Weird headline, totally unsupported by the article.
According to the article, there were several strategic blunders, including trying the model outside of cities where lack of density cut against it. Plus the apparent dismissal any value their 2700 retail locations could provide.
As far as I can tell, Kroger didn’t acknowledge anything except a change in strategy.
Doesn't that support the article? their bet was massive robotics in centralized warehouses, but that turns out not to be profitable.
Unsure how the headlines doesn't align. Maybe it's different than what I'm seeing:
> Kroger acknowledges that its bet on robotics went too far