China report: Industrial chemicals being used in products from candy to seafood
sagawaeas...@yahoo.com
China shuts 180 food factories for using formaldehyde, illegal dyes
By AUDRA ANG
Associated Press
BEIJING - China has closed 180 food factories after inspectors found
industrial chemicals being used in products from candy to seafood,
state media said today.
The closures came amid a nationwide crackdown on shoddy and dangerous
products launched in December that also uncovered use of recycled or
expired food, the China Daily said.
Formaldehyde, illegal dyes, and industrial wax were found being used
to make candy, pickles, crackers and seafood, it said, citing Han Yi,
an official with the General Administration of Quality Supervision,
Inspection and Quarantine, which is responsible for food safety.
"These are not isolated cases," Han, director of the administration's
quality control and inspection department, was quoted as saying.
Han's admission was significant because the administration has said in
the past that safety violations were the work of a few rogue
operators, a claim which is likely part of a strategy to protect
China's billions of dollars (euros) of food exports.
International concerns over China's food safety problems ballooned
this year after high levels of toxins and industrial chemicals were
found in exported products.
Chinese-made toothpaste has been rejected by several countries in
North and South America and Asia, while Chinese wheat gluten tainted
with the chemical melamine was blamed for dog and cat deaths in North
America. Other products turned away by U.S. inspectors include toxic
monkfish, frozen eel and juice made with unsafe color additives.
Authorities in China have pushed for more stringent controls and
increased publicity of their efforts to control the problem.
Han said most of the offending manufacturers were small, unlicensed
food plants with fewer than 10 employees, and all had been shut down.
China Daily said 75 percent of China's estimated 1 million food
processing plants are small and privately owned.
According to Han, the ongoing inspections are focusing on commonly
consumed food such as meat, milk, beverages, soy sauce and cooking
oil. Rural areas and the suburbs - where standards are likely less
strict - are still considered key areas for inspectors, he said.
Meanwhile, another regulating agency, China's State Administration for
Industry and Commerce, said it closed 152,000 unlicensed food
manufacturers and retailers last year for making fake and low-quality
products.
It also banned 15,000 tons of "unqualified food" from entering the
market because it failed to meet national standards.
The report, posted on the administration's Web site Tuesday, gave no
other details and telephone calls to the administration were not
answered.
Peeter
------------------------------
"Nice" report, but lousy "facts." China has no true regulatory
agencies that would shut down their industries. China DOES have
propaganda organizations that work overtime.
------------------------------
Brontide
Which is why we hear of a crackdown started in December only after
they were caught exporting illegal and toxic goods to the US for
consumption.
-Eric
zxcvbob
Maybe Walmart is putting some pressure on them. (think about it)
Bob
JoeSpareBedroom
news:5efgh1F...@mid.individual.net...
Good idea. But, I'm a cynic. My idea of pressure would be "We are your
biggest customer. We will be placing our own technicians in your factories,
along with our own armed security personnel. You will be OK with that,
right? Or, we'll collapse your economy by next week."
Never happen, but it should.
George
You mean instead of the usual "we are giving you another big order and
you need to make it for 10% less than the last time"?
Rod Speed
> "zxcvbob" <zxc...@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:5efgh1F...@mid.individual.net...
>> Brontide wrote:
>>> On Jun 27, 11:29 am, Peeter <kink...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 27, 8:05 am, sagawaeasdgsdaa...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> "Nice" report, but lousy "facts." China has no true regulatory
>>>> agencies that would shut down their industries. China DOES have
>>>> propaganda organizations that work overtime.
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Which is why we hear of a crackdown started in December only after
>>> they were caught exporting illegal and toxic goods to the US for
>>> consumption.
>>>
>>> -Eric
>>>
>>
>>
>> Maybe Walmart is putting some pressure on them. (think about it)
> Good idea. But, I'm a cynic. My idea of pressure would be "We are your
> biggest customer. We will be placing our own technicians in your
> factories, along with our own armed security personnel. You will be
> OK with that, right? Or, we'll collapse your economy by next week."
That last is pure fantasy.
> Never happen, but it should.
Not even possible on that last.
JoeSpareBedroom
news:5efmn1F...@mid.individual.net...
I've read the Wal Mart absorbs enough Chinese production to equal everything
they sell to their next 3 biggest *country* customers. I think we could
cause them a bit of pain for a while.
Peter Bruells
> "zxcvbob" <zxc...@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:5efgh1F...@mid.individual.net...
> > Brontide wrote:
> >> On Jun 27, 11:29 am, Peeter <kink...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> On Jun 27, 8:05 am, sagawaeasdgsdaa...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>> "Nice" report, but lousy "facts." China has no true regulatory
> >>> agencies that would shut down their industries. China DOES have
> >>> propaganda organizations that work overtime.
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>
> >> Which is why we hear of a crackdown started in December only after
> >> they were caught exporting illegal and toxic goods to the US for
> >> consumption.
> >>
> >
> > Maybe Walmart is putting some pressure on them. (think about it)
> >
> > Bob
>
> Good idea. But, I'm a cynic. My idea of pressure would be "We are your
> biggest customer. We will be placing our own technicians in your factories,
> along with our own armed security personnel. You will be OK with that,
> right? Or, we'll collapse your economy by next week."
>
> Never happen, but it should.
Why? Are you seriously rooting for a collapse of the US economy?
JoeSpareBedroom
news:m28xa5n...@rogue.ecce-terram.de...
Of course not. But, are you suggesting that strongarming the Chinese into
better quality control will collapse our economy?
By the way, any company can stumble and never get up. A few deaths from
tainted product, and Wal Mart could have a major problem on its hands, if
customers are smart enough the correctly blame them for dealing with thugs.
Mark Anderson
> > Why? Are you seriously rooting for a collapse of the US economy?
>
> Of course not. But, are you suggesting that strongarming the Chinese into
> better quality control will collapse our economy?
When the Chinese start dumping their US treasury bonds and not buying
any more that will hurt our economy greatly. Plus all the fat people
who roam the aisles of WalMart every day won't be able to buy any
useless Chinese made crap.
JoeSpareBedroom
news:MPG.20ec6b984...@chi.news.speakeasy.net...
> In article dishbo...@yahoo.com says...
>> > Why? Are you seriously rooting for a collapse of the US economy?
>>
>> Of course not. But, are you suggesting that strongarming the Chinese into
>> better quality control will collapse our economy?
>
> When the Chinese start dumping their US treasury bonds and not buying
> any more that will hurt our economy greatly.
Uh oh. USA put on credit hold by China. Maybe our elected slobs would
correctly begin thinking of this country as a business. Rite Aid was on
credit hold for some time. New management did a nice job of hauling the
company out of the toilet.
Rod Speed
Thats a pig ignorant lie, and even if it was true, it STILL couldnt collapse
the chinese economy by next week anyway. Or next month either.
> I think we could cause them a bit of pain for a while.
Nope, because Walmart wouldnt do that, because it would have nothing to sell.
They aint actually that stupid.
Even Walmart has noticed that there isnt anywhere else they can get that volume from.
Rod Speed
That wouldnt kill Walmart.
JoeSpareBedroom
The Chinese place quite a bit of value on saving face. More important
sometimes than cash.
JoeSpareBedroom
You're probably right. So many of their customers love being lied to. It
wouldn't matter to them if toys were literally exploding in their children's
hands.
Peter Bruells
Not in the least, but collapsing the Chinese economy will collapse the
U.S. econonmy. And vice versa. And the same with the E.U. economy.
> By the way, any company can stumble and never get up. A few deaths
> from tainted product, and Wal Mart could have a major problem on its
> hands, if customers are smart enough the correctly blame them for
> dealing with thugs.
I didn't read your remark above as being limited to one company.
Rod Speed
They're also quite capable of telling those who try
to monster them to go and fuck themselves too.
JoeSpareBedroom
I'm not convinced that having our own people physically present to monitor
production would be such a problem. Matter of fact, a relative used to work
for a large American company that makes solutions for contact lenses in
China. The company has kept American staff in place from the day the
production facility was set up.
JoeSpareBedroom
Sounds like you're admitting defeat. We're owned? Yes?
Rod Speed
>>> Why? Are you seriously rooting for a collapse of the US economy?
>> Of course not. But, are you suggesting that strongarming the
>> Chinese into better quality control will collapse our economy?
> When the Chinese start dumping their US treasury bonds and not buying any more
They arent stupid enough to do that given that its their biggest market.
> that will hurt our economy greatly.
Nope.
> Plus all the fat people who roam the aisles of WalMart every
> day won't be able to buy any useless Chinese made crap.
Wont happen either.
Rod Speed
> "Mark Anderson" <m...@nospambrandylion.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.20ec6b984...@chi.news.speakeasy.net...
>> In article dishbo...@yahoo.com says...
>>>> Why? Are you seriously rooting for a collapse of the US economy?
>>>
>>> Of course not. But, are you suggesting that strongarming the
>>> Chinese into better quality control will collapse our economy?
>> When the Chinese start dumping their US treasury bonds and not buying any more that will hurt our
>> economy greatly.
> Uh oh. USA put on credit hold by China.
Not even possible.
> Maybe our elected slobs would correctly begin thinking of this country as a business.
Pity it isnt.
> Rite Aid was on credit hold for some time. New management did a nice job of hauling the company
> out of the toilet.
Companys arent countrys.
Rod Speed
>> That wouldnt kill Walmart.
Its not for that reason.
> It wouldn't matter to them if toys were literally exploding in their children's hands.
Corse it would. But that cant happen.
Rod Speed
Nope, it would just take some time to adjust.
> And vice versa. And the same with the E.U. economy.
Have fun explaining how come that didnt happen in WW2.
JoeSpareBedroom
No, but that doesn't mean the execs should completely toss budgeting
thoughts out the window. As you said, "pity it isn't".
JoeSpareBedroom
What do you think the reason is? Because in so many locations, they've
eliminated all other sources for consumers?
