Does it really make sense for the State of Ohio to promote Columbus as a potential headquarters location when the State of Ohio has identified Cincinnati as a 'Consumer Marketing Innovation Hub'? Wouldn't there be economies of scale to be gained by locating Sears in the same city as other consumer giants like Macy's, Kroger, Procter & Gamble and all of the associated branding/marketing firms that service these industry giants?

 

I thought that was the whole point of designating industry hubs throughout Ohio (Cleveland = Healthcare; Columbus = Energy; Dayton = Aviation). Here is an interesting story on the whole topic from the Cincinnati Business Courier: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/print-edition/2011/12/09/in-sears-pitch-ohio-hubs-take.html.

 

Those designations, no matter where they are, are just marketing. Like declaring West Virginia "Open for Business" or D.C.'s business district around the White House the "Golden Triangle".

It is not the state government's job to help boost the economy of one of its cities at the expense of its other cities.  Columbus already sucks enough resources from the rest of the state in the form of being the home to behemoth Ohio State and the seat of state government.  If anything Columbus doesn't need any extra help like other cities in Ohio, particularly the northern part of the state, need.

^ Dayton and Wilmington are in just as bad of shape as any city in Nohio.

I guess my thought is that if sears says "we've looked at all the options and we are only interested in columbus for possible relocation in ohio" then why should the state say we aren't interested in bringing you to ohio. I'm not saying that ohio should or should not try to bring sears but I guess  my thought is even if a company chose to locate in findlay or portsmouth I would have no problem with it as long as it is in ohio.

 

Its not columbus's fault that sears isn't interested in cleveland. Again what major retailers are hq'ed in cleveland or northeast ohio?The limited and abercrombie being located in central ohio have nothing to do with the state government. I don't remember anyone in central ohio complaining when american greetings recently got money from the state. Also if osu is such a drain on the rest of the state then using that logic northeast ohio is even more of a drain with cleveland state, Akron, and kent state all in the area.

 

I understand this board is clevelandcentric but as a resident of columbus I probably would be annoyed if a fortune 500 company that was only interested in cincy, cleveland,toledo, dayton, whatever  had the state do nothing to make it attractive for that company to come to ohio. The mentality that the ohio cities shouldn't be working together to bring business into ohio is archaic in my opinion and detrimental to ohio's growth. Ohio's cities have differences that will allow companies  to have a good fit somewhere in our state. Apparently sears feels the best fit for them in ohio is columbus.

 

 

 

On the bright side, Columbus is probably best-positioned to handle the likely bust of the company.

I guess my thought is that if sears says "we've looked at all the options and we are only interested in columbus for possible relocation in ohio" then why should the state say we aren't interested in bringing you to ohio. I'm not saying that ohio should or should not try to bring sears but I guess  my thought is even if a company chose to locate in findlay or portsmouth I would have no problem with it as long as it is in ohio.

 

Its not columbus's fault that sears isn't interested in cleveland. Again what major retailers are hq'ed in cleveland or northeast ohio?The limited and abercrombie being located in central ohio have nothing to do with the state government. I don't remember anyone in central ohio complaining when american greetings recently got money from the state. Also if osu is such a drain on the rest of the state then using that logic northeast ohio is even more of a drain with cleveland state, Akron, and kent state all in the area.

 

I understand this board is clevelandcentric but as a resident of columbus I probably would be annoyed if a fortune 500 company that was only interested in cincy, cleveland,toledo, dayton, whatever  had the state do nothing to make it attractive for that company to come to ohio. The mentality that the ohio cities shouldn't be working together to bring business into ohio is archaic in my opinion and detrimental to ohio's growth. Ohio's cities have differences that will allow companies  to have a good fit somewhere in our state. Apparently sears feels the best fit for them in ohio is columbus.

 

ColDayMan likes it when anyone rags on Cleveland.

 

However, do you guys realize that the post preceding Buckeye's were a from a mix of posters from Cincinnati, Columbus, and Cleveland?

 

On this page the posts are from (in order) Cincy, Cincy, Col, Cincy, NYC, Cle, Cincy, Cle, Col, Col, Col, Cle, Cincy, Col, Cincy, Col.  I know we love to pretend that this board is dominated by whiny babies from Cleveland, though.

And he ragged on Cleveland where?  For Christ sakes, he said he'd be happy for anyone to have a shot.

 

The mentality that the ohio cities shouldn't be working together to bring business into ohio is archaic in my opinion and detrimental to ohio's growth

 

If that's "ragging" on a place, then I'm waiving a Terrible Towel.

Maybe you should have only quoted that part if that's the only part you liked.

 

However, most of the rest of the post was dedicated to the idea that the board is a bunch of Cleveland-centric babies whining about Sears going to Columbus.

Well, since this thread is about to get shut down, let me play the role of the random person that just starts yelling whenever two people start a fight.

 

"ooooh, no  he didn't! Watch out! What did he say about your mama??"

Not trying to rag on cleveland by any means. I really like cleveland and have relatives who live there. Maybe saying this board is clevelandcentric is not an accurate statement. That being said I  don't agree with the notion that ohio shouldn't be interested in bringing in companies from out of state if they are only interested in locating in one city in that state. Cleveland is not a charity and I feel that its insulting to the city and greatly discounts clevelands positives by even insinuating that. This is also not a case in which columbus is stealing clevelands jobs with the states help which I would be irate about. If columbus even gets sears(which is unlikely) it will have obtained sears on its own merits, not at the expense of cleveland with financial assistance from the state.

And then a big crowd gathers around and is disappointed that all there is to see is a couple Urban Ohio geeks pulling each other's hair because of an annoyingly large Like button.

Well, the two latest posts aren't exactly helping your cause.

 

You have a point.  But I think Kasich's plan is to 1) boost Cbus as Ohio's first city, and 2) make Cbus more reliably republican in the process.  Sears would bring a lot of high income transplants from the Illinois exurbs.

 

It is not the state government's job to help boost the economy of one of its cities at the expense of its other cities.  Columbus already sucks enough resources from the rest of the state in the form of being the home to behemoth Ohio State and the seat of state government.  If anything Columbus doesn't need any extra help like other cities in Ohio, particularly the northern part of the state, need.

 

And let's keep it real, if there was a forum history of Cincinnatians (or any other Ohioans) going into Columbus-centric threads and stating "opinions", I'm sure BUCKEYE54 would've pointed that out plainly.

 

But really, this:

 

ColDayMan likes it when anyone rags on Cleveland.

 

...made my day!  I don't think I even have discussed Cleveland in months and I put ONE like button on a post that I felt was accurate and sh!tstorm comes again! 

Not trying to rag on cleveland by any means. I really like cleveland and have relatives who live there. Maybe saying this board is clevelandcentric is not an accurate statement. That being said I  don't agree with the notion that ohio shouldn't be interested in bringing in companies from out of state if they are only interested in locating in one city in that state. Cleveland is not a charity and I feel that its insulting to the city and greatly discounts clevelands positives by even insinuating that. This is also not a case in which columbus is stealing clevelands jobs with the states help which I would be irate about. If columbus even gets sears(which is unlikely) it will have obtained sears on its own merits with financial assistance from the state.

 

OK, I should rephrase.  I didn't take it as you ragging on Cleveland, but rather generalizing Cleveland posters on this board as not caring about the rest of the state and whining about anything that benefits Ohio outside of Cleveland.  Sure, there are posters that do that, but there are posters from other cities that do the same.  Just on this page, UncleRando seemed to think the state should help them move to Cincinnati instead.

 

The only person that hinted at Cleveland (actually "northern Ohio") being a charity is not a representative for all of us. :)

 

By the way, I agree with the rest of your post outside of the singling out of Cleveland for having a "we're a charity-case" attitude.

And let's keep it real, if there was a forum history of Cincinnatians (or any other Ohioans) going into Columbus-centric threads and stating "opinions", I'm sure BUCKEYE54 would've pointed that out plainly.

 

Ha, I knew that would come out.  Your famous claim made over and over again.  I suppose if you repeat it enough, you think it will be accepted as truth.

 

...made my day!  I don't think I even have discussed Cleveland in months and I put ONE like button on a post that I felt was accurate and sh!tstorm comes again! 

 

It's based on your history.  And yes, I was a little trigger-happy as well, as I've come to associate your name with posts meant to irritate Clevelanders.

So basically you overreacted to his initial post, "called me out" over some foolishness, and got defensive over someone who's intentions were clearly not to be negative?

 

I wish there was an "annoyingly large" dislike button on Facebook.

Ha, I knew that would come out.  Your famous claim made over and over again.  I suppose if you repeat it enough, you think it will be accepted as truth.

 

It's based on your history.  And yes, I was a little trigger-happy as well, as I've come to associate your name with posts meant to irritate Clevelanders.

 

In a sense, those two sentences could equal my reaction to your post.  You've made this "claim" based on "history" that I'm "anti-Cleveland" and you associate ColDayMan = Anti-Cleveland or something like that.  I suppose if you repeat my name over and over again like Beetlejuice, ColDayMan will be bound to pop-up in a Tower City Retail/Casino thread sometime.

 

I mean, I can't disappoint my fans!

I really should have quoted clevelander which I think would have cleared up some confusion. My post was in response to his allegations. I felt he was stating that cleveland was a charity and far more deserving of a company because people in NE ohio need it far more then central ohio. I became slightly annoyed with the contention that columbus was being handed sears from kasich at the expense of the other cities without merit of their own and that Columbus is a drain on the state because of ohio state and state govt. Again I would be happy if ohio landed more jobs period from other states and countries regardless of what city the company decided to go to. Ohio needs to work together and shelve the rivalries. I feel we sabotage ourselves as a state with petty rivalries and would be benefited much more as a whole if we worked  together.

I really should have quoted clevelander which I think would have cleared up some confusion. My post was in response to his allegations. I felt he was stating that cleveland was a charity and far more deserving of a company because people in NE ohio need it far more then central ohio. I became slightly annoyed with the contention that columbus was being handed sears from kasich at the expense of the other cities without merit of their own and that Columbus is a drain on the state because of ohio state and state govt. Again I would be happy if ohio landed more jobs period from other states and countries regardless of what city the company decided to go to. Ohio needs to work together and shelve the rivalries. I feel we sabotage ourselves as a state with petty rivalries and would benefited much more as a whole if we worked  together.

 

You did nothing wrong and you really don't have to explain yourself.  I think most people can read your post and see your intentions were positive and truthful.

My saying clevelandcentric had more to do with my attempting to understand his logic. It was saying I know you're from cleveland so naturally you want your city to get business but i disagree with your opinion.

Not trying to piss off people. Good to see we can at least have a discussion about this.

I guess my thought is that if sears says "we've looked at all the options and we are only interested in columbus for possible relocation in ohio" then why should the state say we aren't interested in bringing you to ohio. I'm not saying that ohio should or should not try to bring sears but I guess  my thought is even if a company chose to locate in findlay or portsmouth I would have no problem with it as long as it is in ohio.

 

Its not columbus's fault that sears isn't interested in cleveland. Again what major retailers are hq'ed in cleveland or northeast ohio?The limited and abercrombie being located in central ohio have nothing to do with the state government. I don't remember anyone in central ohio complaining when american greetings recently got money from the state. Also if osu is such a drain on the rest of the state then using that logic northeast ohio is even more of a drain with cleveland state, Akron, and kent state all in the area.

 

I understand this board is clevelandcentric but as a resident of columbus I probably would be annoyed if a fortune 500 company that was only interested in cincy, cleveland,toledo, dayton, whatever  had the state do nothing to make it attractive for that company to come to ohio. The mentality that the ohio cities shouldn't be working together to bring business into ohio is archaic in my opinion and detrimental to ohio's growth. Ohio's cities have differences that will allow companies  to have a good fit somewhere in our state. Apparently sears feels the best fit for them in ohio is columbus.

 

As a resident of Greater Cleveland, I feel that there is a big disconnect at times between what's going on up here and what's being "decided" for us down there.  I'm all for the Ohio cities working together, but I don't really see how giving a company big tax breaks to move to Columbus does anything at all to help Cleveland.  Much of those taxes, by definition, won't have to be paid, so very little that revenue will be "trickling up" to Cleveland.  If the state is willing to make similar considerations for all potential companies to move to Ohio (and also then likely have to do the same to entice companies to stay here), then I'd be fine with it in theory.  Unfortunately that would be budgetary suicide for the state.

