Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-21-2009, 12:30 PM
Wheelz Wheelz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,885
Why are people still so upset about Marshall Fields?

In the Cool stuff that's gone thread (which I didn't want to hijack), more than one poster mentioned Marshall Field's.

It's been four years, and people are still writing letters to the Tribune to wish the Macy's corporation a slow and painful death. Occasionally, people even picket the State Street Macy's, apparently trying to get them to change the name back to Field's.

There's a Macy's that used to be a Field's at the mall near where I live, and I'll be damned if I can tell any difference other than the name over the door. IMO, the State Street flagship had been getting kind of dumpy in later years; Macy's seems to have spruced the joint up quite a bit.

The Walnut Room is still there, Frango Mints are still there. Both chains have a reputation as a good, higher-end store, but beyond that - a department store is a department store is a department store, right? In fact, if my research is correct, the Field family hadn't owned the store since 1982, and it had changed hands a couple more times before Macy's bought it.

So, as far as I can tell, Macy's great crime wasn't buying Marshall Field's, it was putting their own name on what are now their own stores. I can't think of a single way anything else would be appreciably different if the new owners had left the old name.

So why is this such a hot-button issue for so many people?
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 12-21-2009, 04:58 PM
Tim R. Mortiss Tim R. Mortiss is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Lincoln Park, Chicago
Posts: 5,989
I completely agree with you. If the Field family didn't care enough to hang onto the property, why should the rest of us care what it is called? The current owners are well within their rights to call it whatever the hell they want.

If I owned a store, I sure wouldn't want people telling me what I could and couldn't call it. We still have property rights in this country, after all (at least, some of them haven't been taken away yet).....TRM (who is bracing for a name change at the fine building on Clark and Addison sometime soon)

Last edited by Tim R. Mortiss; 12-21-2009 at 04:59 PM.
  #3  
Old 12-22-2009, 11:03 AM
Jophiel Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 16,487
'Cause Fields was Chicago-esque and Macy's is New York and folks who felt strongly about such traditional things felt slighted. As if Macy's said "Screw you folks and your traditions, it's more important that we can buy Macy's bags in bulk" (economies of scale being the prime reason I saw Macy's cite for not keeping the Field's name).

It's an emotional response and not really a rational one. But then, as someone who hasn't shopped at Macy's since the switch, I'm not really worried about being rational. There's plenty of other stores for me to shop at and, as a consumer, I can be as fickle and capricious as I like

For the record, I don't send angry letters to the Tribune or picket. I just refuse to shop at Macy's.

Quote:
If the Field family didn't care enough to hang onto the property, why should the rest of us care what it is called? The current owners are well within their rights to call it whatever the hell they want.
Agreed, although the consumers are within their rights to bitch about it or refuse to shop there or otherwise use consumer pressure to try to make a business change its mind. For whatever reasons they wish, really. Until someone's throwing cinder blocks or Molotov cocktails, I don't see the problem.

Last edited by Jophiel; 12-22-2009 at 11:05 AM.
  #4  
Old 12-23-2009, 10:49 AM
daveg daveg is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 56
Perhaps it can be summed up in one word: Tradition

YMMV
  #5  
Old 12-23-2009, 12:27 PM
Tim R. Mortiss Tim R. Mortiss is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Lincoln Park, Chicago
Posts: 5,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveg View Post
Perhaps it can be summed up in one word: Tradition

YMMV
I disagree. Tradition is something you do yourself. Not something you try to coerce other people to do with their own lawfully acquired property for your benefit.
  #6  
Old 12-23-2009, 02:11 PM
Jophiel Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 16,487
I disagree with your description of it and I assume most people would cite "tradition" as their reason as well. You're welcome to say they're all wrong but that and $26 will get you a box of Frango mints.
  #7  
Old 12-23-2009, 11:02 PM
eleanorigby eleanorigby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Present and Accounted For
Posts: 18,256
If it has to be explained, you won't understand. Macy's is not Field's, nor can it ever be Field's. And just so you know: they originally did not want to keep Frango.

I shopped at Field's my whole life. Going to Field's to see the windows at Christmas was a wonderful tradition. I worked at the State St store when I was in college; my sisters worked at either State or Watertower. We registered for gifts there and I ordered the wedding invitations from there. My wedding china/crystal and sterling were displayed (with my name etc) at the Park Forest store back in 1987. Field's was THE store for my family and friends. Macy's doesn't even come close. I now do my "good" shopping at Carson's. I find it highly satisfactory that Macy's wasn't allowed to remove the nameplates from the corners of the State St store, seeing as how their considered National Landmarks.


I have no such feeling or loyalty toward Macy's. I have no desire to shop there at all. I don't go there. I won't go there. YMMV.
  #8  
Old 12-28-2009, 04:54 PM
WarmNPrickly WarmNPrickly is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 5,441
Also, for me, Macy's is a symbol of New York. Marshal Fields was a symbol of Chicago. Macy's essentially told Chicago that its symbols aren't important. I don't live in the Chicago area anymore, but I sure as hell will never shop at Macy's. There are plenty of options for me to shop from, I can be as fickle as I like. I will teach my children the same.

Macy's made a business decision when they chose to change the name. I have a right to respond to that decision by not shopping at their stores. There is nothing coercive about it, because I know they will never change the name back.
  #9  
Old 12-28-2009, 11:34 PM
ScatteredFrog ScatteredFrog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 217
It wasn't just the name that changed -- it was also the merchandise and the staff and the attitudes.

I lived in New Jersey from 1998 to 2006. Moved there from Joliet. And believe me, in those eight years, I had my share of Macy's -- including the flagship store in Manhattan. I always thought it was a shitty store, and the store on 34th Street is an incredible dump. I heard some time in 2005 or 2006 that MF was going to become a Macy's and I was horrified BECAUSE I knew that Macy's is a shitty store. From personal experience. I didn't want that to happen to a store that people travel to Chicago to visit.

Most of the higher-end merchandise was shipped out and replaced by crap. My wife and I had the misfortune of going there after Christmas last year because her aunt in Massachusetts gave her a Christmas present -- from Macy's -- that she had to return, and the staff was near impossible to find and seemingly unwilling to help.

Even the "true" Macy's stores -- that is, the ones that were always Macy's and not another re-branded store, like former Bamberger's etc., aren't truly Macy's -- they're Macy's in name only. What once was a great and highly reputable chain of department stores turned into lackluster fragments of what they used to be at best, glorified K marts at worst.

Tim -- why should we care what the name (and content) is?

Because:

1) Macy's midwest division has been doing poorly ever since September 2006 -- gee, that's when the switchover of name and merchandise happened. September 9, 2006, to be exact.

2) They have stockholders to report to -- some of whom are demanding that the Marshall Field's brand be restored.

3) Let's say I'm visiting from New York. Why would I want to visit Macy's when I have one in New York? I'll just stick with Garrett's. Now let's say that Marshall Field's was still Marshall Field's, and I'm visiting from New York. Oh wow, there's the famous Marshall Field's! Let me go check it out! Oooh, nifty! Nice merchandise! Holy crap, they even wrap it up nicely and put it in a fancy box for me -- and it's only costume jewelry!? They care! Sure beats the skinny black-shirted smoking teenagers at Macy's whose job descriptions obviously involve counting the seconds to their smoke breaks.

BTW -- my mother, a native Chicagoan, asked me what the big deal is, a store is a store, just don't shop there if you don't like it, etc. Well, recently when she was downtown, she told me she checked out Macy's. She said, "Okay, I understand where you're coming from now." She was disgusted.
  #10  
Old 01-01-2010, 09:27 PM
OldTimer OldTimer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2
The information that follows is paraphrased from Axel Madsen's book "The Marshall Fields" published in 2002.

When Marshall Field II died under mysterious circumstances, his father created a will that established a trusteeship for bulk of his fortune (about $2.5 billion in today's dollars) naming his two young grandsons, Marshall III and Henry as beneficiaries of the trust. One of the unusual conditions of the will/trust document was that that the trust would be terminated when each reached the age of 50. A few years after his grandfather's death, Henry too died and after a brief but intense legal battle, Marshall Field III was named sole beneficiary of his grandfather's trust.

Here's where it becomes relevant to this discussion. Trustees are charged with fiduciary responsibility and by 1917 90% of the company stock had been sold to partners and managers of the wholesale and retail businesses. For most of his life Marshall Field III owned only a minor share of the businesses that bore his name. Instead he followed his own instinct and made money first as a financier and later as a newspaper publisher. The Sun-Times and the Daily News were part of his financial empire as were other odds and ends including the Sunday magazine supplement, Parade, and World Book and Childcraft encyclopedias. The Field trust also financed the building of the Field Building on LaSalle Street and the Merchandise Mart.

Marshall Field III finally came into his grandfather's money when he turned 50 in 1943. At the time, his fortune was worth more than what he inherited and only a small percentage was in Marshall Field stock. This he disposed of in 1965.

What this boils down to, and the reason for this post, is that no Field family member has had anything to do with the store on State Street since the death of its founder in the early 1900s.

Irrelevant but interesting factoid number one: Marshall Field, the founder, died from pneumonia which developed from a cold he caught after he played a round of golf (as was his wont) in suburban Wheaton on New Year's day! They used red balls to find them in the snow -- just so you know.

Irrelevant but interesting factoid number two: Marshall Field's will was contested nine times in court and one of the results was that both state and federal inheritance laws were changed.

As an old timer, I would like to add what made MF&Co so unique (circa 1970) but will save that for a later post.
  #11  
Old 01-01-2010, 09:57 PM
OldTimer OldTimer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2
PS: The Marshall Field Trust also built the Pittsfield Building (named after the founder's birthplace in Massachusetts) and the building on the southwest corner of Wabash and Washington which was known as the Marshall Field Annex. The first four (?) floors were the Men's Store, the upper floors, medical offices. These two buildings, with the addition of the Garland Building, are now the center of many medical and dental offices. If you live in the city, I'm sure you have been in one of them for medical or dental care. Lord knows, I have.

Irrellevent but interesting factoid number three: John D. Rockefeller may have donated money for the original UofC buildings but Marshall Field donated the land he owned in Hyde Park to put build them on.
  #12  
Old 01-07-2010, 01:08 PM
Cheryl44 Cheryl44 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ravenswood Manor
Posts: 140
Are you kidding me?

Macy's is not nor ever has been a high end store. To put it in the local parlance Macy's = Goldblatt's.
  #13  
Old 01-07-2010, 07:50 PM
Tim R. Mortiss Tim R. Mortiss is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Lincoln Park, Chicago
Posts: 5,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheryl44 View Post
Macy's is not nor ever has been a high end store. To put it in the local parlance Macy's = Goldblatt's.
I've been to the Macy's on 34th Street in NYC, and you are correct. It has a stale, dingy feel to it, like an eight-story Woolworth's.

But the one that used to be Field's on State Street seems to have maintained the level of class and cache it had when it was Field's, local prejudices notwithstanding.

Last edited by Tim R. Mortiss; 01-07-2010 at 07:50 PM.
  #14  
Old 01-08-2010, 07:47 AM
C K Dexter Haven C K Dexter Haven is offline
Right Hand of the Master
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago north suburb
Posts: 16,078
Cecil has now addressed this as well, in his Straight Dope Chicago column: http://chicago.straightdope.com/sdc20100107.php
  #15  
Old 01-08-2010, 10:02 AM
Wheelz Wheelz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by C K Dexter Haven View Post
Cecil has now addressed this as well, in his Straight Dope Chicago column: http://chicago.straightdope.com/sdc20100107.php
Hey, cool!

Nice column, Cece.
  #16  
Old 01-08-2010, 11:06 AM
SelmaPatty SelmaPatty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1
People are just stupid. I remember right before they changed names there were crowds going to the Walnut room. One network quoted a diner saying he would never go there when it became Macy's. Hello? It had been bought by Macy's over a year earlier, they were just getting around to changing the name. Your money that day went to Macy's. I only miss the wry humor of the old "Field Days" sales.
Of course, just wait until the name-change mania/phobia comes to Wrigley Field.
  #17  
Old 01-08-2010, 11:22 AM
ScatteredFrog ScatteredFrog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 217
It was NOT JUST THE NAME THAT CHANGED. The merchandise changed. The customer service left.

Sears Tower -- name changed, new owners.

