Incompetence So Great

Back when I was rebuilding a grocery chain’s loyalty program, I encountered a situation that was apparently not at all uncommon:  astonishing incompetence.  Here’s what happened.

I’d relaunched our loyalty card in our Long Island stores, in the face of fierce competition.  Long Island, while geographically tiny, is densely populated and therefore had a huge number of grocery chains in the area at the time:  A&P, Pathmark, ShopRite, Stop & Shop and our company Grand Union.  In addition, there was any number of independent operators, ranging from bodegas to large stores located in a single town or area.  It was, at the time, quite probably the most competitive grocery market in the world.  No single chain had more than 3% market share, for example.

Which is why, when I joined Grand Union to fix their loyalty program, the management committee insisted that the relaunch take place in Long Island.  (I’d suggested taking a small area such as Connecticut to test the program, but for strategic reasons, Long Island was the division in most trouble, so that was what I had.)

Anyway, I did the thing:  redesigned the card’s appearance (to distinguish itself from the older card) and taking previous customer spending as a benchmark, stratified customers into “Platinum”, “Gold” and “Regular” groups.

This, by the way, was a cause of great consternation to the management group and to Operations, who for decades had treated every customer as equal.  That was nonsense, of course;  when I analyzed the data, it worked out that each store’s financial viability depended on a very few customers.  In large stores, the per-store actual count was about 2,000 shoppers, and in smaller stores, much less — as little as 1,100 customers.  As I put it to management, if I were to write a letter to all those top customers, telling them to stop shopping with us or they’d be murdered, we’d have to close all our stores inside a month.  Not only did those 20%-odd account for about 72% of total sales, they accounted for nearly 90% of our gross profits.  (Which makes sense, because those top customers shopped the whole store, most especially the high-margin departments such as Deli, Produce, Scratch Bakery and Butchery.)

I’d also redesigned our advertising approach.  Instead of relying on those familiar weekly store “flyers” (distributed in newspapers and in the stores themselves), we would stop using flyers altogether and do direct mail offers only to our Platinum and Gold customers, sponsoring both production costs and markdowns by reallocating the print spend.  I didn’t care about the “regular” customers, who not only shopped just the weekly discounted items (low margin) but hardly spent anything in the rest of the store.  I didn’t even care if they stopped shopping with us altogether, because the benefits accrued (lower staff counts and more-profitable sales) would more than make up for the expected sales loss.  (Just to be clear on this, it wasn’t just supposition on my part.  In my previous consultancy job, I’d steered several chains into a similar direction, with almost universal success.)

Of course, the resistance I got from, well, just about everyone, was fierce.  The only thing that saved me was that the CEO was on board with my plan, as was a key board member, who’d been a client from a previous job, as CEO of his supermarket company in Chicago.

Anyway, we launched the new program, and as the sales were reported weekly and not daily, I sat back confidently to await the results.

Which were catastrophic.  Relaunch week showed sales down by nearly forty(!) percent.  I nearly had a heart attack.

Then I went into the data, and started looking at the daily sales.  Hmmm, what was this?  No sales reported at all for the first three days of the promotion week (Wednesday through Friday) — I mean, zero sales, not a single dollar.  Clearly, something was amiss.

So I went over to the IT department to see what had happened.  It turned out that they had chosen that same week to test a new software product which collected the in-store returns, collapsed the data to make it all fit into the data pipe back to head office, then opened the zipped files once on the mainframe.  Well, the program hadn’t worked at all, resulting in the loss of three days’ sales data.

I nearly had a heart attack, again.  The most disturbing thing was the attitude of the IT department — essentially an insouciant shrug, accompanied by “Well, it’s working now so your data will get better.”

To say I was enraged would be the world’s largest understatement.  My own boss was likewise angered, but not as much as I was because he was not a data person.

The CEO was unavailable, so I went off to see the CFO.  (A little background:  he was a recent arrival at Grand Union, but as luck would have it, we’d met before during my earlier career when I’d been advising his company — a Florida chain — with their own loyalty card program.  He’d been very impressed with my input, his finance brain immediately understanding the financial implication of customer segmentation;  but I’d been unable to implement the new program because I’d quit to join Grand Union.)

I walked into his office in a white-hot rage, but somehow managed to hold back.  In calm, but very lucid tones, I outlined what had happened and what the effect had been on our data.  To say he was appalled would also be a huge understatement.  “The data is completely lost?  We can’t retrieve it at all?”

Back in those days, data storage was not the simple and inexpensive task it is today, so at store level, once the data had been shipped off to head office, the space was cleared to make way for the next week.

He looked at me.  “Of course, I’m going to make sure that Management knows all about this at our next meeting.  But how did this happen?”

I thought about it for a moment, then said, “It is difficult to comprehend incompetence on this scale.  I am not a paranoid person, but if I were, I would suspect sabotage.”

I told you all that, so you could look at this situation on the same basis.

New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill had to confess that some 6,600 noncitizens landed on the Garden State’s voter rolls in 2023-24, and 400 voted.

And:

“I am appalled by the reckless failures that allowed this to happen and the lack of transparency shown by those in charge at the time,” Sherrill, just six months into her first term, said in a statement.

Yeah, I’m sure she is.

Sherrill blamed system software for the “error” and pledged an investigation into the alarming failure. She said she’s also canning the vendor involved.

Of course it’s the software’s fault. [eyecross]  But the oversight of the data?  That’s not the vendor’s job, it’s her state government’s remit, and that’s the biggest failure.  More to the point:

New Jersey’s registration “glitch” is just the latest in a growing record of noncitizens doing what Democrats and their accomplice media friends say rarely happens: registering and voting in U.S. elections.

“The revelation comes as President Donald Trump and other Republicans continue to assert that voting by noncitizens is rampant in U.S. elections, even though it’s rare and, when caught, can be punished as a felony that can lead to deportation,” useful idiot Geoff Mulvhill wrote in his coverage of the scandal. 

When caught? Such crimes are rarely caught due to lack of interest by many election and law enforcement officers on the front and back ends of the system. Democrat policymakers have bent over backwards to be “inclusive” and “equitable” in voter rights legislation, at the expense of election security. 

Now let’s revisit my words to Grand Union’s CFO:

“It is difficult to comprehend incompetence on this scale.  I am not a paranoid person, but if I were, I would suspect sabotage.”

It’s clear that Democrats, in New Jersey and indeed nationwide, are cooking the books everywhere:

This is why they’re refusing to open their respective voters’ rolls to federal scrutiny and verification — not to hide their incompetence, but their sabotage of probably our most important institution:  the vote.

Feel free to be as enraged now as I was back then.


Afterwards:  The head of IT at Grand Union was fired couple of months after my meeting with the CFO.  His replacement?  The guy who had authorized the use of the new data-compression software.  He was not only found to be truly incompetent (duh), but I was actually approached to head up the corporate IT department — an offer I declined, with thanks.

As for the relaunched program:  the Long Island group became the most profitable of all Grand Union’s divisions, and sales grew every month thereafter, resulting in a full point of market share growth.  Then the CEO retired, and his successor announced that the new loyalty program would not be allowed to roll out into the other areas (upstate New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Vermont).  More to the point, my advertising campaign was to be shut down and the company would revert to the old store flyer program.

I resigned immediately.

Grand Union went out of business three years later.

Thanks, Mom

Then we have this little tale of civic duty:

A 19-year-old Ohio man arrested for the alleged terror plot against UFC Freedom 250 has been identified.

And how was he found out?

[His mother] called local police on June 10, saying she was “was concerned about her son” because of his recent conduct, which included buying guns and communicating with a group of radicals online.

Proper’s mother had also seen her son researching mapping locations in Washington, DC, near the White House, according to the complaint, and told officers that her son had said the group was looking at multiple locations for “recon” and “hit and run missions.”

And:

Law enforcement later searched Proper’s home and found a chat with detailed imagery of DC, which highlighted sniper locations and “potential drone launch locations, and other detailed tactical planning.”

Proper’s father, meanwhile, told officers his son had been planning to leave to meet up with the individuals over the weekend of the UFC fight and had also recently amassed “gear, food, ballistic plates, a new shotgun, a rifle, ‘lots’ of ammunition, extra magazines, and plate carriers” with his recent graduation money, the complaint against Proper states.

So they turned him in, because they are good people who realized that there is a greater good to choose between between family ties and criminal — deadly — behavior.

Also, turns out that the supposed ringleader of these little reindeer games was… an illegal alien.

Read all about it in the above link.

What makes my blood run cold was that if his parents hadn’t acted, we might well have seen a bloodbath at the White House shindig.