Peter Bruells
Dear me, you do know that Chinese overtook the U.S. in exports last
year and will overtake Germany, if it hasn't already?
And Wal Mart... well, that's a company that flopped horribly because
it couldn't stand the competitive market over here, cut its losses and
sold off its stores.
Rod Speed
Nope, just rubbing your nose in the fact that its nothing like your line.
> We're owned? Yes?
Nope. The US could certainly impose controls on the quality of US imports if it chose to.
JoeSpareBedroom
...which is exactly where this conversation started, so we're going around
in circles.
Rod Speed
Exports have never been that important to the US economy.
> and will overtake Germany, if it hasn't already?
No surprises there.
> And Wal Mart... well, that's a company that flopped horribly
> because it couldn't stand the competitive market over here,
> cut its losses and sold off its stores.
Doesnt change the fact that its a bigger operation than quite a few countrys.
Rod Speed
They dont.
> As you said, "pity it isn't".
Nope, no country of any significance could work like a company.
JoeSpareBedroom
Endless borrowing most certainly DOES mean politicians have lost their way.
>> As you said, "pity it isn't".
>
> Nope, no country of any significance could work like a company.
Financially, or administratively?
Rod Speed
They find it a convenient place to buy what they buy.
It really is as basic as that.
> Because in so many locations, they've eliminated all other sources for consumers?
Nope, they havent eliminated anything. They've just been a lot
more successful at attracting customers than anyone else has.
And thats due to a variety of things, the prices of what they sell,
the range of what they sell, so its a one stop shop for many,
and they have plenty of quite adequately run stores so that
most consumers can use them if they decide they like them.
JoeSpareBedroom
There's a certain amount of hypnotism involved, though. Here, two
traditional supermarkets are precisely, inarguably as convenient as WM. A
couple of times a year, our local newspaper takes a grocery shopping list to
the two supermarkets, and the WM store. WM has ***NEVER*** been cheaper than
the other two stores. Mention this to WM worshippers and you'll get a blank
stare. Seriously. They believe that 3 is a smaller number than 2 because
they have been trained to believe it. They cannot understand how any store
can be cheaper than at their shopping church.
zxcvbob
I was trying to suggest that Walmart might be in a better position to do
that than the govt. It works on a variety of levels.
Bob
Rod Speed
Nope, we just had a minor diversion discussing what wouldnt work.
Rod Speed
Sure, but doing that conflicts with their fundamental approach of driving down costs.
And wouldnt do a damned thing about the other chinese imports.
In fact it would likely aggravate those, with the WalMart discards
being imported by others.
> It works on a variety of levels.
But is subject to other considerations too.
Rod Speed
Nope. Just like almost no one has no borrowings at all in
their entire life, no modern country has no borrowings at all.
The world's moved on, borrowing makes sense in some situations.
>>> As you said, "pity it isn't".
>> Nope, no country of any significance could work like a company.
> Financially, or administratively?
Neither.
Rod Speed
Nope, the retail world just moves on.
> Here, two traditional supermarkets are precisely, inarguably as convenient as WM.
No they arent on the total range of what they stock, including non supermarket items.
> A couple of times a year, our local newspaper takes a grocery
> shopping list to the two supermarkets, and the WM store. WM has ***NEVER*** been cheaper than the
> other two stores.
Sure, but for most consumers, there is a lot more involved than just price.
Price alone is a different market segment, what Aldi attempts to concentrate on.
> Mention this to WM worshippers and you'll get a blank stare. Seriously.
Because they care about more than just price, even if they dont realise that.
> They believe that 3 is a smaller number than 2 because they have been trained to believe it.
Nope, they care about more than just price.
> They cannot understand how any store can be cheaper than at their shopping church.
They aint that stupid. They just cant state what drives their choice on what store
they use very clearly, because they dont even realise why they use Walmart.
JoeSpareBedroom
I wonder where the tainted Colgate toothpaste came from....
Peter Bruells
> "Peter Bruells" <p...@ecce-terram.de> wrote in message
> news:m2r6nxm...@rogue.ecce-terram.de...
> > Not in the least, but collapsing the Chinese economy will collapse the
> > U.S. econonmy. And vice versa. And the same with the E.U. economy.
> I'm not convinced that having our own people physically present to monitor
> production would be such a problem. Matter of fact, a relative used to work
> for a large American company that makes solutions for contact lenses in
> China. The company has kept American staff in place from the day the
> production facility was set up.
That's kinda the point. The companies that will agree to such terms
are those that do not need to be forced to do so. They are probably
glad to get free training in quality control. The others will wave
you a good-bye and look for another sucker.
But the idea that Wal-Mart could "force" China's economy is laughable.
Rod Speed
Irrelevant to that bit.
JoeSpareBedroom
You're stating the obvious. Somewhere in between excess and nothing, there's
a happy medium. But, we're paying for a war at the moment.
>
>>>> As you said, "pity it isn't".
>
>>> Nope, no country of any significance could work like a company.
>
>> Financially, or administratively?
>
> Neither.
Got a solution?
JoeSpareBedroom
Two things:
If we focus for the moment only on groceries, than there is nothing at Wal
Mart to focus on other than price. Their dry, dairy and frozen grocery
selection is smaller than at traditional stores. This is factual. No point
in disputing it. The quality of their produce is awful. So, other than
price, selection and quality, what else is there? Service is hideous, so
that can't be an issue.
As far as "don't realise why they use WM", I use the cynical word
"hypnotism" in place of advertising.
JoeSpareBedroom
Not necessarily. This country does not destroy tainted product at the
shipping port. We turn it away. It goes elsewhere.
Rod Speed
Pity about your silly claim about 'Endless borrowing most
certainly DOES mean politicians have lost their way'
> Somewhere in between excess and nothing, there's a happy medium.
Nothing like your original silly line.
> But, we're paying for a war at the moment.
Yep.
>>>>> As you said, "pity it isn't".
>>>> Nope, no country of any significance could work like a company.
>>> Financially, or administratively?
>> Neither.
> Got a solution?
Dont need one. A decent democracy works fine with countrys.
Thats survived full depressions, two world wars, countless other wars, etc etc etc fine.
Any of those would sink a company.
Rod Speed
> Two things:
Thats missing the point completely. The whole point of WalMart
is that it combines the grocerys with a hell of a lot more than just
grocerys and many find it convenient to get everything else at the
same place they get their grocerys from, instead of having to
patronise more than one place for all the stuff they need.
> Their dry, dairy and frozen grocery selection is smaller than at traditional stores. This is
> factual. No point in disputing it.
Not relevant to the fact that WalMart leaves all its competitors
for dead on the number of customers that choose to use WalMart.
> The quality of their produce is awful.
Their customers clearly dont agree.
> So, other than price, selection and quality, what else is there?
Being able to get everything you need at the one place.
> Service is hideous, so that can't be an issue.
The customers clearly dont care.
> As far as "don't realise why they use WM", I use the cynical word "hypnotism" in place of
> advertising.
It aint got a damned thing to do with advertising.
Rod Speed
> Not necessarily.
Fraid so.
> This country does not destroy tainted product at the
> shipping port. We turn it away. It goes elsewhere.
That aint what happened with the toothpaste.
And legally they cant destroy the product anyway.
JoeSpareBedroom
....so far. That may soon change. Allowing poisoned products to recirculate
is something that should be changed. Obviously, we know it's going to go
somewhere. Latin America, perhaps? I see no reason to allow criminals to
sell their product to someone else.
JoeSpareBedroom
About 35% of their customers shop there ONLY for groceries. I wish I could
give you the phone number of the person at WM who could confirm this for
you, but I don't think he'd appreciate it.
>> Their dry, dairy and frozen grocery selection is smaller than at
>> traditional stores. This is factual. No point in disputing it.
>
> Not relevant to the fact that WalMart leaves all its competitors
> for dead on the number of customers that choose to use WalMart.
Not in this market (Rochester NY), and quite a few others. Again, we're
talking about groceries for the moment, because you cannot compare a
hardware store to a farm stand.
>> The quality of their produce is awful.
>
> Their customers clearly dont agree.
They obviously don't know any better. Perhaps a whole generation of kids
will grow up never having seen a decent head of lettuce that didn't look
like it had been thrown at the wall.
>> So, other than price, selection and quality, what else is there?
>
> Being able to get everything you need at the one place.
>
The store counts on impulse purchases by people who shop for the sake of
shopping. I've met people like this. So have you.
>> Service is hideous, so that can't be an issue.
>
> The customers clearly dont care.
That's sad. 30 minutes in the cashier's line, when you could spend 10-15%
less for the good down the street, and never wait more than 3 minutes to
unload your stuff onto the belt. I guess some people are OK with paying more
for the privilege of wasting their time.
clams casino
>
>
>
>You're probably right. So many of their customers love being lied to. It
>wouldn't matter to them if toys were literally exploding in their children's
>hands.
>
>
>
>
Very little at Walmart is made under a Walmart name / supervision.
Almost all is supplied by someone else (P&G, Goodyear, Dell, Colgate,
Nabisco, etc) .
If there is something wrong with a product, the blame will be passed
onto their supplier.
Rod Speed
Nope.
> Allowing poisoned products to recirculate is something that should be changed.
You aint established that they are 'poisoned' and it shoudnt
be hard to detect a second attempt to import those anyway.
> Obviously, we know it's going to go somewhere. Latin America, perhaps? I see no reason to allow
> criminals to sell their product to someone else.
Pity about the law on what you can do with stuff that doesnt enter the country.
JoeSpareBedroom
You sound content with things as they are. zzzzzzz........
JoeSpareBedroom
news:b8Agi.154864$NK5.1...@newsfe23.lga...
Take a close look at some of the
*******NON-FOOD**********
brand names. Many contain small print containing the WM name. In those
instances, they are directly responsible for the results of their products.
clams casino
> A
>couple of times a year, our local newspaper takes a grocery shopping list to
>the two supermarkets, and the WM store. WM has ***NEVER*** been cheaper than
>the other two stores.
>
>
>
>
This is completely contrary to any of my experience. Granted, Walmart
does not carry a full line of groceries, although their Super Walmarts
do provide a wide variety.
In my personal comparisons, I've typically found local grocers charge
nearly 50% more for the typical grocery items found at basic Walmarts
(eggs, bread, milk, paper products, snack items, cleaning products,
etc.) We tend to buy the packaged stuff at Walmart (toothpaste, can
goods, napkins, etc) and buy fresh fruits, meats & vegetables at the
grocers where quality is typically superior, along with some items that
are just not available at Walmart..
JoeSpareBedroom
Where are you located?
Rod Speed
You dont know that, that they never ever buy anything else.
> I wish I could give you the phone number of the person at WM who could confirm this for you, but I
> don't think he'd appreciate it.
There is no way that any individual in WalMart can ever know that.
And even if there are some, and its unlikely to be anything like that,
its presumably because they find WalMart convenient for other reasons.
>>> Their dry, dairy and frozen grocery selection is smaller than at traditional stores. This is
>>> factual. No point in disputing it.
>> Not relevant to the fact that WalMart leaves all its competitors
>> for dead on the number of customers that choose to use WalMart.
> Not in this market (Rochester NY), and quite a few others.
Just because those areas have been stupid
enough to not allow WalMart to operate there.
> Again, we're talking about groceries for the moment,
No we arent. Doing that misses the point completely on why Walmart
leaves its competitors for dead customer numbers and turnover wise.
> because you cannot compare a hardware store to a farm stand.
Pity thats not why WalMart leaves its competitors
for dead customer numbers and turnover wise.
>>> The quality of their produce is awful.
>> Their customers clearly dont agree.
> They obviously don't know any better.
Or you're just plain wrong, or they dont care.
> Perhaps a whole generation of kids will grow up never having seen a decent head of lettuce that
> didn't look like it had been thrown at the wall.
Or they dont care enough about stuff like that to bother with the alternatives.
>>> So, other than price, selection and quality, what else is there?
>> Being able to get everything you need at the one place.
> The store counts on impulse purchases by people who shop for the sake of shopping. I've met people
> like this. So have you.
There arent enough of those to explain why WalMart leaves its
competitors for dead customer numbers and turnover wise.
>>> Service is hideous, so that can't be an issue.
>> The customers clearly dont care.
> That's sad.
Thats life.
> 30 minutes in the cashier's line, when you could spend 10-15% less for the good down the street,
> and never wait more than 3
> minutes to unload your stuff onto the belt.
The customers clearly dont care.
> I guess some people are OK with paying more for the privilege of wasting their time.
Yep, there is more to life than time and money for most.
JoeSpareBedroom
>> About 35% of their customers shop there ONLY for groceries.
>
> You dont know that, that they never ever buy anything else.
>
>> I wish I could give you the phone number of the person at WM who could
>> confirm this for you, but I don't think he'd appreciate it.
>
> There is no way that any individual in WalMart can ever know that.
>
> And even if there are some, and its unlikely to be anything like that,
> its presumably because they find WalMart convenient for other reasons.
Let's clear away all the other clutter, and focus on this for the moment,
because the statements you've made above are about to hurt you.
I have a business contact at Wal Mart, someone I've known for years. He's a
grocery buyer. He tells me that they can determine what percentage of sales
transactions included product only from one department: Groceries.
With the possible exception of one and two store companies, like IGAs out in
the sticks, most grocery chains can do the same thing.
Are you telling me this is not possible?
Rod Speed
You need to get your ears tested.
JoeSpareBedroom
>> 30 minutes in the cashier's line, when you could spend 10-15% less for
>> the good down the street, and never wait more than 3
>> minutes to unload your stuff onto the belt.
>
> The customers clearly dont care.
>
>> I guess some people are OK with paying more for the privilege of wasting
>> their time.
>
> Yep, there is more to life than time and money for most.
>
Usually, when people say there's more to life than money, they mean that
quality of life means more time to spend with family, for instance. But, you
seem to be saying that wasting more time and spending more money somehow
contributes to quality of life. Can you explain this further?
JoeSpareBedroom
>
>>> Not relevant to the fact that WalMart leaves all its competitors
>>> for dead on the number of customers that choose to use WalMart.
>
>> Not in this market (Rochester NY), and quite a few others.
>
> Just because those areas have been stupid
> enough to not allow WalMart to operate there.
But, that's clearly not the case here. In one particular area near my home,
there is a WM superstore, and 3 blocks away in either direction, two grocery
competitors who are doing gangbuster business. Do you dispute that these two
competitors exist, or that they are where I told you they were?
JoeSpareBedroom
>
> No we arent. Doing that misses the point completely on why Walmart
> leaves its competitors for dead customer numbers and turnover wise.
>
>> because you cannot compare a hardware store to a farm stand.
>
> Pity thats not why WalMart leaves its competitors
> for dead customer numbers and turnover wise.
And yet, in many markets, they are NOT hurting their competitors IN THE
GROCERY CATEGORY (or pharmacy, for that matter). How can this be? Here, the
Wegman's chain has existed since 1915. When WM announced their intention to
build superstores here, the company's CEO was interviewed on TV for his
reaction. Summary:
"Yawn"
He was right. Wegmans continues to expand into Wal Mart's markets in the
northeast, with uncanny success.
How can this be?
Rod Speed
>>> About 35% of their customers shop there ONLY for groceries.
>> You dont know that, that they never ever buy anything else.
>>> I wish I could give you the phone number of the person at WM who could confirm this for you, but
>>> I don't think he'd appreciate it.
>> There is no way that any individual in WalMart can ever know that.
>> And even if there are some, and its unlikely to be anything like that, its presumably because
>> they find WalMart convenient for other reasons.
> Let's clear away all the other clutter, and focus on this for the moment,
OK.
> because the statements you've made above are about to hurt you.
Nope.
> I have a business contact at Wal Mart, someone I've known for years. He's a grocery buyer. He
> tells me that they can determine what percentage of sales transactions included product only from
> one department: Groceries.
But he can never know who never ever buys anything but grocerys from WalMart.
> With the possible exception of one and two store companies, like IGAs out in the sticks, most
> grocery chains can do the same thing.
> Are you telling me this is not possible?
Yep, there is no way to work out who ocassionally buys
other than grocerys, even if thats only once or twice a year.
JoeSpareBedroom
True, but they choose to extrapolate from the numbers for planning purposes.
It works well. Otherwise, they never would've expanded so much into
groceries to begin with.
Please start running your spell checker. Your slip is showing.
Rod Speed
>>> 30 minutes in the cashier's line, when you could spend 10-15% less for the good down the street,
>>> and never wait more than 3
>>> minutes to unload your stuff onto the belt.
>> The customers clearly dont care.
And clearly arent anal enough to bother measuring that either.
>>> I guess some people are OK with paying more for the privilege of wasting their time.
>> Yep, there is more to life than time and money for most.
> Usually, when people say there's more to life than money, they mean
> that quality of life means more time to spend with family, for instance.
Or that they dont bother to work out what is cheapest and just buy
everything they need at a particular store that they find convenient etc.
> But, you seem to be saying that wasting more time and
> spending more money somehow contributes to quality of life.
Nope, that they arent interested in trying to time the
various checkouts and use the ones that are fastest.
Few bother to check out the prices at all stores they can
use and only buy whats cheapest at each store either.
> Can you explain this further?
Just did.
Rod Speed
>>>> Not relevant to the fact that WalMart leaves all its competitors
>>>> for dead on the number of customers that choose to use WalMart.
>>> Not in this market (Rochester NY), and quite a few others.
>> Just because those areas have been stupid
>> enough to not allow WalMart to operate there.
> But, that's clearly not the case here. In one particular area near my
> home, there is a WM superstore, and 3 blocks away in either
> direction, two grocery competitors who are doing gangbuster business.
Then your original is just plain wrong.
> Do you dispute that these two competitors exist, or that they are where I told you they were?
Nope, that your original is just plain wrong.
Look at the industry statistics.
JoeSpareBedroom
My original WHAT?
Rod Speed
Doesnt mean that the original claim has any validity.
> It works well. Otherwise, they never would've expanded so much into groceries to begin with.
Doesnt mean that the original claim has any validity.
> Please start running your spell checker. Your slip is showing.
I have never ever given a flying red fuck about stuff as trivial as spelling.
Rod Speed
>> No we arent. Doing that misses the point completely on why Walmart
>> leaves its competitors for dead customer numbers and turnover wise.
>>> because you cannot compare a hardware store to a farm stand.
>> Pity thats not why WalMart leaves its competitors
>> for dead customer numbers and turnover wise.
> And yet, in many markets, they are NOT hurting their competitors IN THE GROCERY CATEGORY (or
> pharmacy, for that matter).
Irrelevant to whether WalMart leaves its competitors
for dead customer numbers and turnover wise.
Even you should have noticed that its not a specialist store.
The whole point of their operation is that they do supply the bulk of what most buy.
> How can this be?
Specialists can always do better than what generalists can do.
> Here, the Wegman's chain has existed since 1915. When WM announced their intention to build
> superstores here, the company's CEO was interviewed on TV for his reaction. Summary:
> "Yawn"
> He was right. Wegmans continues to expand into Wal Mart's markets in the northeast, with uncanny
> success.
> How can this be?
Specialists can always do better than what generalists can
do because they can concentrate on one market segment.
Rod Speed
> My original WHAT?
Your original claim, second para at the top.
Michel Boucher
news:W1wgi.11100$B25....@news01.roc.ny:
> Good idea. But, I'm a cynic. My idea of pressure would be "We are
> your biggest customer. We will be placing our own technicians in
> your factories, along with our own armed security personnel. You
> will be OK with that, right? Or, we'll collapse your economy by
> next week."
