Jessie, the Gates thing was mentioned by another poster . .
But you're quite right. By the early 1990s Kmart was clearly headed downhill -- unable to get decent employees, profits dropping and unable to remodel their stores. Nobody wanted to be caught dead at Kmart. I've a hunch Kmart will not be around 5 years from now.
For retail business observers, it will be interesting to watch WalMart in the future . . their "success" was largely based on growth. They grew easily in the beginning by trampling Mom & Pop stores in smaller towns -- many of which were inefficent to begin with and by wiping them out, they literally had no competion and a work force that had no alternatives. Well, those "gravy" location are gone. They now have to build in areas with competitors, compete for employees, deal with organized labor in the areas and pay top dollar for store sites. What WalMart didn't expect was bad PR from labor practices, communities opposing stores in their neighborhoods, and most surprisingly, communities using/creating zoning laws to stop WalMart specifically.
This "growth" that fueled them will run out of steam and they'll have to actually run their stores to make the profits they are known for. When the economy improves, employees will head elsewhere and people having more money will buy clothing at Nordstrom instead of WalMart. Then, of course, is the stores that will eventually need remodeling -- this costs a bundle and WalMart currently doesn't pay much for this item now.
We shall see.
Alexandra Talks Economy
-
Curly(SO)
- Miss Golden Goddess
- Posts: 879
- Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 5:08 am
- Location: UK
Sorry if my post sounded a bit harsh, am feeling a bit edgy at the mo! I have visited Canada and U.S several times and have American family, so I am certainly not Anti-American, just being pro-the rest of the world I suppose. I wanted to say that there are also other great places to live and be successful, but I obviously didn't word my post very well!
Curly(SO).
Curly(SO).
-
Ridge
- Miss Sapphire Goddess
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 10:58 am
I have a problem with some of the premises in the recent post.
1. Walmart has always targeted the smaller community that did not have the wide array of shopping a larger community has. I do not believe they will leave that model much, maybe mocing to the fringes of urban areas.
2. The target audience of Walmart as such is the consumer more cost conscious. The person who shops at Nordstroms is not cost conscious and likely would not shop at Walmart. The Walmart shopper would likely not like the prices at Nordstroms and not shop there. The state of the economy shall not affect this customer mix.
3. Walmart is alleged to not operate on a profit basis. I think this is not true. Indeed, I think they are extremely profit-oriented and shall be the better competitor in the future. Their company value, and thus the value of the Walton family ($100 Billion) did not get their without some form of corporate savvy.
4. Remodeling can be expensive. But if needed, a company will do it to preserve its sales. It if far cheaper to remodel than build new stores and get them up to speed. I think Walmart will remodel if they think it necessary to remain competitive. But then Walmarts are not known for their cutting-edge designs. Rather they pride themselves on minimalization. It works - just look at Old Navy as an off-shoot of The Limited. Two different approaches for two different customers.
5. When the economy kicks-off ( there is debate if this has actually happened), then Walmart will become stronger, not weaker, for the reasons cited above.
6. Walmart is not perceived as a "sweat shop" employer. No more so than McDonalds or other such icons. If a company takes care of its employees (its most valuable asset) then the employees are loyal and will not leave for "greener" pastures. The management team at Walmart is not a bunch of idiots-they know exactly what to do and they appear to do it very well.
Ridge
1. Walmart has always targeted the smaller community that did not have the wide array of shopping a larger community has. I do not believe they will leave that model much, maybe mocing to the fringes of urban areas.
2. The target audience of Walmart as such is the consumer more cost conscious. The person who shops at Nordstroms is not cost conscious and likely would not shop at Walmart. The Walmart shopper would likely not like the prices at Nordstroms and not shop there. The state of the economy shall not affect this customer mix.
3. Walmart is alleged to not operate on a profit basis. I think this is not true. Indeed, I think they are extremely profit-oriented and shall be the better competitor in the future. Their company value, and thus the value of the Walton family ($100 Billion) did not get their without some form of corporate savvy.
