Talk:IKEA/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Marketspeak

The following paragraph is riddled with marketspeak nonsense:

IKEA also claims to have pioneered the use of more sustainable approaches to mass consumer culture. Its founder calls it "democratic design," meaning that the company applies an integrated approach to manufacturing and design (see also environmental design). Responding to the explosion of human population—and material expectations—in the 20th century, the company has mastered economies of scale, capturing material streams and creating manufacturing processes that hold costs and resource use down

It could probably benefit from a rewrite. I'm just surprised the word "leverage" isn't in there somewhere. --193.11.222.179 17:39, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Unique?

Is IKEA 'unique' in offering flat-pack products? Erm, no. As this is patently untrue in at elast one of its markets (UK), could this be amended, please? Sojourner001 17:39, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

You're right, in a way, but the flat-pack idea was unique when Kamprad started IKEA and that's what people are thinking about when you say IKEA. But be bold, change what you think is wrong.--NoNo 16:19, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Controversy over Front-Cover Photo in 2007 Catalog

I have added a reference to a Canadian news article that some people claimed that the front-cover photo in the 2007 catalog has been "doctored". Rgl168 00:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Darn. You beat me to it. I changed your wording slightly (hope you don't mind). "Male penis" was redundant, and when I made that change the sentence didn't sound quite right to me. I don't much like my attempt either, to be honest. Fracture98 06:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

"Human looking" was my suggestion. Ikea Dog Penis 15:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

anti-penis activists? That might be an elaborate euphemism for feminists, but it sounds rather stupid. There's got to be a better way of saying that. --Ben, July 3rd, 2007

agreed EvilFred 22:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Totally amazing this ever got legs. Let me guess - this happened in the US?

Bedding product names: another source

Some of the bedding items I've seen in IKEA's online catalog don't use the names of flowers, plants or precious stones: one line of their sheets and pillowcases is called SOVA ("sleep"), their pillows are called GOSA ("snuggle"), and their quilts are called MYSA ("feel cozy/get cozy"). I corrected the list of sources for those names, accordingly. --Ingeborg S. Nordén 21:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Old Phila Store is still US Offices ??

I live near the old Philadelphia IKEA store. Last year they moved 2 miles away. However, I believe that their USA offices are still in the old building. It is not totally empty. I'm not sure though, I must check. --141.151.12.247 00:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC) Opps that was me, forgot to log-in... --michael180 00:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

for example on http://www.ikea.com/ms/en_US/about_ikea/press_room/productloans_print2.html at the bottom of the page the address listed is of their old store.--michael180 01:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Community Impact

This section seems really POV. I'd bet most popular stores might create traffic jams when they open. This article seems to say an IKEA store ruins a community, more so than a new Wal-Mart or Best Buy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.75.180.31 (talk) 19:01, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

Agree. Someone with a bent wrote that.

I agree--halfway down the pages the negativity begins, and it ends towards the end of the page with the finishing of the "criticisms" section. Why is community impact completely negative? Shouldn't something positive be said about Ikea, like how it creates jobs and supports a community with low prices?

Also agree, UK resident here and all the people I know like IKEA for what it is and are glad to have a store relatively nearby. The perceptions of the community are thus largely positive IME. Indeed, the swarming masses of humanity there every weekend would suggest a little too positive. The store may create traffic but that's because vast reams of the populace want to shop there, i.e. a postiive thing.

The criticisms are largely inconsistent. Consider that IKEA is criticised for having too few stores but that the stores present problems, so do we want more or less IKEA stores? It is criticised for the planning decisions of local governments and the illegal behaviour of potential customers neither of which are representative of IKEA. It is criticised for the traffic to main arteries and then for plans of city centre or more remote developments, e.g. Red Hook, where these are not present. It isn't that these criticism have no substance. Rather it is that the poor performance of planning officials, infrastructure, and personal behaviour are neither exclusive to IKEA nor its sole responsibility. -Panlane 08:51, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Someone at Wiki obviously has a perverted agenda. But if the article is reporting on criticisms from elsewhere then it's totally in order.

Brooklyn

"The IKEA megastore currently under construction (as of 2005) in Brooklyn, New York is dividing the community. The section of Brooklyn where the store is being constructed is located in the neighborhood of Red Hook, which is notably isolated from major transportation arteries."

Can anyone update this? Assuming that it is finished, can anyone around Brooklyn comment on the current situation? Andrewjd 13:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Banned commercial?

I've been searching a bit and all I can find about the so-called "banned" commercials is video host sites. I have yet to see a source (IKEA, goverment agency, newspaper, etc..) that confirms these videos are banned.

62.16.162.252 13:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Shuttle bus

Reading this article was quite enlightening. But the information on the shuttle bus routes seems quite unnecessary. I'll delete it unless there are objections. I'm happy to find a place in the article to mention that IKEA does run shuttle buses. Rogwan 19:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. Rogwan 19:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

$1.75 million euros???

Somebody please correct this:

IKEA contributed 1 euro to UNICEF from each soft toy sold during the 2006 holiday season, raising a total of $1.75 million euros.

Done, but why didn't you!? Rogwan 09:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

- coz I didn't know whether to remove $ sign or to remove euros! :P Thanks!

Hockey Players?

I removed "Hockey players: Henrik Sedin, Daniel Sedin, Markus Naslund" from line 61, under the product names category. I've been to Ikea many times, and I've never seen a hockey player for sale. And I'm in Quebec; we love hockey! mj_sklar 03:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

;) You mean Mats Näslund? And no he's not for sale. But you can lease him by the week. ;) ;)

this is the diff where the information crept in. Funny enough for me to include this in WP:BJAODN. Thewinchester ^(talk) 03:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

IKEA Philadelphia

At the time the Philadelphia store opened in 1985, I saw a newspaper article that said IKEA had approached city leaders in Boston as the location for the first US store. The Boston politicos didn't show any interest. After being rebuffed, the IKEA folks went to Philadelphia, next on the list. The article said they were given the red carpet treatment which included helicopter rides to scout out locations. The store was located in suburban Plymouth Meeting and a distribution center was sited in Philadelphia. Royf 22:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

split - IKEA's debut in each country

Article is long - would anyone mind me splitting the section IKEA#IKEA's debut in each country into it's own article? Use IKEA's debut in each country or a different title? Ninja neko 12:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd agree with that, however the name is important for the article to be notifiable on its own. There's a lot of information there already that isn't directly relevant to a country's IKEA debut. A title such as 'IKEA around the world' or 'IKEA in each country' would be more relevant and encourage a lot more development. Of course, if it is made into an article, it should be more than just a list anyway. ~~ Peteb16 11:31, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Why should it be more than a list? There are articles that are just lists, they've even become Featured lists. Ninja neko 18:24, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Those lists have sections giving background of the content, this should have the same. ~~ Peteb16 22:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Should Jonathan Coulton's song be mentioned?

Jonathan Coulton wrote a song about Ikea that would fit nicely in a trivia subheading or something...just a thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.124.116.96 (talk) 21:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Control by Mr Kamprad

I feel the statement "so IKEA can avoid taxation" is a little strong, yes it is true ikea minimised there exposure to tax, but i don't belive that it avoids all taxes, in every country. Agree? Chap6595 (talk) 09:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Who is writing all this crap about Ingvar? Someone who's more involved: find out and ban the loser!

ikea australia

i am an employee of ikea here in australia ikea value there cultures and values which they are so proud of it is a shame that they dont live up to what the profess. it is all about the almighty dollar with them and there values show in there bank account.

Do they also sponsor classes in English and typing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.5.136.204 (talk) 11:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Antisemitism?

I heard a rumor that IKEA sparked controversy in Israel over something antisemitic. I was told this by an Israeli, so I assume she knew what she was talking about. Can anyone give me any more details or confirm or deny this rumor? 208.38.46.5