>
> Never happen, but it should.
What you really meant to say was: Never would happen, shoulda woulda
coulda.
There is absolutely no way that
a. China would allow non-Chinese to act in a Deadwood type of justice
on their soil and I believe they would be prepared to face a possible
loss of income rather than have anything remotely approaching that
happen, and
b. Wal-Mart knows better than to mess with China because they are the
customer, but they also depend on China; it's a mutually beneficial
relationship as long as people of a certain economic milieu are driven
to buy at Borg-Mart.
In the words of Reese Bobby: If yer not furst, yer layust. Truer
capitalist words were n'er spake.
--
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's
oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the
search for a superior moral justification for
selfishness." -- John Kenneth Galbraith
clams casino
Southern New England. Shaws and Stop & Shop are the primary grocers
in NE, although we rarely shop at either.
As previously mentioned, we start with what Walmart carries (except
fresh fruits, meats & vegetables) and pick up the other items
elsewhere (smaller grocers, butcher & local vegetable stands), keeping
our overall grocery costs relatively low (averaging about $75/week for
two). We could probably cut costs by not buying higher quality / fresh,
but the savings would not be worth it to us. Nevertheless, it's hard to
beat Walmart pricing on staples.
clams casino
Guess I'll have to read some items. We rarely buy items at Walmart that
aren't brand names available elsewhere.
JoeSpareBedroom
When the projects based on the extrapolation are wildly successful, it most
certainly does suggest the numbers were valid. Nobody can predict customer
behavior completely, but sometimes the numbers tell the truth.
I'm curious: What general type of business are you in? I'm guessing
something technical.
JoeSpareBedroom
Still not making sense. Be specific by quoting the words you're thinking of.
Rod Speed
Nope. Just that that particular claim has no relevance to the
result that was seen when the grocery section was expanded.
> Nobody can predict customer behavior completely, but sometimes the numbers tell the truth.
That particular number has no relevance to whether
expanding the grocery section is worthwhile.
> I'm curious: What general type of business are you in? I'm guessing something technical.
You guessed right, but that has no relevance to what is being discussed.
JoeSpareBedroom
You seem to be contradicting what you've said earlier: "leaves its
competitors for dead customer numbers and turnover wise".
Matter of fact, I'm looking at a map on my wall which indicates that the
highest sales numbers come from the specialists, and this is in the regions
with the highest populations. The data comes from industry sources, and the
map is compiled by a company called Trade Dimensions International. Our
company's numbers (selling groceries to chains, wholesalers and Wal Mart)
indicate the same thing.
If stores in the same neighborhoods are moving more cases per week than WM,
how are they being left in the dust?
JoeSpareBedroom
You're a different type of customer, I guess. Many families don't have time
to shop in two or three places, while other people are thrilled by the idea.
JoeSpareBedroom
Actually, it does.
Rod Speed
> Actually, it does.
Nope. Your original claim was just plain wrong
and its completely irrelevant to that where I work.
Rod Speed
Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
Rod Speed
Nope. Your seems machinery needs seeing too.
Your comprehension in spades.
> Matter of fact, I'm looking at a map on my wall which indicates that
> the highest sales numbers come from the specialists, and this is in
> the regions with the highest populations.
Not one of the specialists has TOTAL customer
numbers or turnover anything like WalMart's.
> The data comes from industry sources, and the map is compiled by a company called Trade Dimensions
> International. Our company's numbers (selling groceries to chains, wholesalers and Wal Mart)
> indicate the same thing.
Irrelevant to WalMarts TOTAL customer numbers or turnover.
> If stores in the same neighborhoods are moving more cases per week than WM, how are they being
> left in the dust?
Never even mentioned more cases.
William Souden
>> Actually, it does.
>
> Nope. Your original claim was just plain wrong
> and its completely irrelevant to that where I work.
>
>
Welfare Rod does not work.
marika
Rod Speed wrote in message <5eg6sjF...@mid.individual.net>...
>Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
>
>
itym he can really defeat some victory that might get him snatch
mk5000
"The high end of the scale is not, perhaps, proof of the average gap between
face value and resale value of concert tickets, but just as an indication of
the scale of the disparity recent sell-out concerts (BBC) have included
Arctic Monkeys - £24 tickets reselling for £270 - Kylie Minogue - tickets
reselling at "five times face value" - and Glastonbury 2005 which saw
tickets initially sold for £129 resell for £700."-seamus mccaley
JoeSpareBedroom
Actually, it does matter to me, as an aid in understanding how you think
about things. For example, I know a C++ programmer who is considered a god
around here, by people who hire programmers. Absolutely brilliant. But, I
once tried to explain a business model to him, and after several attempts
over two weeks, he found it impossible to grasp. The rigorous thinking
requires for some technical fields sometimes makes people unable to grasp
things like intuition or hunches.
This is why you discounted the 35% figure I taught you - people who only
visit Wal Mart for items from the grocery category. You said it was
meaningless. Clearly, it is not, because the number is so consistent from
year to year that WM actually plans around it successfully. They did this
based on a hunch. It doesn't matter if X percent of those people
occasionally shop other departments. The number itself was enough to make a
business decision.