Looks like we dodged a bullet — lots of bullets, in fact — with this one.

Vox Populi

I see that the Micks have the temerity to be angry about yet the latest crime committed by an “immigrant” — one of the many thousands dumped in Northern Oirland by the various British governments of recent times.

Of course, being Irish, they are expressing their displeasure in the traditional manner:

Violent scenes were witnessed in Northern Ireland again on Wednesday as tensions remain high in the wake of an apparent attempted beheading on the streets of Belfast, allegedly at the hands of a Sudanese asylum seeker.

Hordes of black balaclava masked men clashed with riot officers of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) on Wednesday in areas such as the Belfast suburb of Newtownabbey, where a lorry truck was set on fire by agitators. The truck is believed to have been a municipal “gully emptier” used to clean street drainage systems.

A car was also set on fire on Antrim Road in the area, while fires were also lit at the Sandyknowes roundabout, the Belfast Telegraph reported.

Nearby, police were forced to deploy a water cannon to push back a large crowd attempting to break into a Newtownabbey hotel, likely over at least rumours of migrants being housed inside.

Next will be the bombs, I’m guessing.  I’m pretty sure that the IRA Provos still have a few hidden somewhere since The Troubles subsided.

Needless to say, the BritGov is responding in its traditional way, by labeling the protesters as “extreme Rightwing”, suppressing all online mention of the protests as well as going with the water cannons (in stark contrast to their treatment of the BLM-inspired riots a couple years back).

The response from the British government has seemingly attempted to shift the blame for the violence to those commenting on social media, rather than the horrific stabbing attack, footage of which was widely seen and reports indicating that the UK government had granted the suspect asylum after entering into the country illegally.

UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer vowed to “crack down on anyone who is fuelling this division,” adding that “there is no justification for the violence and disorder that we saw threatening our communities, nor for those who encouraged it, online or elsewhere.”

Tell that to the Beheaders, old cock, and maybe then we can believe you.

When all the smoke has cleared, I’ll just be curious to see what’s left.  Of everything.  Over There.  In the meantime…

Excluded!

Firebrand CongressTotty Nancy Mace has an idea:

South Carolina GOP Representative Nancy Mace introduced a joint resolution on Wednesday proposing a constitutional amendment that would explicitly bar naturalized citizens from serving in Congress, the federal judiciary, or holding any Senate-confirmed positions.

The proposed legislation seeks to extend the “natural-born citizen” constraint — which currently applies only to the presidency and vice presidency under Article II of the U.S. Constitution — to all members of the House of Representatives, the Senate, federal judges at all levels, and prominent appointed officers such as Cabinet members and ambassadors.

If passed and ratified, the amendment would establish a strict dual-track citizenship restriction, requiring federal lawmakers and officials to have held U.S. citizenship from birth.

Okay, I need to talk about this because I am a naturalized U.S. citizen (35 years, give or take a few months), and of course I would be affected by such legislation.  (Not that I care, because age and inclination would exclude me from any of the above lofty offices anyway.)

Now I can understand why Our Nancy would be suggesting such a thing, because let’s be honest, I bet there are more than a few naturalized U.S. citizens who are bent on overthrowing the republic rather than thanking their lucky stars (as I do, every day) for being allowed to share in the American Dream.

So I can see why she would be interested in such an action.  The words “Quisling” and “fifth column” (a.k.a. Trojan horse) come to mind here, and probably with some justification.

However, allow me to point out that arch-Nazi collaborator Vidkun Quisling was not a naturalized Norwegian citizen, but native-born.  And let’s be perfectly blunt about this:  for every naturalized citizen who may be harboring evil subversive ideas about his adopted country, I can probably point to several native-born citizens who are just as evil (Ocasio-Cortez comes to mind).

However, Mace’s proposed legislation would also rid us of pustules like Ilhan Omar and Pramila Jayapal, to mention just two, who infest Congress like some malignant cancer.

So:  is Nancy Mace’s proposed legislation a Good Thing?  Here’s what else she said, in support of it:

Mace argued that the amendment simply extends the rigorous constitutional standard already required of the president to other critical positions of national trust.

…and mentions Super-Pustule Ilhan Omar specifically as evidence.

This would mean, by the way, that there’d be in essence two kinds of citizenship:  native-born, to whom all things are possible;  and naturalized, who could do anything except run the country.

This would mean that people like me — super-patriots, despite having been born in the wrong country — would be excluded from the levers of power.