Probably the fact that IKEA is Swedish, and that Sweden is often critical against Israel and its breaches of international law concerning the Israel-Palestine situation. Specifically, this art exhibit (Snow White and The Madness of Truth) and the vandalisation of it by the Zvi Mazel probably sparked alot of anti-Swedish sentiment in Israel. oh wait, it might just have been the fact that Ingvar Kamprad allegedly symphatized with the Nazis in his youth. From the Wiki entry on him: "In 1994 the personal letters of the Swedish fascist activist Per Engdahl were made public after his death and it was revealed that Kamprad had joined Engdahl's pro-Nazi group in 1942 and that Kamprad had raised funds for and recruited members to said group at least as late as September 1945. When Kamprad quit the group is unknown but he remained a friend of Engdahl until the early 1950s. Since the public revelation Kamprad has said that he bitterly regrets that part of his life, calling it his greatest mistake and he subsequently wrote letters of apology to all IKEA employees of Jewish descent." Mackan 06:27, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Probably another reason. Needs research of course. But I think you may find IK revealed not too many years ago he'd been a Nazi sympathiser. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.5.136.204 (talk) 11:47, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

New Store In Melbounre

Where's Melbounre? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.5.136.204 (talk) 11:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Ikea has bought a new block of land in the eastern suburbs along one of the major freeways, either M1 or the new Eastlink. Can any support my rumors that an announcment will happen before August this year —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chap6595 (talk • contribs) 07:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC).

I can't confirm this rumourt but i think it is unlikely. The IKEA Richmond store is less than 5 years old. Most ikea stores last longer than 5 years before being moved. A new IKEA will cost $50 (Adelaide store) - $100 (Perth Store) million Australian dollars to built (plus approval from Inter IKEA Systems BV for the new store plus moving expenses). There have been no planning submissions to council. Interesting to see what happens.

I'm not surprised you can't confirm the rumourt. I've never been able to confirm a rumourt either.

Well I work for IKEA and I can tell you it is happening...they have bought the land in the eastern suburbs within 5 kms of the new East Link Project and are waiting for that to be finished and for all the work to be sorted out before they put in a planning submission. They area also looking for a cite for 1 more store it the north or north west of the city. I know this as i work at IKEA and we have all be told this.. It costs approximatly 35 to 50 million for a store, Adelaide and Perth would have cost no more than 50 million...no matter what, unless you count all the stuff in them and the stock —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.219.141.32 (talk) 12:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Site even. Recommend tutelage in English before contemplating contributing to articles here. Thank you.

Well I was the one that posted the comment above...i now know the site its is on the corner of Westall Rd and Princess Hwy, the store will be announced in 6 months...can I now put this on the site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chap6595 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Well I stand corrected, It was announced on Saturday that the new store will cost $150 million and is located on the corner of Westall and Princess Hwy. It will take just over 18 months to finish —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chap6595 (talk • contribs) 04:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

You stand corrected but the quality of the writing here cannot. It's scary it's so bad. People read these sections and you give Wiki a really bad name.

Proofread

I can see this travesty of an article also needs a thorough proofread. I don't want to get into it but the literary quality is horrendous in places. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.5.136.204 (talk) 12:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

IKEA POV

There is an unbelieveable amount of POV and bias in this article. It's ridiculous to see, at the beginning of the "controveries" section, or the former criticisms section, that IKEA is bad because it destroyed historical buildings "in at least one case." I mean, come on. The rest of the article is full of POV too, especially in the community impact section. The only good thing that's about IKEA is that its creating jobs, and whoever wrote the section immediately reminded the reader that ONCE AGAIN, IKEA is creating traffic problems, just so that you remember that IKEA is evil. (By the way, I live next to an IKEA, and the traffic there may be slightly more busy, but on average it's fine. Unless traffic problems are a continuing problem, which I can assure you they aren't, I see no reason to include more than one mention of traffic problems at the openings of new stores--that's what happens with most stores. There's definitely serious NPOV problems. Can someone flag this article?Merechriolus (talk) 05:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I don't even see why community impact section is there. It's just a listing of traffic congestions whenever an IKEA opened. As for the criticism section, it's not so much a criticism of anything in particular of IKEA, well it is actually now that i think of it. It's mostly a criticism of some marketing mistakes the company has made. Cloud02 (talk) 19:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I removed all of the uncited POV statments and a one that cited someones personal blog. This should help some. Sections like this should always be cited otherwise it creates problems like this. Sawblade05 ⁽^{talk to me} ^| ^{my wiki life}⁾ 02:05, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Split