But, you knew that.
JoeSpareBedroom
Blue acid today?
JoeSpareBedroom
Not one of them in a single market area, like Los Angeles, Cleveland, etc?
And, what is YOUR definition of turnover? That not a word used much in
retailing, at least not in the USA. The word "turnover" usually refers to
losing employees.
>
>> The data comes from industry sources, and the map is compiled by a
>> company called Trade Dimensions International. Our company's numbers
>> (selling groceries to chains, wholesalers and Wal Mart) indicate the same
>> thing.
>
> Irrelevant to WalMarts TOTAL customer numbers or turnover.
See above. You need to provide your definition of turnover before we can
continue.
>
>> If stores in the same neighborhoods are moving more cases per week than
>> WM, how are they being left in the dust?
>
> Never even mentioned more cases.
Define turnover. What exactly does that refer to (for you)?
Rod Speed
>>> Actually, it does.
completely irrelevant to that how I think about things.
> For example, I know a C++ programmer who is considered a god around here, by people who hire
> programmers.
> Absolutely brilliant. But, I once tried to explain a business model to him, and after several
> attempts over two weeks, he found it impossible to grasp.
Thats completely irrelevant to the FACT that your original claim is just plain wrong.
Thats completely irrelevant to the FACT that WalMart clearly has a business model
that works when it produces a turnover bigger than the GDP of some countrys too.
> The rigorous thinking requires for some technical fields sometimes makes people unable to grasp
> things like intuition or hunches.
Thats completely irrelevant to the FACT that your original claim is just plain wrong.
Thats completely irrelevant to the FACT that WalMart clearly has a business model
that works when it produces a turnover bigger than the GDP of some countrys too.
> This is why you discounted the 35% figure
Nope, I rubbed your silly little nose in the FACT that NO ONE can
know what the actual number of WalMart's customers who never
ever buy anything except grocerys from WalMart actually is.
That number has just been plucked out of some fool's arse and he's
so stupid that he cant even manage to grasp that it isnt even possible
to know what that number actually is, or he never ever said anything
like that and its YOU that has just turned some number he may well have
mentioned into something completely different to what he actually said.
> I taught you
You never ever 'taught' anyone anything. You CLAIMED that, a different matter entirely.
> - people who only visit Wal Mart for items from the grocery category.
You did manage to get bit right, likely by accident.
> You said it was meaningless.
No I didnt. What I actually said is still there in the quoting.
The word meaningless doesnt even appear except from you.
> Clearly, it is not, because the number is so consistent from year to year
There may well be a number that is very consistent from year to year,
BUT IT IS NOT THE NUMBER YOU CLAIM IT IS, because no one
can actually measure what that number you claimed actually is.
> that WM actually plans around it successfully.
Proves absolutely NOTHING about how accurate that number is,
or whether its actually measuring what YOU claimed it measures.
> They did this based on a hunch.
PIty that cant actually measure what you claimed about WalMart customer behaviour.
> It doesn't matter if X percent of those people occasionally shop other departments.
Corse it does, it proves that YOUR claim cant actually be measured.
> The number itself was enough to make a business decision.
Irrelevant to whether its actually even possible to measure that claim YOU made.
> But, you knew that.
Pathetic.
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of why no one is
actually stupid enough to employ you to do anything technical.
Rod Speed
Rod Speed
Not where WalMart is allowed to have stores.
> And, what is YOUR definition of turnover?
Same one that appears in the dictionary.
http://onelook.com/?w=turnover&ls=a
> That not a word used much in retailing, at least not in the USA.
Pig ignorant lie. ALL listed retailers report that to the stock market etc.
> The word "turnover" usually refers to losing employees.
Nope, thats just a different use of that particular word.
You can also measure the turnover of stock too.
>>> The data comes from industry sources, and the map is compiled by a
>>> company called Trade Dimensions International. Our company's numbers
>>> (selling groceries to chains, wholesalers and Wal Mart) indicate the same thing.
>> Irrelevant to WalMarts TOTAL customer numbers or turnover.
> See above. You need to provide your definition of turnover before we can continue.
Nope.
>>> If stores in the same neighborhoods are moving more cases per week than WM, how are they being
>>> left in the dust?
>> Never even mentioned more cases.
> Define turnover. What exactly does that refer to (for you)?
See above.
JoeSpareBedroom
> That number has just been plucked out of some fool's arse
Actually, it was plucked easily from years' worth of computer data. You must
not be an IT person, or you'd know how unbelievably simple it is to query a
relational database that's been properly designed for a company that wants
to mine information in every way possible.
JoeSpareBedroom
Define "turnover", or your fun is over. It is a word not related to what
you're trying to discuss. Perhaps you intend it to be synonymous with a
valid word, but I'll need to know what that word is before we can continue.
Rod Speed
>>> About 35% of their customers shop there ONLY for groceries.
>> That number has just been plucked out of some fool's arse
> