketer.

Oliver Chen, a TD Cowen analyst, said Walmart’s ecommerce business was on a quicker path to profitability than Target’s. BNP Paribas Exane, the only broker with a sell rating on Target, argued that online market share gains from rivals including Amazon, Walmart and China-based deep discounter Temu threatened Target’s $106bn in total sales, not just online sales. 

Target has tied most of its digital growth to its store footprint, enabling online customers to pick up orders at their local outlet or receive a speedy home delivery. “So if you think store shopping will wind down anytime in the next decade, we’ll politely disagree on that point,” Cornell told analysts earlier this year.

Advertisement

News

Former Olympian pleads not guilty in reflecting pool vandalism charges

Published

on

Former Olympian pleads not guilty in reflecting pool vandalism charges

Former U.S. Olympian David Hearn (left) walks with his attorney Norman Eisen to speak to reporters and protesters gathered after his arraignment at the Superior Court of the District of Columbia in Washington, D.C. on Thursday.

Finn Gomez/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Finn Gomez/Getty Images

Former U.S. Olympic canoeist David Hearn pleaded not guilty to damaging the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in D.C. Superior Court Thursday morning.

Federal prosecutors charged Hearn with a single count of destruction of property causing more than $1,000 in damage to the pool.

Hearn has previously claimed, which his attorneys repeated during a short press conference outside the court, that he simply touched the water in the pool out of curiosity.

Advertisement

The Trump administration had just completed a $14 million renovation of the pool.

But shortly after the work finished, peeling paint and algae gathered in the water. The remodel has been largely criticized as a massive failure and waste of taxpayer dollars.

Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean released Hearn on his own recognizance. His next hearing is scheduled for Aug. 5.

Norm Eisen, one of Hearn’s attorneys, spoke to reporters outside of court following the hearing. He said the administration is using Hearn as a “scapegoat … for their own failures.”

“It is not a crime to touch the reflecting pool, to touch water in the United States of America,” he said.

Advertisement

Prosecutors say there is a host of evidence against Hearn.

This is a developing story.

Continue Reading

News

Three more people charged with damaging Reflecting Pool after Trump’s multimillion-dollar restoration | CNN Politics

Published

on

Three more people charged with damaging Reflecting Pool after Trump’s multimillion-dollar restoration | CNN Politics

Three more people have been criminally charged with destruction of property at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.

Officers say they detained Cameron Thiers, Sophie Dennison-Gibby and Justin Carreno one Saturday afternoon in June and described in court documents witnessing them peeling and removing pieces of blue paint from the Reflecting Pool.

One officer “witnessed Carreno reach down into the reflecting pool and pull up a piece of the blue paint,” according to the court documents.

The officer who detained Dennison-Gibby “found 1 additional piece of the reflecting pool liner” in her purse, the documents said.

All three incidents were recorded on the officers’ body worn cameras, they said in the court documents.

Advertisement

Several “partnering law enforcement agencies assigned to the Reflecting Pool” working with US Park Police were involved in detaining the two men and one woman — including officers from Texas, Oklahoma, Montana and California.

One of the officers said in court documents that Thiers “admitted to removing a piece of blue sealant from the Reflecting Pool and still had it in his hand when I made contact with him.”

The three defendants were arraigned in court Wednesday and pleaded not guilty to the misdemeanor charges of destruction of property with a value less than $1,000. The judge ordered them to stay away from the Reflecting Pool.

Lawyers for Thiers and Dennison-Gibby declined to comment. CNN has reached out to Carreno’s attorney.

If found guilty of destruction of property, the defendants could be fined up to $1,000 and face a maximum of 180 days behind bars.

Advertisement

The New York Times first reported that three additional people had been charged with damaging the Reflecting Pool.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed that vandals caused major damage to the pool by gashing the lining after his administration spent more than $14 million on renovations, though he has not provided evidence to support that claim. The officers who charged Carreno, Thiers and Dennison-Gibby did not accuse them of gashing the lining.

Former Olympic canoeist David Hearn was indicted by a grand jury in Washington, DC, last week for allegedly damaging the Reflecting Pool. Hearn — unlike Carreno, Thiers and Dennison-Gibby – was charged with destruction of property with a value of more than $1,000 which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, if convicted. He is set to be arraigned in court Thursday.

Crews began draining the Reflecting Pool over the weekend to make repairs, according to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, for the second time in three months.

The move comes after weeks of problems – algae blooms, green-hued water, a chipping bottom and the administration’s allegations of vandalism – that have plagued the iconic landmark, making its woes the subject of national interest.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court financial disclosures reveal how their books add to their income

Published

on

Supreme Court financial disclosures reveal how their books add to their income

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett speaks at the Reagan Library on Sept. 9, 2025, in Simi Valley, Calif. Barrett discussed and signed copies of her new book, Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution.

Mario Tama/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Mario Tama/Getty Images

Even as the Supreme Court was handing down one legal thunderbolt after another last week, the justices were quietly releasing their annual financial reports. Justice Samuel Alito was the only sitting justice to request an extension, which he has done for 15 years. The disclosures do not give a complete account of the justices’ total income and wealth, but they give insights into their concertgoing, guest professorships and even their involvement in youth sports.

In addition to their salaries, much of the justices’ reported income came from their book deals. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson led the pack earning more than $1.1 million last year for a total of roughly $4 million since her memoir, Lovely One, was published in 2024.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and retired Justice Anthony Kennedy also reported income from published books. Earnings from their books ranged from $849,000 for Barrett, to $300,000 for Gorsuch and $88,000 for Sotomayor, whose books include her 2013 autobiography and five children’s books. Justice Clarence Thomas, who previously earned $1.5 million for his 2007 memoir, listed no publisher payments last year, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, one of 13 co-authors of a 2016 legal treatise, also received no payments last year. Kavanaugh is said to be working on a memoir but he listed no payments for the anticipated book. Alito does have a book coming out in the fall, but with his financial report still outstanding, there is no data on how much he was paid for the work in 2025.

Advertisement

The only two sitting justices who have not written books are Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Elena Kagan.

Many justices also earned income from teaching at law schools. Roberts reported income from New England Law, located in Boston, and Gorsuch reported teaching income from George Mason University in Virginia. Thomas taught classes at Catholic University in Washington, D.C., and Barrett and Kavanaugh taught at Notre Dame Law School. Barrett graduated from the school and began teaching there 23 years ago; Kavanaugh has family connections to Notre Dame.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending