Nordstrom
As the developer, politicians and proponents of Providence Place argued for its construction, they would often fly the Nordstrom banner, maintaining that the store’s presence here would attract shoppers from afar, particularly from Boston, where Nordstrom does not have a store. But with Nordstrom’s opening just three months away, talk with Nordstrom representatives and they’ll tell you that Boston shoppers are on their radar screen, but more so for the eventual construction of a store there.
Where do they believe the Nordstrom shoppers will come from? Right here, in a marketplace they list among the top 50 in the country. Sure they’d love to have shoppers from Boston, but they are very clear that eventually those shoppers will have their own Nordstrom to visit.
Rhode Island's Market Has Changed. Developers, Builders, Investors and Sellers Must Change With It.
By Emilio DiSpirito IV License Partner | Engel & Völkers Oceanside Leader | The DiSpirito…
Learn More
The upscale chain that will be among the chief anchors of the new Providence mall, has set its sites on expansion throughout the East.
Nordstrom has shown considerable confidence in the area, choosing its locations based on the strength of the retail environment, the long term economic health of an area, and identifying it among the top 50 markets, according to its corporate public relations representatives. And they said, the store was also attracted to the prospect of being part of the downtown revitalization.
We suspect that Nordstrom has done its homework and has chosen Providence because it firmly believes the area is a sound market for its product. That’s a vote of confidence that we rarely see here.
The one disturbing factor remains the consistent belief among local power brokers that to sell an idea to the Rhode Island populace you need to embellish its expected results. In this case that the mall, and Nordstrom in particular, would attract shoppers from areas that even Nordstrom officials don’t see as long-term customers.
Maybe among our greatest faults in Rhode Island is a belief that we need to raise expectations beyond reality to overcome a skepticism that is sometimes seen as an obstacle to progress.
More regulations
We agree with those manufacturers and distributors who oppose the state Department of Labor and Training’s renewed efforts to force forklift operators to pay for and secure a license, above and beyond existing requirements to meet federal OSHA guidelines.
Opponents of the proposal suggest that the fee for such a license is nothing more than a revenue generating gimmick on the part of the state.
They believe simply that the state is trying to make money. State officials counter primarily with some valid concerns about safety. They point out for example, that in 1998, two workers at separate Rhode Island manufacturing plants died as a result of forklift accidents.
But we do not see the safety argument as justifying the state licensing requirement. Nor do we consider the fee that goes along with it to be so troubling in and of itself. But the perception such a fee fuels is not worth the revenue stream it would generate.
And that perception is another fee and another regulation put upon Rhode Island businesses. Just more evidence for those who like to talk about Rhode Island’s poor business climate.
There is no need to create another layer of regulation on top of OSHA regulations that presumably would do a better job than the state.
What we should be doing is seeing where we can eliminate these seemingly minor fees and overregulation to streamline our systems and make it easier for businesses to operate, especially when there are other safeguards in place.
We are sure companies like American Power Conversion, CVS, and Pepsi can afford to pick up the tab for forklift operator licenses. But we also suspect they’ll simply view this as just another anti-business regulation.