This was talked about some time ago, but the discussion has been archived yet the banner remains. It was proposed that the section IKEA's debut in each country should be split into a new article to reduce the size of this article and aid expansion of the topic. Should this still go ahead and if so to what article title should we split it into? Suggestions include: 'IKEA's debut in each country', 'IKEA in each country' and 'IKEA stores'. Personally I prefer the latter two as they doesn't limit the content of the new article. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 20:55, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't need to be split, it needs to either be cut down into well-sourced prose and incorporated into the history, summarized to just IKEA has a presence in X number of countries, or just cut out all together. It isn't necessary and is more trivia than anything else. AnmaFinotera (talk) 21:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

An anonymous criticism of IKEA

Certainly in England at least, Ikea is a controversial subject purely because it is aggravating. There are not enough stores to get to one quickly and easily and when one arrives near you it creates all sorts of congestion problems. Not only that but people are extremely dissatisfied with having to go there only to walk round and round before going to the warehouse to pick up your purchase only to find they're out of stock and you have to get something else. Plus it seems that nowadays, evenyone's home is completely full of Ikea merchandise. This is all just a thought, seems strange that Americans think it is 'fascinating and exotic'

I don't know whether we Americans find IKEA 'fascinating and exotic'; I know I don't, but I can find Europe on a map, apparently unlike many Americans who watch, for example, FOX News. Personally, I shop there because their stuff is smartly designed, reasonably reliable, and very inexpensive.

Atlant 23:13, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

What the hell, dude? Your response was half half-assed (quarter-assed?) answer and half-jab at a group of people. I hope you feel proud of having to prove that you're "one of the good ones" by setting yourself apart from a fictional stereotype.

Like any retailer that's just getting established, there's a honeymoon of novelty. There was certainly a buzz when a franchise came here to the Chicago area, but I think that's worn off now. I think I'll strike the "fascinating and exotic." --Theodore Kloba 17:56, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

Just getting established? Ingvar's been running the company since 1943, When do you think he'll no longer be 'just getting established'? And the 'chain' of stores started officially in 1965 - that's anoherr 43 in there. 43 years. Forty three years. 'Just getting established'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.5.136.204 (talk) 11:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

See WP:CIV and WP:NPA before your attitude causes you trouble.

Atlant 12:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

To quote the Π-KEA bot from Futurama: "Enjoy your affördable Swedish cräp!"

Salleman 3 July 2005 14:23 (UTC)

In Toronto, IKEA is definitely not perceived as “fascinating and exotic”. AFAIK it’s just perceived as “relatively inexpensive” (not really “inexpensive” inexpensive, esp. to new immigrants) and “relatively good-looking” (esp. to young people).—Gniw (Wing) 16:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Also, Ikea's stratgy of having very few stores is good from a buisness perspecitve, sort of like FedEx shipping everything to a centeral place and then shipping it all out after sorting it. The centralization of the chain means that it can continue to hae low-priced goods because it keeps low operation and transoprtaton costs in an area. Though we live in an era where we want everything on our front doorstep, we do not have to think that way as buisnesses and not doing things that way is more profitable and far better for the consumer in the long run. Holoeconomics (talk) 12:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

IKEA stores (F.K.A. IKEA's debut in each country)

I've changed the name of the section 'IKEA's debut in each country' to more accurately reflect the content found in that section. This section has often been scrutinised and more work needs to be done to make it less of a Trivia section, perhaps with a revised table or changing the whole thing to a prose as suggested above. I'm hoping changing the name is a start as it broadens its scope. If anyone disagrees, by all means let's discuss it further below. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 13:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the rename, and hope continued attention will help make it less of a trivia/directory and more of a historical/business discussion with more sources.AnmaFinotera (talk) 18:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Inter IKEA Systems collected 631 billion Euros!!!!

Is this reported number ture? Is it 631 billion or million!? (Ref. Tax Avoidance Paragraph).

It will be 631 million. IKEA Systems takes a 3% franchising fee from all the stores. Reference http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=6919139 Chap6595 (talk) 12:44, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

"Pre-history"

First a bit of pre - history. Ingvar Kamprad as only five years old was selling boxes of matches, which he bought in packs of ten.He split them and sold each pack individualy, making profit on each box. Over the next few years he diversified into selling Christmas cards and magazines, fish and lingonberries, using his grandmother`s bicycle to make deliveries. By the age of 11 he was buying seeds from a small agricultural company, JP Persson from nearby Nassjo. This is not a story of powerty, but rather of determination, focus and careful business. At boarding school Ingvar had a cardboard box under his bed, with watches, wallets, pens , pencils, belts and lighters, which he was now selling.--Hushband (talk) 18:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

And then in 1943 real IKEA history starts.