 

Ultimately this move sets a bad precedent for the state.  And I don't think it's going to benefit Cleveland or any other struggling Northern Ohio city as much as some are implying.  This is not a very good example of Ohio cities working together.  Situations like this one sometimes get me wondering how much better off Greater Cleveland might be if everything from roughly Stark County and north were its own state.

I don't see Cleveland as a charity-case, either.  Of course not.  I'm simply stating that Cleveland could certainly use such an arrow in its sling (more than the other two Cs) in the future when it comes to attracting outside business.  However as I stated above, it's simply not going to be possible for the state to repeat this policy over and over.

 

As for Columbus hoarding resources with state government and OSU, we've had that debate before and you'll never convince me that this isn't a significant net gain for Columbus and a significant net loss for everyone else in the state.

Does it really make sense for the State of Ohio to promote Columbus as a potential headquarters location when the State of Ohio has identified Cincinnati as a 'Consumer Marketing Innovation Hub'? Wouldn't there be economies of scale to be gained by locating Sears in the same city as other consumer giants like Macy's, Kroger, Procter & Gamble and all of the associated branding/marketing firms that service these industry giants?

 

I thought that was the whole point of designating industry hubs throughout Ohio (Cleveland = Healthcare; Columbus = Energy; Dayton = Aviation). Here is an interesting story on the whole topic from the Cincinnati Business Courier: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/print-edition/2011/12/09/in-sears-pitch-ohio-hubs-take.html.

 

Why do you guys keep pushing this idea that the potential location was all Kasich's idea?  He had nothing to do with it.  SEARS approached the state with Columbus already in mind.  This is not a conspiracy nor does it have anything to do with what Cincy or Cleveland may or may not have. 

It is not the state government's job to help boost the economy of one of its cities at the expense of its other cities.  Columbus already sucks enough resources from the rest of the state in the form of being the home to behemoth Ohio State and the seat of state government.  If anything Columbus doesn't need any extra help like other cities in Ohio, particularly the northern part of the state, need.

 

First, and again, the state didn't choose the location.  Second, do you or anyone else have any kind of evidence that Columbus gets far more attention than the rest of the state in terms of economic boosts or incentives?   

I guess my thought is that if sears says "we've looked at all the options and we are only interested in columbus for possible relocation in ohio" then why should the state say we aren't interested in bringing you to ohio. I'm not saying that ohio should or should not try to bring sears but I guess  my thought is even if a company chose to locate in findlay or portsmouth I would have no problem with it as long as it is in ohio.

 

Its not columbus's fault that sears isn't interested in cleveland. Again what major retailers are hq'ed in cleveland or northeast ohio?The limited and abercrombie being located in central ohio have nothing to do with the state government. I don't remember anyone in central ohio complaining when american greetings recently got money from the state. Also if osu is such a drain on the rest of the state then using that logic northeast ohio is even more of a drain with cleveland state, Akron, and kent state all in the area.

 

I understand this board is clevelandcentric but as a resident of columbus I probably would be annoyed if a fortune 500 company that was only interested in cincy, cleveland,toledo, dayton, whatever  had the state do nothing to make it attractive for that company to come to ohio. The mentality that the ohio cities shouldn't be working together to bring business into ohio is archaic in my opinion and detrimental to ohio's growth. Ohio's cities have differences that will allow companies  to have a good fit somewhere in our state. Apparently sears feels the best fit for them in ohio is columbus.

 

As a resident of Greater Cleveland, I feel that there is a big disconnect at times between what's going on up here and what's being "decided" for us down there.  I'm all for the Ohio cities working together, but I don't really see how giving a company big tax breaks to move to Columbus does anything at all to help Cleveland.  Much of those taxes, by definition, won't have to be paid, so very little that revenue will be "trickling up" to Cleveland.  If the state is willing to make similar considerations for all potential companies to move to Ohio (and also then likely have to do the same to entice companies to stay here), then I'd be fine with it in theory.  Unfortunately that would be budgetary suicide for the state.

 

Ultimately this move sets a bad precedent for the state.  And I don't think it's going to benefit Cleveland or any other struggling Northern Ohio city as much as some are implying.  This is not a very good example of Ohio cities working together.  Situations like this one sometimes get me wondering how much better off Greater Cleveland might be if everything from roughly Stark County and north were its own state.