Wrigley Field -- while I can't believe that a Cubs fan would allow that to happen, if it happens, it's a name change. Nothing else other than sponsorship and corporate feces. (The field's named after WJ Wrigley, not his company.)

US Cellular Field -- name changed. Plus, it's not really Comiskey anyway, so who the hell cares? (then again, it's the Sox, so who the hell cares?)

However:
La Salle Bank --> Bank Of America = new bank in addition to new name.

Marshall Fields --> Macy's = new store, new merchandise, new name.
  #18  
Old 01-09-2010, 09:43 PM
WarmNPrickly WarmNPrickly is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 5,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by SelmaPatty View Post
People are just stupid. I remember right before they changed names there were crowds going to the Walnut room. One network quoted a diner saying he would never go there when it became Macy's. Hello? It had been bought by Macy's over a year earlier, they were just getting around to changing the name. Your money that day went to Macy's. I only miss the wry humor of the old "Field Days" sales.
Of course, just wait until the name-change mania/phobia comes to Wrigley Field.
I don't care that Macy's owns the place. I care that they removed a symbol of Chicago and replaced it with a symbol of New York. It doesn't matter how illogical it is. There is absolutely nothing that Macy's has that I can't just as easily get at another store at the same mall. It's like choosing between Chili's and Applebee's. I can choose not to go to Macy's for any reason I want, because I won't lose anything by going someplace else.
  #19  
Old 01-11-2010, 01:42 PM
ScatteredFrog ScatteredFrog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 217
Jim McKay says he tried posting here but had problems...hope he doesn't mind me posting what he had to say:

Date: Saturday, January 9, 2010 8:21 pm CT
Posted by: Jim McKay

Thanks to the mysterious Mr. Adams for the lengthy interview last week. Consistent with his reputation for exhaustive questioning, by the end of the phone call, my hand and arm were tingly with numbness from holding the receiver.

Regarding this week's Straight Dope: Chicago--"Why are people still so upset about Marshall Field's?", I believe some further clarifications are in order.

Sure, in Atlanta they are mostly over Rich's becoming Macy's; downstate and in St. Louis they are pretty much over Famous-Barr becoming Macy's and so on. But what is curious is that these same out-of-towners are also among a significant portion of those not over the loss of Marshall Field's. At least half, if not more, of our blog writings, donations of buttons and leaflets, etc. come from those outside of Chicago, many of whom have never been Chicagoans and have only visited our city. According to Marshall Field's literature from 2005, the State Street store was Chicago's "number three destination." Clearly, it is not that any more. If Macy's had purchased and converted Carson Pirie Scott instead of Field's, I suspect the reaction would have, as Adams put it, "eventually rolled over," as was the case with patrons of the likes of Rich's, Famous-Barr, etc. During our leaflet and button distributions on State Street, we regularly encounter non-Chicago natives from around the country, as well as more than a few international visitors from the likes of London, Paris, Tokyo--and even the occasional traveler from the likes of Moscow and Sao Paulo--who are very disappointed to find Macy's in place of Marshall Field's. I don't think former Rich's and Famous locations experience that. Contrary to your column, this is more than the locals Chicagoans being dismayed at having their store converted to New York's brand. Said one St. Louis native to me, "Well, Famous-Barr is just Famous-Barr...but how can they get rid of Marshall Field's for crying out loud? It's why I go to Chicago!" Our survey of Chicago shoppers (not Chicagoans) on State Street and Michigan Avenue showed that 78% preferred Field's and wanted its return, many saying they missed the merchandise and non-pushy service.

Marshall Field's was indeed both an emporium as well as a cultural institution. For example, we hear a lot of fuss about Chicago trying to build its fashion image and also its rep for fine dining. Chicago's best-known fashion and culinary brand was Marshall Field's. If we now build these reps on Macy's, the successes will be credited to a brand synonymous with New York and the failures will be dismissed as simply being typical of the Midwest. In the past year, if one looks closer at the State Street store, one would notice the likes of floor tiles repaired with heavy-duty tape or broken elevators that stay that way for long stretches of time or full store windows dedicated to Clorox sanitary wipes. It is indicative of a slow slide of Chicago's architectural gem into the same mediocrity that plagues Macy's Manhattan flagship.

