One day I asked my brother why he didn't buy his clothes at Walmart.
He said he didn't have enough money for that. Meaning he couldn't
afford to repeatedly replace poor quality clothes.

If you do find something there that meets your needs, just wait.
Before long, Walmart will cheapen it to the point of becoming useless.

John Normile

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 05:07:42 GMT, Ignoramus12063
wrote:

I used to feel, and with some reasons, that Walmart was an honest
company providing us the benefits of its efficiency and purchasing
power.

I no longer think so and do not regard walmart as a trustworthy
company, based on my personal experiences with the following.

1. "Smart battery chargers" are worse than stupid battery chargers,
turning off at various times based on wrong (in my opinion) charging
algorithm.

2. Their soldering iron does not solder anything.

3. Their battery jumper cable was complete trash and basically fell
apart and was very bad. (I need a decent jumper cable by the way,
something made for real users).

I had a few other experiences with their stuff made just to barely
survive light use. Perhaps it is OK for people who use things very
lightly, but they do not work well for me. I am not in any way a
"tough user", just trying to do things as they were intended to be
done, like solder wires or jump car batteries. I have resolved to buy
better stuff and pay more than walmart prices if necessary.

Had to get this off my chest.

i

--

One day I asked my brother why he didn't buy his clothes at Walmart.
He said he didn't have enough money for that. Meaning he couldn't
afford to repeatedly replace poor quality clothes.

If you do find something there that meets your needs, just wait.
Before long, Walmart will cheapen it to the point of becoming useless.

John Normile

This makes absolutely no sense to me. Wal-mart is a retailer, not a
manufacturer. They sell what people buy. If no one buys it, it will be gone from
the inventory.

"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please
everybody."
Bill Cosby


Ron Thompson
On the Beautiful Florida Space Coast, right beside the Kennedy Space Center, USA

http://www.plansandprojects.com
My hobby pages are he
http://www.plansandprojects.com/My%20Machines/

Severe stupidity is self correcting, but mild stupidity is rampant in the land.
-Ron Thompson

Ron Thompson wrote:

If you do find something there that meets your needs, just wait.
Before long, Walmart will cheapen it to the point of becoming useless.


This makes absolutely no sense to me. Wal-mart is a retailer, not a
manufacturer. They sell what people buy. If no one buys it, it will be gone from
the inventory.

When one retailer becomes the critical customer to a manufacturer, they
gain the power to dictate details of what should be internal decisions
within the manufacturer.

To some extent you are safe with name brands for which the large
retailer is only one of many places it can be bought... however, there
have been rumors of manufacturers making a different version of their
product for discount retailers vs. traditional speciality stores.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Ron Thompson wrote:

If you do find something there that meets your needs, just wait.
Before long, Walmart will cheapen it to the point of becoming useless.


This makes absolutely no sense to me. Wal-mart is a retailer, not a
manufacturer. They sell what people buy. If no one buys it, it will be
gone from
the inventory.

When one retailer becomes the critical customer to a manufacturer, they
gain the power to dictate details of what should be internal decisions
within the manufacturer.

And when one retailer becomes dominant in a geographical marketing area,
they worry less about selling what people want to buy: people buy what they
sell. For example, the selection that many people in rural areas of the
country had, for decades, was whatever Sears sold.

There's evidence that this is happening to some degree with Wal-Mart now, in
areas where they've knocked off competing retailers.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:

And when one retailer becomes dominant in a geographical marketing area,
they worry less about selling what people want to buy: people buy what they
sell. For example, the selectio that many people in rural areas of the
country had, for decades, was whatever Sears sold.

There's evidence that this is happening to some degree with Wal-Mart now, in
areas where they've knocked off competing retailers.

True - however while the Walmart 45 minutes away from your rural
homestead may approach a bricks and mortar monopoly, they have to
compete with online retailers offering delivery to your door in a day
or three. Probably, there will be one of those offering the
professional version of an item - ie, the one used by people who use it
daily and know how it's supposed to work.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Ed Huntress wrote:

And when one retailer becomes dominant in a geographical marketing area,
they worry less about selling what people want to buy: people buy what
they
sell. For example, the selectio that many people in rural areas of the
country had, for decades, was whatever Sears sold.

