Robinson’s Renewal : 105-Year-Old Chain Strives to Regain Upscale Image
Robinson’s has an identity problem.
The department store chain’s big downtown location, once a handsome flagship with designs on being a mecca for downtown workers, looks like a clearance center. Yet the spiffy Beverly Hills store, befitting its location, sports attractive Ralph Lauren and Giorgio Armani boutiques. In Northridge, the newest addition to the chain comes off as a moderately priced store with upscale aspirations but numerous sale racks.
Two years after its purchase by May Department Stores, Robinson’s seems still to be in search of an image. Is it carriage trade or trendy? Mainstream or high end? Competition for Bullock’s or the more moderate Broadway?
“At one time, it had a look of its own, more like a big boutique,” said Russa Graeme, a Studio City artist and former customer. “Now they’ve sort of joined the crowd.”
Her view is typical of that of many shoppers and retail observers, who say that this 105-year-old fixture in Southern California retailing has taken a much more moderate tack than in years past, when it was considered first a carriage-trade store and then, more recently, a fashion leader.
The chain may seem a shadow of its former self, but some signs of the old Robinson’s elan have reappeared in recent weeks.
Robinson’s has started calling attention to them with a splashy new “Robinson’s Now” advertising campaign. And observers say the store is developing a more refined approach after months of languishing as an overly “safe,” mainstream merchant.
Many in the retailing industry traced the conservatism to the chain’s purchase in October, 1986, by May Department Stores, a company with a strict focus on bottom-line results and a penchant for middle-of-the-road merchandising, as evident in its May Co. California operation.
The takeover resulted in a clash of cultures, with May and Robinson’s executives knocking heads over how to approach merchandising, close observers say. May, they contend, assumed that customers would adjust quickly to changes in products on the store’s shelves and racks.
“What we (were) seeing was a mistaken notion that a cookie-cutter approach on the lowest common denominator is workable,” said Kurt Barnard, publisher of the Retail Marketing Report newsletter in New York. “You cannot . . . expect the customer to mold herself to the store. I believe it’s precisely the other way around.”
The ensuing management upheaval and strategy changes added to uncertainty at the store, which had already suffered through two top-level shifts in a year. To the puzzlement of rivals, Robinson’s scaled back on top designer fashions and fortified such proven moderately priced lines as Liz Claiborne, making it look in some departments like a clone of its cousin, May Co.
Employee morale sank. Executives and merchandise buyers jumped ship or were fired. In some cases, long-standing relationships with clothing manufacturers were severed ungracefully, former employees say. Disgruntled with thin stocks, mundane fashions and spotty service, customers began fleeing to Bullock’s and Nordstrom. Even the store’s official name was a moving target, bouncing from Robinson’s to J. W. Robinson Co. and back to Robinson’s--as if to signify that the store itself didn’t know quite what to aim for.
And rumors surfaced that May might even sell the underperforming chain.
For now, though, much of the speculation seems to have been laid to rest, and industry observers are saying that the Robinson’s ship is finally being righted.
“Possibly within the last nine months, Robinson’s has a clearer understanding or a re-establishment of what the base was,” said Philip B. Sobel, a former senior vice president at Robinson’s who is now president of Caesars World Merchandising in Los Angeles. “Today if you look at Robinson’s, you see a vastly improved one, well on its way to becoming more a competitor of Bullock’s.”
Indeed, after a turbulent realignment, Robinson’s has some cause for mild celebration. Its “Robinson’s Now” ad campaign has drawn praise. And over the last six months, industry sources say, the 24-store chain has shown excellent improvement in sales and profits. Analysts expect the chain, for which May does not break out results, to become profitable for the current quarter after several quarters of losses. Last year, analysts say, the chain lost money on $576 million in sales.
Expansion Program
The chain has also embarked on a $105-million, five-year program to build four new stores and remodel an additional location. It also stands to benefit from the closings of poorly performing units in Anaheim and Panorama City.
Robinson’s President and Chief Executive Robert L. Mettler and May Department Stores officials declined to be interviewed for this story. But discussions with longtime observers of the Southern California retailing scene paint a fairly upbeat picture.
“They have been trying--with some trial and error over a couple-year period--to reposition Robinson’s in the marketplace,” said William N. Smith, a retailing analyst with the Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co. brokerage in New York. “Hopefully, they’re more out of the error stage right now.”
To be sure, Robinson’s has maintained a loyal, through-thick-and-thin following, although even devotees occasionally feel let down.
Cheryl Shiver, a customer service agent for an overnight delivery company and a longtime Robinson’s shopper, praised a Robinson’s saleswoman who recently found Shiver’s expensive sunglasses in a fitting room, carefully wrapped them and saved them by the register. Shiver said she uses “Robinson’s for everything--bed linens, towels, my son’s clothing.” But she finds herself going elsewhere for some fashion items. “They don’t have the trendy things anymore,” she said.
Northridge resident Jennifer Colby, a fragrance company representative who spends a great deal of time in department and specialty stores, finds the selection at Robinson’s appealing and affordable and the service frequently better than at Nordstrom. Her main criticism would be that Robinson’s looks like every other store. “If they’re going to compete, they will have to be different,” she said.
Elise Ung Brisco, an optometrist who lives in Culver City and has shopped in Robinson’s for eight years, values the store for its extensive petites department and its customer service. “You can return anything any time,” she said, noting that the store took back without question pumps that she had bought six months before but had not worn.
On the other hand, a shopper at the Beverly Hills store said rude service in a ready-to-wear department last summer prompted her to write a scathing letter to management. Since then, she has received two cards from Robinson’s asking her about the store’s service.
Service was a hallmark of the store during the 7 1/2-year tenure of Chairman Michael Gould, who at one time envisioned the downtown Robinson’s as a lunchtime haven for office workers complete with trendy eateries.
Gould resigned in March, 1986, after the parent company criticized him for letting costs get out of hand. He was quickly replaced by Tom L. Roach, who held the top post for just 10 tumultuous months during which May Department Stores entered the scene.
In January, 1987, May replaced him with Mettler, an executive known for his friendly ways. As Mettler came in, other executives were squeezed out in anticipation of a restructuring.
“What happened when we all left was that you had May (executives) with very strong egos coming in to run it their way,” said a former high-level Robinson’s official. “A year and a half later, they found that some of their merchandising concepts were not correct for Robinson’s. Now they’re going back to some of (the earlier strategies).”
New Key Executives
Gould, now president and chief executive of Giorgio Beverly Hills, the fragrance company, is quick to praise Mettler. “I have known Bob Mettler for 18 years. He is personable, always upbeat and is a good cheerleader for the staff.” (Gould’s company recently spirited away from Robinson’s Sabra Lande, the store’s senior vice president and general merchandise manager of accessories and shoes. She is one of several executives who have joined Giorgio Beverly Hills in the last two years.)
Observers also applaud two recent additions who joined Robinson’s after R. H. Macy & Co. took over their old employer, Bullock’s. They are Judy B. Farris, senior vice president, marketing and sales promotion, who is given much of the credit for the new ad campaign, and James Rosenthal, senior vice president, general merchandise manager of men’s clothing and furnishings. With such merchandising strength, one rival retailer said, “they could get the better business back if May will let them.”
Meanwhile, though, Robinson’s faces stiff competition from Bullock’s and the Broadway, which is taking advantage of changeovers at Bullock’s and Robinson’s to push more heavily into upper-moderate lines.
Robert F. Buchanan, senior retail analyst at A. G. Edwards & Sons in St. Louis, credits the recent improvement at Robinson’s largely to a general pickup in retail sales in Southern California.
“I’m hard-pressed to say that the improvement in fortunes at Robinson’s . . . has much to do with re-merchandising efforts on the part of the company,” he said, although he acknowledged that Robinson’s “is moving to get a better handle on expenses and to refine its vendor structure.”
Key to a turnaround, he added, will be improvements in store layout and visual presentation as well as increased efforts to attract younger shoppers.
Robinson’s employees are said to still be suffering from morale problems caused by the constantly shifting strategies. “Those who have stuck it out are skeptical,” said one former employee. “Management has a credibility problem.”
As for speculation that May might unload Robinson’s, analysts are divided in their opinions.
“It’s not for sale,” said Thomas H. Tashjian, vice president of retail trade at Seidler Amdec Securities in Los Angeles. “It would be foolhardy to believe that May would be interested in selling it now that it’s making a turn.”
But Buchanan says Robinson’s management faces a crucial test in the coming year. “I think management doesn’t wait forever to turn this thing around,” he said. “If we don’t see significant improvement in a year, this thing goes on the block.”