I removed this contribution from the article. I've heard similar stories about Kamprad's early life, but this addition needs references.
/ Raven in Orbit (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Criticism POV

"Over the last 15 years Ikea has driven the idea of furniture as fashion and have produced many low cost funiture items. Sadly, the quality of many of their items has declined as they have reduced manufacturing costs - and to be fair - the price. One could argue that this feeds (some may say reflects) consumer culture - whichever view you take, it would seem to lead to more consumption of resources than totally necessary."

That part seems really super POV to me. It should be edited or removed. Mkilly 23:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Totally agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.5.136.204 (talk) 11:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Also agree and I believe it is not ture. I have Ikea furniture and have had it for about 8-9 years. It has held up well, even though I can be a bit destructive at times.Holoeconomics (talk) 12:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

If you are going to buy the cheapest product there then it is not going to last as long as the more expensive one....the saying you get what you pay more springs to mind. Chap6595 (talk) 12:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I also agree, where is the proof? Never had any problems myself? (Birtitia (talk) 09:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC))

Article clean-up

The article has "clean-up" and "neutrality" tags on it and there has been considerable discussion about its problems on this page. Some improvements have been made, but the article remains substandard. It seems to me that we could address some of the problems by proceeding as follows:

~~Eliminate the "IKEA in pop culture" section. This is cruft—trivial and pointless.~~ Done 14:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
~~Create a sub-article for the "IKEA stores" section.~~ Done 03:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Drastically reduce the "Criticisms" section, making the language NPOV and moving most of what is worth keeping to other sections.
Reorganizing and editing the article.

Comments? The above list is a "bottom-up" approach, and I think point 1 is the least arguable, so I plan to begin with that. But, by all means stop me if you are attached to any of these sections in their current incarnation. Sunray (talk) 23:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I've started by eliminating the "IKEA in pop culure" section (#1, above). Ahhhhh, starting to feel better already. Sunray (talk) 14:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Something I'd like to see improved upon is the selection of images. Basically what we currently have is an image gallery of different stores posted in almost every section. It is my understanding that images are supposed to be placed in a section which is directly relevant to the image content. WP:IMAGE states "Articles that use more than one image should present a variety of material near relevant text". Therefore the only images which I believe are correctly placed are the images of Kamprad, the IKEA Catalogue and the IKEA towers at Croydon. The rest really needs to be put into a gallery of some sort (perhaps within the section and/or article 'IKEA Stores'. Meanwhile, more relevant images need to be found to replace them. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 11:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Would you be able to work on that? Sunray (talk) 15:51, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll have a go, yes. Not today though. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 21:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Something I'm having problems with is cleaning up the "Criticisms" section. Every time I go through it and weed out the less notable stuff, someone sympathetic to whatever group is involved, puts the information back. I'm wondering whether we should either: a) eliminate the section altogether, or b) drastically reduce it, leaving all references in, but in tightly worded paragraphs. Any thoughts? Sunray (talk) 15:51, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

On your first solution, you can't eliminate the content of the section, it's content will always be notable to someone and even helpful as a reference not just to people reading about IKEA, but to those looking further into how a culture can be effected by certain marketing tatics in general. But by saying that I've hit upon a bit of a revalation. The whole section is all really to do with cultural impact, which is what the previous section is supposed to be doing. So maybe merging the sections is the answer. On your second solution, I don't think what's in this section needs trimming any more than it already has been. It probably shouldn't be in a list though and an attempt to make it more of a prose would also improve things. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 21:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Chuck out your chintz

There should be a valid reason for redirecting "Chuck out your chintz" to Ikea. Ok, the phrase was linked to Ikea, but the article doesn't even mention the phrase. -Paul —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.73.99.107 (talk) 13:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Anecdote

I read that Americans in the first stores in the USA started buying the vases because they though they were meant as glasses. Later IKEA started to adopt the sizes of their glasses in their American stores. Andries (talk) 11:39, 17 May 2008 (UTC)