Talk:Safeway (Australia)

message: Key quote in this Age article:
:"...Woolworths, which trades in Victoria as Safeway."
And here:
:"...Woolworths (known as Safeway in Victoria)..."
Safeway is just Woolworths under a different trading name in the state of Victoria.  Not a separate company, not a separate business.  <B>S<SPAN STYLE="font-size:87%">EO75</SPAN></B> [talk] 06:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Both of these are NATIONAL issues, and hence Woolworths is used predominantly but Safeway is mentioned to reflect that most Australians identify with WOolworths, but a very large number identify with Safeway. IN the media, with national issues like this, often only one national source (Herals Sun-News Corp, The Age-Fairfax) is used to cut costs. For Wikipedia, there is no need to cut costs, and topics do not have to be reduced to "soundbytes"- this is one reason why Wikipedia is so useful to so many people and a reason why we should maintain Wikipedia's vast database on information. Niveam (talk) 06:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This doesn't disprove that Safeway is Woolworths.  Safeway is just a different trading name in Victoria, one state out of eight in the country.  You walk into a Safeway store in Victoria and the only difference between it and a Woolworths store in all other states is nil except for the store's trading name.  As Murtoa has tried to explain, you'll find all the makings and underpinnings of a Woolworths supermarket.  Even the catalogue is the same, and on page 2 is: "Woolworths Supermarkets: 1 Woolworths Way, Bella Vista, NSW 2153"; on page 5 are 'Woolworths Select' products.  The history behind the Safeway trading name is significant, and since this is the only difference between the two, this information should be added to the Woolworths article to fully and properly educate Wikipedia's readers.  <B>S<SPAN STYLE="font-size:87%">EO75</SPAN></B> [talk] 23:52, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Safeway ''is'' Woolworths

message: Grace Bros. and Myer set a good precedent for keeping articles like this separate, the GB/Myer story seems a similar one to Safeway/Woolworths, ie. both had differing histories then one took over the other. Endarrt (talk) 23:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Precedent

message: This morning (20 Aug 2008) 3AW presenter Neil Mitchell opened his program stating there would be an announcement this week on Safeway rebranding to Woolworths. Alas Mr Mitchell was rather confused in relation to certain facts about Woolworths Victorian supermarket division. Safeway have sold very little if any Safeway branded homebrands for sometime now yet he told listeners that they were in the process of removing all the Safeway branded products for Woolworths branded products. He also failed to mention that in the 1980's Woolworths rebranded their Victorian supermarkets to Safeway and implied Woolworths only ever traded as a variety store in Victoria. Wrong and it is very simple to tell the difference between a former Aust Safeway store and former Woolies Supermarket with both having a distinct exterior. Mitchell failed to do his homework however the day is drawing closer for the Woolworths name to once again grace Supermarkets (the outside that is) in Victoria? An often forgotten fact that Woolworths prior to Supermarkets becoming the core purchased numerous small chains back in the days of Woolworths Food Fair including Crofts and Nancarrows with Nancarrows being part of Woolworths to well into the 1980's. Quite often if a Victorian Woolworths was trading poorly it was rebranded to Nancarrows.  Nancarrows were to be rebranded Australian Food Stores however they were offloaded to Davids Holdings. When Nancarrows were sold to Davids so to were a handful of Woolies and Safeway (some trading as Food for less) supermarkets. There are many of these store still trading today, now as IGA's  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.221.32.95 (talk) 13:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, wonder if Neil Mitchell is user Niveam..? :)  <B>S<SPAN STYLE="font-size:87%">EO75</SPAN></B> [talk] 23:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The rumour became fact today. Murtoa (talk) 01:18, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it will undoubtedly be Woolworths soon!  <B>S<SPAN STYLE="font-size:87%">EO75</SPAN></B> [talk] 22:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rebrand 

message: Discussion above will show that I have been one of the main proponents to merge this article to Woolworths.  This was mainly predicated on the fact that any ongoing commentary on Safeway was likely to exactly mirror Woolworths, since they essentially were the same operation.  However, now that the re-branding has been announced I think it takes the heat out of this argument.  This article therefore can become more a receptacle for the (interesting) history of Safeway in Australia, with appropriate links to Woolworths articles. Murtoa (talk) 06:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree, now you mention it along with Endarrt's precedent example above, as long as there is enough decent content to make the subject notable enough (or else we could face another merge debate). I found this Age article a very interesting read (I always thought Safeway Chelsea looked and felt 'rich in heritage'!), and contains excellent bits of information to make such an historical article worthy and similarly of interest.  So... Does anyone know of a version of the old Safeway 'red S' brand? This one looks quite familiar from memory (with "SAFEWAY" in bold all-caps Helvetica IIRC).  Let me know and I'll create and upload a quality version for the article.   <B>S<SPAN STYLE="font-size:87%">EO75</SPAN></B> [talk] 00:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rebranding lessens need to merge articles