In today’s political climate, though, I’m not sure that that’s a bad thing.

Feel free to argue the point in Comments.


By the way, some might ask why I refer to Nancy Mace as a “CongressTotty”.

Q.E.D.

More “Legal” Bullshit

Here’s an interesting take:

A University of Miami law professor recently offered reasons why that the public should consider extending copyright law to include “collectively held cultural identities.”

In an excerpt of her paper “Protecting Cultural Personality” in Race, Racism and the Law, J. Janewa Osei-Tutu notes companies such as Timbuk and Louis Vuitton “have designed and marketed clothing based on traditional ethnic clothing styles or symbols” … but without the “knowledge, consent, or involvement of the cultural group” in question.

Osei-Tutu argues intellectual property laws are “underinclusive — at least in relation to valuable intangible cultural heritage from indigenous communities and local communities from the global south [which] allows corporations and those outside the community to capture and monetize this unprotected resource, which means that it is exposed and subject to misappropriation.”

Sounds like bullshit, dunnit?  Gets deeper, though:

In order to protect “cultural personality rights,” Osei-Tutu (pictured) says cultural groups should have “sufficient boundaries and markers, or indicia” by which to identify them.

Groups can be “self-defining,” and it’s “not necessary for the public to have significant knowledge of the group.”

Sure, just make it up as you go along.  Okay, I’ll play.

Supposing I composed and released a blues song in the style of, oh, B.B. King.  (Note:  “in the style of”, not a copy of.)  Am I making an appropriation of the blues culture — defined on the fly as something that is inherently of Southern Black origin?  According to this college harpy professor, probably so.

Fine.  But let’s just examine that “blues culture” thing for a moment.  It was indisputably a lament, born of a race’s suffering, and played on either piano or else guitar by Black musical luminaries such as Otis Spann and Muddy Waters, respectively.

On the piano?  You mean, that keyboard instrument invented and devised in 1700 by Italian Bartolomeo Cristofiori, a White man?  And about the guitar:  the “classical” acoustic version was invented by inter alia  Spaniard Antonio de Torres Jurado, and its electrical counterpart by inter alia  Adolph Rickenbacker and Leo Fender (to name but two).  Regardless, both instruments were invented by White men of European heritage.

If Spann and Waters had had to operate under those pesky “cultural appropriation” restrictions, it’s safe to say that the blues would still be being sung in Black Christian churches and not in concerts all over the world.

Wait:  did I say “churches”?

Doesn’t look too much like something African (or African-American), does it?

Of course, I’m just screwing around here.  But at the heart of this little piece of satire is a very serious message to the racist hustlers like this Osei-Tutu creature:

Stop fucking around and claiming that “cultural appropriation” is somehow an evil thing.  That, or don’t wear jeans (invented by White Jewish guy Levi Strauss) ever again.

And steer clear of fried chicken, while you’re about it, or else the Romans are going to declare a classical fatwa on your ass.

I could go on all day, but I think you get my point.

The Actual Totalitarians

Victor Davis Hanson points out (in not quite so many words) that in politics, there’s nothing new under the sun — most especially since the French Revolution, that is — and that the “Democrat Party” of today should just be honest about it and rename themselves the Jacobin Party.

Why?

Jacobinism aims to divide the nation arbitrarily between the noble oppressed and the toxic oppressors.  (Sound familiar?)

And VDH then goes on to list the offenders and offences:

BLM (actually, it’s Antifa, the only omission he makes), biological men competing in women’s sports, critical legal theory normalizing cashless bail, race-based reparations, violent felons arrested and back on the street hours later, radical abortion on demand until birth, attacks on the concept of the cultural “melting pot” and opposition to organized Christianity.

Read the whole article for the full catalogue.

Here’s the question to ponder.  Never mind what they might say;  which is the political party in the U.S. that actively supports terrorism?  And let’s be clear by what we mean by “terrorism”:  threatening assassination, supporting assassinations or calling for the same, beating up political opponents, calling for violence against those who refuse to support their policies (e.g. Supreme Court justices), using “grassroots” street protests to cow and intimidate opposition… the list goes on and on.

Yup:  that list belongs to the modern-day Jacobins — just as it was back in the late eighteenth century.  They would make history repeat itself, if they could.  And never forget that the term “Reign of Terror” was also coined during the French Revolution, by the Jacobins.  Ipse dixit.