I'm not a shopping guru, but the new house brands don't match the quality and detail of Field Gear I used to purchase. Another example personal to my experience is the loss of the classy Field's stationery department where one could purchase unusual greeting cards or even have business cards and stationery ordered. That has been replaced with some greeting cards that a Macy's clerk recently described to me as being "not really a stationery department anymore...it's just a rack of cards by the luggage." Sorry, I can't personally comment on ladies' apparel, but a couple of years ago, members of FieldsFansChicago.org compiled a list of over fifty major changes in merchandise since Macy's took over.

To clarify, most of us at FieldsFansChicago.org want a lot of things but it's not that we don't think they will happen--it's that we don't think they will happen under the person Roger Ebert calls "the three-headed one," Macy's CEO, President and Chairman, Terry Lundgren. But we DO think they will happen when in the ever-shifting retail landscape. The question is how long will Macy's continue to exist as it currently does? The fact is that the Marshall Field's stores have had three different owners in the past six years. The fact is that Macy's is highly leveraged with billions of dollars of debt. Their current market capitalization is over $7 billion with heavy debt service. The Marshall Field's brands were last appraised in 2004 at over $420 million in May Department Stores' annual report. That value is maximized when the brands are used with the State Street store. How can Macy's survive without capitalizing on their underutilized asset, Marshall Field's? Brands from Bigsby and Kruthers to AT&T Wireless to California's Lucky grocery stores to the Ford Taurus all came back. So can Marshall Field's. Does it really make sense to take such a unique store and make it one of 800 other Macy's? We don't think so.
  #20  
Old 01-11-2010, 08:48 PM
buttonjockey308 buttonjockey308 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: 60601
Posts: 3,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarmNPrickly View Post
I don't care that Macy's owns the place. I care that they removed a symbol of Chicago and replaced it with a symbol of New York. It doesn't matter how illogical it is. There is absolutely nothing that Macy's has that I can't just as easily get at another store at the same mall. It's like choosing between Chili's and Applebee's. I can choose not to go to Macy's for any reason I want, because I won't lose anything by going someplace else.
This, and I get tired of hearing 'the greatest city in the world' tripe from the NYC crowd. Yep, it's a neat city alright and for sure a financial and cultural capital, but all predjudices aside, NYC isn't even the greatest city in America, I'm not even sure it's the greatest city on the east coast.

Oh, and another reason? The merch sucks. I threw out luggage that my parents got @ Fields many, MANY years ago just because it was avocado green and I couldn't bear to keep it in storage anymore. The year before? I threw out luggage I bought on my one and only trek into Macy's. One trip is all I got out of it. Nope, never again Macy's. Never again.
  #21  
Old 01-12-2010, 05:05 PM
eleanorigby eleanorigby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Present and Accounted For
Posts: 18,256
omg, I am so embarrassed. It's THEY'RE, not their, in my post....


That fixed, I also have to decry the loss of quality stationery--I see no Crane's in Macy's. I also saw nothing in the way of Christmas windows. I pass by that way occasionally when I take the 156 instead of the 151 to get to my train. I saw some half-ass presentation about letters to Santa or Xmas greetings or some such. Put it this way: the windows did not make me want to take a later train so that I could enjoy some nostalgia and some holiday cheer.


I miss The Bowl and Basket, the Walnut Room, the whole "give the lady what she wants" attitude. The OP does know that Marshall Field essentially invented the department store, correct?

I have a bumper sticker from Jim McKay. It reads: Fields is Chicago; Boycott Macy's with the url in the sticker. It's not on my car, but I still don't shop at Macy's and I won't.

Last edited by eleanorigby; 01-12-2010 at 05:08 PM.
  #22  
Old 01-14-2010, 04:57 PM
kidchameleon kidchameleon is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cecil's basement
Posts: 5,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by SelmaPatty View Post
People are just stupid.
Amen to that. I remember someone writing into the Trib blathering on about Macy's symbol being the red star and that showed they were being run by communists. Communists? Really?
  #23  
Old 01-14-2010, 05:58 PM
Beware of Doug Beware of Doug is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: My Own Private Iowa
Posts: 15,364
Quote:
Originally Posted by eleanorigby View Post
I also have to decry the loss of quality stationery--I see no Crane's in Macy's. I also saw nothing in the way of Christmas windows. I pass by that way occasionally when I take the 156 instead of the 151 to get to my train. I saw some half-ass presentation about letters to Santa or Xmas greetings or some such. Put it this way: the windows did not make me want to take a later train so that I could enjoy some nostalgia and some holiday cheer.

