Talk:Service Merchandise

Best Buy

Was Best Buy truly the only electronics company to place pressure on Service Merchandise? This smells a little funny.

Actually, as a former electronics department employee for SMC, I can say it was Wal-Mart and the fact that SMC had such a small selection of items, plus virtually no product training for employees. There was also a horrible return policy of only 7 days.24.211.211.161 (talk) 03:53, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Service merch logo.gif

Image:Service merch logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Service logo.jpg

Image:Service logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Service Merchandise.gif

Image:Service Merchandise.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Bill Cosby

I remember that Bill Cosby was used in some of their advertising. Does anyone know anything about this? -- Suso 04:27, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Locations

Were there really only the four New York locations listed in the article? I'm pretty sure I remember one in Valley Stream on Long Island. Phaded 00:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Demise of Service Merchandise

Having been an employee of Service Merchandise from 1987-1995, the demise of Service Merchandise was severalfold, and in my opinion, not due to pressure by other retailers such as Best Buy or Wal Mart.

In approximately 1993, there was shift in management from Raymond Zimmerman to another (I forget his name) who was responsible for transforming the retailer from a catalog based showroom to a "boutique retail store" (their words, not mine). Although good in intention, it alienated the vast majority of loyal SMC customers, who liked the catalog.

As noted in the article, SMC did not embrace the internet at all. In late 1994, the company started producing catalog CD-ROMs, but that is as far as the technology went. In retrospect, what better company was there to take advantage of the internet than SMC? They already had the catalog structure & distribution channels in place.

The lack of understanding of their customers and their failure to embrace the internet commerce movement was the reason for the decline of the company.—Preceding unsigned comment added by JessterCPA (talk • contribs)

The above poster is exactly correct. They didn't get the Internet in the same way Sears did not get it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meharpe (talk • contribs) 14:49, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Internet Company?

I'm confused, i went to www.servicemerchandise.com expecting to see this internet company called service merchandise like the article says, but instead i get 99centstuff.com?!?!Grk1011 (talk) 04:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

The link on the article works and takes you to Service Merchandise.

Fair use rationale for Image:Service merch logo.gif

Image:Service merch logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 08:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Locations list

Please do not restore this list. It is unencyclopedic in both tone and content. Wikipedia is not a directory, even for a defunct chain.oknazevad (talk) 01:28, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Wheel of Fortune

Were Service Merchandise certificates ever used for any shows other than Teen Weeks, where the normal sponsors' certificates (e.g. Tiffany, Gucci, Gump's) weren't really tailored to kids that age? Even at that, the earlier Teen Week shows gave away U.S. Savings Bonds, which was effectively giving out cash, albeit at a 50% discount. — Preceding unsigned comment added by That Don Guy (talk • contribs) 16:02, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Supposed restart as online retailer

I've removed all references to the supposed 2004 restart of this company as an online retailer. There were zero references for this claim, and it appears that if the online company ever did exist it was not actually the same company, but just a case of someone buying a defunct name. I'm very suspicious of this since one of the editors on this article was also involved in very similar claims about a supposed restart of another retailer Consumers Distributing as an online retailer. In both cases the webpages said "We are rebuilding the site to be better than ever. Please click here to join our contact list." It beggars belief that one online retailer would have such a webpage, let alone two. Meters (talk) 21:52, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Six years since I removed it and IPs are still trying to add this unsourced claim. I still suspect that this is just the internet domain and name squatting that has affected several formal retailers. Even almost 20 years ago this article did not claim that the company was still in existence, just that the company name had been bought at at auction Meters (talk) 22:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Raymond Zimmerman, the former CEO, acquired the name. So it isn't just domain squatting by an unrelated party. However, the old company was liquidated and he started a new one, so there isn't an organizational continuity. This 2004 Nashville Post article gives the basic info about it. There are some other articles about it online, but many of them are subscriber-only. --RL0919 (talk) 22:20, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Former locations

A series of IPs have been attempting to add a long list of former store locations. Not only is this list completely unsourced, but it is simply not needed. 28 k (twice the size of the rest of the article) of former store locations is not useful, even if it we had reliable sources. Meters (talk) 21:18, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

A year later and still going on, and started in 2008 (see history and previous talk page thread by user:oknazevad ). Meters (talk) 03:28, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

I'd actually support the inclusion of some general sense of where the stores are locations. Allows the reader to get a sense of the reach of these defunct stores. Jjazz76 (talk) 22:28, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete picture

Tried to add a picture of a former Service Merchandise location but editor deleted it. Clearly relevant to get a sense of what these stores looked like. Jjazz76 (talk) 22:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

As I said in my edit summary, File:Service_merchandise.jpg is a poor quality image, it does not belong in the section where it was placed, and it adds nothing useful to the article. It's a washed out, poor contrast picture of a former store with an overgrown parking lot. Or perhaps I should say, what the uploader claims is a former store, as we have no source to show that this really was a Service Merchandise outlet. There's no reason to have a picture of the exterior of a former store in the "Showroom ordering process" section as an exterior shot has nothing to do with the ordering process, and I don't see a bad picture of the exterior of a abandoned building being of any use anywhere else in the article either. The building has nothing identifying it as a Service Merchandise outlet, and the chain has been defunct for more than 20 years, so what's the point? The article would be better served by a picture of the exterior of a store while it was still in operation with signage, or of interior shot showing the ordering counters. Meters (talk) 22:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Meters,

Thanks for your reply. The particular outside is indicative of how the Service Merchandises looked in that period, particularly the brown/beige stones. The site is well documented and there was even a film made about this location that later became a flea market.