 

A stronger Columbus can help Cleveland through related industry growth and companies looking at Ohio overall for future business moves.  Not all of them are going to go to Columbus, otherwise you wouldn't have F500 companies in Cleveland or Cincinnati.  You have to look at the bigger picture, not just your city. 

 

Besides, Sears is still likely not coming here, anyway. 

I think Kasich's plan is to ... make Cbus more reliably republican in the process.

You seem to be under the impression that Columbus is currently a Republican stronghold.  It is anything but.  The current Democratic mayor was just re-elected to his fourth consecutive four-year term.  All seven City Council members are Democratic and have been since 2004. 

 

I erred in saying "reliably" when what I really meant was more Republican.

 

And I had no desire to instigate a 2-page pissing match.  I do believe statewide politicians tend to favor their home areas, however slightly.  This is natural and probably stems from ideological affinity as much as anything else.  If Sears did move to Columbus, I doubt they'd end up downtown or anywhere nearby.  More likely in Licking or Delaware County.   

Does it really make sense for the State of Ohio to promote Columbus as a potential headquarters location when the State of Ohio has identified Cincinnati as a 'Consumer Marketing Innovation Hub'? Wouldn't there be economies of scale to be gained by locating Sears in the same city as other consumer giants like Macy's, Kroger, Procter & Gamble and all of the associated branding/marketing firms that service these industry giants?

 

I thought that was the whole point of designating industry hubs throughout Ohio (Cleveland = Healthcare; Columbus = Energy; Dayton = Aviation). Here is an interesting story on the whole topic from the Cincinnati Business Courier: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/print-edition/2011/12/09/in-sears-pitch-ohio-hubs-take.html.

 

Why do you guys keep pushing this idea that the potential location was all Kasich's idea?  He had nothing to do with it.  SEARS approached the state with Columbus already in mind.  This is not a conspiracy nor does it have anything to do with what Cincy or Cleveland may or may not have. 

 

The idea that Sears first approached Kasich about Columbus is simply not true.  The very FIRST publicly-acknowledged discussions of Sears moving to Ohio took place in Cincinnati about its move THERE.  Capsule summaries of those discussions between the governor and John F. Barrett, the powerful head of Western & Southern Life (also a major player in downtown Cincinnati real estate), can be found in the Cincinnati Business Courier, 4-29-11 and 5-10-11.  Only later was Columbus ever  mentioned.  The astonishing $400 million capital bribe followed shortly afterwards.

^ Those early discussions were discussed on the first few pages of this thread, should anyone want to look.

Does it really make sense for the State of Ohio to promote Columbus as a potential headquarters location when the State of Ohio has identified Cincinnati as a 'Consumer Marketing Innovation Hub'? Wouldn't there be economies of scale to be gained by locating Sears in the same city as other consumer giants like Macy's, Kroger, Procter & Gamble and all of the associated branding/marketing firms that service these industry giants?

 

I thought that was the whole point of designating industry hubs throughout Ohio (Cleveland = Healthcare; Columbus = Energy; Dayton = Aviation). Here is an interesting story on the whole topic from the Cincinnati Business Courier: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/print-edition/2011/12/09/in-sears-pitch-ohio-hubs-take.html.

 

Why do you guys keep pushing this idea that the potential location was all Kasich's idea?  He had nothing to do with it.  SEARS approached the state with Columbus already in mind.  This is not a conspiracy nor does it have anything to do with what Cincy or Cleveland may or may not have. 

 

The idea that Sears first approached Kasich about Columbus is simply not true.  The very FIRST publicly-acknowledged discussions of Sears moving to Ohio took place in Cincinnati about its move THERE.  Capsule summaries of those discussions between the governor and John F. Barrett, the powerful head of Western & Southern Life (also a major player in downtown Cincinnati real estate), can be found in the Cincinnati Business Courier, 4-29-11 and 5-10-11.  Only later was Columbus ever  mentioned.  The astonishing $400 million capital bribe followed shortly afterwards.

 

Not that I'd be any more in favor of Sears getting big tax breaks to relocate to Cincinnati (in fact I'd probably be less in favor of that scenario because it would mean a big unintended Ohio taxpayer boost for Northern Kentucky), but I do seem to recall that Cincy was first discussed as a possibility and that there was never a big tax break promised (though I think it may have been implied).

