Though RM has been our market of choice, we have not been closely involved in management decisions or the running of the store. Commenting here feels a bit like offering advice from the cheap seats or put otherwise, back seat driving. I will never-the-less, endeavor to provide some observation and speak to some concerns I have, i.e. walk this tight rope, to the degree they may be constructive.

I could be wrong but it seems to me that the coop was functioning reasonably well through Mead's tenure. Staff was reasonably stable, the store reasonably competitive while maintaining a reasonable p&l, product choices were reasonably well considered along coop principles, and produce was superior in quality and variety compared to any other option nearby that I'm aware of.

My spotty understanding of the financials include an awareness that sales had fallen off a bit but not majorly over the last two or three years and obligations to investor's and/or creditors increased about $1mill or so resulting from the last remodel.

It seems to me that entering a reasonably healthy situation, new management would tread lightly for a while so as not to disturb what is already in place and working. Not totally conscious of the timeline, I could definitely be mistaken but it seems to me that some fairly significant changes were made fairly soon into new management's tenure resulting in a fairly high level of instability. I am aware of a few such dynamics.

One involves the staff. It seems to me that one of the most valuable assets the coop had was a strong contingent of loyal, experienced, knowledgeable, motivated, and friendly staff people. I suppose it's natural to expect some turnover with a change at the top but my understanding is that turnover has been exceptionally high. Many good people have been lost and some that remain are unhappy. This is a huge and unfortunate loss that begs the question as to whether people and issues were mishandled.

Another change involved the discount structure. Management originally put the discounts in place in order to stimulate sales. I suppose one might argue as to whether or not they were equitable but the most relevant question is whether or not they contributed to the health of the coop. Obvious customer response built up over the years seemed to demonstrate that they probably did. If so, the response to the question of “Why just seniors?” may not be one of eliminating the senior discount but of designing discounts to target other groups as well. It seems to me that they add to the energy of the store. The targeted groups felt privileged and grateful, staff seemed to compliment and feed off the good feelings, and sales were higher than they would have been without them. Cutting the discount programs in order to improve the bottom line may be like cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face and ultimately lead to the reverse of what was intended, a deterioration of profitability. It would be important to review and understand the response to the policy of reducing the discounts so as to determine whether it was a wise decision or not and then respond accordingly.

A third change I think I’ve witnessed is some reduction in the availability, condition, and care of produce in more recent time. This department is of particular concern because I believe it is one of the main ways in which the store differentiates itself from larger competitors who are unable to source from small local suppliers as well as RM can due to their relative sizes. It is also one the main ways in which the store supports local producers.

All this being said, it also seems to me like the overall food industry has changed a bit for the better since the time when coops first came about some decades back. Chains are making some effort to offer healthier options. Whole Foods offered a private for profit effort that tries to include many of the same choices. The food retail marketplace has also been very competitive. Large chains have folded and new ones have come about. I think, however, that there is still a place for the coop but it is not as obvious or as strikingly alternative as it once was.
I’m sure profitability is a challenge for management. Survival of the store is not guaranteed. Issues must be adroitly navigated. This is not to say that changes can’t or shouldn’t be made. In fact, they are inevitably necessary to adapt to changing conditions. Nor is it to say that mistakes are not allowed. Sometimes, it may be better to make mistakes and learn from them than not to do anything at all. The trick is to make as few as possible, keep them small, and correct them quickly. Management personnel should be no any less valued than other staffers.
All in all, I believe that changes I’ve observed and mentioned above would benefit from review. Abnormal staff turnover especially deserves board attention and I believe the problem has reached a scale warranting member concern. The listening session scheduled for tomorrow night seems like a good move which I applaud the board for making. Surely all stake members can learn from each other in order to find the best path forward.

Awhile back I sent nt an email to the general manager about the repeal of the senior discount. Extended an invitation to even get together and discuss my observation. Response back was a blow-off thank you note. Expect that from Cub foods not My Coop.
I’m ready and willing to put forth the effort to work towards “taking our/my coop back”. Feel free to contact me.

We have reduced our shopping at the CO-OP due to the cut in discounts and the loss of the experienced friendly staff. We feel they don’t appreciate how we are helping the CO-OP. How much is the loss of patrons spending compared to the 10% discount once per week?

Somethings obviously wrong here now.