Locking Up Items To Deter Shoplifting Is Pushing Shoppers Online

Longtime Slashdot reader schwit1 shares a report from Axios: Locking up merchandise at drugstores and discount retailers hasn’t curbed retail theft but is driving frustrated consumers to shop online more, retail experts tell Axios. Retail crime is eating into retailers’ profits and high theft rates are also leading to a rise in store closures. Secured cases can cause sales to drop 15% to 25%, Joe Budano, CEO of anti-theft technology company Indyme, previously told Axios. Barricading everything from razors to laundry detergent has largely backfired and broken shopping in America, Bloomberg reports.

Aisles full of locked plexiglass cases are common at many CVS and Walgreens stores where consumers have to wait for an employee to unlock them. Target, Walmart, Dollar General and other retailers have also pulled back on self-checkout to deter shoplifting. “Locking up products worsens the shopping experience, and it makes things inconvenient and difficult,” GlobalData retail analyst Neil Saunders said, adding it pushes shoppers to other retailers or to move purchases online.

Driving the news: Manmohan Mahajan, Walgreens global chief financial officer, said in a June earnings call that the retailer was experiencing “higher levels of shrink.” Amazon CEO Andy Jassy spoke of the “speed and ease” of ordering online versus walking into pharmacies on a call with investors last week. “It’s a pretty tough experience with how much is locked behind cabinets, where you have to press a button to get somebody to come out and open the cabinets for you,” Jassy said. schwit1 adds: “The American-style retail shopping experience was invented in a high-trust environment. As trust erodes, so does the experience.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Fire Damages Russian-Occupied Nuclear Plant in Ukraine

The Guardian reports

Sunday, Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, highlighted that Russian forces appeared to have started a fire in one of the cooling towers of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant that it has occupied since the early days of the war. “Radiation levels are within norm,” Zelenskiy said before accusing Russia of using its control of the site, whose six reactors are in shutdown mode, “to blackmail Ukraine, all of Europe, and the world”. A Ukrainian official in Nikopol, the nearest town across the river Dnipro from the nuclear plant, added that according to “unofficial information”, the fire was caused by setting fire to “a large number of automobile tyres” in a cooling tower. Video and pictures showed smoke dramatically billowing from one of the towers, although experts said they are not in use while the reactor is in shutdown mode, prompting some to question whether it was a way of trying raise the stakes over Ukraine’s incursion into Russia.

From the CBC:

The Russian management of the facility said emergency workers had contained the fire and that there was no threat of it spreading further. “The fire did not affect the operation of the station,” it said. The six reactors at the plant located close to the front line of the war in Ukraine are not in operation but the facility relies on external power to keep its nuclear material cool and prevent a catastrophic accident.

Moscow and Kyiv have routinely accused each other of endangering safety around it.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Alcohol Researcher Says Alcohol-Industry Lobbyists are Attacking His Work

“Last year, a major meta-analysis that re-examined 107 studies over 40 years came to the conclusion that no amount of alcohol improves health,” the New York Times reported this June, citing a study co-authored by Tim Stockwell, an epidemiologist at the Canadian Institute for Substance Use Research. Dr. Stockwell (and other scientists he’s collaborated with) “are overhauling decades-worth of scientific evidence — and newspaper headlines — that backed the health benefits of alcohol,” writes the Telegraph, “or what is known in the scientific community as the J-curve. The J-curve is the theory that, like a capital J, the negative health consequences of drinking dip slightly into positive territory with moderate drinking — as it benefits such things as the heart — before rising sharply back into negative territory the more someone drinks.”

But Stockwell’s study prompted at least one scientist to accuse Stockwell of “cherry picking” evidence to suit an agenda — while a think-tank executive suggests he’s a front for a worldwide temperance lobby:

Dr Stockwell denies this. Speaking to The Telegraph, he in turn accused his detractors of being funded by the alcohol lobby and said his links to temperance societies were fleeting. He was the president of the Kettil Bruun Society (a think tank born out of what was the international temperance congresses) [from 2005 to 2007] and he has been reimbursed for addressing temperance movements and admits attending their meetings, but, he says, not as a member…

Former British government scientist Richard Harding, who gave evidence on safe drinking to the House of Commons select committee on science and technology in 2011, told The Telegraph that Dr Stockwell had wrongly taken a correlation to be causal. “Dr Stockwell’s research is essentially epidemiology, which is the study of populations,” Dr Harding said. “You record people’s lifestyle and then see what diseases they get and try to correlate the disease with some aspect of their lifestyle. But it is just a correlation, it’s just an association. Epidemiology can never establish causality on its own. And in this particular case, Dr Stockwell selected six studies out of 107 to focus on. You could say he cherry picked them. Really, the important thing is not the epidemiology, it’s the effect that alcohol actually has on the body. We know the reasons why the curve is J-shaped; it’s because of the protective effect moderate consumption has on heart disease and a number of other diseases.”