As I wrote in previous posts, it is my understanding from what I've read and also from what people who are very reputable have told me, sears initially looked at cleveland, cincy, and columbus to determine if any of the three cities would be suitable for them. To my understanding they may have had conversations with power brokers of all 3 cities at one time or another. Also I've been told tax breaks were being offered prior to sears even in the initial exploratory meetings. Sears finally determined that if they were going to move to ohio that columbus was the only city they were strongly considering. Again some of the reasons I have been told have to do with the limited and abercrombie hq'd in columbus, ohio state, and columbus having a reputation as being a young city. Look at the other finalist, Austin. Clearly sears is attempting to rebrand itself as a younger company and having a large pool of a young workforce is something that they are attempting to tap into. If anything, columbus grows in spite of kasich and his policies. He's certainly no more popular here then he is in the rest of the state. It would probably be more beneficial for him as far as a reelection bid goes to attempt to bring sears to one of his two largest metro areas. Not buying the conspiracy theories.

Does it really make sense for the State of Ohio to promote Columbus as a potential headquarters location when the State of Ohio has identified Cincinnati as a 'Consumer Marketing Innovation Hub'? Wouldn't there be economies of scale to be gained by locating Sears in the same city as other consumer giants like Macy's, Kroger, Procter & Gamble and all of the associated branding/marketing firms that service these industry giants?

 

I thought that was the whole point of designating industry hubs throughout Ohio (Cleveland = Healthcare; Columbus = Energy; Dayton = Aviation). Here is an interesting story on the whole topic from the Cincinnati Business Courier: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/print-edition/2011/12/09/in-sears-pitch-ohio-hubs-take.html.

 

Why do you guys keep pushing this idea that the potential location was all Kasich's idea?  He had nothing to do with it.  SEARS approached the state with Columbus already in mind.  This is not a conspiracy nor does it have anything to do with what Cincy or Cleveland may or may not have. 

 

The idea that Sears first approached Kasich about Columbus is simply not true.  The very FIRST publicly-acknowledged discussions of Sears moving to Ohio took place in Cincinnati about its move THERE.  Capsule summaries of those discussions between the governor and John F. Barrett, the powerful head of Western & Southern Life (also a major player in downtown Cincinnati real estate), can be found in the Cincinnati Business Courier, 4-29-11 and 5-10-11.  Only later was Columbus ever  mentioned.  The astonishing $400 million capital bribe followed shortly afterwards.

 

That's not been in a single article I've read, not from Chicago, and not in any of the other articles from state publications.  Everything I've read says Sears approached Ohio about Columbus, not the other way around, but that sites in all 3 cities were looked at anyway.  Regardless of what happened, Sears ultimately narrowed down the choice, and only Ohio choice, to Columbus.  I guess if believing in conspiracies makes you sleep better, go for it. 

 

Once again this thread keeps drifting into a my-C-is-better-than-your-C. And we certainly aren't going to bash each other -- comprende Clevelanders?

 

My middle finger is extended, and hovering over the lock button. Stay focused or stay away.

Guys. Sears has not accepted the deal as of yet. What they are waiting on, i have no idea. If they did move they would face the negative impact of the 3rd largest media market in the united states. Most would not shop Sears again.

Guys. Sears has not accepted the deal as of yet. What they are waiting on, i have no idea. If they did move they would face the negative impact of the 3rd largest media market in the united states. Most would not shop Sears again.

 

I think they are waiting to see what Illinois will do before they make their decision.  Incentives have been rejected once but last I heard was being pushed again.  I don't think the package is as big as Ohio is offering, but if it goes through, will very likely be enough to keep them from moving. 

 

I also don't think there will be any significant backlash. 

I love it when my posts are randomly edited by others on here.  What was it that I said in "reply #272" that was so off-topic that it had the be removed?  I legitimately can't even remember, but if one of the mods could send me a PM so I know what to avoid doing next time, I'd appreciate it.

 

Anyways, I would love to see some real policy analysis of these types of tax breaks.  I want to know how much the city in question will benefit and really how much the rest of the state would benefit, if at all.  I just don't buy into the argument that Cincinnati and Cleveland will somehow benefit from a company locating in Columbus with the assistance of significant tax breaks.

Discussion over:

 

Sears staying once Illinois governor signs tax deal

 

Sears Holding Corp.    will remain in suburban Chicago if Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn signs a tax-break package that the state’s general assembly passed Tuesday, the Chicago Tribune reports.

 

The Illinois legislature approved $15 million in tax credits for the next 10 years, along with extending a special taxing district that will save Sears (NASDAQ:SHLD) about $125 million during the next 15 years, the Tribune reports. It now goes to the desk of Quinn, who praised the bill’s passage Tuesday.

 

A memo from Sears’ chief executive to employees said the company would stay in Illinois if the governor signs off on the tax breaks.

 

 

Now Ohio should use that 400 million in incentives and try to bring in 4 F500 companies at 100 million each.

Now Ohio should use that 400 million in incentives and try to bring in 4 F500 companies at 100 million each.

 

Or it could have paid for operating the 3C train for about 30 years, which may have brought in more companies than that.

As JYP states, the discussion about Sears is over. Thanks for coming.

(I was going to post this in the Sears HQ Relocation thread, but it's locked.)

 

http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/27/news/companies/sears_kmart_closings/index.htm?hpt=hp_t2

 

Sears/K-Mart continue what sadly appears to be an inexorable march in the wrong direction.  On the plus side, it sounds like most of these closings will be outside the Great Lakes/Northeast regions, but no identification of actual locations yet to see if Ohio is affected. 

19 straight quarters of sales declines...as argued by many in the other thread, it is a dying company and would not have brought much to Ohio (if it even lasts the next 7-8 years).  It was silly to even chase after it.

This thread is reactivated under a new, more relevant subject, especially given today's news.

Thanks, Ken.  (As I said, I would have posted it here in the first place, but you had rightly locked it.) 

19 straight quarters of sales declines...as argued by many in the other thread, it is a dying company and would not have brought much to Ohio (if it even lasts the next 7-8 years).  It was silly to even chase after it.

 

As I mentioned a few pages ago, I think that Sears/K-Mart is just in a really tough spot.  K-Mart is clearly getting taken to the woodshed by both Wal-Mart and Target.  It sounds like Sears is making some inroads, but they have so many competitors--be it higher-end, better-run and -performing department stores (Macy's, etc.), department stores in their same general category (Penney's, Kohl's), or speciality stores that compete with them in specific categories (Lowe's/Best Buy/Home Depot--heck, even specialty retailers like LL Bean and Eddie Bauer offer seroius direct competition to their Land's End brand/store-within-a-store concept)--that it is going to be very tough for them, too. 

It makes you wonder what kind of intelligence, sort of speak, did the Governor have going after this company. 19 quarters of sales decline should have told him or anyone something.

We were talking about Sears disappearing and how sad it is since they've been around for so long. Truly, the peeps around my table agreed that they have mainly become seen as a store for 2 things - appliances and very good tools, and they should have basically retooled their whole business around focusing on that and cut back or eliminated completely all the other stuff. As a specialty retailer of tools, maybe workout equipment and household appliances, they could have survived and thrived IMO. But trying to be everything to everyone just quit working.

I also linked this little <a href="http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/sears-as-we-know-it-is-dead/683944">blog post about Sears</a> on CU earlier today as well.  Sears does still have some things going for it that many other department stores don't yet.

 

First, it has the largest appliance service network in the nation.  In a country of disposable consumer goods, that may not be as much of an asset as one might hope, but there nevertheless still exists a reasonable-sized body of people who get appliances with the expectation of keeping them for a very long time.  In addition, many modern appliances have significant complex features that make them a little bit harder to work on at home than those of one or two generations ago.  This service network could give Sears some resilience against online competition as well--Amazon can't send a technician to your house.  This won't help them against Home Depot or Lowe's, however, if the appliance businesses of the latter take off.

 

Second, Sears can still punch in its weight class (for the moment) with Home Depot and Lowe's on the sale and installation of appliances, because that's not the bread and butter of the latter (which is one reason Sears still has the larger service network as well).  Even now, it's still the first place my parents think of when they consider where they'd go if their dishwasher or washing machine breaks and they need a new one.