4. Remodeling can be expensive. But if needed, a company will do it to preserve its sales. It if far cheaper to remodel than build new stores and get them up to speed. I think Walmart will remodel if they think it necessary to remain competitive. But then Walmarts are not known for their cutting-edge designs. Rather they pride themselves on minimalization. It works - just look at Old Navy as an off-shoot of The Limited. Two different approaches for two different customers.
5. When the economy kicks-off ( there is debate if this has actually happened), then Walmart will become stronger, not weaker, for the reasons cited above.
6. Walmart is not perceived as a "sweat shop" employer. No more so than McDonalds or other such icons. If a company takes care of its employees (its most valuable asset) then the employees are loyal and will not leave for "greener" pastures. The management team at Walmart is not a bunch of idiots-they know exactly what to do and they appear to do it very well.
Ridge
-
Beauty
- Retired Site Administrator
- Posts: 3662
- Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:30 am
- Location: Northern VA
- Contact:
Hi Curly,Curly(SO) wrote:Sorry if my post sounded a bit harsh, am feeling a bit edgy at the mo! I have visited Canada and U.S several times and have American family, so I am certainly not Anti-American, just being pro-the rest of the world I suppose. I wanted to say that there are also other great places to live and be successful, but I obviously didn't word my post very well!
Curly(SO).
Your post wasn't Anti-American at all.
To me you just said it's not the only nice place to live in the world. There's nothing wrong with that. Beauty
-
Loretta Ann
- Permanently Banned
- Posts: 2199
- Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 11:30 pm
- Location: Vancouver, Canada
-
Alexandra
- Miss Ruby Goddess
- Posts: 1149
- Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 8:27 pm
- Location: In Monolith We Trust
this just in . . . it appears that Kmart and Martha Stewart are working on a long-term deal . . . 
unless Kmart plans to cater to the thug crowd, I think I'll move up my prediction for Kmart's demise by a year or two!
Curly, the UK is on the top of my list of favorite places and I've never been there!!!
unless Kmart plans to cater to the thug crowd, I think I'll move up my prediction for Kmart's demise by a year or two!
Curly, the UK is on the top of my list of favorite places and I've never been there!!!
Alexandra
-
Jessie
- Miss Ruby Goddess
- Posts: 1102
- Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 9:44 pm
- Location: Eastern Washington
- Contact:
-
Danielle La Belle
- Account Deactivated at Member's Request
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 9:49 am
- Location: SC
Hello friends:
It sounds like someone has their “nylons in a knot”, their “hi-cut’s in a bunch” these days. I have read each thread entry and for the life of me, cannot imagine why that for the most part, people are so easily mis-lead.
I have read both pro and con stories about the Wal-Mart corporation. The average Super Wal-Mart manager makes about $ 136,000 (Southern States) per annum. The average employee makes an hourly wage of $ 9.00 (Southern States). I am not really sure about how benefits are applied if any are even provided.
The state of the economy. In 1974 my civil servant salary was $16,000.00 per annum. I purchased a 1975 Chevrolet NOVA, then, a 6 passenger vehicle with a 350cu in V8 engine, and typical options, for $ 4,000.00.
Today, the same size and class of automobile, (if you can get a V8 eng in the car) costs about $24,000.00. Meaning, that for me to maintain my 4:1 ratio, I would need to make $96,000.00 on average. People that I left in Washington doing the same job then and now are just at the mid- $60,000.00 range. Their chief advantage is that their homes have gone up in value 300 – 500% since my time in the 70’s. But my point is about the ECONOMY and the dollar buying less and the difference in value that I see throughout the country.
In good conscience, I cannot blame or find fault with any particular political party or any corporation for the present economic situation. Rather, each part plays a role as in the various cells in the human body. Each interacting with others and causing chain reactions that lead to other actions etc. The World economy is even more complex to speak of.
