Word: retailing
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1940-1949
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...never publicly advertised her ties. But with some 100 retail outlets such as Chicago's Marshall Field & Co. and Dallas' Neiman-Marcus (which gave her its 1944 award for fabric design) clamoring for all she could send, the business expanded so rapidly that she finally had to hire two artists to help her turn out some 800-odd designs this year. That's still not enough, because her customers often insist on buying ties by the dozen. Among her strangely mixed clientele: William Randolph Hearst Sr., Frank Sinatra, Noel Coward, David Dubinsky and Harry Truman, who once...
...prices had been submitted to OPA in the U.S. as those in effect in December 1941 or January 1942, the base period for price ceilings. Using them as a base, OPA had set the U.S. price of Harwood's at $19.05 a case (wholesale) and $6.44 a fifth, retail. But, contended police, the lists had actually been printed in 1944. The two printers refused to talk...
After five years of flood, the tide in retail trade seemed about to turn last week. Sales were still enormous (see Earnings), and the upcoming Christmas shopping binge would keep them high, but more & more sales clerks heard two long forgotten phrases: "How much is it?" and "No thanks." All over the U.S. there were more & more signs that the sellers' market was turning into a buyers' market because 1) prices were too high or 2) the free-&-easy spenders of the first postwar rush had run out of money...
...monopoly, said the Government, consisted of a vertical combination of purchasing, manufacturing, distributing, and retail companies, all controlled by the Hartfords. Particularly useful was A. & P.'s purchasing agency, the Atlantic Commission Co., which used its mass buying power to force producers to give A. & P. preferential prices, the pick of the lot in products. If producers or manufacturers balked, A.C. Co. threatened to buy elsewhere or to set up a competing A. & P. subsidiary. Result: a two-price structure in which the lower price is paid by A. & P., the higher price by A. & P.'s retail...
...Government also made much of the fact that A. & P. used the profits from non-retail operations to cut down its retail prices. This, said the Government, made it virtually impossible for less integrated retailers to compete. But A. & P. argued that it was only making use of the usual chain-store economies to offer consumers lower prices. If that was a crime (and the court ruled that it was) then every other chain store and large industrial company which reduced prices by integrating its operations was equally guilty. (Indictments, almost identical with the one returned against A. & P., have...