 

Third, Sears has a good business model (even if they aren't executing on it very well or making it a mainstay of their business) offering automotive services at major retail sites (i.e., malls).  This could be a much bigger asset for them than it is.  People might well be willing to have someone working on their car while they shop (it beats waiting).  I honestly don't know why they don't promote themselves more within the malls where they operate--some people might not be thinking about getting an oil change, new wiper blades, or some other quick, routine maintenance when they go to the mall (because it wasn't the express purpose for their visit, so it's at the back of their mind).  However, I firmly believe that most people (at least those in the lower-middle-class and up, i.e., those with some discretionary income) have a laundry list of routine maintenance tasks that they're meaning to have done on their car "at some point," and Sears could definitely take advantage of that without demanding a special trip when people are already at the mall.

 

I haven't price-shopped these things, but I haven't seen other Internet commentators or industry analysts saying that Sears' prices are completely uncompetitive with Home Depot, Lowe's, or H. H. Gregg in the appliance space, with Best Buy in the electronics space (and let's not forget that Best Buy is facing its own problems, even after Circuit City went under), or with Goodyear and Firestone service centers in the auto service space.  The main problem I see with Sears is that it has a material image problem, and by "material," I mean something that goes beyond mere marketing--I'm talking about the physical builds of the stores themselves, which have been so sparsely updated for so long that it often seriously lessens the shopping experience and makes people wonder about the brand.  (This, of course, can become self-fulfilling.)  K-Mart is even worse in this regard.  Most Wal-Marts these days are significantly more welcoming, and I can't think of a single other major big box competitor that has the same image.  The contrast is particularly sharp when one walks into more clothing-oriented department stores such as Dillard's, Kohl's, and Macy's, which can often even be found in the exact same mall with a Sears.

 

This gives the impression of being cheap--and while that word has both good and bad connotations, the current consumer perception of Sears is dominated by the bad ones, not the good ones.  That is going to continue to sandbag further growth in appliance sales, appliance service, electronics, auto repair, and other big-ticket segments (including some with higher margins that you'd absolutely want to expand).  Will you buy a cheap pair of socks that might not last very long?  Well, maybe you would, honestly.  But would you buy from a place that you considered cheap when you're looking to buy a new oven or refrigerator?  You just might think a little harder about that.

Bah, Sears.

 

First, it has the largest appliance service network in the nation.  In a country of disposable consumer goods, that may not be as much of an asset as one might hope, but there nevertheless still exists a reasonable-sized body of people who get appliances with the expectation of keeping them for a very long time. 

 

... the current consumer perception of Sears is dominated by the bad ones, not the good ones.  That is going to continue to sandbag further growth in appliance sales, appliance service, electronics, auto repair, and other big-ticket segments (including some with higher margins that you'd absolutely want to expand). 

 

Uhm, I'd buy a Craftsman hand tool at Sears, or maybe some tube sox, and not much else.

 

A few personal experiences:

 

The stockade fence that my fiance' had Sears build around her very small yard for $9K in the mid 90s (probably overpriced by a factor of 2x) was falling over due to rot in the posts about five years later. The freaking a-holes didn't use treated lumber. Contact with Sears about this problem indicated that Sears just contracts out this kind of work and there is little quality control. Of course they disavowed all support for the work.

 

About that appliance service business. My wife's grandmother had apparently purchased a service plan with Sears on an aged washer and dryer. They were QUITE happy to keep renewing this plan to an old lady on a 20+ year old pair of appliances, and the yearly cost was several hundred dollars - enough to buy a new washer and dryer every year.

 

Some years ago in the early 90s I went to one Sears Paint and Hardware store and received some pretty decent help with some problems I was having in painting walls that were covered with wallpaper that had to be removed. A couple of years later I visited the same store and the staff were sullen unhelpful stiffs and I walked out without even buying anything. Apparently the had accidentally hired someone decent at random at that store just once.

 

The heating elements went out in a 10 year old or so Kenmore electric water heater in my house. The idiots at Sears were quoting me 2 weeks delivery time to receive replacement elements. (In February - lovely.)  I bought a new heater at Lowes and pitched the old one.

 

Screw Sears. The brand is garbage. Some of their business practices are unethical, the store employees are low quality, and they don't support the stuff they sell. I cheer the day they go out of business. They're just a hollow holding company and a crappy one at that.

^At least Sears has been in the same location, and under the same name, for what, at least 50 years? In a day when the average retail concept has a life span of 15 years, it's nice to see that stability.