```json
{
    "title": "Gap.Com: Finally somebody else notices!",
    "url": "https://performancezen.com/2005/09/19/gapcom-finally-somebody-else-notices/",
    "datePublished": "2005-09-19",
    "dateModified": "2005-09-19",
    "language": "en-US",
    "description": "At my real job, we monitor and report on the performance of a number of different e-commerce verticals. [I will now try and stop using marketing-speak.] In the retail index,…",
    "author": "spierzchala",
    "publisher": "Performance Zen"
}
```

# Gap.Com: Finally somebody else notices!

At my real job, we monitor and report on the performance of a number of different e-commerce verticals.
[I will now try and stop using marketing-speak.]
In the retail index, the Gap has been down for nearly 3 weeks. Well, they have come part way up, but it is flaky, and they don't have a search function.

**No search function?**

Oh yeah, let's go shop somewhere else.
Anyway, Erick Schonfeld at Business 2.0 just

[linked](http://business2.blogs.com/business2blog/2005/09/gapcom_down_for.html)

to a

[story](http://adweek.blogs.com/adfreak/2005/09/gapcom_shoppers.html)

at adfreak about this little re-design outage.
20 days. And counting.
This is unheard of in the Internet economy. Well, not unheard of, but the only other site I know that had a similar re-design outage was

[Wal-Mart](http://www.itworld.com/Tech/2416/CWSTO53336/)

back in 2000.
The Gap is a savvy online retailer. Why couldn't this been done in a more intelligent way? What has made this re-design so problematic?