How to contact Trader Joe's by email



"Kevin S. Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 17 Apr 2006 11:15:15 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>They've been around probably twenty years but FINALLY
>>build a store in Manhattan -- and it's a half-hour wait to get inside
>>on weekend afternoons.
>
> What kind of freakin' moron waits in line to go to a grocery store?

The same kind of moron that waits in line for ANYTHING!!!!!
We become morons while we're in waiting, looking at the ceiling, counting
birds or flies.
Dee Dee
 
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:48:54 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I'll help you. There is not, nor could there EVER be a business which would
>gain Kevin's respect. He believes he's been dealt a lousy hand too often, so
>all businesses suck. And, no matter how hard someone else worked to become
>enormously sucessful, he thinks their success is undeserved, and perhaps
>even stolen. This is why, in his little diatribe, he included such words as
>"ivory tower" and "eggheads".

Where on earth are you getting these bizarre ideas about Kevin? Are
you his wife's ex-husband or something?

BW
 
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:03:22 -0700, The Ranger <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:50:25 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 12:53:13 -0700, The Ranger <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:32:26 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>> >[snip]
>> > > > All you bases are belong to us.
>> > > >
>> > > You can't even get a ubiquitous meme right
>> > >
>> > Irony is always best exhibited through example.
>> >
>> So go ahead. Provide one.
>
>You're doing so well on your own, you don't need my help.

Ah, so you DON'T know what irony is. Thought so, Alanis. Thanks for
confirming.

BW
 
> So you meant "inarguably perfect from a management point of view."
> Wegman's is hardly perfect from a customer's point of view. Too damn
> big, for one thing. And those weimaraners-they're way too
> skeevy-looking.
>
> BW

Wegman's is not perfect from this consumer's POV. If so, why am I shopping
also at Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, and a number of other large grocery
stores; certainly not because I'm checking prices.
Dee Dee
 
"Mark Thorson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Doug Kanter wrote:
>>
>> Or, to elaborate further, "to reach whom, about what?", since this
>> information might be helpful in answering the original question.
>
> For one thing, the shelves holding the Valrhona
> chocolate bars near the cash registers encourage
> the bars to spill on the floor, breaking many of
> them. If you even try to take one bar, the
> whole stack may lean forward, ejecting a few
> from the shelf. This is so annoying!

That's not a reason to look for an e-mail address. It's a reason to ask to
speak to the manager, and say "Come with me. I'd like to show you
something". These people aren't monsters with giant scary teeth and claws.
They will listen. You can actually speak to them.
 
Doug Kanter wrote:
>
> Or, to elaborate further, "to reach whom, about what?", since this
> information might be helpful in answering the original question.

For one thing, the shelves holding the Valrhona
chocolate bars near the cash registers encourage
the bars to spill on the floor, breaking many of
them. If you even try to take one bar, the
whole stack may lean forward, ejecting a few
from the shelf. This is so annoying!
 
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:50:25 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 12:53:13 -0700, The Ranger <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:32:26 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
> >[snip]
> > > > All you bases are belong to us.
> > > >
> > > You can't even get a ubiquitous meme right
> > >
> > Irony is always best exhibited through example.
> >
> So go ahead. Provide one.

You're doing so well on your own, you don't need my help.

ObFood: Deep fried fish.

The Ranger
--
"All Scottish cooking is based on a dare"
Mike Meyers
 
"Otto Bahn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote
>
>>>>>>They've been around probably twenty years but FINALLY
>>>>>>build a store in Manhattan -- and it's a half-hour wait to get inside
>>>>>>on weekend afternoons.
>>>>>
>>>>> What kind of freakin' moron waits in line to go to a grocery store?
>>>>
>>>>It happens whenever Wegman's opens a store in a region that's new to the
>>>>company. You'd have to visit one to understand. It's not unusual to have
>>>>800-1000 people in the parking lot waiting for the doors to open for the
>>>>first time.
>>>>
>>> So you're saying it's usually the moronic-type moron who would stand
>>> in line to get inside a grocery store.
>>
>> No, stupid. It would be people who'd lived their entire lives without
>> setting foot in a supermarket that was inarguably perfect. Not trendy
>> like Whole Foods, but perfect.
>
> Do you enjoy looking down on people who cannot afford to live
> in a neighborhood with a Trader Joe's?
>
> --oTTo--
>

What's this word, 'trendy' all-about when referring to Whole Foods?
Trendy+Whole Foods -- hahahaha.
Dee Dee
 
"Dee Randall" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> So you meant "inarguably perfect from a management point of view."
>> Wegman's is hardly perfect from a customer's point of view. Too damn
>> big, for one thing. And those weimaraners-they're way too
>> skeevy-looking.
>>
>> BW
>
> Wegman's is not perfect from this consumer's POV. If so, why am I
> shopping also at Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, and a number of other large
> grocery stores; certainly not because I'm checking prices.
> Dee Dee
>

That's two.
 
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:48:54 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I'll help you. There is not, nor could there EVER be a business which
>>would
>>gain Kevin's respect. He believes he's been dealt a lousy hand too often,
>>so
>>all businesses suck. And, no matter how hard someone else worked to become
>>enormously sucessful, he thinks their success is undeserved, and perhaps
>>even stolen. This is why, in his little diatribe, he included such words
>>as
>>"ivory tower" and "eggheads".
>
> Where on earth are you getting these bizarre ideas about Kevin? Are
> you his wife's ex-husband or something?
>
> BW

Look at the specific words he chose to use. Are they negative words, or
positive words, in that context?
 
"The Ranger" <[email protected]> wrote

>> > All you bases are belong to us.
>> >
>> You can't even get a ubiquitous meme right
>
> Irony is always best exhibited through example.
>
> Don't flop about too much, dear.
>
> ObFood: Stew.

It's a little late to claim trollage when *you* hit the
hook like a salmon in heat.

--oTTo--
 
"Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote

>>> No, stupid. It would be people who'd lived their entire lives without
>>> setting foot in a supermarket that was inarguably perfect. Not trendy like
>>> Whole Foods, but perfect.
>>
>> Do you enjoy looking down on people who cannot afford to live
>> in a neighborhood with a Trader Joe's?
>
> My comment reflects reality: A neighborhood's affluence is in no way an
> indicator of the quality of grocery stores available.

We're talking about Trader Snobs, not any old store.

--oTTo--
 
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:48:16 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Sounds like you may have a knack for the grocery business. How would you
>improve the stores, besides making them smaller?

DON'T DO IT, BARBARA! IT'S A TRICK!!!

He wants you to answer the question because he figures your answer
will be something silly that only someone unfamiliar with the grocery
business would suggest, like "free candy on Thursdays" or "topless
produce managers." Then he'll ANNIHILATE you when he unleashes the
mighty power of his Wegman-Sized Brane and explains that your idea is
not just silly, but also dumm, leaving you sobbing in the dust at his
feet, stricken and repentant for being so foolish as to ever question
his vision of the Perfect Grocery Storm.
 
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 20:05:11 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Dee Randall" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>> So you meant "inarguably perfect from a management point of view."
>>> Wegman's is hardly perfect from a customer's point of view. Too damn
>>> big, for one thing. And those weimaraners-they're way too
>>> skeevy-looking.
>>>
>>> BW
>>
>> Wegman's is not perfect from this consumer's POV. If so, why am I
>> shopping also at Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, and a number of other large
>> grocery stores; certainly not because I'm checking prices.
>> Dee Dee
>>
>
>That's two.
>
Let me get this straight. Are you seriously suggesting that the
truthiness of your assertion is somehow supported by the fact that
only two people have bothered to question it?

Do the lurkers also support you in e-mail?
 
"Otto Bahn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote
>
>>>> No, stupid. It would be people who'd lived their entire lives without
>>>> setting foot in a supermarket that was inarguably perfect. Not trendy
>>>> like Whole Foods, but perfect.
>>>
>>> Do you enjoy looking down on people who cannot afford to live
>>> in a neighborhood with a Trader Joe's?
>>
>> My comment reflects reality: A neighborhood's affluence is in no way an
>> indicator of the quality of grocery stores available.
>
> We're talking about Trader Snobs, not any old store.
>
> --oTTo--
>
>

I understand that, and I'm not referring to Trader Joe's. My point is that
there are loads of affluent places where they're still living with stores
whose physical premises and way of doing business haven't changed since the
1950s. I'm talking about stores you've heard of. Why do you think Winn Dixie
ended up in Chapter 11?
 
"Kevin S. Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:48:16 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Sounds like you may have a knack for the grocery business. How would you
>>improve the stores, besides making them smaller?
>
> DON'T DO IT, BARBARA! IT'S A TRICK!!!
>
> He wants you to answer the question because he figures your answer
> will be something silly that only someone unfamiliar with the grocery
> business would suggest, like "free candy on Thursdays" or "topless
> produce managers." Then he'll ANNIHILATE you when he unleashes the
> mighty power of his Wegman-Sized Brane and explains that your idea is
> not just silly, but also dumm, leaving you sobbing in the dust at his
> feet, stricken and repentant for being so foolish as to ever question
> his vision of the Perfect Grocery Storm.


