The devil is in the...big box retailer?
- Thread starter Tash
- Start date
Tash
Well-known member
Quote:
But that's the whole basis for competition. Mom & Pop stores CAN survive alongside Walmart if they offer something different to the customers. The whole point of a business is to make money. To fault them for that is just absolutely ridiculous.
Originally Posted by Shimmer
play fairly doesn't = lowering prices to anything the competitor marks theirs as. A green grocer can't lower prices as much as WM does, and WM will match and will BEAT any price a mom&pop can consider. after a point mom&pop have to go out of business. |
But that's the whole basis for competition. Mom & Pop stores CAN survive alongside Walmart if they offer something different to the customers. The whole point of a business is to make money. To fault them for that is just absolutely ridiculous.
Kimberleigh
Well-known member
Quote:
If I understand this comment correctly, you're not "competing" with WM necessarily if you're not offering the same products.
| Originally Posted by Tash
But that's the whole basis for competition. Mom & Pop stores CAN survive alongside Walmart if they offer something different to the customers. The whole point of a business is to make money. To fault them for that is just absolutely ridiculous. |
If I understand this comment correctly, you're not "competing" with WM necessarily if you're not offering the same products.
Raerae
Well-known member
I refuse to shop at Walmart. Nothing to do with the companies policies or whatever. But I don't enjoy being around the crowd that shops there, and waiting 45 minutes to go through the 1 checkstand open at prime time. Meanwhile Mom + litter of kids ahead of me, has to empty 1/2 their shopping cart because they can't pay for most of the things they put in it. Maybe it's just my Walmart, but the one in Long Beach sucks.
So I'll happily pay higher prices to shop at a place I can get in an out quickly, vs saveing what? a few dollars off my entire bill? Not to mention I really don't like shopping at, "We offer everything you can think of stores." I don't need to buy my clothes, while buying grocheries, while buying electronics, while buying CD's etc.
Realistically, when you go into stores like that, you just end up spending MORE money, on impulse purchases and the like. Go in for 1 thing, walk out with 10 others you really didn't.
So I'll happily pay higher prices to shop at a place I can get in an out quickly, vs saveing what? a few dollars off my entire bill? Not to mention I really don't like shopping at, "We offer everything you can think of stores." I don't need to buy my clothes, while buying grocheries, while buying electronics, while buying CD's etc.
Realistically, when you go into stores like that, you just end up spending MORE money, on impulse purchases and the like. Go in for 1 thing, walk out with 10 others you really didn't.
Beauty Mark
Well-known member
Quote:
I agree with that, particularly the business plan, but I still think it's up to the individual store/chain to make it something special.
I'll compare something better than what I was. There were like 3 coffee shops within a block of each other when I went to college. Two were independent places, one was Starbucks. Starbucks isn't doing what Wal-Mart is, but the sheer idea of business is they all were selling a similar product. They were all doing well for the 4 years I was there, and people had preferences. Their coffee tasted the same (I think the two indie ones used the same coffee supplier), and yet they managed to make it work.
I'm not pro-Wal Mart, but I'm also not anti-huge corporations in principle. For me, I prefer shopping smaller shops/chains. I like supporting someone who really is invested in my community, the service is generally better, etc. I don't think they're ever going to be millionaires, but I think the shops I'm thinking about aren't doing too badly for themselves.
I also think that if communities are concerned about places like Wal-Mart coming into their towns, they bear some of the responsibility. I don't know how much they can do, but they need to put forth some action.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
mmm True, but...Wal-Mart doesn't cater to the high end crowd, Wal-Mart's entire business plan is to be the only gig in town. By the sheer enormity of their conglomeration they drive the lifeblood of America out of business. |
I agree with that, particularly the business plan, but I still think it's up to the individual store/chain to make it something special.