I miss The Bowl and Basket, the Walnut Room, the whole "give the lady what she wants" attitude.
I think the culture has changed. The idea of selling to a stable, urban middle class - a group that is stylish but not fashion obsessed, and may stay loyal for decades - is over.

This, I imagine, was Field's customer. The closest equivalent these days in a chain is Lord & Taylor, and their shoppers are getting older and less stylish every year - a trend the merch doesn't yet reflect.

The urban middle class today - in New York, Chicago, wherever - is mostly made up of the newly middle class. They're younger, busier, more multicultural. They shop for trends, brands, and deals. They don't use niceties like stationery. And they don't ask for the same level of quality and service, because they never knew it.

This is Macy*s customer. The industry, I believe, is going their way - whether it's the right decision or not.

Last edited by Beware of Doug; 01-14-2010 at 06:01 PM.
  #24  
Old 05-28-2010, 12:57 PM
emellis emellis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1
That is the whole point

Business is emotional. What makes a business successful or not depends on how it caters to the wants and needs of the people, and this is a decidedly unrational process. The minute a business-owner or executive loses site of this and focuses on buying bags in bulk he/she is probably screwed. What good are bags that you bought in bulk if they are sitting on a pallet in the back covered with shrink-wrap because nobody is buying your mercahdise.
  #25  
Old 06-12-2010, 08:10 AM
Roman_Gertz Roman_Gertz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim R. Mortiss View Post
I disagree. Tradition is something you do yourself. Not something you try to coerce other people to do with their own lawfully acquired property for your benefit.
I must disagree with you on that thought.. Tradition is something that people have been doing for quite some time already, and people would continue to do..
  #26  
Old 06-12-2010, 08:05 PM
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Chicago Savant
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,156
^Have we been invaded by some sort of 'bots? Both here and in the Rand McNally thread, we have these comments that sound automated, like some sort of Turing Test, repeating and reinterpreting phrases from the previous post. Marshall Field "riot?" "The people who lost their loved once?"
  #27  
Old 06-12-2010, 08:17 PM
samclem samclem is online now
Graphite is a great
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 25,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
^Have we been invaded by some sort of 'bots? Both here and in the Rand McNally thread, we have these comments that sound automated, like some sort of Turing Test, repeating and reinterpreting phrases from the previous post. Marshall Field "riot?" "The people who lost their loved once?"
Probably. I've been following this and the other. Not totally clear cut, but expect action sooner rather than later.

samclem
  #28  
Old 06-12-2010, 11:52 PM
Jim2929 Jim2929 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21
When they changed the name to Macys. I cut my Fields credit card in half.
I'll never shop that store again. I make two or three trips back to my old home Chicago a year,
my wife's first stop was always Fields. never again. the place is just plan shit.
  #29  
Old 06-14-2010, 12:06 PM
ScatteredFrog ScatteredFrog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 217
Speaking of bots that are repeating from prior posts, I really feel like a broken record.

IT IS NOT JUST A NAME. Yes, the name is PART of the issue (I think it's kind of insulting to remove the name of someone who practically built this city), but it's much more than that. The merchandise changed, the prices increased, and the customer service went down the crapper.
  #30  
Old 06-14-2010, 08:37 PM
samclem samclem is online now
Graphite is a great
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 25,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScatteredFrog View Post
Speaking of bots that are repeating from prior posts, I really feel like a broken record.

IT IS NOT JUST A NAME. Yes, the name is PART of the issue (I think it's kind of insulting to remove the name of someone who practically built this city), but it's much more than that. The merchandise changed, the prices increased, and the customer service went down the crapper.
I truly apologise for our slowness in removing these cretins. We tend to err on the side of caution.

