The Invasion of Walmart

[Justloadit]

Instead of buying products, Wal-Mart de Argentina offers a "sale spot" to suppliers -- who bear the cost of unsold merchandise. "In the event the product sells," Scasserra explained, "the supplier gets paid, but if the product does not sell, then it was deemed never to be Wal-Mart's to begin with, and therefore the supplier bears the full adverse effect of the unsold stock... Wal-Mart does not take ownership of the goods until the product is sold." ..........

Wal-Mart also forces supplies to wait at least three months to get paid, ...........

"the suppliers are victims of constant pressure to lower the price of their products," .........

In the case of home appliances, Wal-Mart would force its suppliers to give the retainer discounted and free merchandise, "and it advertises 'unbeatable deals', with the cost of these deals being forcibly absorbed by their suppliers."
............

So what is different about Pick & Pay, Checkers, Spar and others?

They do exactly the same, this is the reason I do not even want to consider dealing with them, unless it is COD

Finally, Scasserra recommended that the policy of allowing a merchant to force the producer to be responsible for unsold products should be banned. Wal-Mart should be obligated to purchase the goods up front, and be limited to 30 days credit.

I wish all my debtors did this, oh I forgot, I only have 2 debtors who pay me 30 days anyway, every one else is COD

[Dave A]

And our big retailers aren't doing much of this already?

[tec0]

In a way I don’t see this as job creation rather enslavement. Our government predicate that South Africans must consider self-employment. They even give loans to the majority of South Africans to do so. I can’t help but think that this is counterintuitive and goes against our government aim to start with.

Good case and point, employees stopped all work on the new power stations because the people that will eventually receive permanent employment there are NOT South African. This again goes against what was promised “NEW JOBS FOR SOUTH AFRICANS”

The irony… Government promise job creation for South Africans, promote self-employment and yet they aim to higher workers from other countries and allow the biggest competitor to Self-employment in the world to set up shop in South Africa.

It really sound like a bad joke.

[Blurock]

Agreed Dave, All our clothing retailers have a hand in the demise of our textile industry. They all sent buyers to China to source goods, including furniture. Some retailers even have arrangements with local importers and then have the audacity to say they buy from South African suppliers.

The bottom line is the cheap imported goods did not lower the price at the till. It only served to line the pockets of the shareholders as evidenced from 60 -70% increase in the profits of retail chains. The staff also did not share in this windfall as salaries remained static. In some cases management benefited, but mostly shareholders.

I am not a unionist and am also appalled at what is happening e.g. in Newcastle where factories are forced to close because they can not afford to pay the minimum wage. At least the people had work and were earning a living! Where will they be employed now? More welfare cases!

South Africa is a country of contrasts where we have to balance the need to be profitable and competitive with our social responsibilities and militant union demands.
Maybe the answer lies in taking a long term view. Do not go for the fast buck, but in stead create sustainable wealth that can be shared over time. Any one with a magic wand out there?