I'll compare something better than what I was. There were like 3 coffee shops within a block of each other when I went to college. Two were independent places, one was Starbucks. Starbucks isn't doing what Wal-Mart is, but the sheer idea of business is they all were selling a similar product. They were all doing well for the 4 years I was there, and people had preferences. Their coffee tasted the same (I think the two indie ones used the same coffee supplier), and yet they managed to make it work.
I'm not pro-Wal Mart, but I'm also not anti-huge corporations in principle. For me, I prefer shopping smaller shops/chains. I like supporting someone who really is invested in my community, the service is generally better, etc. I don't think they're ever going to be millionaires, but I think the shops I'm thinking about aren't doing too badly for themselves.
I also think that if communities are concerned about places like Wal-Mart coming into their towns, they bear some of the responsibility. I don't know how much they can do, but they need to put forth some action.
Tash
Well-known member
Quote:
No, you can offer the same products, and you can even sell them for higher, but you offer things that Walmart doesn't. Like a cleaner store, friendlier employees, etc, etc. It's the reason why Target it able to compete. Their prices aren't cheaper, it's just a better environment and atmosphere. If you've ever taken a business class, it's one of the first things you'll learn.
| Originally Posted by Kimberleigh
If I understand this comment correctly, you're not "competing" with WM necessarily if you're not offering the same products. |
No, you can offer the same products, and you can even sell them for higher, but you offer things that Walmart doesn't. Like a cleaner store, friendlier employees, etc, etc. It's the reason why Target it able to compete. Their prices aren't cheaper, it's just a better environment and atmosphere. If you've ever taken a business class, it's one of the first things you'll learn.
Amber-126
Member
I do love Michael Moore and his documentaries, and I also disagree with your thought that you shouldn't give "other people" your money. But who are these other people? What about seniors, children, orphans, and "other people" who don't have a way to pay for medical help by themselves. And just to specify, not everyone in the group is available for the insurance and benefits your fortunate enough to have (in and out of Wal-MArt) and therefore prevent illness and/or save their lives.
It seems you're very selfish to not want to share a small portion of the money you bust your ass for to help those "other people" I just mentioned.
It seems you're very selfish to not want to share a small portion of the money you bust your ass for to help those "other people" I just mentioned.
Dizzy
Well-known member
Quote:
Seniors have Medicare, Children have SCHIP (name differs depending on state), orphans are children and they're either under foster care, in halfway homes, or in some other similar arrangement, and are usually covered under SCHIP, and "other people" who can't pay have Medicaid. It's not as if we just leave everyone to their own devices, it's just that we require personal responsibility.
And quite frankly, if someone doesn't want to share their hard earned money, I don't blame them. It's not being selfish, it's the fact that in our society you have to earn everything, and we earn our money. We should do with it as we see fit, not work for someone else's benefit. That's the cornerstone of a socialist government, something that is the complete antithesis of American government and beliefs.
Now... as for Wal-Mart.
I don't shop at Wal-Mart, period. I decided to try to buy as many American-made products as I can because I don't want so support the low safety standards in third world countries' factories, or certain countries who devalue their money to skew trade relations, etc. This is just icing on the cake- more reasons to avoid Wal-Mart, imo. I don't want to support a company who feels that they can treat their employees like dirt for the benefit of stockholders.
| Originally Posted by Amber-126
I do love Michael Moore and his documentaries, and I also disagree with your thought that you shouldn't give "other people" your money. But who are these other people? What about seniors, children, orphans, and "other people" who don't have a way to pay for medical help by themselves. And just to specify, not everyone in the group is available for the insurance and benefits your fortunate enough to have (in and out of Wal-MArt) and therefore prevent illness and/or save their lives. It seems you're very selfish to not want to share a small portion of the money you bust your ass for to help those "other people" I just mentioned. |
Seniors have Medicare, Children have SCHIP (name differs depending on state), orphans are children and they're either under foster care, in halfway homes, or in some other similar arrangement, and are usually covered under SCHIP, and "other people" who can't pay have Medicaid. It's not as if we just leave everyone to their own devices, it's just that we require personal responsibility.
And quite frankly, if someone doesn't want to share their hard earned money, I don't blame them. It's not being selfish, it's the fact that in our society you have to earn everything, and we earn our money. We should do with it as we see fit, not work for someone else's benefit. That's the cornerstone of a socialist government, something that is the complete antithesis of American government and beliefs.
Now... as for Wal-Mart.
I don't shop at Wal-Mart, period. I decided to try to buy as many American-made products as I can because I don't want so support the low safety standards in third world countries' factories, or certain countries who devalue their money to skew trade relations, etc. This is just icing on the cake- more reasons to avoid Wal-Mart, imo. I don't want to support a company who feels that they can treat their employees like dirt for the benefit of stockholders.
Kimberleigh
Well-known member
Quote:
Too bad you're not comparing a mom/pop store to Wal-Mart; you're just comparing two box stores to each other. A mom/pop CANNOT adequately compete with either Target or WM. You can say the same thing for any home improvement store to any other local hardware store. I don't need to take a business class to see what happens in my own town. *shrug*
| Originally Posted by Tash
No, you can offer the same products, and you can even sell them for higher, but you offer things that Walmart doesn't. Like a cleaner store, friendlier employees, etc, etc. It's the reason why Target it able to compete. Their prices aren't cheaper, it's just a better environment and atmosphere. If you've ever taken a business class, it's one of the first things you'll learn. |
Too bad you're not comparing a mom/pop store to Wal-Mart; you're just comparing two box stores to each other. A mom/pop CANNOT adequately compete with either Target or WM. You can say the same thing for any home improvement store to any other local hardware store. I don't need to take a business class to see what happens in my own town. *shrug*
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
Target isn't a Mom and Pop.
Mom and Pop is Judy's Hardware on the corner of Main & Center, est. 1983, selling coke floats along with your household needs. THAT is a M&P. They don't have a multibillion dollar a year budget. They don't have the ability to slash prices consistently so low that people are willing to make the drive from Wal-Mart area to Main & Center to get hardware, tools, paint, or household cleaning stuff.
Do they have the ability to offer a nice clean store? Sure do.
But, honestly? Most people are so busy/lazy/preoccupied/whatever, that driving an extra 4 to 8 miles out of the way to use Judy's Hardware instead of buying it all at once at Wal-Mart isn't going to happen.
I'm not saying WalMart's business plan isn't smart on their end, I'm saying it's absolutely detrimental to the small business owners in the stores in the small towns they move into across America.
| Originally Posted by Tash
No, you can offer the same products, and you can even sell them for higher, but you offer things that Walmart doesn't. Like a cleaner store, friendlier employees, etc, etc. It's the reason why Target it able to compete. Their prices aren't cheaper, it's just a better environment and atmosphere. If you've ever taken a business class, it's one of the first things you'll learn. |
Target isn't a Mom and Pop.
Mom and Pop is Judy's Hardware on the corner of Main & Center, est. 1983, selling coke floats along with your household needs. THAT is a M&P. They don't have a multibillion dollar a year budget. They don't have the ability to slash prices consistently so low that people are willing to make the drive from Wal-Mart area to Main & Center to get hardware, tools, paint, or household cleaning stuff.
Do they have the ability to offer a nice clean store? Sure do.
But, honestly? Most people are so busy/lazy/preoccupied/whatever, that driving an extra 4 to 8 miles out of the way to use Judy's Hardware instead of buying it all at once at Wal-Mart isn't going to happen.
I'm not saying WalMart's business plan isn't smart on their end, I'm saying it's absolutely detrimental to the small business owners in the stores in the small towns they move into across America.
Raerae
Well-known member
Quote:
The root of the "problem" isn't Walmart though. It's the willingness of people to support that type of business model. Realistically, if most people felt that Walmart (or Best Buy, or Target, or Linens and Things, or Costco, or whatever) was SO horrible, they wouldn't shop there on the principle of it, even if it meant spending a little bit more $. But that isn't the case. It's not Walmart that screwing over small business. It's the people living in that town, thats screwing over small business. But suddenly not supporting their local business's because they can save a few dollars.