Hopefully, they don't breed.
  #31  
Old 06-16-2010, 08:47 AM
Wheelz Wheelz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScatteredFrog View Post
IT IS NOT JUST A NAME. Yes, the name is PART of the issue (I think it's kind of insulting to remove the name of someone who practically built this city), but it's much more than that. The merchandise changed, the prices increased, and the customer service went down the crapper.
We will never know for sure, but I tend to believe it really is about the name.

IMO Field's had been going downhill for years anyway. If everything else were exactly as it is today, except that it still says "Marshall Field's" on the sign, I have serious doubts that people would be up in arms over the merchandise and service like they've been up in arms over the name.

Right or wrong, I do think it's more about that than anything else.
  #32  
Old 06-16-2010, 07:41 PM
Exapno Mapcase Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 29,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by eleanorigby View Post
The OP does know that Marshall Field essentially invented the department store, correct?
I have no horse in this race, but I did recently read Robert Hendrickson's The Grand Emporiums: The Illustrated History of America's Great Department Stores. (Don't ask.)

For whatever definition of "essentially invented the department store," this is contradicted by him. Macy's started a generation before Field's and famous names like Gimbels in New York, Lazarus in Columbus, and Wanamaker's in Philadelphia were all up and running before Fields. Hendrickson also says that some people consider Zions in Salt Lake City the first true department store.

As far as I'm concerned all the traditions of department stores can go hang, especially the one that decides whether and where to put the apostrophe. (For the record, I'm following Hendrickson's usages.)
  #33  
Old 06-16-2010, 09:38 PM
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Chicago Savant
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,156
Surely Hendrickson wrote ZCMI rather than Zions.
  #34  
Old 06-16-2010, 09:58 PM
Exapno Mapcase Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 29,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
Surely Hendrickson wrote ZCMI rather than Zions.
Actually he used both. Zions was easier than spelling the whole thing out.

ZCMI.
Quote:
Zions Cooperative Mercantile Institution was founded in 1868, by Brigham Young and was one of the earliest department stores in the United States. For many years, it used the slogan, "America's First Department Store".
It is now also part of the Macy's empire. As are Lazarus and Wanamaker's. Gimbel's had a more ironic ending.
Quote:
The cornerstone of the chain, the downtown Milwaukee store where Adam Gimbel had first found success (and alleged to be the most profitable Gimbel store), was handed to former BATUS sister division Marshall Field's, as well as some other Milwaukee Gimbels branch stores. After a few uncomfortable years trying to be a mass-market retailer, Fields gave up in 1997, closing the Milwaukee store and selling off the remaining Gimbels branches it held, except for the Hilldale store in Madison, Wisconsin, which became Macy's in September 2006.
  #35  
Old 06-16-2010, 10:14 PM
samclem samclem is online now
Graphite is a great
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 25,226
I've not delved into Hendrickson's cites on this.

I'm just saying that Robert Hendrickson is one piss-poor person to read about history. His etymological works are considered crap.
  #36  
Old 06-17-2010, 12:47 PM
Exapno Mapcase Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 29,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
I've not delved into Hendrickson's cites on this.

I'm just saying that Robert Hendrickson is one piss-poor person to read about history. His etymological works are considered crap.
The book is certainly popular history. But I'm not sure what the rest of your point is. The chronology of when different department stores opened is obviously correct. ZCMI does advertise itself as the first department store. I can look at his Macy's history and trace it directly to books on Macy's that I've read.

What am I not supposed to trust?
  #37  
Old 06-20-2010, 07:06 AM
lee lee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Cook County, IL
Posts: 4,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidchameleon View Post
Amen to that. I remember someone writing into the Trib blathering on about Macy's symbol being the red star and that showed they were being run by communists. Communists? Really?
As a child of the cold war, the red star of Macy's does rub me the wrong way, as does the one on Red Star yeast. Do I believe either company has anything to do with communism? Not to my knowledge. But the choice of symbols is grating. Oddly, Arm & Hammer baking soda does have a connection to communism, and yet that doesn't bother me. Nor do American communists in general.

