evil ways said:
OmniGamer said:
Why? For forcing an over-priced, less-stocked competitor out of business?xsarien said:
Grocery stores are still in business. Old Navy is still in business. WalMart sells the same wares as these stores, but yet they can co-exist because they offer bargains, more diverse product lines than WalMart, different store environments, etc.Vieo said:
levious said:
Even if that is true, Toys R' Us' prices (particularly on videogames) are still overinflated compared to non WalMart stores, as I said earlier. They also could've bolstered their toy lineup in order to make their store more of a "specialty" place for higher-quality or more scarce toys, as Slo was saying in regards to other competitors of WalMart.xsarien said:
human5892 said:
You can't compare the two. FAO Schwarz did not have nearly the same store coverage and brand recognition.xsarien said:
human5892 said:
I disagree, if only because of the plainly-visible evidence of thousands of other stores across the nation maintaining their profits with WalMart around. Isn't it conceviable that a store goes out of business in the face of WalMart because of mismanagement, over-pricing (something extremely common at mom-and-pop stores, BTW), or otherwise simply not reacting well to competition?xsarien said:
That is undoubtedly disconcerting for some manufacturers, like Vlasic. But it doesn't mean that all products will suffer a degradation of quality. It also doesn't mean that WalMart's effect is strictly negative; that very same article admits, "There is no question that Wal-Mart's relentless drive to squeeze out costs has benefited consumers. The giant retailer is at least partly responsible for the low rate of U.S. inflation, and a McKinsey & Co. study concluded that about 12% of the economy's productivity gains in the second half of the 1990s could be traced to Wal-Mart alone."
human5892 said:
What evidence? Which stores? Keep in mind that you say they are "maintaining their profits", not just staying in business with diminishing returns. Wal-Mart isn't the only cause of small-business troubles, but to say that they're not a major factor is a little silly. They're gigantic, and can undercut and outbleed pretty much anyone.
No offense, but you seem to be diluting your arguments with the same broad generalization: that mom-and-pop stores are the "good guys", and are only trying to make a little profit in this crazy corporate world. In reality, there are plenty out there who are guilty of ridiculous price gauging, especially when they're the only game in town. The small town I grew up in is a perfect example of this; with only one store to buy paint in, the owner can charge pretty much whatever he wants, because unless you want to drive 20 minutes to a bigger town (doesn't sound like much, but some people are lazy and others -- especially in this town -- are old and don't like to drive much) you can't get it anywhere else. For stores like this, a little WalMart -- or any competition -- is just what the doctor ordered.xsarien said:
Again, you're ignoring the countless examples of stores that thrive in towns where WalMarts exist.
I admit I did skim the article and didn't catch that part. That is a cause for concern. However, that does not give you or anyone else license to blame WalMart whenever a rival store shuts down.
Heh, I don't know. I live in PA, if that helps.
Every store in the nation that's not on the brink of bankruptcy! There's been a WalMart in my town for years and years now, and there are still plenty of successful grocery stores, shoe stores, clothing stores, and a big farmer's market. There's your evidence. The way some people talk, you'd think everytime a WalMart went up their competition would completely die and the town would rely on the WalMart for all of their needs. In reality, for many places, it's just competition as usual.border said:
Nintendo Ate My Dog said:
So basically because a store isn't going out of business, that means they are thriving and "successful"? Huh? You said that they're maintaining profits, but you really have no idea. Things could still be getting progressively worse, with margins getting smaller and less-and-less profit year over year. Pull out the balance sheets and let's see how they are actually doing.human5892 said:
Well, I threw in the fact that the WalMart has been around for years and years to illustrate that the stores can't be doing that bad (the town even manages to support three grocery stores along with the WalMart). Many of them also routinely have packed parking lots and are crowded on the inside, too.border said:
Nintendo Ate My Children said:
human5892 said:
No, it isn't. But the thousands of other towns that exist with other stores and WalMarts are.xsarien said:So your one PA town is evidence enough that Wal*Mart isn't the giant wrecking ball everyone from small entrepreneurs to the State of California claims it to be? Even going by pure anecdotal evidence, you're outnumbered, dude.
In my experience, the Toys 'R Us has been generally overpriced -- why do you think I do know to shop around?
