return2ozma@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world · 1 year agoU.S. retailers admit they lied about shoplifting, retail crime againboingboing.netexternal-linkmessage-square118fedilinkarrow-up1790arrow-down117cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up1773arrow-down1external-linkU.S. retailers admit they lied about shoplifting, retail crime againboingboing.netreturn2ozma@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world · 1 year agomessage-square118fedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squareQuarterSwede@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up43arrow-down15·1 year agoThey’re all insured for these kinds of losses anyway (I used to work in big box retail operations).
minus-squareQuarterSwede@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up4arrow-down3·11 months agoAnd that’s a totally simplistic view of what I said. Overall, big box does well to keep theft down as to avoid paying. It’s all a big game.
minus-squarequo@feddit.uklinkfedilinkarrow-up4·11 months ago“They’re all insured for these kinds of losses anyway” is a simple straightforward statement. Insurance doesn’t mean they are protected from theft. If they actually have too much theft, closing a store can make sense, regardless of insurance.
minus-squarewahming@monyet.cclinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up16arrow-down1·1 year agoInsurance isn’t going to cost less than what they’re losing. It just smooths out the losses and avoids any surprises.
They’re all insured for these kinds of losses anyway (I used to work in big box retail operations).
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
And that’s a totally simplistic view of what I said. Overall, big box does well to keep theft down as to avoid paying. It’s all a big game.
“They’re all insured for these kinds of losses anyway” is a simple straightforward statement.
Insurance doesn’t mean they are protected from theft. If they actually have too much theft, closing a store can make sense, regardless of insurance.
Insurance isn’t going to cost less than what they’re losing. It just smooths out the losses and avoids any surprises.
deleted by creator