Macy's could have kept up the Christmas window tradition, it was great publicity, and got news coverage every year. The displays were something special, and really did make me want to at least take a look inside. That they so bungled the handling of the dropping of the Christmas displays made me decide they were a business too stupid to get my dollar. It felt like they were deliberately pissing on the holiday and they came off as mean spirited as Scrooge.
  #38  
Old 02-22-2011, 11:51 PM
Tim R. Mortiss Tim R. Mortiss is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Lincoln Park, Chicago
Posts: 5,989
I shopped there for years when it was Fields. And I've shopped there after the conversion. Honestly, except for the color of the shopping bags, I can't tell the difference. Haters are being silly.
  #39  
Old 03-02-2011, 08:43 PM
SeaDragonTattoo SeaDragonTattoo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Chicago, Far Northsider
Posts: 7,799
I used to do all my Christmas shopping at the flagship Field's on State Street. Between there and Christkindlmarket I got all my shopping done and really enjoyed doing hands-on "physical" shopping then. My first, and last, experience with Macy's was that first Christmas after the name change. It was very different from the year before, and the many years prior that I shopped there for Christmas. I used to stop in the basement food court for late lunch - the food had changed, the tables were dirty, I went into the Ladies Room down there and it was so dirty I had to walk back out and seek a little-used room in the furniture department.

The areas around elevators and escalators that used to show off some space and clean flooring had been stocked with "displays" of extra merchandise - cheap toys, games, puzzles, all extra Christmas gift stock that made the whole place into a cluttered mess. No more spacious feel, just clutter, and cheap clutter at that. The handbag section was a mess and the jewelry counters were jammed with crap all over the tops with nary a salesperson to be found. If there was still a book section, I couldn't find it. A lot of the independent sellers that had areas they rented - there had been a clockmaker, a hair accessory maker, and some artist areas in the basement that were all gone - there were lots of empty areas.

That was the last time I stepped into the State Street store. I wept and I'm sure I looked like a crazy person, but my Christmas shopping tradition that I had carried from my mother was gone. I've done all my shopping on Amazon ever since. It's still very sad to me. It makes me tear up a little just thinking about it.
  #40  
Old 03-08-2011, 02:11 AM
jz78817 jz78817 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 9,883
well, we got the double-whammy in Detroit, when Hudson's became Marshall Field's, then Macy's. I'm not enough of a "shopper" to have really noticed any differences other than signage.
  #41  
Old 03-08-2011, 10:13 AM
Wheelz Wheelz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim R. Mortiss View Post
I shopped there for years when it was Fields. And I've shopped there after the conversion. Honestly, except for the color of the shopping bags, I can't tell the difference. Haters are being silly.
This has been my experience as well, based mostly on suburban mall locations.

I never frequented the State Street store, but the couple times I've been there and the Water Tower location post-Macy's, things have seemed pretty much the same as before. In fact, in the few years before the switch, I sadly noted that the State Street Field's had been getting kind of dumpy -- poor lighting, display fixtures in need of repair, etc. At least Macy's pumped in a little cash to get things looking nice again.
  #42  
Old 03-08-2011, 12:34 PM
President Johnny Gentle President Johnny Gentle is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 583
In Minneapolis, the similar complaint has to do with restoring the Dayton's name. Dayton's locations were converted along with Hudson's to Marshall Fields about 10 years ago, and then were converted to Macy's along with the entire chain.

One of the major complaints deals with the annual holiday display in the flagship Dayton's store on the Nicollet Mall in downtown Mpls. This is the store that appears in the opening credits of the Mary Tyler Moore show behind MTM tossing her hat into the air. Since 1962, there have been annual displays in the 8th floor auditorium, and many families would attend each year to see the display. Coupled with evening parades during the holiday season, Dayton's drew a lot of visitors downtown in cold snowy weather. But now, apparently Macy's has decided to downplay the annual display.
  #43  
Old 03-10-2011, 03:53 PM
Jophiel Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 16,487
I still don't shop at Macy's. Maybe if they had something no one else does, my resolve would be tested but I'm not hurting for department store options.

My wife shops at Macy's and admits that it considerably low quality (store & merchandise) than it was as Field's. She's a transplant from the East Coast so she's shopped at Macy's for years and years and had no allegiance to Field's but she'll say that it was nicer as Field's before the buy-out and conversion.
  #44  
Old 03-10-2011, 09:58 PM
kaylasdad99 kaylasdad99 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 27,598
The real tragedy is that when people in the future read C.M. Kornbluth's The Marching Morons, nobody will get the shout-out.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017