BuffettNews.com

So why did the government go after Microsoft....or even Enron...its not nice...its business

ParrotHeadDan wrote:You obviously do not get it. A small business cannot compete with Walmart. They strong arm suppliers to drive down their prices and make them agree that they will not sell the same product to a competitor at the same or lower price. This serves to drive down not only their prices but also the profit margins of their suppliers or they must move jobs or production overseas (generally to the wonderful country of Communist China).

Depends on the small business. There are plenty of small businesses that are still making it quite well in america. If you're talking about small hardware stores, or places of the such, then no. There is very little way unless you are very creative to compete against a home depot or a walmart or a kmart, or whatever. There are plenty of small businesses that do quite well, as you can watch on many of the different cable channels that exhibit them on a daily basis (travel channel, discovery, food network). There are shows dedicated to highlighting small businesses. I'm not defending the big stores, but small businesses aren't completely destitute. It all depends on the type of business and where you are, as with any business.

ParrotHeadDan wrote:This is not capitalism and it is not competition. It is in effect a monopoly, or if you prefer call it: managed competition. Unfortunately it is the Loard of the Flies effect. It doesn't matter what service the small business provides generally people will head for what they perceive is the lowest price. Lowest price at what cost is the question.

For a bag of chips or a bottle of shampoo, you are correct. Why would anyone shop elsewhere for the same exact item and willingly pay a greater price? But that does not necessarily apply to everything. Clothing, jewelry, handcrafted items, furniture, bakeries, specialty stores. There are plenty of people who still flock to them instead of walmarts/kmarts/targets/etc.

ParrotHeadDan wrote:You obviously do not get it. A small business cannot compete with Walmart. They strong arm suppliers to drive down their prices and make them agree that they will not sell the same product to a competitor at the same or lower price.

Oh but I *DO* get it. I just see it as business. Not everyone is meant to be equal - you will have winners and losers.

It's not that small business can't compete with Walmart, it's that they can't compete on PRICE. That's true.

But that's simply because Walmart is taking advantage of the economy of scale. If I buy 100,000 of anything, I would expect to get a better price than the guy buying 10, and if you give that price to the guy who buys only 10, I'm not going to do business with you.

Walmart also will sell items at a loss to draw people in, assuming that they will then spend more money on profit items. Risky, but again, good business. "Loss leader" is not a new concept.

And let's be honest - if it's not Walmart, it's Amazon, or any number of other bulk wholesalers. There's simply no reason for small retailers carrying the same items consumers can buy elsewhere for less. It was a valid concept in the 1950s before malls, the internet and large, international merchandisers, but the world is changing.

So its up to small retailers to adapt - to be smart about how they run their business. They'll have to figure out ways to either get merch for lower, provide merch not available at the big stores, or to provide services that compensate.

Those that do will thrive, those that don't won't. But again, that's just the evolution of business. It's been happening for over 100 years.

It was the liner notes to Son of a Son a Sailor that first brought Greenpeace to my attention, of which Buffett has always been an avid supporter. I may not agree with everything they do but I'd most definitely say Buffett is an environmentalist. Wal-Mart has also been taken to task for their less than ethical practices and paying no more than minimum wage to most of their employees. How they conduct business may be perfectly within the limits of the law and capitalism but that doesn't mean I have to agree with them.

Yes...obviously you do get it. So lets have one or two companies that rule. Hmmm....Anyone know what Walmart has done in communities where they have put all of their small business competitors out of business? Anyone...Anyone..Beuller? Ah...yes they raised their prices. Enjoy!

ParrotHeadDan wrote:So why did the government go after Microsoft....or even Enron...its not nice...its business

I'd be curious what anti-trust issue you think Enron had. Accounting fraud and anti-trust are not related.

And the government felt that Microsoft crossed the line when it dictated to manufacturers that they could not include competitors software on pcs. But demanding a lower price because you buy in bulk is not the same.

Key Lime Lee wrote: And let's be honest - if it's not Walmart, it's Amazon, or any number of other bulk wholesalers. There's simply no reason for small retailers carrying the same items consumers can buy elsewhere for less. It was a valid concept in the 1950s before malls, the internet and large, international merchandisers, but the world is changing.

Very true. Where I used to live, you couldn't go to any small retail area without finding a small book retailer. My mom's college friend owned a bookstore in Newtown. Once Amazon took off (as well as b&n and Borders), they've all gone. My mom's college friend now does quite well making handmade cards. Business evolves like life does. You either adapt or disappear. Sounds harsh, but that's what business is. It's cutthroat and harsh, and it's reality. Even the few business classes I took in college, that was exactly what was taught and printed in the textbooks.

We're on page 11 of this thread and the people who claim the evil Wal Mart puts small businesses out of business have yet to address the question I asked back on page 6:

LIPH wrote:Didn't WalMart start as a mom & pop business?

Feel free to discuss

Microsoft was trying to become a Monopoly while Wal-Mart still has to compete with other stores.

Didn't say it was an anti trust issue with Enron. The point was made that business is business and business is not nice. My point is the if Dennis Koslowsky or the fine people at Enron choose to take the profits from the BUSINESS that they run....hey...it may not be ethical or even legal....its just business.

ParrotHeadDan wrote:So why did the government go after Microsoft....or even Enron...its not nice...its business

The government went after Microsoft because they allegedly had a stranglehold/monopoly on all things computer. I doubt any one of us (or few of us anyway) could describe features or functions on our computer without mentioning something that is Microsoft-centric. In our lifetimes, we'll probably see maybe not the demise of Microsoft, but technology changes and it changes rapidly. Because people dislike Microsoft, it will naturally spawn competition. Apple is one, but I'd anticipate others, but for right now, Microsoft is cheap and easy for most consumers to understand. Until someone comes up with a better/easier/cheaper product, people are going to use Microsoft.

The government went after Enron (and Qwest and Worldcom) not because they were companies with a monopoly over a specific product or service, but because they had shady CEOs who overinflated stock predictions, conducted business transactions in HIGHLY unethical ways, and allowed accountants to fudge numbers that weren't supposed to be fudged. And you want to talk devastation? Tens of thousands of people, and I'd venture to say over 100,000 people, lost their jobs because of the scandals at Enron and Qwest and Worldcom.

Those scandals are very different from what I see you accusing WalMart of doing.

You assume I think business is inherantly unethical. That's incorrect.

I simply don't automatically equate power with a lack of ethics.

I do think business is not for the squeamish.

LIPH wrote:We're on page 11 of this thread and the people who claim the evil Wal Mart puts small businesses out of business have yet to address the question I asked back on page 6:

LIPH wrote:Didn't WalMart start as a mom & pop business?

Feel free to discuss

You're right, of course.

I'd also like to know what small businesses, as all the places I've seen walmarts, there are plenty of small businesses still running fine. They adapted when walmart came to town.

Walmart has been singled out, but anyone can come up with a laundry list of big businesses that 'threaten' small business. They all started small, too. It's the evolution of business.

sy wrote:

LIPH wrote:We're on page 11 of this thread and the people who claim the evil Wal Mart puts small businesses out of business have yet to address the question I asked back on page 6:

LIPH wrote:Didn't WalMart start as a mom & pop business?

Feel free to discuss

You're right, of course.

Was there ever any doubt?

Microsoft drastically changed their interface by stealing the icon driven interface from Apple. I use both platforms because I have to in my job but I most definitely prefer Apple.

And yep, to the best of my knowledge Wal Mart started as a Mom and Pop business but that doesn't justify them trying to monopolize the market and paying most of their employees little more than minimum wage. There's good reasons why my community has put laws into effect restricting "big box" stores from locating here. Wal Mart may be perfectly within the confines of the law but that doesn't keep them (and similar big box type stores) from s ucking any less.

sy wrote:

LIPH wrote:We're on page 11 of this thread and the people who claim the evil Wal Mart puts small businesses out of business have yet to address the question I asked back on page 6:

LIPH wrote:Didn't WalMart start as a mom & pop business?

Feel free to discuss

You're right, of course.

I'd also like to know what small businesses, as all the places I've seen walmarts, there are plenty of small businesses still running fine. They adapted when walmart came to town.

Walmart has been singled out, but anyone can come up with a laundry list of big businesses that 'threaten' small business. They all started small, too. It's the evolution of business.

But big business can HELP small business too. If I was a small business owner, I'd be buying bulk products as cheaply as I could at places like WalMart or Sam's Club or Costco so that MY profit margin would be larger. The big warehouse stores have never really appealed to me because I never quite figured out what to do or where to store 100 rolls of toilet paper or a case of 1g jugs of peanut butter, but it seems to work for some people.

It's also a good thing to remember, that the normal, retail consumer is not often the biggest target consumer a company may have in mind. Places like Sam's or Costco or even Home Depot cater to business owners and contractors and such.

Same thing with companies like Microsoft and the telecom companies. Sure, the ads you see on TV make you want to buy a cell phone or the latest and greatest version of Windows, but those companies make the big bucks through contracts with other companies, big and small. Wholesaling service is where the cash really, really comes from.

Capt.Flock wrote:Microsoft was trying to become a Monopoly while Wal-Mart still has to compete with other stores.

This is just too F-ing funny....Walmart is strong arming suppliers the same way that Microsoft was strong arming computer companies. Difference without distinction.

Here is the thing. I am not saying that Walmart doesn't have a brilliant business model. Clearly they do they have made everyone think they are a wonderful capitalist ALL-AMERICAN company. Meanwhile selling Americas trade balance to China. If Walmart were a country they would be China's 8th largest trading partner (and this stat is from several years ago, I'm sure it is larger now). Walmart has created a business model that has also been followed by many others (HomeDespot, WorstBuy, Targe') but ask the people in Worster Mass that used to work for Newell Rubbermade how they feel about Walmart's "business model". I bet they aren't too keen on it. How about the people that used to work for and supply Vlassic Pickles? These are only two of thousands of examples.

This is a free country and no one can tell anyone where to shop I'm just afraid that in the not so distant future there may only be a few big box choices. And I'll bet it's coming sooner than you think.

Key Lime Lee wrote:You assume I think business is inherantly unethical. That's incorrect.

I simply don't automatically equate power with a lack of ethics.

I do think business is not for the squeamish.

"Business Ethics: and other oxy-morons"

buffettbride wrote: But big business can HELP small business too. If I was a small business owner, I'd be buying bulk products as cheaply as I could at places like WalMart or Sam's Club or Costco so that MY profit margin would be larger. The big warehouse stores have never really appealed to me because I never quite figured out what to do or where to store 100 rolls of toilet paper or a case of 1g jugs of peanut butter, but it seems to work for some people.

EXACTLY. and people underestimate the power of buying wholesale off the internet when you're a small business owner. If it weren't for walmarts/samsclubs/bjs/amazons/whatever, I wouldn't make nearly the profit I do. Being able to go to walmart and buy fabric at 2.00 a yard versus the 8-9 somewhere else nets me a tidy profit.

As for buying 1g jugs of peanut butter, trust me, around the holidays, that's the size of stuff I buy. Between having to entertain the number of people I do, and baking the amount I do, I'm the one residential person who actually buys that size of stuff

LIPH wrote:

sy wrote:

LIPH wrote:We're on page 11 of this thread and the people who claim the evil Wal Mart puts small businesses out of business have yet to address the question I asked back on page 6:

LIPH wrote:Didn't WalMart start as a mom & pop business?

Feel free to discuss

You're right, of course.

Was there ever any doubt?

Nope