A recent online question asking whether Target is something people actually wanted in Findlay, Ohio, drew a strong and surprisingly lopsided response from the community. Many residents used the thread to vent frustration not only about Target itself, but also about the loss of the Findlay Village Mall and the broader shift toward big-box chains over traditional retail.​

Clear majority opposed

Out of more than 120 individual comments captured in the discussion, roughly three out of four commenters openly said they did not want a Target in Findlay. By contrast, only about one in five clearly expressed support for the project or enthusiasm about having another shopping option in town, with a small remainder saying they were indifferent or felt it “doesn’t matter” because the store is already coming. Many of the “no” responses were emphatic single-word replies like “No,” “Nope,” “Not me,” or “Absolutely not,” repeated dozens of times throughout the thread.​

Approximate breakdown of sentiment

(Figures are based on counts of clearly pro‑, anti‑, or neutral comments in the thread and are approximate rather than an official survey.)​

What people said instead of Target

A dominant theme among those opposed was not simply “no Target,” but “we wanted something else.” The most frequently mentioned alternatives included:​

• A Sam’s Club or Costco, repeatedly cited as a better fit for local shoppers.​

• Keeping or revitalizing the mall, with many residents saying “the mall was just fine” and lamenting the loss of Elder‑Beerman, JCPenney, Sears, and smaller specialty shops.​

• Entertainment or unique destinations, such as a Dave & Buster’s, convention center, or more nighttime venues and independent businesses.​

Several commenters argued that Findlay is “big enough to support better” and that replacing the mall with yet another big-box retail store was a missed opportunity to diversify what the city offers.​

Concerns beyond retail choice

For some residents, opposition to Target went beyond retail competition and nostalgia for the mall. A number of comments referenced national cultural or political controversies around Target, vowing to “boycott Target” or objecting to the company’s bathroom and social policies. Others complained that Target is “just another Walmart,” “overpriced,” or “a red Walmart,” questioning whether the store will provide anything substantially different from existing options on Tiffin Avenue.​

A divided but resigned community

Despite the heavy skew toward “no,” there was also a vocal minority welcoming Target as “another choice” that might save them trips to other cities, especially for children’s clothing and certain brands. A few residents reminded others that the landowner and company ultimately decide, noting that a delegation of local leaders had once lobbied Target’s headquarters years ago when demand appeared higher.​

That mix of frustration, nostalgia, and reluctant acceptance paints a picture of a community that largely did not ask for Target—but is now bracing to live with it, and deciding individually whether to step through the doors once they open.​