Is Wal-Mart Evil?

It has become very fashionable to bash Wal-Mart and declare them evil.  Now even the Maryland legislature has gotten into the act by passing a law that affects only Wal-Mart.  This law will be a disaster and everyone cheering it should remember one thing: first they will come after Wal-Mart, then they will come after you.

It's rare that you get to see the other side of the coin, that is, someone actually talking about why Wal-Mart has grown the way it has.

Perhaps this tale of customer service at Wal-Mart is a reason why people shop and spend money there despite what is fashionable.  If this happens often, it could explain a lot of things.

Comments

[StGabe]

That, once, one person got good service from Walmart is not really terribly great evidence. Not to mention that any aware Blog reader these days should bear in mind that many companies are not afraid to plant false, positive messages about their products and services on blogs (that's not paranoia, I've watched it being done).

I think that Walmart is #1 not because of customer service but because it can leverage its large business base, undercut competitors, lobby legislators, etc. Even if I were sympathetic to the wording of this particular law, Walmart is the last sector of American society I think needs "protection" from regulation.

As far as hate towards Walmart, It's not so much Walmart specifically as the entire movement of our economy away from anything with, well, character or personality. And a movement towards profits first. A lot of consumers are left powerless to organize and change these trends. Their "hate" of Walmart, is not irrational, it is just an example of consumer choice (and potentially voter choice) in trying to shape the market the way they want it to be. It's an economic valuation on more than the lowest price, longest store hours or selection. That this is accompanied by a strong dislike of that which embodies the opposite is only natural.

[Mark-Jan Harte]

StGabe, you've got it precisely backwards. Wal-Mart has *become* #1 because of its unbeatable prices and service. They didn't start out with 3,000 stores, you know. Providing clear value to its customers is what made them successful. How can that possibly be bad?
If you blame Wal-mart for being big, blame their customers for shopping there.

I'm afraid that it is you has my post precisely backwards.

First of all, I didn't say that Walmart hadn't become #1 because of prices (and they are able to have such prices because of how large they are). I am not convinced on service, you'll need more than one anecdote on a blog for that one.

And I do blame customers for shopping there. That's why I said it's not so much Walmart specifically as the trend that Walmart is a part of. Some consumers shop on a price-only basis. Other consumers dislike this trend and its many side-effects and their strong dislike for Walmart is an expression of this consumer preference. How are people supposed to change the market if they don't express preferences against that which they don't like? Aren't you just saying that consumers aren't allowed to have preferences or that the only allowable preference is price?

[Mark-Jan Harte]

Of course consumers are allowed to shop anywhere they want. The fact that they choose to do so at Wal-Mart in such large numbers, means that Wal-Mart is meeting a huge demand. That's why they have grown so big, and are now able to squeeze their suppliers. But that is a result of their success, not the cause.

I'm all for customer choice; including the choice to shop at Wal-Mart.

[GBGames]

I personally don't shop there if I can help it for two reasons:

One, I didn't like the reports about how it treats its employees. I don't remember reading anything that said these reports were blown out of proportion.

Two, I didn't like how Wal-Mart used the DMCA to get fatwallet.com to take down prices for Black Friday, and not just once either. I avoid Best Buy for this same reason. Wal-Mart took it a step further by using the DMCA's provision to request the identity of the person who posted the prices. The DMCA is not supposed to allow major companies to make a bogus copyright claim to have their way, but it is broadly worded and heavily in favor of the copyright holder's rights over the customer.

Wal-Mart did great with regards to their systems; everything is streamlined and efficient, allowing them to make money on lower margins. It also forced their suppliers to do the same.

Is Wal-Mart evil? Not any more evil than any other corporation. Playing tough is perfectly fine, and people will complain about success anyway.

Still, I would really like it if companies wouldn't use a law about copyprotection to prevent someone from knowing their not-so-secret secret prices. I would prefer that companies would realize that just because a terrible tool is available doesn't mean they should use it.