In article <telecom23.556.15@telecom-digest.org>,
dold@XReXXWhatX.usenet.us.com says:
>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was a K-Mart in
>> the complex where Walmart is located; Walmart drove them out of
>> business two years ago.
> In Napa, California, there was a very old KMart store in a "strip
> mall" with a few other stores. The Lucky's grocery store closed when
> Alpha Beta bought Lucky's, and they kept a store open a couple of
> blocks away.
> KMart wanted to expand, opening one of their newer Super-KMarts,
> taking over the Lucky's space. Napa said no. They didn't want the
> expansion. They wanted another store to move in to Lucky's.
> KMart closed the store as too small and too old for their new network.
> The other little shops closed without the major draws in the shopping
> center.
> Six months later, Walmart razed the entire strip mall and built a new
> store that encompassed more square footage than the entire complex had
> before, and they are the sole store in the complex.
> Did Napa make a mistake, and decide to take an offer from Walmart?
> Had they already received the offer from Walmart before KMart asked?
> I was surprised that Walmart would put a store in Napa, since there
> was already one in American Canyon, 14 miles away. Since then, they
> have applied for a move of the American Canyon store to a larger
> position 3 miles closer to Napa.
> Other stores can stay in business, but only in little tiny niches. No
> one can compete with Walmart. A new move by Walmart will leave
> merchandise in the inventory of the supplier until it is sold. $60
> billion will disappear from Walmart books. This would really be "just
> in time". It would never belong to Walmart. It would be sold
> directly from the distributor to the consumer at the Walmart checkout.
So they're acting as a consignment vendor. How interesting.
> I think that is how Amazon.com operates with some of their suppliers,
> but they don't have physical control of the item, it remains with the
> distributor, who might route it elsewhere. In the Walmart case, it
> wouldn't be available for other use by the distributor.
> Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Distance between stores is not an issue
> for Walmart. In addition to ours here, they have another one in
> Coffeyville, and others throughout southeast Kansas. PAT]
Distance has nothing to do with location of stores period. In Boston
there are two CVS stores directly across the street from each other.
Granted, it's a busy street and the reasoning is that people don't have
to cross the street to get to CVS.
It is all about capturing as much of the market as you can.
In article <telecom23.557.14@telecom-digest.org>, Wesrock@aol.com
says:
> Lisa Hancock also noted in her message on this that some corporations
> could be quite generous with their money and the one in Chicago in
> those days which comes to mind for me was the phone company. During
> the early/middle 1960's, Dr. Martin Luther King was a regular guest
> preacher both at Chicago Temple on Sunday mornings and at Sunday
> Evening Club at Orchestra Hall. I always went to hear him speak and
> meet him each time he was in town, usually three or four times per
> year. Both at the Chicago Temple and at the Sunday Evening Club they
> *always* made a point of printing in the program words to the effect,
> "The personal expenses of Dr. and Mrs. King on this visit to Chicago
> and the honorarium for his message to us were met with a gift from the
> Illinois Bell Telephone Company." And Dr. King did not come cheap as
> a speaker, either. Temple paid him five hundred dollars to speak and
> I think Sunday Evening Club did the same, always through Illinois Bell
> which was a very generous, good corporation. PAT]
That was part of the mission of the BOC's at the time. Support the
community in order to maintain that protected monopoly status.
On the whole, only now am I paying less for voice communications than I
did in 1982. Of course I've ditched circuit for packet so that might be
part of it. Right now I'm shelling $100 for cable, Internet and phone
per month, the phone representing $24.99 of that. I really can't
complain as the phone is unlimited local and ld, has ALL the features I
want and works fairly well.
Cox Communications tends to be generous with the communities they
serve. But they have no choice -- they are a protected monopoly to
some degree.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Is Cox Communications the same thing
as Cox Cable? Assuming that it is, Cox has the southern end of our
Montgomery County (Coffeyville, Caney, Tryo and Dearing) while Cable
One has Independence, and communities in the north area including
Neodesha, Liberty, Sycamore, etc. And Cable One at least is rather
generous (or maybe the terms of the franchise make them be generous)
in giving Independence *three* cable channels for community use.
Channel 10 is general community programming, Channel 14 is for the
Independence High School and our Community College, and Channel 22
is for general use by City of Independence for announcements and
meetings of the town board, etc. PAT]
Tony P. (kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net)