TORONTO – When Toys “R” Us Canada announced it was selling its branding to a U.S. firm in June, consumers might have imagined the extent of the deal was a new owner for the retailer’s name and home for Geoffrey the giraffe.
But something else was moving alongside the branding: consumer data.
Customers were told over the summer and fall that the purchaser — an affiliate of Ad Populum, the owner of Party City and the firm managing the Chia Pet brand and Elvis Presley attraction Graceland — was being given access to their names, contact and account information, transaction histories and communications with Toys “R” Us Canada.
Ad Populum didn’t detail what it would do with the data in its email notification to Toys “R” Us Canada customers and also didn’t respond to The Canadian Press’ requests for comment asking for specifics on how it will use the data.
Its affiliate Next Century announced last week that it will open Toys “R” Us Canada departments within Staples Canada locations starting Nov. 14.
The sale that transferred Toys “R” Us Canada’s consumer data is a part of insolvencies most people seldom think about. Experts, however, say it’s worth paying attention to because it’s becoming more common as businesses realize the immense power — and cash — they can derive from customer information.
“I definitely see it as a growing issue and one that will become more and more relevant as different types of information get sold,” said Dina Kovacevic, editor of Insolvency Insider, a Canadian newsletter covering bankruptcy and creditor protection news.
“Data is the currency. It’s going to get wild out there.”
When customers are fretting about the future of their favourite brands or scrambling for deals during closing sales, troubled companies often have a mountain of debt and thus are frequently on the hunt for buyers for their assets.
While people often think of leases, inventory, equipment and intellectual property first, consumer data can be one of the most lucrative assets a company has.
By buying emails, addresses and phone numbers, firms don’t need to build consumer bases from scratch and if they’ve purchased the rest of a failing business in hopes of revamping it, that data can make for a more seamless transition.
But customers don’t always realize their data is up for grabs unless they scour court records or pay attention to the odd news article mentioning it.
Most find out when they receive a letter telling them their data has changed hands and offering them a way to request its deletion, if they have qualms about the transfer.
“Our system is not quite as transparent as the U.S.,” said Constantine Karbaliotis, counsel at law firm nNovation LLP.
South of the border, there is often much more awareness and, thus, consumer groups and attorneys general have sometimes intervened when data from insolvent companies is up for sale.
“We don’t have that same sort of opportunity for involvement,” Karbaliotis said. “What we have is … after the fact, I can withdraw my consent.”
While some may yank their consent, it rarely becomes a hot topic among Canadians.
Chantal Bernier, a lawyer who was interim privacy commissioner from 2013 to 2014 after spending five years as assistant commissioner, remembers only one acquisition she worked on where there was public “uproar” about consumer data changing hands.
In that case, a luxury business purchased a rival company selling more affordable goods and customers were concerned transferring data as part of the sale would turn them into targets for upselling.
Bernier’s client deleted the data for customers who requested it and she found it heartening that so many people cared about privacy.
South of the border, consumer awareness may be growing because of two recent deals.
Google has been offering US$10 million for Spirit Airlines data, which reportedly includes 100 million emails, 500 million Microsoft Teams messages and other employee records.
The tech giant wants to use the defunct air carrier’s data to train AI systems, but unions and some policymakers are ringing alarm bells.
Then, there’s 23andMe, a U.S. firm that used saliva samples to offer global customers insights about their ancestry, genetics and health risks.
When it filed for bankruptcy and put its consumer data up for sale last year, 27 states and the District of Columbia tried to block the move, arguing genetic data is too sensitive to transfer to a new owner without informed customer consent.
Karbaliotis suspects people swung into action because users realized “you can’t change your genetic data. Once it’s lost, it’s lost.”
A U.S. court ultimately gave the deal a greenlight, but some think the case was still an aha moment for many consumers.
“A lot of the time when there’s a merger or acquisition transaction, you’re like whatever, some big company sold my email to some other big company, it doesn’t really impact me, but when it’s your genetic data that’s being sold, it’s pretty scary,” Kovacevic said.
“You’re afraid that the purchaser might use it in some way that you don’t want it being used, so that case, I think, became really very real for people.”
For Karbaliotis, such incidents are yet another reminder that “before you give people information, you should be thinking about these things.”
“Nobody contemplated the risk of insolvency, but everybody should be thinking, ‘OK, what happens if this company is sold or goes bankrupt? Could it be acquired by somebody who’s, you know, less trustworthy?’” he questioned.
“And how do you remain in control of personal information? Well, don’t give it out.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 8, 2026.
