Dick's Sporting Goods ain't doing so well

Last line of article says they are down 32.7% in the last 12 months. If you are that far down when the market as a whole has been in record high territory for the same time you may want to consider not alienating an entire segment of the market with stupid do nothing policies.
 
They we're already struggling, which may have been a marketing gamble on their part. It may make sense in their regular stores, possibility enhancing sales to that market. But they have the Field and Stream stores, which made the move stupid. "Cutting off your nose to spite your face."
 
dave33 said:
Last line of article says they are down 32.7% in the last 12 months. If you are that far down when the market as a whole has been in record high territory for the same time you may want to consider not alienating an entire segment of the market with stupid do nothing policies.
Click to expand...

The stock market may be riding a high, but retail not so much.
 
I have never really bought gun stuff from them, always found them high. We have bought alot of baseball, clothes from them through the years. Not anymore, I will shop at academy for most of our sporting needs now.
 
Last edited:
1 - Dicks total hunting division (including wearables, guns, ammo, bows...) accounts for about 12% of their total revenue. Dicks not selling "AR style" weapons really has no impact on their overall bottom line.

2 - I never bought a rifle from Dicks before, but some years ago they pulled the same stunt (pulling AR's off their shelves) and at that point I knew I'd never buy a gun there anyways unless they were going out of business and couldn't pass up on a deal.
 
Has nothing to do with their politics. They we're sinking before.
 
concepthomes1 said:
I still buy golf items from Dick's.
I understand the negative effect from gun owners but in reality, I also respect that every business should be able to sell to whomever they please. While this libertarian concept certainly makes me appear as a hypocrite since I am a gun owner, it's really simple to me.
Click to expand...
To me the big deal was they refused to deliver rifles folk had paid for last time they did this.
Acting pious, yet transferring their inventory to their sister franchise, F&S.
After that stunt, I haven't darkened their door, except once to fill a cart, get to the register, then politely informing them I will be purchasing these items, just not with them due to their disdain for law abiding citizens.
 
Since you can get damn near everything there for less elsewhere even after figuring in overnight shipoing, I'm not shocked.

I don't even shop there, I've only been in with a friend and spent the whole time luring her to try other avenues. After we couldn't get anyone to help us, we left and she ordered her shoes for way less elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
My wife and I get 3 points each on the Dick’s app daily as long as we register at least 10,000 steps on Fitbit. For every 300 points they send us a $10 reward. So, every 4 months or so, I go to Dick’s use $20 reward on golf balls (yes, I lose lot of golf balls) and walk out...not a penny out of my pocket, playing with house money.
 
Joe said:
1 - Dicks total hunting division (including wearables, guns, ammo, bows...) accounts for about 12% of their total revenue. Dicks not selling "AR style" weapons really has no impact on their overall bottom line.
Click to expand...

Somebody at Dick's was more interested in virtue-signalling than understanding retail sales.

Since the "hunting division" generated 12% of sales revenue, and "ARs" were only a small fraction of that division's sales, somebody thought that banning sales of "evil assault rifles" would have practically no financial impact on the company. WRONG. The fraction of a percent of revenue lost from AR sales will be meaningless, but the impact is from the loss of all sales to customers alienated by the new policy.
 
The Field & Stream debacle shows their mgmt has no idea what they are doing. All the big box outdoor stores have to be dying a slow death. Black guns dont even figure into it.
 
noway2 said:
You need to convince yourself that the water trap really doesn't exist.
Click to expand...
:) I wish that was my only problem! Hitting the ball way right or left into the woods is my bigger problem :(
 
Here's my take:

IDGAF what took them down, or when. All I know is another FUDD anti-2A company is getting fuxx0red in the nether region financially after being a decent company for buying a gun only a few years back. They had some pretty competitive pricing before Sandy Hook, and I used to buy quite a bit of hunting and shooting supplies from them before they spun off F&S as a brand.
So whether or not this latest Anti-2A tirade hurts them or not, the message is: Don't inject your stupid marxist politics in when you are struggling to pay to keep the lights on.

Eff them, Eff Stack, and Eff any other company that feels like pushing their politics on me. Voting with my wallet is the only voice I have toward corporate america (other than purchasing shares)
 
Last edited:
12151791 said:
:) I wish that was my only problem! Hitting the ball way right or left into the woods is my bigger problem :(
Click to expand...
You're like me then. You play at playing golf :D

Never understood the attraction of it until I tried it last year for the first time. Hoping to get out there the weekend of April 13th when we have our first RV trip of the season.
 
gc70 said:
Somebody at Dick's was more interested in virtue-signalling than understanding retail sales.