Don't worry. She won't respond to that particular question.
 
"Kevin S. Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 20:05:11 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Dee Randall" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>>> So you meant "inarguably perfect from a management point of view."
>>>> Wegman's is hardly perfect from a customer's point of view. Too damn
>>>> big, for one thing. And those weimaraners-they're way too
>>>> skeevy-looking.
>>>>
>>>> BW
>>>
>>> Wegman's is not perfect from this consumer's POV. If so, why am I
>>> shopping also at Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, and a number of other large
>>> grocery stores; certainly not because I'm checking prices.
>>> Dee Dee
>>>
>>
>>That's two.
>>
> Let me get this straight. Are you seriously suggesting that the
> truthiness of your assertion is somehow supported by the fact that
> only two people have bothered to question it?
>
> Do the lurkers also support you in e-mail?

Yawn..........
 
"Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote

>>>>> No, stupid. It would be people who'd lived their entire lives without
>>>>> setting foot in a supermarket that was inarguably perfect. Not trendy like
>>>>> Whole Foods, but perfect.
>>>>
>>>> Do you enjoy looking down on people who cannot afford to live
>>>> in a neighborhood with a Trader Joe's?
>>>
>>> My comment reflects reality: A neighborhood's affluence is in no way an
>>> indicator of the quality of grocery stores available.
>>
>> We're talking about Trader Snobs, not any old store.
>
> I understand that, and I'm not referring to Trader Joe's.

You're still a snob, though.

--oTTo--
 
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:32:50 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
><[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:00:01 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>><[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 18:07:25 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Kevin S. Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:44:18 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:35:04 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
>>>>>>><[email protected]> whined:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My dad's company had a file full of these people.
>>>>>>>>The same ones would find something wrong with a food product every 3
>>>>>>>>weeks.
>>>>>>>>Perhaps Trader Joe's finds that if person has to lift an arm to put
>>>>>>>>on
>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>stamp, and then go to a mail box, they actually have something valid
>>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>say.
>>>>>>>>Maybe e-mail makes it too easy to whine for no reason.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Good thing newsgroups don't allow that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe if it COST you 39 AMERICAN CENTS and the TIME it takes to BUY a
>>>>>> stamp every time you wanted to point out some APPARENT contradiction
>>>>>> between what IS and WHAT should be (or what you EGGHEADS in your IVORY
>>>>>> TOWERES probably think of as IRONY) then maybe you wouldn't be so
>>>>>> quick to point out some APPARENT contradiction between what IS and
>>>>>> WHAT should be (or what you EGGHEADS in your IVORY TOWERES probably
>>>>>> think of as IRONY)!!1!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Maybe you'd like to explain what you're thinking. Maybe.
>>>>
>>>
>>>He did not assemble them in a meaningful way.
>>
>> Actually, he did.
>>
>>>You know that. If you don't
>>>agree, explain the point he believes he's making.
>>
>> It's all there in his sentence. Maybe that's what threw you--the fact
>> that it's a long sentence. It is, however, perfectly formed and
>> logical.
>>
>> P.S. "TOWERES" means "TOWERS." The rest is all quite clear, if you
>> can process sentences more complicated than "See Jane run and find
>> Spot, who is hiding behind a tree."
>>
>> BW
>
>Sorry. If you can't explain what he's saying, the only possible assumption
>is that you don't understand it, either.
>
Another would be that she doesn't feel obligated to do your homework
for you, nor assist you with remedial tutoring.

You know, you have a bad habit of overstating things. "Inarguably
perfect." "The only possible assumption."

You should stop doing that. It makes you look dumm.
 
"Otto Bahn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote
>
>>>>>> No, stupid. It would be people who'd lived their entire lives without
>>>>>> setting foot in a supermarket that was inarguably perfect. Not trendy
>>>>>> like Whole Foods, but perfect.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you enjoy looking down on people who cannot afford to live
>>>>> in a neighborhood with a Trader Joe's?
>>>>
>>>> My comment reflects reality: A neighborhood's affluence is in no way an
>>>> indicator of the quality of grocery stores available.
>>>
>>> We're talking about Trader Snobs, not any old store.
>>
>> I understand that, and I'm not referring to Trader Joe's.
>
> You're still a snob, though.
>
> --oTTo--
>
>

I guess we'll have to disagree on that. But, I know my business inside &
out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back