All Walmart is doing it providing the good/services that people obviously want. And that cheap crappy products, for low money.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
But, honestly? Most people are so busy/lazy/preoccupied/whatever, that driving an extra 4 to 8 miles out of the way to use Judy's Hardware instead of buying it all at once at Wal-Mart isn't going to happen. |
The root of the "problem" isn't Walmart though. It's the willingness of people to support that type of business model. Realistically, if most people felt that Walmart (or Best Buy, or Target, or Linens and Things, or Costco, or whatever) was SO horrible, they wouldn't shop there on the principle of it, even if it meant spending a little bit more $. But that isn't the case. It's not Walmart that screwing over small business. It's the people living in that town, thats screwing over small business. But suddenly not supporting their local business's because they can save a few dollars.
All Walmart is doing it providing the good/services that people obviously want. And that cheap crappy products, for low money.
Kimberleigh
Well-known member
Quote:
Unfortunately, I think all you did was take Shimmer's succinct comment and make it more verbose.
She, if I read her post correctly, isn't solely placing this kind of blame on WM or other big box stores; she's placing it in both WM's hands (by slashing prices that a local store can't compete with on any level) and the laziness of people living in a town of big box stores who can't be bothered to stop at a hardware store, grocery store, or small boutique for clothes when you can stop at WM or Target or Meijer's or WHATEVER to suit all your needs simultaneously.
| Originally Posted by Raerae
The root of the "problem" isn't Walmart though. It's the willingness of people to support that type of business model. Realistically, if most people felt that Walmart (or Best Buy, or Target, or Linens and Things, or Costco, or whatever) was SO horrible, they wouldn't shop there on the principle of it, even if it meant spending a little bit more $. But that isn't the case. It's not Walmart that screwing over small business. It's the people living in that town, thats screwing over small business. But suddenly not supporting their local business's because they can save a few dollars. |
Unfortunately, I think all you did was take Shimmer's succinct comment and make it more verbose.
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
I'm goingto give you an example of a town.
Bonham TX.
Small town, county seat, approx. 10K people living in it.
No major retailers there, except WalMart. There's a Cato, but the Cato struggles from April - August. No Target. No major grocery store, excepting Brookshire's, which struggles now. No K-Mart. No Dollar Tree (Wal-Mart ran them out within a year of opening...).
Employers there are actually difficult to come by. It's a farm town, in a lot of ways. There are a couple of bigger employers (the State being one of them), but most people either farm/ranch, or work for the school/county/or nursing homes.
Income there is either below poverty, or comfortable farmer types. There's not a lot of middle ground.
The closest serious competitors to Wal-Mart are Target, Albertson's, K-Mart, Kroger, and Big Lots.
30 miles away.
There used to be a Ben Franklin, two western wear stores, two or three video rental stores, a family owned grocery store, a Factory Outlet store, etc. in the town. One by one they closed down because they quite simply COULD NOT keep up with Wal-Mart's pricing, and the convenience can't be beat.
That town, those people are the people Wal-Mart's business plan uses.
Excellent for Wal-Mart, because by default, they HAVE to win.
Not so hot for small business owners.
| Originally Posted by Raerae
The root of the "problem" isn't Walmart though. It's the willingness of people to support that type of business model. Realistically, if most people felt that Walmart (or Best Buy, or Target, or Linens and Things, or Costco, or whatever) was SO horrible, they wouldn't shop there on the principle of it, even if it meant spending a little bit more $. But that isn't the case. It's not Walmart that screwing over small business. It's the people living in that town, thats screwing over small business. But suddenly not supporting their local business's because they can save a few dollars. All Walmart is doing it providing the good/services that people obviously want. And that cheap crappy products, for low money. |
I'm goingto give you an example of a town.
Bonham TX.
