Reuters is running a story today on how Toys R Us may sell its toy business. It feels a little like a zen question, but what would a toy-less Toys R Us actually be? Just “R Us”? Or maybe just “Us”?
Sadly, according to Reuters, a toy-less Toys wouldn’t be very zen at all: it would be “Babies R Us”. The company, under price pressure from Wal-mart, would drop toys from its core products and focus instead on its profitable baby-centric subsidiary.
Related posts:
Ideally Toys R Us is sticking to it’s long term goal of providing value to it shareholders, which in sense was always it’s purpose, albeit in a different business.
Although does this place “Geoffrey the Giraffe” on the endangered species list?
Agreed, but when a company’s name no longer applies it is always entertaining to ponder what precise value said company is continuing to provide to its shareholders. After all, the name, at least in principle signified something or another about the company’s expertise. Or maybe it didn’t