Since the "hunting division" generated 12% of sales revenue, and "ARs" were only a small fraction of that division's sales, somebody thought that banning sales of "evil assault rifles" would have practically no financial impact on the company. WRONG. The fraction of a percent of revenue lost from AR sales will be meaningless, but the impact is from the loss of all sales to customers alienated by the new policy.
Click to expand...
This.

Ask Wells Fargo what happens when your reputation gets tarnished, even if you're financially sound. Oh wait, I don't have to ask, I just look at my 401K.
 
gc70 said:
WRONG. The fraction of a percent of revenue lost from AR sales will be meaningless, but the impact is from the loss of all sales to customers alienated by the new policy.
Click to expand...

I would respectfully disagree with you.

The percentage no one knows is how many gun enthusiasts actually buy from Dick's for the major of non hunting/gun products at their stores and what total percentage of sales that actually is.

I would have to assume Dicks has a pretty good idea of how many gun enthusiasts actually buys other items, and I'm guessing they weighed the possible positive vs negative ramifications this decision could have on their sales. Since they had already pulled AR's off the shelf in the past, they would of already of had a good idea of what kind of drop they could expect, and they decided to do it anyways.
 
Joe said:
I would respectfully disagree with you.

The percentage no one knows is how many gun enthusiasts actually buy from Dick's for the major of non hunting/gun products at their stores and what total percentage of sales that actually is.
Click to expand...

customer sales > single product sales
 
Joe said:
I would respectfully disagree with you.

The percentage no one knows is how many gun enthusiasts actually buy from Dick's for the major of non hunting/gun products at their stores and what total percentage of sales that actually is.

I would have to assume Dicks has a pretty good idea of how many gun enthusiasts actually buys other items, and I'm guessing they weighed the possible positive vs negative ramifications this decision could have on their sales. Since they had already pulled AR's off the shelf in the past, they would of already of had a good idea of what kind of drop they could expect, and they decided to do it anyways.
Click to expand...

And I would have to respectfully disagree with you. You're giving them way more credit than they deserve. When you're down nearly 30% over the past year, I can't imagine why anyone would think that would be a good time to alienate any customers regardless of how small of a percentage their sales account for. Because as someone pointed out above, the loss in sales will now not only be in AR's (which they quit selling awhile back), but also everything else which would have been bought by the people who will now no longer shop there.
 
Last edited:
Railsplitter said:
When you're down nearly 30% over the past year, I can't imagine why anyone would think that would be a good time to alienate any customers regardless of how small of a percentage their sales account for
Click to expand...
Perhaps they're betting the long odds that the gun grabbing leftists will be more inclined to shop there?
 
noway2 said:
Perhaps they're betting the long odds that the gun grabbing leftists will be more inclined to shop there?
Click to expand...

May be - who knows. I've never understood why people shop there to begin with because of their high prices. It's like people don't like saving money or something.
 
But do they still sell Camelbacks and other Vista Outdoor Products? Or have they done like REI and cut off any vendors associated with firearms? Maybe Dicks needs to follow REI's lead to lure all the gun grabbers into buying from them?
 
Joe said:
and I'm guessing they weighed the possible positive vs negative ramifications this decision could have on their sales.
Click to expand...
They did. But have you ever been to one of these corporate type meetings?
The top brass decides that this is what they're gonna do. Then they hold a meeting with the under-brass and ask for input.
In theory that is.
The top brass don't look kindly on anyone who bucks the decision. What they really want is support and overtly optimistic yes-men who agree and put up 'options' to counteract any negativity that may result from the decision. If you're one of those that insists nothing good can possibly come from this, and the company cannot overcome the detrimental results regardless of any shell games planned, you're not going to go far within the company. You can be proven 100% correct as time moves on, but you're not a team player. So everyone agrees with whatever decision comes down the pike, with only token comments to the negative...like they're intently thinking about it but in reality they're just sucking up to the program.
 
12151791 said:
My wife and I get 3 points each on the Dick’s app daily as long as we register at least 10,000 steps on Fitbit. For every 300 points they send us a $10 reward. So, every 4 months or so, I go to Dick’s use $20 reward on golf balls (yes, I lose lot of golf balls) and walk out...not a penny out of my pocket, playing with house money.
Click to expand...
Ever hook the Fitbit up to a small dog? You can get 10,000 steps in before your first coffee.
 
Friday said:
The top brass decides that this is what they're gonna do. Then they hold a meeting with the under-brass and ask for input.
In theory that is.
Click to expand...


I couldn't figure out how to close/cancel my F&S account, so I had to call to cancel.

When asked why,,,??
Answer, “I thought Venezuela was South of our border??”

Bye,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

images


images
 
The F&S that opened here had nose bleed prices. I think I went there twice. The first time I just looked around and checked prices and said, "DAMN" and walked out the door. I went back with some shooting buddies who did not believe me when I told them about the high prices. They went "DAMN" and we all walked out and never went back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom