 |
|
|
|||||
Its no secret that 2024 was a tough year for many retailers. From home goods stores like LL Flooring, to pharmacy chains like Walgreens, to automotive parts providers like Advance Auto Parts, numerous retailers announced store closures last year. Yet as bad as 2024 was when it came to retailer closures, 2025 is expected to be much, much worse, according to a report out from Coresight Research. How bad, you ask? Last year saw the most U.S. retail store closures7,325 of themsince the first year of the pandemic. In 2025, the number of closures is expected to double. Retail store closures could reach 15,000 in 2025 According to a January 22 report from Coresight Research that tracks the openings and closings of U.S. retail stores in 2024 and 2025, this year could see as many as 15,000 U.S. retail locations close. In the first 10 days of the new year, retail store closures announcements have already hit almost two thousand, at 1,925 stores announced to be closing. Nearly 30 retailers have announced store closures for 2025. Many of those, including Nordstrom, Kohls, Anthropologie, and Best Buy, have announced just one store closure, and others, including Foot Locker and Joann, fewer than 10. But five retail giants have announced dozens or hundreds of closures, which account for a majority of the 1,925 announced closures in 2025. Those retailers include: Party City: 738 closures Big Lots: 601 closures Walgreens Boots Alliance: 333 closures 7-Eleven (Seven & i Holdings Co., Ltd.): 148 closures Macys: 51 closures The report’s total 15,000 expected closures represents a 50% increase from the 10,000 retail store closures experienced in 2020, when the pandemic wreaked havoc on retail foot traffic as worried consumers opted to shift their spending to online retailers. 2024 was the worst year for retail store closures since the pandemic While Coresights 2025 numbers are estimates, firm figures are in for the calendar year 2024. It was a year that saw the highest number of U.S. retail store closures since the pandemic. In total, in 2024, major retailers closed 7,325 locations across the country, reducing their retail footprint by a staggering 120 million square feet. In 2024, discount store retailers were the overwhelming contributor to U.S. retail store closures, accounting for 23.9% of all store closures. Three retailers accounted for the majority of that slice of the pie, including Family Dollar at 718 stores closed, Big Lots at 517 stores closed, and 99 Cents Only Stores at 371 stores closed. Overall, the list of top U.S. retailers with closures in 2024 includes: Family Dollar: 718 closures CVS Health: 586 closures Conns: 553 closures rue21: 543 closures Big Lots: 517 closures Other major retail chains also saw a significant number of store closures in 2024, including 7-Eleven (492), Rite Aid (408), American Freight (353), and Walgreens Boots Alliance (259). Shein and Temu represent an increasing threat to U.S. retailers So, whats behind the high number of store closures in 2024 and expected closures in 2025? There are several factors, according to Coresight Research CEO Deborah Weinswig. Inflation and a growing preference among consumers to shop online to find the cheapest deals took a toll on brick-and-mortar retailers in 2024, Weinswig said. Last year we saw the highest number of closures since the pandemic. Retailers that were unable to adapt supply chains and implement technology to cut costs were significantly impacted, and we continue to see a trend of consumers opting for the path of least resistance. Not only do they want the best prices, but they also have no patience for stores that are constantly disorganized, out of stock, and that deliver poor customer service. Yet its not just inflation-weary consumers looking for the best deals for their discretionary spending, or a displeasure with the brick-and-mortar shopping experience. Coresight says that retailers are also experiencing pressure from new online entrantsnot just e-commerce giant Amazon. The firm sees Shein and Temu (combined) as a $100+ billion juggernaut pressuring incumbent retailers and marketplaces across a number of global markets, including the US, the report states. We expect general-merchandise retailers across a wide range of categories, from automotive to home and pet, to be threatened by the further growth of Temu and the scaling of Sheins non-clothing offering. It should be noted, however, that while 2024 saw the most store closures since the pandemic, it also saw a number of openings. In 2024, major U.S. retailers opened 5,970 locations, dropping the net loss of stores to 1,355 locations. The bad news for 2025 is that store closures are not only expected to double, but store openings are expected to come in lower than they did in 2024. For 2025, Coresight Research expects approximately 5,800 major retail locations to open. That’s fewer than the number of locations that opened last year, and leaves an expected 2025 net loss of approximately 9,200 retail locations. That being said, Coresight expects a 3.3% rise in retail sales in America for 2025 (excluding automobiles and gasoline). However, that growth pales in comparison to online retail sales, which are expected to grow at almost triple that rate at 8.3%. Additionally, the report notes, we expect competition from e-commerce players to be Shein and Temu, as well as alternative channels such as TikTok (should it continue to operate in the US) and social commerce more widely.
Category:
E-Commerce
Sooner or later, the politicians who most admire Donald Trump begin to emulate him. They adopt his populist rhetoric, specific diction, or aggressive tone. If they happen to be men, they might stuff their closets with navy suits and red ties. Some of them even start to stand like him. Its not just politicians, though. A lot of the tech billionaires who have recently become more open to Trump (who have been dubbed the “broligarchy”), have to varying degrees also come to resemble him in one way or another. Earlier this week, for instance, the long-running feud between Elon Musk and Sam Altmanboth once members of OpenAIs board before Musk departed in 2018veered into the realm of Trumpian spectacle. After Trump trumpeted a $500 billion joint venture between OpenAI, Oracle, and SoftBank on Tuesday, Musk threw cold water on the idea. He responded to OpenAIs X post officially unveiling the Stargate project, bluntly concluding: They dont have the money. Altman wasted no time firing back. He invited Musk to visit the first Stargate site purportedly in development, and took a jab at Musks patriotism. ([I] realize what is great for the country isn’t always what’s optimal for your companies, he wrote, but in your new role [I] hope you’ll mostly put [America] first.) Later, the OpenAI CEO attempted to de-escalate the spat, adding: [I] genuinely respect your accomplishments and think you are the most inspiring entrepreneur of our time. But its hard to put billionaire-war toothpaste back in the tube. These two have sparred before, in company blog posts and goofy Musk tweets, but this X activity is something new. Its the most publicly pugnacious Altman has gotten yet, even if he did try to soften it afterward with a compliment. Its also the closest hes come to the Trump tactic of airing out adversaries on social media. Perhaps donating $1 million to Trumps inauguration has pulled him into Trumps gravitational orbit, floating alongside the rest of the broligarchy. Musk was the first of the heavy-hitter tech CEOs to start imitating Trump. Even before his May 2022 announcement that hed be voting Republican going forward, Musk had already reinvented himself. It seemed his primary takeaway from Trumps first term was that he, too, should become the main character online (and in reality) as often as possible. Trump had led like a P. T. Barnum-esque ringmaster, turning the office of the presidency into a reality TV show. Perhaps Musk recognized that even though Trump lost his bid for reelection, there was power in providing the general public with spectacleeven if it meant being hated as much as admired. While Musk had long been a public figure, and sparked his fair share of controversies, at the dawn of the 2020s, he started generating headlines practically every day. Whether it was through complaining about gender pronouns, hyping up crypto, hosting SNL, or berating rival billionaire Jeff Bezos over the aesthetics of his Blue Origin rocket. He also began to antagonize journalists he disagreed with, and to use one of Trumps favorite terms: fake news. It should not be surprising that the pair are now close allies, locked in a symbiotic relationship. Bezos eventually followed his foe Musk into Trump Country, squashing a Kamala Harris endorsement from running in his troubled news outlet, The Washington Post, last October. Also like Musk, Bezos had seemingly already internalized the Trump trait of showmanship. After his divorce from Mackenzie Scott in 2019, Bezos quickly became more of a fixture in headlineswhether he was showing off his Blue Origin rocket, dressing in skin-tight art deco, or popping up at Coachella with girlfriend Lauren Sanchez. He also purchased a $500 million superyacht and shot down rumors of an even more expensive wedding. The divorced-guy version of Bezos seemed comfortable in the spotlight, ever-ready to give America something to talk about. When he was seen smiling in the VIP row at Trumps inauguration earlier this weekthe nexus of the worlds attention that dayhe could hardly have looked more at home. Like Bezos, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has also had a glow-up recently, ditching his signature hoodies for loose T-shirts and a neck chain, and perming his hair into the Gen Z broccoli cut. The new look also accompanies a fresh pivot into Trumpism, complete with financial support and hostility toward MAGA bugaboos like fact-checking and DEI. According to a New York Times report, this pivot is more than a cover-your-ass initiative to keep Meta prtected, but public proof that the billionaires personal politics have shifted sharply to the right since 2020. The CEO may have also dropped some hints of his evolution along the way. Zuckerbergs Trumpiest moment may not have come across that way in real time. In many respects, it was probably the best press hed gotten since his wunderkind era. Either way, during the summer of 2023, as Meta was about to launch its Twitter-killer Threads, Musk joked about the possibility of a cage match with Zuckerberg. He probably didnt expect what happened next. Zuckerberg contacted Ultimate Fight Championship CEO and close Trump ally Dana Whitenow a member of Metas boardand asked him to broker the fight. If the matchup between Mr. Musk, 52, and Mr. Zuckerberg, 39, goes ahead, it would be a rare spectacle, even in the braggadocio-filled universe of the tech industry, the Times reported. Just the fact that a cage match was potentially in the offing was a spectacle all on its own. It drew attention to Zuckerbergs recent transformation into a Jiu-Jitsu badasswhich he demonstrated on the Lex Fridman podcastnot to mention the launch of Threads. Musk may have started the cage match conversation, but it was Zuckerbergs newfound showman instincts that recognized it as an incredible opportunity for self-promotion. Before calling the fight off six weeks later, Zuckerberg got to look cool by calling Musks bluff. He seemed to codify the sides of the social media playing field. Musk represented the one tilting far-right and fringe beliefs, while Zuckerbergs side was distancing itself from politics and instead going hydrofoiling. The hypothetical fight between the two seemed like a proxy war for the future of social media. Looking back now, though, it just seems like blatant self-promotion, with the soap opera drama of WWE and the reality-show flair of Trumps entire political career. In 2023, it was easy, maybe even fun to revel in the hype of a dumb CEO fight and choose sides. Now, the whole broligarchy is clearly all on the same sideduking it out amongst each other to see who can be most like Trump at any given time.
Category:
E-Commerce
When Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg appeared on a January 10, 2025, episode of The Joe Rogan Experience, he lamented that corporate culture had become too feminine, suppressing its masculine energy and abandoning supposedly valuable traits such as aggression. The workplace, he concluded, has been neutered. Perhaps not surprisingly, Zuckerberg has also embraced stereotypically masculine pursuits in his personal life. Hes become a mixed martial arts aficionado and has shared his affinity for smoking meats. On his expansive Hawaii compound, hes even taken up bow-and-arrow pig hunting. Hes come a long way from the geeky image of his youth. But is Zuckerberg right? Do workplaces in the U.S. need to embrace a more diesel-fueled, street-fighting, meat-eating mentality? As a social psychologist who studies masculinity and aggression, I think its important to evaluate what the science says about Zuckerbergs claimsand to consider what it means for the future of workplace culture in the U.S. Show no weakness In 2018, sociologist Jennifer Berdahl and her colleagues coined the term masculinity contest culture to describe workplaces rife with cutthroat competition, toxic leadership, bullying, and harassment. Integrating decades of prior research on masculinity in the workplace, Berdahl and her collaborators were able to map how masculinity contest cultures operate, as well as show how they affect organizations and individual employees. In her experiments, she had participants agree or disagree with statements such as expressing any emotion other than anger or pride is seen as weak, based on their perceptions of their own organization. Using advanced statistical techinques, Berdahls team was able to distill masculinity contest cultures down to four components: showing no weakness, strength and stamina, putting work first, and dog eat dog. Then they were able to show how these cultures are tied to a host of negative outcomes for workers and companies, such as burnout, turnover, and poor well-being. And at the organization level, they can foment a dysfunctional office environment, toxic leadership, and even bullying and harassment. An imagined grievance Based on this research, then, it seems like promoting rigid masculinity in the workplace is not the best solution for an arguably already struggling Meta. What, then, led Zuckerberg to claim that the workplace has been neutered and must be infused with masculine energy? Has the American office really gone full Legally Blonde? Zuckerbergs own company isnt exactly a paragon of parity: Its total workforce, as of 2022, was nearly two-thirds male, while its tech workforce was three-quarters male. Furthermore, according to psychologists Sapna Cheryan and Hazel Markus, workplaces in the U.S. still reflect what they call masculine defaultscultures that reward characteristics or behaviors generally associated with men. This can range from how companies describe themselvesfor example, as places that are aggressive and unrestrainedto hosting events catering to traditionally male pursuits, such as golf outings. Although Cheryan and Markuss analysis centers on how masculine defaults make it harder for women to carve out their professional paths, they can harm everybody, including men. My research, for example, has shown that when men feel pressured to fulfill certain masculine expectations, they can develop fragile masculine identities, which are linked with aggression and anxiety. Although the pervasiveness of masculinity norms can give men an upper hand in the workplace, I wonder whether men are contorting themselves to fit into outdated molds of who succeeds at work. Indeed, research shows that successful organizations promote a healthy mix of stereotypically masculine and feminine qualities. In other words, its best when people of all genders feel comfortable showcasing traits such as cooperation and agency, qualities that dont necessarily fall into one gender camp. The rise of the fragile billionaire If many workplaces still possess dog-eat-dog cultures and celebrate masculinitywith evidently poor outcomesyou might wonder why billionaire corporate leaders would advocate for them. The most generous explanation is ignorance. Zuckerberg could simply be unaware that most offices in the U.S. still possess competitive environments and traits associated with traditional masculinity. Although this could be the case, I think there could be two other explanations for Zuckerbergs promotion of rigid masculinity norms. There could be an economic motive. Perhaps Zuckerberg thinks that promoting his company as an arena of high-stakes competition and aggression is the best way to attract talent and spur innovation in a field already dominated by men. Its often thought that competition drives innovation. So Meta needs to be more masculine could actually be code for Meta needs to breed mre internal competition, which will spur innovation and turn a profit. This assumption is also misguided: Recent research has shown that internal competition may actually stifle innovation. There could also be a psychological motive. Ive found in my research that men are most likely to cling to notions of rigid masculinity when they feel pressure to man up and are insecure about themselves. Perhaps Zuckerberg sees diversity efforts as a challenge to his power. Maybe he thinks aligning himself with President Donald Trumps version of masculinity will help him gain and retain power, especially as he faces challenges from other tech giants. So his promotion of an aggressive workplace, along with his slashing of policies that could make him look weak, are moves to reinforce his status as a leader, as an innovator, and as a man. This isnt to say that activities such as hunting and mixed martial arts are inherently bad, or even inherently masculine: There are plenty of female hunters and UFC fighters. Nor is it to say that certain masculine characteristics in the workplace are inherently bad. But when I see middle-aged billionairesZuckerberg isnt the only oneexhibiting the signs of fragile masculinity that Ive observed among young adult men and adolescent boys, I cant help but wonder what the countrys future holds. Adam Stanaland is an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Richmond. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||