Dr Stockwell rejects Dr Harding’s criticism of his study, telling The Telegraph that Dr Harding “doesn’t appear to have read it” and accusing him of being in the pocket of the alcohol industry. “We identified six high-quality studies out of 107 and they didn’t find any J-shaped curve,” Dr Stockwell said. “In fact, since our recent paper, we’ve now got genetic studies which are showing there’s no benefits of low-level alcohol use. I personally think there might still be small benefits, but the point of our work is that, if there are benefits, they’ve been exaggerating them.”

The article notes that Stockwell’s research “has been published in The Lancet, among other esteemed organs,” and that “scientists he has collaborated with on research highlighting the dangers of alcohol are in positions of power at major institutions, such as the World Health Organisation.”

And honestly, the opposing viewpoint seems to be thinly-sourced. Besides Harding (the former British government scientist), the article cites:

The head of lifestyle economics at the Institute of Economic Affairs (which Wikipedia describes as “a right-wing, free market think tank”)

An alcohol policy specialist at Brock University in Ontario (who argues rather unconvincingly that “you can’t measure when someone didn’t hurt themselves because a friend invited them for a drink.”)
On the basis of that, the article writes “respected peers say it is far from settled science and have cast doubt on his research”. (And that “fellow academics and experts” told The Telegraph “they read the report in disbelief.”) Did the Telegraph speak to others who just aren’t mentioned in the story? Or are they extrapolating, in that famous British tabloid journalism sort of way?

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Can a Free Business Rent Program Revive San Francisco’s Downtown?

The New York Times visits the downtown of one of America’s biggest tech cities to explore San Francisco’s “Vacant to Vibrant” initiative, where “city and business leaders provide free rent for up to six months” to “entrepreneurs who want to set up shop in empty spaces, many of which are on the ground floor of office buildings.”

The program also offers funding for business expenses (plus technical and business permit assistance) — and it seems to be working. One cafe went on to sign a five-year lease for a space in the financial district’s iconic One Embarcadero Center building — and the building’s landlord says the program also resulted in another three long leases. Can the progress continue?

The hope is that these pop-up operations will pay rent and sign longer leases after the free-rent period is over, and that their presence will regenerate foot traffic in the area. Some 850 entrepreneurs initially applied for a slot, and 17 businesses were chosen to occupy nine storefront spaces in the fall. Out of those businesses, seven extended their leases and now pay rent. Eleven businesses were selected in May for the program’s second cohort, which started operating their storefronts this summer…

The city’s office vacancy rate hit 33.7%, a record high, in the second quarter this year, according to JLL, a commercial real estate brokerage. That’s one of the bleakest office markets in the nation, which has an average vacancy rate of about 22%. For the moment, however, San Francisco has a silver lining in Vacant to Vibrant. Rod Diehl, the BXP executive vice president who oversees its West Coast properties, said the pop-up strategy was good not just for local business owners to test their concepts and explore growth opportunities, but also for office leasing efforts… Beyond free rent, which is typically given for three months with a possibility for another three months, Vacant to Vibrant provides up to $12,000 to the businesses to help cover insurance and other expenses. The program also offers grants up to $5,000 for building owners to cover costs for tenant improvements in the spaces as well as for other expenses like utilities…

In addition to the Vacant to Vibrant program — which received $1 million from the city initially and is set to receive another $1 million for the current fiscal year, which began July 1 — the city is directing nearly $2 million toward a similar pop-up program. This new program would help businesses occupy larger empty spaces along Powell Street, as crime and other retail pressures have driven out several retailers, including Anthropologie, Banana Republic and Crate & Barrel, in the Union Square area.
One business owner who joined “Vacant to Vibrant” in May says they haven’t decided yet whether to sign a lease. “It’s not as crowded as before the pandemic.” But according to the article, “she was hopeful that more businesses opening nearby would attract more people.”

“In addition to filling empty storefronts, the program has the opportunity to bring in a fresher and more localized downtown shopping vibe, said Laurel Arvanitidis, director for business development at San Francisco’s Office of Economic and Workplace Development.”

Victor Gonzalez, an entrepreneur who founded GCS Agency to stage showings for artists, is embracing the opportunity to get a foothold downtown despite the city’s challenges. When he opened a storefront as part of the first Vacant to Vibrant cohort in the Financial District last year, he immediately knew that he wanted to stay there as long as possible. He has since signed a three-year lease. “San Francisco is no stranger to big booms and busts,” he said. “So if we’re in the midst of a bust, what’s next? It’s a boom. And I want to be positioned to be part of it.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.