Small town, county seat, approx. 10K people living in it.
No major retailers there, except WalMart. There's a Cato, but the Cato struggles from April - August. No Target. No major grocery store, excepting Brookshire's, which struggles now. No K-Mart. No Dollar Tree (Wal-Mart ran them out within a year of opening...).
Employers there are actually difficult to come by. It's a farm town, in a lot of ways. There are a couple of bigger employers (the State being one of them), but most people either farm/ranch, or work for the school/county/or nursing homes.
Income there is either below poverty, or comfortable farmer types. There's not a lot of middle ground.
The closest serious competitors to Wal-Mart are Target, Albertson's, K-Mart, Kroger, and Big Lots.
30 miles away.
There used to be a Ben Franklin, two western wear stores, two or three video rental stores, a family owned grocery store, a Factory Outlet store, etc. in the town. One by one they closed down because they quite simply COULD NOT keep up with Wal-Mart's pricing, and the convenience can't be beat.
That town, those people are the people Wal-Mart's business plan uses.
Excellent for Wal-Mart, because by default, they HAVE to win.
Not so hot for small business owners.
Beauty Mark
Well-known member
It hurts small business owners, but what about the consumer? If the people in your example are below poverty line, do you think they should avoid places like Wal-Mart and pay the higher fee or enjoy Wal-Mart's lower prices and maybe be able to afford a cheap thrill once in a while?
Shimmer
Well-known member
:shrug: There's not an easy answer for that. Quite a fair percentage of the population is on public assistance, and doesn't absorb the cost one way or the other of M&P grocers, etc.
That said, I'm not denying the business practice is beneficial to Wal-Mart. I'm saying it's bad for communities, because while those stores do move in and 'create' jobs, the jobs they 'create' are jobs that barely pay above minimum wage.
That said, I'm not denying the business practice is beneficial to Wal-Mart. I'm saying it's bad for communities, because while those stores do move in and 'create' jobs, the jobs they 'create' are jobs that barely pay above minimum wage.
Raerae
Well-known member
And how is that because of Walmart?
Yes, if Walmart wasn't there, the Mom and Pop stores would still be there. BUT. If people continued to go to the Mom and Pop stores, they would still be there. The problem with that town isn't Walmart. The problem with that town is the fact that like a lot of America, a very LARGE part of the country is living at or below the poverty line. Is it really fair to ask these people to go with less so the people living the "comfortable" life can shop at the local mom and pops?
I have enough money to say, "I'm not shopping at Walmart, the hassle and time spent shopping there for ME, isn't worth saving a few dollars." Not to mention, i don't want low quality merchandise. A lot of places where Walmart is killing local business, the people living there, don't have that same luxury.
I know for a fact, no one really cares if another Walmart gets built in So Cal. Why? Because there is enough people earning enough money to keep the local Mom and Pop and other retailers in business. We can offord to NOT shop at Walmart. Something a lot of America, can't.
Quote:
Yes, if Walmart wasn't there, the Mom and Pop stores would still be there. BUT. If people continued to go to the Mom and Pop stores, they would still be there. The problem with that town isn't Walmart. The problem with that town is the fact that like a lot of America, a very LARGE part of the country is living at or below the poverty line. Is it really fair to ask these people to go with less so the people living the "comfortable" life can shop at the local mom and pops?
I have enough money to say, "I'm not shopping at Walmart, the hassle and time spent shopping there for ME, isn't worth saving a few dollars." Not to mention, i don't want low quality merchandise. A lot of places where Walmart is killing local business, the people living there, don't have that same luxury.
I know for a fact, no one really cares if another Walmart gets built in So Cal. Why? Because there is enough people earning enough money to keep the local Mom and Pop and other retailers in business. We can offord to NOT shop at Walmart. Something a lot of America, can't.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
I'm goingto give you an example of a town. Bonham TX. Small town, county seat, approx. 10K people living in it. No major retailers there, except WalMart. There's a Cato, but the Cato struggles from April - August. No Target. No major grocery store, excepting Brookshire's, which struggles now. No K-Mart. No Dollar Tree (Wal-Mart ran them out within a year of opening...). Employers there are actually difficult to come by. It's a farm town, in a lot of ways. There are a couple of bigger employers (the State being one of them), but most people either farm/ranch, or work for the school/county/or nursing homes. Income there is either below poverty, or comfortable farmer types. There's not a lot of middle ground. The closest serious competitors to Wal-Mart are Target, Albertson's, K-Mart, Kroger, and Big Lots. 30 miles away. There used to be a Ben Franklin, two western wear stores, two or three video rental stores, a family owned grocery store, a Factory Outlet store, etc. in the town. One by one they closed down because they quite simply COULD NOT keep up with Wal-Mart's pricing, and the convenience can't be beat. That town, those people are the people Wal-Mart's business plan uses. Excellent for Wal-Mart, because by default, they HAVE to win. Not so hot for small business owners. |
Raerae
Well-known member
Quote:
But even so, it all even's out in the end, in fact, the community you described on a whole, is probably better off. Since while people are earning less working at walmart, they are also paying less for their merchandise. Whereas before, they were earning more, but paying more. Net result is the same amount of money left over at the end of the month. But since Walmart has lower prices, that money goes farther now. Not to mention, people who are unemployed or living off govt assistance, their assiatance money goes farther now too.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
:shrug: There's not an easy answer for that. Quite a fair percentage of the population is on public assistance, and doesn't absorb the cost one way or the other of M&P grocers, etc. That said, I'm not denying the business practice is beneficial to Wal-Mart. I'm saying it's bad for communities, because while those stores do move in and 'create' jobs, the jobs they 'create' are jobs that barely pay above minimum wage. |
But even so, it all even's out in the end, in fact, the community you described on a whole, is probably better off. Since while people are earning less working at walmart, they are also paying less for their merchandise. Whereas before, they were earning more, but paying more. Net result is the same amount of money left over at the end of the month. But since Walmart has lower prices, that money goes farther now. Not to mention, people who are unemployed or living off govt assistance, their assiatance money goes farther now too.
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
:shrug:
link
link
link
Cal people DO care
link
link
PBS
| Originally Posted by Raerae
And how is that because of Walmart? Yes, if Walmart wasn't there, the Mom and Pop stores would still be there. BUT. If people continued to go to the Mom and Pop stores, they would still be there. The problem with that town isn't Walmart. The problem with that town is the fact that like a lot of America, a very LARGE part of the country is living at or below the poverty line. Is it really fair to ask these people to go with less so the people living the "comfortable" life can shop at the local mom and pops? I have enough money to say, "I'm not shopping at Walmart, the hassle and time spent shopping there for ME, isn't worth saving a few dollars." Not to mention, i don't want low quality merchandise. A lot of places where Walmart is killing local business, the people living there, don't have that same luxury. I know for a fact, no one really cares if another Walmart gets built in So Cal. Why? Because there is enough people earning enough money to keep the local Mom and Pop and other retailers in business. We can offord to NOT shop at Walmart. Something a lot of America, can't. |
:shrug:
link
link
link
Cal people DO care
link
link
PBS
Beauty Mark
Well-known member
Quote:
A living wage. Yet another problem. I think there should be a min wage for part-time employee and living min wage for full-time. I sometimes wonder if Wal-Mart did well by their employees how low their products would be.
I brought up the question in general, because I think some people (not you) sometimes forget that it's quite a double-edged sword.
| I'm saying it's bad for communities, because while those stores do move in and 'create' jobs, the jobs they 'create' are jobs that barely pay above minimum wage. |
A living wage. Yet another problem. I think there should be a min wage for part-time employee and living min wage for full-time. I sometimes wonder if Wal-Mart did well by their employees how low their products would be.
I brought up the question in general, because I think some people (not you) sometimes forget that it's quite a double-edged sword.
