Wal-Mart

[Stagger_Lee]

[ QUOTE ]
If you think they put small stores out of business, you're right! That's what COMPETITION is!

[/ QUOTE ]

If that's all competition is then I wouldn't piss on it to put out the flames if it was on fire.

This is not competition - this is removal of competition in order to create a monopoly. This is reducing everything to the lowest common denominator. Exactly the same result as communism.

Competition is very important and it should not be removed either through banning it or via monopolistic practices.

[glorfindel]

[ QUOTE ]
I shudder at the thought of a marketplace with no competition.

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean like United States' healthcare/insurance system?

[ChipWrecked]

In the Atlanta 'hood, Wal-Mart took abuse for not opening a location because "We ought to be able to shop in the same stores you white people go to." In Inglewood, they are forced out. When you get to a certain level of success, you have a target (lol) on your back in this country. You are damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Disclaimer: I worked for Wal-Mart in high school. Store number 11. Worst. Job. Ever. But, some of the fulltimers from those days made out very well with their company stock.

I shop there as I do enjoy saving a few cents on my shampoo as that adds up over time.

[TwoOuter]

I think the comments about monopolization are spot on. The effects carry on down the supply chain as well. When Walmart squeezes these suppliers to provide products at lower cost, you end up with not only cheap crap but crap often manufactured under less than ideal conditions.

In a similar vein, Home Depot's monopolistic purchasing power results in some tool manufacturers being forced to create two lines of their products- their "real" line and the stuff they sell at Home Depot.

It's complicated though. These big boxes DO provide jobs (though the net increase in jobs is harder to calculate). Consumers DO want lower prices (often in spite of their best interests). So cities are faced with a tough choice: bring in the boxes or see tax revenue go to other nearby cities who provide the boxes a home.

[katyseagull]

[ QUOTE ]


Do any of u enjoy going to Wal-Mart? Because of the low prices, the immense selection of products, the friendly service? (yeah right). What is your opinion on Wal-Mart in general?





[/ QUOTE ]

I would say I'm the typical Wal-Mart shopper. I go there because I'm convinced I can get whatever it is I need cheap. Also, I can buy kitty litter, underwear and a vacuum cleaner all at the same place and for the lowest prices I will find anywhere. How can you beat that?

I was not brought up to think this way, btw. My mom hates Wal-Mart with a passion and even though there is one located less than 1/2 mile from her house she feels she has an obligation to support smaller businesses. If I suggest that we run to Wal-Mart to pick up something she always gives me an icy stare. She honestly feels disgusted with me that I do so much of my shopping at Wal-Mart! We've exchanged words over it [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img].

But seriously, if you need a sleeping bag or tennis racket for the weekend what are you going to do? Wal-Mart is the solution, imo. Because of Wal-Mart I have coolers, sleeping bags, bathroom towels, a vacuum, and a drawer full of cotton socks. For us poor folk, Wal-Mart rules.

[dylan's alias]

Target is significantly closer to me than Wal-Mart. That's about the only reason I don't regularly go there.

I'm not sure how I feel overall about the good/bad of big box stores. There has been a change in the quality of products, but not necessarily in a bad way. There isn't as much of a difference between the top end and the average for many items (household goods/cleaners/toiletries). I think in the past, the off brands were genuinely crap. Now, they are often identical to the top brand but in a different package.

And Katy, it isn't just for poor people. I lived in NYC for years, and paid a higher price for everything. Now that I'm in the suburbs, saving a few cents on stuff is great. I won't even buy certain things at the supermarket because they are cheaper at Target. I'm not poor by any stretch, but I work hard and don't like wasting money for no reason.

[[Phill]]

Im from the UK, so cant comment first hand, but heres my take.

Firstly, no company magically creates a monopoly, especially not in the general goods stores where the barriers to entry are as low as anything.

The reason that Wal Mart is successful is that it provides cheap goods which people want. They have managed to find a forumla with works and their growth is testiment to how they are obviously doing something right.

Now, with regard to their workers, there is either two schools of thought - they are providing jobs (crappy or otherwise) in areas which need jobs OR they are providing jobs that are better than what is surrounding the store.

The thing is whilst you could argue that the store uses its massive economy of scale to undercut the small local stores, it is the community that is responsible for these stores losing custom and going out of business.

With a store like Wal Mart you will always get what you pay for, and that means they wont have the nicest stores, the friendliest staff and i would imagine to one degree or another the best products - but they will squeeze every last penny of savings and their low overhead low profitabilty anhd high volume is what is popular - this means someway along the line some people will get steamrolled by the system but people are voting with their feet and their dollar.

[daveT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In a small town, I guess that is true. I do remember being in remote parts of the country, and Wal Mart is all there was. If there was small businesses in these areas, I am sad to see them go.

[/ QUOTE ]

Until recently Wal Mart was only in small towns. Basically Wal Mart would only be in town where the opening of a Wal Mart would be big news.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is something I considered as well.

The argument of small businesses being displaced and low paying jobs go hand in hand but don't jive.

A small business in a small town is not going to be able to pay more than Wal Mart. An employee will probably receive less raises, and will never be promoted. Either way, it is a dead end job.

I think you are right, RR, that Wal Mart's business plan was to simply move in on a small town. Monopoly? I don't know the workings of a small town.

Welcome to the Lounge btw.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you are right, RR, that Wal Mart's business plan was to simply move in on a small town. Monopoly? I don't know the workings of a small town.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think they are more monopsonistic rather then monopolistic. A huge feature of their business plan (no idea if this is sill the case) is that they take items on consignment in that they don't pay their suppliers until after they sell the item; meaning they carry no inventory costs.

[katyseagull]

[ QUOTE ]


Now, with regard to their workers, there is either two schools of thought - they are providing jobs (crappy or otherwise) in areas which need jobs OR they are providing jobs that are better than what is surrounding the store.



[/ QUOTE ]

In my area, the opening of a new Wal-Mart is a big deal because it provides a lot of jobs. Many of us aren't willing to work at Taco Bell but we wouldn't mind a job at Wal-Mart. The problem, as I understand it, is that Wal-Mart does not give good benefits. I may be wrong but that's what I've heard. They employ a lot of part- timers (who work for low wages by the hour with no benefits) and much fewer full-timers.

I've read that the big box stores are not doing that well this year. Profits are way down for stores like Wal-Mart and Lowes. Anyone else hear this? I think they've gone and built too many is what I think. Also, Wal-Mart went from huge stores to building mega-huge SUPER stores. This might have been a mistake.