If you have an issue with the quality of the image, I can retake it.

Also you need to Assume Good Faith on the part of other editors. Are you seriously try to assert this location wasn't a former Service Merchandise location? Jjazz76 (talk) 22:44, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Here's some RS on that particular location:

https://hudsonvalleycountry.com/dutchess-mall-fishkill-to-be-torn-down/ Jjazz76 (talk) 22:45, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm not asserting anything, you are, and without sources. If you want to use it as an example of the company's typical architecture in a certain era you would need a reliable source to show that that building was a Service Merchandise outlet (the ref you gave above does not prove that. It simply says that it is a picture of the mall, and that Service Merchandise was one of the businesses in the mall.) You would need to identify what era you were referring to, provide a reliable source to show that the building was from that era and had not subsequently been modified during subsequent operation. You would also need a reliable source to show that the building exterior had not been changed in the more than 20 years since that outlet closed. For that matter, you would need a reliable source to show that Service Merchandise outlets even had a typical architecture for that era. Even if it were a good quality picture, and it were in a more appropriate section, and you had all those sources, I don't think it contributes anything useful. As I said The article would be better served by a picture of the exterior of a store while it was still in operation with signage, or of interior shot showing the ordering counters.

As for bad faith, I didn't say anything about bad faith. I didn't warn you for making your initial edit, I warned you for restoring that contested edit when you should not have without prior discussion, And you know you shouldn't do that because you have previously been warned about restoring contested edits. Meters (talk) 00:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your continued discussion, which I appreciate. I still think it is better than having NO image of the store, but will concede it isn't the best image. I'll have to see if I can find an older picture that I perhaps took in the 1990s.

Happy editing and thanks for your hard work on this article! Jjazz76 (talk) 00:45, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Also just to loop back on this, re-reading your prose, I think the amount of evidence you believe one would need to upload a picture of a Service Merchandise is quite onerous, and I don't think follows the rules states by Wikipedia. There are about a million pictures of various stores on Wikipedia, and none have "proven' their architecture, non-modification, authenticity to the level that you claim is needed. Jjazz76 (talk) 00:54, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Here's a whole bunch of other pictures, taking by someone else completely showing that particular Service Merchandise, including a sign on the door the says "Service Merchandise" as well as a picture of the well-cited flea market that replaced it.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/snappyjack1/albums/72157632322341959/with/8313800700 Jjazz76 (talk) 00:59, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

You don't need those sources to upload the photo. You need those sources to claim all the things about it you intend to in an attempt to get it into the article. If the company had a characteristic architecture and you want to claim tha t this photo shows it then you need reliable sources, otherwise this is nothing but WP:OR and personal knowledge. Meters (talk) 04:47, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I just want to upload a picture of a Service Merchandise building, even if it is now in poor shape. Would you object to a better picture of this particular building? I don't want to waste my time taking another picture for you to object again. Rumor is this one is likely to be demolished in the near future. Jjazz76 (talk) 05:23, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

As I said Even if it were a good quality picture, and it were in a more appropriate section, and you had all those sources, I don't think it contributes anything useful.. Meters (talk) 16:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Why doesn't it include anything useful, specifically? Jjazz76 (talk) 20:32, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

To be fair, I'm totally willing to concede on image quality and placing, but I don't think "no pictures of former Service Merchandise buildings" is a reasonable position. Jjazz76 (talk) 20:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

How can we get some additional opinions on the matter besides just you and me? Jjazz76 (talk) 20:36, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

What does a picture of an empty building (with no signage) and an overgrown parking contribute to the article? Meters (talk) 23:07, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

It gives you a sense of what the stores once looked like, and how they in some cases have simply been left to decay. It helps tell the story of Service Merchandise and its legacy.

From the existing article: "With only 200 catalog showrooms remaining, the stock was valued at less than one cent per share. With no profitability in sight, Service Merchandise ceased operations and shuttered all of its remaining stores by early 2002."

Again, I'd really like to gain some additional insight on this, as right now it is just the two of us and we clearly have different visions on this particular aspect of the article.

Thought it seems you are good with my other cleanups of the article. Jjazz76 (talk) 00:09, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

A picture of an abandoned former store taken more than 20 years after the company went out of business doesn't seem very helpful for the article. Photos such as File:Former Service Merchandise - Columbus OH, W. Broad Street, 2012...b.jpg are a decade closer to the company's operating days, but I wouldn't use those either. If anyone wants to contribute older photos of stores from when they were operating or at least closer to operating condition (with signage, for example), that on the other hand would be more helpful. --RL0919 (talk) 04:13, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I'll see what I can dig up. The challenging is finding something in the public domain. Jjazz76 (talk) 04:28, 24 September 2024 (UTC)