Talk:Haggen (supermarket)/Archives/2015
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Haggen (supermarket). Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Top Foods
It would appear that Top Foods has been phased out as a separate brandname? It would be useful if a (local) editor more familiar with whether that is the case or not could make the apparent phase-out of Top Foods more clear in the article text, especially in the article's lede. Thanks in advance. --IJBall (talk) 16:56, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- --IJBall (talk) 20:52, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Resolved
2015 Expansion Faltering
www.toacorn.com/news/2015-08-20/Front_Page/SUPERMARKET_BLEEP_003.html LorenzoB (talk) 15:32, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
This whole area needs to be expanded to reflect Comvest failed strategy to flip Haggen, store closings and lawsuits against Alberstons/Cerberus Capital. It may go down as one of the worst corporate strategies ever. (IHMO it shows the negative side of lower carried interest rates for private equity managers but I have no way to prove that.) http://www.cerberuscapital.com/albertsons-safeway-complete-merger-transaction/ http://www.seattletimes.com/business/local-business/bellingham-based-haggen-growing-from-18-stores-to-164/ http://www.oregonlive.com/window-shop/index.ssf/2015/03/haggens_unprecendented_expansi.html http://www.oregonlive.com/window-shop/index.ssf/2015/07/albertsons_sues_haggen.html#incart_related_stories http://www.oregonlive.com/window-shop/index.ssf/2015/08/list_of_haggen_closures.html http://www.oregonlive.com/window-shop/index.ssf/2015/09/haggen_sues_albertsons.html#incart_most-read_window-shop_article
Nofway (talk) 14:35, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Ownership Side Bar
This should be changed to reflect that Comvest is the majority owner, not the Haggen Family. Comvest is responsible for the failed expansion strategy, and Haggen is no longer family owned. Nofway (talk) 14:35, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
- Be bold, go ahead and incorporate your changes into the article! You seem to have plenty of reliable sources to back them up. Conifer (talk) 04:43, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Hofway: agree with Conifer – go ahead and make whatever changes you see fit. As you seem to have sourcing for it, it shouldn't be a problem. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:53, 5 September 2015 (UTC)