homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.205.254.108
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld / Webmaster General
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: phranque & physics

Webmaster General Forum

    
Gap Inc - Stores Offline for "upgrade"?
Is that the "real" reason?
g1smd




msg:336832
 4:12 pm on Sep 2, 2005 (gmt 0)


See: [usatoday.com ]

>> The San Francisco-based company isn't disclosing when the sites will reopen. <<

>> Gap.com and OldNavy.com each generated online sales of $236 million last year <<

I can't believe a business that does USD 4.5 million per week, would knowingly take their sites down for weeks, for an "upgrade".

What do you think is really going on?

I reckon it is a security flaw or a major hardware failure that has taken them offline - something very serious, not a routine upgrade.

 

g1smd




msg:336833
 5:39 pm on Sep 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

OK it is quite believable then, as no one else is a non-believer?

moltar




msg:336834
 6:30 pm on Sep 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

Maybe their host was in one of the Katrina affected states?

txbakers




msg:336835
 6:33 pm on Sep 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

happened before Katrina

moltar




msg:336836
 7:13 pm on Sep 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

publicity stunt?

dcheney




msg:336837
 7:56 pm on Sep 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

Mighty expensive publicity stunt. That's about $4.5m per week per site.

MatthewHSE




msg:336838
 10:09 pm on Sep 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

I don't see that kind of downtime being for an upgrade. Sites making that kind of money can afford to have their upgrade done by someone who knows how to do it with minimal downtime. On the other hand, what kind of failure could cause this kind of downtime with such major sites? Even if it was a massive hardware failure, you'd think they could replace the parts quickly and fairly inexpensively compared to what the downtime is costing them.

Sanenet




msg:336839
 10:47 pm on Sep 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

[...]accounting for 3% of Gap Inc.'s total revenue of $16.3 billion[..]

3%? It's bu**er all of their overall profits. I bet they're probablt still running a 1999 operation that's costing them more than they're earning.

Imagine - average sale per visitor is 34.70$ (avg. between both sites). Now, imagine some bright chap/pette(?) convinced the boss that by revamping the two sites gap.inc can raise avg. sale per customer to 50$.

Bingo, those 4 weeks downtime is recouped within a year. Worth it, no?

dcheney




msg:336840
 11:40 pm on Sep 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

Bingo, those 4 weeks downtime is recouped within a year. Worth it, no?

Not when it could be done with close to zero downtime by almost any professional.

D_Blackwell




msg:336841
 12:13 am on Sep 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Four weeks downtime for a significant business? There have got to be people falling on their swords, or having their heads put on pikes.

1milehgh80210




msg:336842
 5:03 am on Sep 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

This article implies it was originally to take 'several days'.
[thestreet.com...]
maybe someone forgot to do a backup? )

Easy_Coder




msg:336843
 12:11 am on Sep 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Looks like it's not completely shut down.

You can get by the closed site screen... i did with gap.com/test then that opened things up and I wound up getting to products [gap.com...]

g1smd




msg:336844
 12:48 am on Sep 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Looks like gap.com/test no longer works. Guess you were spotted!

g1smd




msg:336845
 12:50 am on Sep 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Ah. I followed your product link and after three more clicks I got a pop-up:

Welcome to the Preview of Gap.com

You are part of a limited number of people to preview our new store.
Based on our customers' feedback, we've updated our site with innovative new features to bring you an extraordinary shopping experience.

Start shopping Gap.com >>

Thank you for helping us bring you a better shopping experience.

Still does not validate [validator.w3.org]!

Essex_boy




msg:336846
 5:44 pm on Sep 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

And the unemployment figures rise by 1

martinibuster




msg:336847
 5:06 am on Sep 15, 2005 (gmt 0)

I couldn't browse their site with JS turned off. If this is what the search engines see, then that's not good.

It's funny how they just don't care if search engines can't follow and index their product pages. This could result in many more sales in their stores for baby clothes, maternity clothes, kids clothes, as well as their mens and women's lines.

If Amazon can do it, then Gap can do it. Doesn't this seem inexcusable in the year 2005? It boggles the mind.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld / Webmaster General
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved