On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 20:44:21 -0000, ":::Jerry::::"
wrote:
"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:11:28 -0000, ":::Jerry::::"
wrote:
The point is, the use of on-line shopping is killing the retail trade,
Why does this matter?
Because not everyone has either computer or credit card, what do you
suggest
they do if and when all but the 50p and charity shops have gone over to
an
on-line store only ?..
snip the "Sod you, I'm alrigh attitued" remarks
It isn't an "I'm all right, sod you" attitude, it's economic reality.
Sorry but it is a "I'm all right, sod you" attitude, just the same as people
not voting for a government that would (say) put 1p in the pound on tax so
HMG can pay for more hospitals or schools etc. Think about it...
If that's your definition of that criterion, then fine, but I have to
say that it isn't mine so I don't accept your conclusion.. I
certainly wouldn't vote for anybody proposing to increase taxation in
any form because fundamentally I don't think that governments should
be in the businesses of health care or education, or anything beyond a
bare minimum of activities.
The proportion of people with computers is rising astronomically, now
well over half of households in the UK and continuing to rise.
Computers are cheap.
To you, to me but to Mr Bloggs on income support, or Mrs Smith on a single
pension, or Miss Jones working 'part time' (read, work when and for how long
we want you to) for the minimum wage ?
Even in that context they are cheap. It's a matter of priorities.
Nobody said that it even had to be a new computer. For web surfing,
any old thing will do and can be bought for a few pounds at a computer
sale.
There are even volunteer organisations who organise computers for the
elderly etc.
For some people, such as the elderly, online shopping to have their
groceries delivered is a godsend.
There are plenty of methods of payment other than credit card
available, including debit cards and even COD from some online
suppliers. The UK has the second largest number of credit cards per
capita outside the U.S.
AIUI it's almost impossible to survive in the USA without a CC, people are
certainly treaded with some suspicion if they can't transact through a CC.
Not really. I am a regular visitor to the U.S. and the only
situations where transactions without a credit card are difficult are
if you want to do something like checking into a hotel or renting a
car. Obviously they want a means to track you down if you don't
pay. However that is true anywhere, including the UK.
If you want to go into a store in the U.S. and buy an item, then
greenbacks are just fine.
So, I'll ask again. What should people do, when high street shops are either
just 50p or charity shops, if they don't own a computer, have a phone line
or CC ? And don't say use a internet cafe or the like, some people don't
know a tab key from a shift key, let alone what 'www' means.
Ultimately they will have to learn or be helped to learn. You can't
hold back progress just because it doesn't suit a minority of people.
If there are a significant number of people who are unwilling or
unable to adapt to or use new technology then they will be a market of
their own and the smart business person will look at the opportunity
and address it while it lasts. In a sense, that is the remaining role
of the small shopkeeper. The point is that they had better watch
their market because it is changing and disappearing.
You can't spend gold sovereigns in Tescos either. People will
inevitably move with the times.
I suspect if you really wanted to pay in Gold at Tesscos and made it
worthwhile for them they would make suitable arrangements, AIUI gold is
still a valid means of payment. :~) But that's not the point, try comparing
like with like, your argument would be correct if we were talking about the
Pound vs. the Euro say.
Whatever. I was simply trying to pick something that could have been
used in the past and now practically can't so the Euro was not a good
example.
If the retail trade can't see that and react to it, then I'm sorry but
it deserves to die.
It's not a case of 'If the retail trade can't see', they can see but they
can't possibly compete - unless there is a change in the taxation system
to
level the playing field.
That's a total nonsense. Why on earth should taxation be used to
distort an economic reality? It's bad enough that there are
distortions with income tax, CGT and IHT as it is.
Oh right, lets scrap all those little tax breaks people get for being
married or having kids or any number of other tax avoidance schemes people
use to pay less tax.
There are so precious few of those left that it isn't worth
discussing.
People like you like the tax system when it puts more
money into your bulging wallet but you don't like the same system when it
tries to benefit others or parts of society that you don't care for or
use...
The trouble is that it doesn't put anything very much of use in my
wallet or anywhere else that is of value to me or most other people.
If it did, I would mind less.
If the retail bricks and mortar trade wants to compete, it will have
to do so in the real market, not an artificial one.
But it can't, an industrial building on a out of town industrial estate is a
lot cheaper to run and maintain than a town centre shop,
Exactly. So the town centre shops should focus on doing things that
attract people to want to go into a town centre. Most town centres
are a complete pain in the bum. It is difficult and expensive to
park and a large amount of time can be wasted finding parking.
The alternative of using public transport is pretty awful and
inconvenient with time and place and one can't practically carry
large amounts of shopping anyway.
The shopkeepers should think about and focus on what will make people
*want* to go to the town centres and go to their shops. They are on a
loser to begin with because few are attractive places. It's not
surprising that many town centre shops are based around relieving the
single under 30s of their disposable income, which is why there are so
many fashion and music shops.
then there are the
distribution costs, savings made by buying in bulk - all of which the
average high street shop can't compete with, hell even Dixons and food
supermarkets etc. are gradually moving away from town centre sites.
Of course. That's inevitable. People want to buy some things on
price and not quality, artistic or intellectual content. It's the
latter three that will be the remaining territory for the small
shopkeeper. The other would be convenience, but that is tenuous at
best.
I can see that your wallet is far more important than the 'health' of
society.
Both are important. Retail shops attempting to compete with a far
cheaper method of connecting supplier with purchaser are not
indicative of the health of society.
Total clap trap, just were and how are people going to shop when town
centres are waste lands of boarded up shops ?
If and when that happens it will be because a) customers have voted
with their feet and b) that shopkeepers have not made the effort or
succeeded in encouraging them to visit their shops. It's as simple as
that. Shops will remain as long as there is a demand.
If people want to shop at low prices as their main criterion then they
go to out of town retail parks, on line or by mail order. You don't
need a computer to shop by mail order.
If out of town shopping parks
have been accepted as a bad thing for the non car owning shopper, how do you
think a (creeping) move over to on-line shopping will effect the 'health' of
society ?...
I don't think they are. For the car owner, it's much easier to go
to one of these places and park for free. For the non car owner,
many of them are reachable on bus routes anyway, so there is no real
issue. Again it's driven by the market. Enough customers without
cars want to go to shopping centre - business opportunity for bus
operator.
Is Mrs Thatcher a relation of yours, she didn't care much for society
either?....
It has nothing to do with caring for society. That is brought about
by minimising government involvement in people's lives, not imposing
distorted economics to bolster the untenable.
It's nothing of the sort unless you care more about your wallet than you do
for the society you live in,
If you ask anybody to tell you honestly which they care most about, it
is their wallet. It is the main basis on which they vote. After
that they may care about public services if they've drunk the
government Kool Aid and after that law and order.
The most effective way of delivering so called public services is for
them not to be public services other than a financial investment by
the government from tax revenue into the service of the individual's
choice.
you have both a computer and a credit card but
you still haven't answered the question about what should people do if they
don't have one or both of the above if / when high street shopping (and
possibly even the out of town parks) becomes a thing of the past.
I did above. It's pretty simple. Some people will adapt to the
progress of technology - there are many silver surfers for example.
Others won't. For these people, there will be a market opportunity
for businesses that operate outside of technological advance if the
numbers are significant.
I'm reminded of one of her most famous quotes though:
"If you try to buck the market, the market will buck you."
Who dictates the market thought ?
Ultimately it's always the customer.
Use high street shops and not the on-line
stores and the next thing you will find is those same on-line stores have
high street outlets or they close will themselves go belly up. It's not the
business that dictates a trend but the customer,
This is true, but it is possible for businesses to influence what the
customer buys quite heavily if they have the financial muscle to do
so.
Ask yourself why people go to online stores. Again it's pretty
simple:
- Price (quite often)
- Choice
- Time
- Convenience
The high street stores are simply not competing with that and in some
cases can't. They need to provide better/different reasons for
customers to visit.
if shop 'A' doesn't stock
white paint and shop 'B' does who do you think people wanting white paint
will trade with. As I said, the move over to on-line shopping is far more to
do with laziness and penny pinching than any other factor - as has been
stated in this thread, people will buy from SF rather than pop out to B&Q...
For a commodity item like paint why not? Let's say I want to buy a
particular brand and colour of paint. I phone B&Q or any of the
others to ask if they have it. When they eventually decide to answer
the phone it's usually a call centre who then have to telephone the
store and hopefully find a sentient being to go and take a look on the
shelf and if I'm lucky have the right thing in the right quantity and
be willing to put it under the counter. More often than not, they
haven't got all that I want and I end up needing to contact 2 or 3
places to get the entire list. So that's probably the best part of an
hour on the phone, and by the time I've visited them all to get the
items and discovered that they've got the item wrong anyway, half the
day's gone. A complete waste of time and effort.
Alternatively, from home or anywhere on a business trip in Europe or
anywhere else, (except at the moment when flying but that's about to
change) I can connect to the Internet by high speed network, wireless
LAN, telephone or even GPRS and access Farrow and Ball's web site,
order exactly what I want and it will be there waiting when I get home
at the weekend.
That isn't laziness, it's maximising use of time. To me time is the
most expensive commodity, so that's what I seek to optimise.
I can appreciate that some people have plenty of time on their hands.
That's fine. They have the freedom to choose where they wish to shop.
If there are enough of them then the bricks and mortar stores will
remain, otherwise they die. It's that easy.
--
..andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|