There's evidence that this is happening to some degree with Wal-Mart
now, in
areas where they've knocked off competing retailers.

True - however while the Walmart 45 minutes away from your rural
homestead may approach a bricks and mortar monopoly, they have to
compete with online retailers offering delivery to your door in a day
or three. Probably, there will be one of those offering the
professional version of an item - ie, the one used by people who use it
daily and know how it's supposed to work.

I wouldn't say there is a strict monopoly on much of anything sold in the
US, and Internet shopping, a modern replacement for catalog shopping, makes
a wide variety of things available to most people.

But if you look at the practicalities of it, in which there are things that
few people would buy on the Internet, and there are things you want to see
and to buy *now*, the reality is that a strongly dominant retailer who has
knocked off much of the local competition is in a position to decide what
your choices will be. They lose contact with what you may want because they
don't have enough *volume* of competition to measure what it is you *do*
want.

It's a matter of numbers and weighting, not a matter of absolutes.

--
Ed Huntress

I think the only difference was that Sears was a massive mail order company -
to the ignored fly over region. You could buy a house or chickens.
House in a kit form would be delivered. Chickens by the mailman.

The big help was - there wasn't a store - not for 50 or 100 miles... If it was
then it was for food and general store - maybe a coop.

What I see is multi-generation family businesses have been crushed. This was wrong.
I didn't see a buyout offer - just lots of cheap or volume stuff.

I like the small shops - were people knew their business and products. These big ones
are programmed from afar and sell 'us' what they want to sell - and it likely
is different in different areas - e.g. only 100 of these turkey things - ship them
to Charlie and give him xxx per item to sell over the normal margin.

Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder



Ed Huntress wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Ron Thompson wrote:


If you do find something there that meets your needs, just wait.
Before long, Walmart will cheapen it to the point of becoming useless.



This makes absolutely no sense to me. Wal-mart is a retailer, not a
manufacturer. They sell what people buy. If no one buys it, it will be

gone from

the inventory.

When one retailer becomes the critical customer to a manufacturer, they
gain the power to dictate details of what should be internal decisions
within the manufacturer.


And when one retailer becomes dominant in a geographical marketing area,
they worry less about selling what people want to buy: people buy what they
sell. For example, the selection that many people in rural areas of the
country had, for decades, was whatever Sears sold.

There's evidence that this is happening to some degree with Wal-Mart now, in
areas where they've knocked off competing retailers.

--
Ed Huntress



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in message
...
I think the only difference was that Sears was a massive mail order
company -
to the ignored fly over region. You could buy a house or chickens.
House in a kit form would be delivered. Chickens by the mailman.

The big help was - there wasn't a store - not for 50 or 100 miles... If
it was
then it was for food and general store - maybe a coop.

What I see is multi-generation family businesses have been crushed. This
was wrong.
I didn't see a buyout offer - just lots of cheap or volume stuff.

I like the small shops - were people knew their business and products.
These big ones
are programmed from afar and sell 'us' what they want to sell - and it
likely
is different in different areas - e.g. only 100 of these turkey things -
ship them
to Charlie and give him xxx per item to sell over the normal margin.

Martin

The same thing has been said about a lot of the "chain" stores.

The "funny" thing is that, in my small town, Wal-Mart really isn't competing
with the existing stores [a lot of the older businesses closed during the
'90s (Wally-World didn't arrive until 2004) when the owners retired/died]
but appears to be coordinating with them: the items stocked are unique to
each store either by brand or size.

Even the prices are in the same ball park.

Sure, many of the products are "entry level"/"bottom end"/"closeout" - which
lets the other places carry the better-quality goods.

My biggest gripe about the people working in Retail is that very, very few
have even a clue as to their products - no matter what they're peddling -
and, generally, are interchangeable with their burger-flipping friends at
the fast-food joints.

"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in message
...
I think the only difference was that Sears was a massive mail order
company -
to the ignored fly over region. You could buy a house or chickens.
House in a kit form would be delivered. Chickens by the mailman.

The big help was - there wasn't a store - not for 50 or 100 miles... If
it was
then it was for food and general store - maybe a coop.

What I see is multi-generation family businesses have been crushed. This
was wrong.
I didn't see a buyout offer - just lots of cheap or volume stuff.

I like the small shops - were people knew their business and products.
These big ones
are programmed from afar and sell 'us' what they want to sell - and it
likely
is different in different areas - e.g. only 100 of these turkey things -
ship them
to Charlie and give him xxx per item to sell over the normal margin.

Yeah, I think many of us do. We all bemoan the loss of the little hardware
stores that had some of everything, right down to one nut or bolt.

We had one of these in my town until around 1990. It was real old-fashioned,
with a whole floor of warehouse and things that had been stored there for 70
years. They had a sale on farrier's rasps one time when they were doing one
of their futile, periodic housecleanings, no kidding.

I bought 3/8" Cro-Max HSS lathe bits there -- after asking if they had any
lathe bits, and after one of the guys scrounged for 15 minutes in the
warehouse. g When they went broke (after Home Depot moved in) I talked to
the former owner at a social event and told him how much I missed being able
to buy a nut, a couple of springs or a pair of motor brushes. "What was the
big reason you went broke?," I asked. "Because people like you bought one
nut at a time," he replied.

--
Ed Huntress

wrote:
Ron Thompson wrote:


If you do find something there that meets your needs, just wait.
Before long, Walmart will cheapen it to the point of becoming useless.



This makes absolutely no sense to me. Wal-mart is a retailer, not a
manufacturer. They sell what people buy. If no one buys it, it will be gone from
the inventory.


When one retailer becomes the critical customer to a manufacturer, they
gain the power to dictate details of what should be internal decisions
within the manufacturer.

To some extent you are safe with name brands for which the large
retailer is only one of many places it can be bought... however, there
have been rumors of manufacturers making a different version of their
product for discount retailers vs. traditional speciality stores.

We buy from a lot of manufacturers who also sell to Wal-Mart. The
Turtle Wax guy was showing us the new items for 2006. One was cross off
with a red pen. We asked what happened to that one. the answer was "We
announced it, but Wal-Mart did not buy it, so we cancelled it".
Similarly, WD40 came out with a new pen applicator. We placed an
order then, but were told that it would not be available to anyone but
Wal-Mart until Jan 2006. it would take them that long - 6 months
production - to fill the Wal-Mart order.

Ron Thompson wrote:
One day I asked my brother why he didn't buy his clothes at Walmart.
He said he didn't have enough money for that. Meaning he couldn't
afford to repeatedly replace poor quality clothes.

If you do find something there that meets your needs, just wait.
Before long, Walmart will cheapen it to the point of becoming useless.

John Normile


This makes absolutely no sense to me. Wal-mart is a retailer, not a
manufacturer. They sell what people buy. If no one buys it, it will be gone from
the inventory.

Well, sort of. What actually happens is an item is introduced with good
quality, materials etc. It sell well, the volume is established and
predictable. Then they purchasing agent looks for ways to reduce the
cost of the item, so he (she) pressures the supplier to lower his cost.
The supplier then has to reduce his cost by substituting cheaper
materials, fasteners, and taking shortcuts in design.

I'm in the auto parts business, and it happens here also. Once the OE
builds a part to a certain spec, and thousands are in service, a service
life expectancy is established. If the OE part proves to usually last
beyond the average life of the car, then the decision is made to lower
the spec. No sense overbuilding at additional expense to get an extended
service life that will, on average, be wasted.

"I'm in the auto parts business, and it happens here also. Once the OE
builds a part to a certain spec, and thousands are in service, a
service
life expectancy is established. If the OE part proves to usually last
beyond the average life of the car, then the decision is made to lower
the spec. No sense overbuilding at additional expense to get an
extended
service life that will, on average, be wasted. "

And the average life of the car would be? The warranty period? LOL

I suspect that I keep my vehicles longer than the "average life" and
the problems that arise are factored into the decision process of what
to buy next.

An example...

Let's say you "value engineer" (I love that phase) a wiring connector
on a vehicle to where it causes intermittents after the car's average
life (warranty period). Based on those problems, I would not buy that
model again and likely not any product from that manufacturer.

In my opinion, it makes alot of sense to overbuild any item to insure
reliability...it assures repeat customers....including this one.

TMT

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Let's say you "value engineer" (I love that phase) a wiring connector
on a vehicle to where it causes intermittents after the car's average
life (warranty period). Based on those problems, I would not buy that
model again and likely not any product from that manufacturer.

If you own the car through it's average service life you aren't the
kind of person the maker wants as a customer anyway. They want you to
replace it every two years - the folks who own the end of lifers don't
have very direct feeback to the manufacturer. Resale value may be an
issue, but it's much less direct feedback than if the car starts
failing in the first 2-4 years.

On 20 Jan 2006 11:33:03 -0800, wrote:
Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Let's say you "value engineer" (I love that phase) a wiring connector
on a vehicle to where it causes intermittents after the car's average
life (warranty period). Based on those problems, I would not buy that
model again and likely not any product from that manufacturer.

If you own the car through it's average service life you aren't the
kind of person the maker wants as a customer anyway.

I was told exactly that by a Chrysler "customer service" rep, when their
asplode-o-matic POS transmission did the usual, 3000 miles out of
warranty.

Problem is, with all the mergers, I'm running out of people to never buy
cars from again, and may have to start the cycle over.

"If you own the car through it's average service life you aren't the
kind of person the maker wants as a customer anyway. They want you to
replace it every two years - the folks who own the end of lifers don't
have very direct feeback to the manufacturer. Resale value may be an
issue, but it's much less direct feedback than if the car starts
failing in the first 2-4 years. "

Again, what is the average life of a car today?

In regards to not being "the kind of customer" the maker wants, I can
understand that since I know what kind of customer they want....what
they want and what they get is two different things. Note Detroit's
current problems.

Actually I am the type of customer they need since I do strongly
influence fleet purchases and I use my personal experiences to
determine some of those purchases. My earlier example of an electrical
connnector was an example of where a company cost itself millions of
dollars to save a few pennies.

Remember the saying "for a lack of a nail a kingdom was lost"....well
trying to short the customer on reliability always comes back to haunt
the company that does it. The domestic manufacturers will pay for their
well earned reputation for poor reliability for decades no matter how
far they want to cut their prices.

TMT

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:25:33 GMT, Ron Thompson
wrote:



This makes absolutely no sense to me. Wal-mart is a retailer, not a
manufacturer. They sell what people buy. If no one buys it, it will be gone from
the inventory.

They are more than a retailer. They bully manufacturers into lowering
their prices - or like one manufacturer, buy millions of dollars of
new equipment in order to be able to meet Walmart's price point. Then,
the next year Walmart wanted another 10%, and went to an offshore
manufacturer when they COULD NOT supply at that price.


"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please
everybody."
Bill Cosby


Ron Thompson
On the Beautiful Florida Space Coast, right beside the Kennedy Space Center, USA

http://www.plansandprojects.com
My hobby pages are he
http://www.plansandprojects.com/My%20Machines/

Severe stupidity is self correcting, but mild stupidity is rampant in the land.
-Ron Thompson

clare wrote:


They are more than a retailer. They bully manufacturers into lowering
their prices - or like one manufacturer, buy millions of dollars of
new equipment in order to be able to meet Walmart's price point. Then,
the next year Walmart wanted another 10%, and went to an offshore
manufacturer when they COULD NOT supply at that price.


And who was that manufacturer?

Dan

On 21 Jan 2006 13:16:11 -0800, "
wrote:


clare wrote:


They are more than a retailer. They bully manufacturers into lowering
their prices - or like one manufacturer, buy millions of dollars of
new equipment in order to be able to meet Walmart's price point. Then,
the next year Walmart wanted another 10%, and went to an offshore
manufacturer when they COULD NOT supply at that price.


And who was that manufacturer?

Dan
I'm trying to remember, but they were a supplier of a client, who now
needs to get their supply elsewhere because the supplier went bankrupt
paying for the equipment without the promised large market.

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:19:15 -0500, with neither quill nor qualm,
clare at snyder.on.ca quickly quoth:

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:25:33 GMT, Ron Thompson
wrote:

This makes absolutely no sense to me. Wal-mart is a retailer, not a
manufacturer. They sell what people buy. If no one buys it, it will be gone from
the inventory.

They are more than a retailer. They bully manufacturers into lowering
their prices - or like one manufacturer, buy millions of dollars of
new equipment in order to be able to meet Walmart's price point. Then,
the next year Walmart wanted another 10%, and went to an offshore
manufacturer when they COULD NOT supply at that price.

They could just as easily have said "NO" to Walmart if that were the
case. Retailers have a CHOICE and are not forced into doing business
with anyone they don't like, y'know. Instead, the greedy *******s
thought they could make a killing with such large sale numbers. Why
are you seeing Walmart as the solo bad guy here, folks?

War is hell, business is worse. Live with it.

- This product cruelly tested on defenseless furry animals -
--------------------------------------------------------
http://diversify.com Web App & Database Programming

clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:25:33 GMT, Ron Thompson
wrote:


This makes absolutely no sense to me. Wal-mart is a retailer, not a
manufacturer. They sell what people buy. If no one buys it, it will be gone from
the inventory.

They are more than a retailer. They bully manufacturers into lowering
their prices - or like one manufacturer, buy millions of dollars of
new equipment in order to be able to meet Walmart's price point. Then,
the next year Walmart wanted another 10%, and went to an offshore
manufacturer when they COULD NOT supply at that price.

Which is why many good manufacturers decline Wal-Mart's business.

In my market, something similar has been happening with Auto Zone. 2
years ago they announced "Pay On Scan". Anyone selling to Zone should be
prepared to ship them merchandise. Zone would pay for it when it sold at
retail. So basically, they wanted free inventory in exchange for the
privilege of being their supplier.
A few big companies could afford to do this, and some startups were
willing to gamble to get some business. But I just heard that Zone is
now retreating. Between supplier resistance and IT tracking issues, POS
is to be abandoned.

"Which is why many good manufacturers decline Wal-Mart's business.

In my market, something similar has been happening with Auto Zone. 2
years ago they announced "Pay On Scan". Anyone selling to Zone should
be
prepared to ship them merchandise. Zone would pay for it when it sold
at
retail. So basically, they wanted free inventory in exchange for the
privilege of being their supplier.
A few big companies could afford to do this, and some startups were
willing to gamble to get some business. But I just heard that Zone is
now retreating. Between supplier resistance and IT tracking issues, POS

is to be abandoned. "

Ever heard of "Just In Time" manufacturing?

The manufacturer wants the supplier to deliver the goods "just in time"
to have it installed...big deal in Japan.

It works when you do the same thing day in and day out and know exactly
what you need.

It doesn't work in retail...where that darn fickle customer won't play
along and buy the same thing every time.

Nobody ever wants to hold inventory...but again there is no free
lunch...someone has to. What we are seeing is a BIG company trying to
have it all...and of course it will only work for awhile. You have to
let your suppliers make a profit or otherwise it makes no sense for
them to do business with you. When they figure out that dealing with
you is a losing proposition, you lose the game. That is one reason why
Walmart is now losing market share while others are gaining....what
works to get you to the top of the heap many times won't work to keep
you on top.

Remember that a company will only do something if they think it will
make them money...and the CEO a bigger bonus. They could care less if
you live or die as long as you or your estate keeps spending money.

TMT

"Rex B" wrote in message
...

clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:25:33 GMT, Ron Thompson
wrote:


This makes absolutely no sense to me. Wal-mart is a retailer, not a
manufacturer. They sell what people buy. If no one buys it, it will be
gone from
the inventory.

They are more than a retailer. They bully manufacturers into lowering
their prices - or like one manufacturer, buy millions of dollars of
new equipment in order to be able to meet Walmart's price point. Then,
the next year Walmart wanted another 10%, and went to an offshore
manufacturer when they COULD NOT supply at that price.

Which is why many good manufacturers decline Wal-Mart's business.

In my market, something similar has been happening with Auto Zone. 2 years
ago they announced "Pay On Scan". Anyone selling to Zone should be
prepared to ship them merchandise. Zone would pay for it when it sold at
retail. So basically, they wanted free inventory in exchange for the
privilege of being their supplier.
A few big companies could afford to do this, and some startups were
willing to gamble to get some business. But I just heard that Zone is now
retreating. Between supplier resistance and IT tracking issues, POS is to
be abandoned.

My biggest problem with that is the stuff that walks out the door without
being scanned. Guess who gets to eat the shoplifting and employee theft
losses. It's not Auto Zone.

--

Clif