When we go on a “rant” we prove only that we can go on a “rant.” We demonstrate our ability to sit in our mental play-pen and throw a tantrum. I believe we used to call this “venting” for want of a better explanation. How about those young men and women in the military that are married with one child and need to get food stamps and sign up for the “cheese” program? Even the US Government does not provide completely for it’s own employees. How can we expect industry to act any better?
Yes, there is an un-even distribution of the money (wealth) in the USA. If we collected up all the money and re-distributed it equally among all adults, in 3 years, those today that do not have any money would be in the same boat, just with a lot of “things”, while those that had the majority of the money would once again, be on top. Some collect “things” others seem to be a collective magnet for money (wealth) as we define it.
I do not wish to see the local Wal-Mart become the “GUM store of old Russia.” But, I cannot in good conscience, target them for being so efficient in business. We are all paying a price for the giant “Trade Deficit” with China and China is paying with it’s natural resources as America did in the first formal decades of industrial development. Japan was buying up USA real-estate in the 80’s and is just coming out of a 10 year recession that saw most of that empire disappear at 10 cents on the dollar.
Wal-Mart corporation is considered a very good stock investment for the next 5 – 7 years. Perhaps we should follow the money via investing and earn some retirement money while we “rant" about "China-Mart!"
As always, with tongue-in-cheek and an eye on my purse,
Hugs
Danielle
It sounds like someone has their “nylons in a knot”, their “hi-cut’s in a bunch” these days. I have read each thread entry and for the life of me, cannot imagine why that for the most part, people are so easily mis-lead.
I have read both pro and con stories about the Wal-Mart corporation. The average Super Wal-Mart manager makes about $ 136,000 (Southern States) per annum. The average employee makes an hourly wage of $ 9.00 (Southern States). I am not really sure about how benefits are applied if any are even provided.
The state of the economy. In 1974 my civil servant salary was $16,000.00 per annum. I purchased a 1975 Chevrolet NOVA, then, a 6 passenger vehicle with a 350cu in V8 engine, and typical options, for $ 4,000.00.
Today, the same size and class of automobile, (if you can get a V8 eng in the car) costs about $24,000.00. Meaning, that for me to maintain my 4:1 ratio, I would need to make $96,000.00 on average. People that I left in Washington doing the same job then and now are just at the mid- $60,000.00 range. Their chief advantage is that their homes have gone up in value 300 – 500% since my time in the 70’s. But my point is about the ECONOMY and the dollar buying less and the difference in value that I see throughout the country.
In good conscience, I cannot blame or find fault with any particular political party or any corporation for the present economic situation. Rather, each part plays a role as in the various cells in the human body. Each interacting with others and causing chain reactions that lead to other actions etc. The World economy is even more complex to speak of.
When we go on a “rant” we prove only that we can go on a “rant.” We demonstrate our ability to sit in our mental play-pen and throw a tantrum. I believe we used to call this “venting” for want of a better explanation. How about those young men and women in the military that are married with one child and need to get food stamps and sign up for the “cheese” program? Even the US Government does not provide completely for it’s own employees. How can we expect industry to act any better?
Yes, there is an un-even distribution of the money (wealth) in the USA. If we collected up all the money and re-distributed it equally among all adults, in 3 years, those today that do not have any money would be in the same boat, just with a lot of “things”, while those that had the majority of the money would once again, be on top. Some collect “things” others seem to be a collective magnet for money (wealth) as we define it.
I do not wish to see the local Wal-Mart become the “GUM store of old Russia.” But, I cannot in good conscience, target them for being so efficient in business. We are all paying a price for the giant “Trade Deficit” with China and China is paying with it’s natural resources as America did in the first formal decades of industrial development. Japan was buying up USA real-estate in the 80’s and is just coming out of a 10 year recession that saw most of that empire disappear at 10 cents on the dollar.
Wal-Mart corporation is considered a very good stock investment for the next 5 – 7 years. Perhaps we should follow the money via investing and earn some retirement money while we “rant" about "China-Mart!"
As always, with tongue-in-cheek and an eye on my purse,
Hugs
Danielle
Make the most of every day!
-
Alexandra
- Miss Ruby Goddess
- Posts: 1149
- Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 8:27 pm
- Location: In Monolith We Trust
Sorry Danielle, I can't agree with you at all!
You said: "Wal-Mart corporation is considered a very good stock investment for the next 5 – 7 years."
So was Enron at one time. Do you consider moral issues when you buy stock or enter stores?
At one time clear cutting federal forests was the most EFFICIENT way to make money in the logging business. Milling the logs for the easiest cuts and tossing the rest was the most EFFICIENT way to make money in the lumber business. Nobody made a moral choice. So, today we have, no old growth forests, no logging industry on fed lands and permanently destroyed livelihoods.
Today: WalMart: the "epitome of efficientcy".
The delimma:
Pocketbook only decisions = selfish
OR
Moral pocketbook decisons = considerate of society
The choice is yours!
Have a great day!
You said: "Wal-Mart corporation is considered a very good stock investment for the next 5 – 7 years."
So was Enron at one time. Do you consider moral issues when you buy stock or enter stores?
At one time clear cutting federal forests was the most EFFICIENT way to make money in the logging business. Milling the logs for the easiest cuts and tossing the rest was the most EFFICIENT way to make money in the lumber business. Nobody made a moral choice. So, today we have, no old growth forests, no logging industry on fed lands and permanently destroyed livelihoods.
Today: WalMart: the "epitome of efficientcy".
The delimma:
Pocketbook only decisions = selfish
OR
Moral pocketbook decisons = considerate of society
The choice is yours!
Have a great day!
Alexandra
-
Ridge
- Miss Sapphire Goddess
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 10:58 am
[edited]
Walmart has a 40 plus year history, Enron had a much shorter history. Walmart had real assets, Enron was based on buying/selling assets. Walmart employs many thousands across the US; Endon was relatively local in Texas. Comparing the two is not appropriate.
Alex, your were truly born too late- your time was the 1960s. Radicalism is your call to order.
I believe we need to be stewarts of our environment. I also believe we can manage the environment to met our economic needs.
Walmart and others like it are not the bad guys. Frankly, I see green when reading your posts - you are green with envy that you do not have the wealth. [edited] If wealth redistribution occurred, I agree we would be back in s few years to where we are. There are those that know how to amass wealth.
As I have said before, please offer a logical alternative to the problem or else be silent. [edited]
Ridge
Walmart has a 40 plus year history, Enron had a much shorter history. Walmart had real assets, Enron was based on buying/selling assets. Walmart employs many thousands across the US; Endon was relatively local in Texas. Comparing the two is not appropriate.
Alex, your were truly born too late- your time was the 1960s. Radicalism is your call to order.
I believe we need to be stewarts of our environment. I also believe we can manage the environment to met our economic needs.
Walmart and others like it are not the bad guys. Frankly, I see green when reading your posts - you are green with envy that you do not have the wealth. [edited] If wealth redistribution occurred, I agree we would be back in s few years to where we are. There are those that know how to amass wealth.
As I have said before, please offer a logical alternative to the problem or else be silent. [edited]
Ridge
-
Danielle La Belle
- Account Deactivated at Member's Request
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 9:49 am
- Location: SC
Which moral compass should I use? In the current political and economic climate there are several to choose from. I could apply your concept, or my neighbors. Each seem to both solidify the owners position and at the same time, employ some parts of recognized socially acceptable Christian-based values.
Republicans support business motives and the Democrats support social motives. If business is doing well say the republicans, then so goes the country as a whole. The Democrats on the other hand see strong unions as a means to their end; the development of the lower to middle class levels which consist of the majority of citizens.
Employees cannot be employed unless business entrepreneurs are successful in developing new start-up businesses that spawn further new business and the need for the employee arises out of this business generation.
The Wal-Mart’s of the world such as the German equivalent, “ALDI,” stores provide extensive business spawning for supplier channels thus creating a modus for employment of 10,000’s of indirectly related employees.
Yes, at what cost? I find it easy to just “rant” about the environment, small farmers losing their farms to bigger, more affluent agri-business corporations, but, this is played out at every level around the world every day. Bigger fish, consuming the smaller fish. The trick is to stay ahead of the curve I am told by business development specialists.
Apples to oranges comparisons do not begin to explain societies motives. Only to confuse and to alienate those that might otherwise participate if they thought there was a chance for their success. Business for business sake is not a good moral compass, nor is starvation while we glad handily protect other species. There needs to be a balance of issues and for that, there are not enough hours in a day to consider what moral compass to employ to arrive at a fair and just solution on all related matters.
Hugs
Danielle
Republicans support business motives and the Democrats support social motives. If business is doing well say the republicans, then so goes the country as a whole. The Democrats on the other hand see strong unions as a means to their end; the development of the lower to middle class levels which consist of the majority of citizens.
Employees cannot be employed unless business entrepreneurs are successful in developing new start-up businesses that spawn further new business and the need for the employee arises out of this business generation.
The Wal-Mart’s of the world such as the German equivalent, “ALDI,” stores provide extensive business spawning for supplier channels thus creating a modus for employment of 10,000’s of indirectly related employees.
Yes, at what cost? I find it easy to just “rant” about the environment, small farmers losing their farms to bigger, more affluent agri-business corporations, but, this is played out at every level around the world every day. Bigger fish, consuming the smaller fish. The trick is to stay ahead of the curve I am told by business development specialists.
Apples to oranges comparisons do not begin to explain societies motives. Only to confuse and to alienate those that might otherwise participate if they thought there was a chance for their success. Business for business sake is not a good moral compass, nor is starvation while we glad handily protect other species. There needs to be a balance of issues and for that, there are not enough hours in a day to consider what moral compass to employ to arrive at a fair and just solution on all related matters.
Hugs
Danielle
Make the most of every day!
-
Ridge
- Miss Sapphire Goddess
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 10:58 am
I agree we need a moral compass. It was well written how there are two distinct views to follow. Each has its benefits and each has its downsides.
I guess we each need to find where we stand.
Some thoughts to help us decide:
1. Stranded alone with no food and no immediate hope of rescue. Planes routinely fly over your location, if only you could signal. Only source of firewood is the endangered ++++++ tree, last one for a thousand miles stands in front you. Do you chop it up for firewood for a signal or do you slowly starve to death?
2. XYZ company has been the major employer in town for 40 years. It is a non-union shop that pays livable wages. Employes want to unionize it for better wages. Company says it will loose toow much money and go out of business, all employees losing their jobs. Do you vote for the union?
3. Scientists have discovered a synthetic fuel for cars, eliminating the need for gas. Problem is trees are the major ingredient for making this fuel. And the trees used can be replaced over time. Do you save the trees or go for the fuel?
Farfetched? Maybe, maybe not. There are certainly trade-offs that can be made. Compromises between the extremes make the most sense.
Walmarts are as neceesary to economic survival as food is to personal survival. Now what are the tradeoffs you can live with?
Ridge
I guess we each need to find where we stand.
Some thoughts to help us decide:
1. Stranded alone with no food and no immediate hope of rescue. Planes routinely fly over your location, if only you could signal. Only source of firewood is the endangered ++++++ tree, last one for a thousand miles stands in front you. Do you chop it up for firewood for a signal or do you slowly starve to death?
2. XYZ company has been the major employer in town for 40 years. It is a non-union shop that pays livable wages. Employes want to unionize it for better wages. Company says it will loose toow much money and go out of business, all employees losing their jobs. Do you vote for the union?
3. Scientists have discovered a synthetic fuel for cars, eliminating the need for gas. Problem is trees are the major ingredient for making this fuel. And the trees used can be replaced over time. Do you save the trees or go for the fuel?
Farfetched? Maybe, maybe not. There are certainly trade-offs that can be made. Compromises between the extremes make the most sense.
Walmarts are as neceesary to economic survival as food is to personal survival. Now what are the tradeoffs you can live with?
Ridge
-
Alexandra
- Miss Ruby Goddess
- Posts: 1149
- Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 8:27 pm
- Location: In Monolith We Trust
Danielle,
If employers made a moral choice there would be no need for unions.
Case in point: Costco.
here's another IMO poor employer to work for, BUT Costco is playing the labor game better . . . they pay a tad more than WalMart, the pay a few more benefits and they obey the hour and wage laws. Unions would have a tough time organizing these stores.
You like to refer to people "ranting" but isn't this what America is about? If we didn't rant our entire country would be clearcut. Love Canal would be flowing coast to coast . . . perhaps even a Chenobyl or two. If people didn't "rant" they'd be no balance of power in America and likely the right-wing agenda would dominate national politics.
If employers made a moral choice there would be no need for unions.
Case in point: Costco.
here's another IMO poor employer to work for, BUT Costco is playing the labor game better . . . they pay a tad more than WalMart, the pay a few more benefits and they obey the hour and wage laws. Unions would have a tough time organizing these stores.
You like to refer to people "ranting" but isn't this what America is about? If we didn't rant our entire country would be clearcut. Love Canal would be flowing coast to coast . . . perhaps even a Chenobyl or two. If people didn't "rant" they'd be no balance of power in America and likely the right-wing agenda would dominate national politics.
Alexandra
-
Alexandra
- Miss Ruby Goddess
- Posts: 1149
- Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 8:27 pm
- Location: In Monolith We Trust
"Employees cannot be employed unless business entrepreneurs are successful in developing new start-up businesses that spawn further new business and the need for the employee arises out of this business generation."
on the other hand new business entrepreneurs can't be successful unless they provide conditions to attract employees in the first place.
on the other hand new business entrepreneurs can't be successful unless they provide conditions to attract employees in the first place.
Alexandra
-
Ridge
- Miss Sapphire Goddess
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 10:58 am
As I said before, Walmart has been around 40 years. Haven't they proven they know what they are doing? They have made billions, their stockholders have made billions and the employees are rich if they owned stock. [edited]
Now you switch to COSTCO! Weren't getting anywhere with Walmart?? Shouldn't the employees decide, not you, if they want to work at Costco or Walmart??? And it appears they have spoken loud and clear- [edited] WE ARE STAYING. WE DON'T NEED TO BE A UNION SHOP. THESE COMPANIES TREAT US JUST FINE. OBVIOUSLY THESE COMPANIES, AS WELL AS OTHERS, ATTRACT EMPLOYEES WITHOUT ANY PROBLEMS. WHY? BECAUSE THEY TREAT THEIR EMPLOYEES FAIRLY, APPRENTLY IN THE EYES OF THE EMPLOYEES.
Ranting is not "balance of power." Where there are problems, they need to be identified and resolved. In today's environment, businesses are very aware of what their social responsibilities are, and they are accepting them. [edited]
Ridge
Now you switch to COSTCO! Weren't getting anywhere with Walmart?? Shouldn't the employees decide, not you, if they want to work at Costco or Walmart??? And it appears they have spoken loud and clear- [edited] WE ARE STAYING. WE DON'T NEED TO BE A UNION SHOP. THESE COMPANIES TREAT US JUST FINE. OBVIOUSLY THESE COMPANIES, AS WELL AS OTHERS, ATTRACT EMPLOYEES WITHOUT ANY PROBLEMS. WHY? BECAUSE THEY TREAT THEIR EMPLOYEES FAIRLY, APPRENTLY IN THE EYES OF THE EMPLOYEES.
Ranting is not "balance of power." Where there are problems, they need to be identified and resolved. In today's environment, businesses are very aware of what their social responsibilities are, and they are accepting them. [edited]
Ridge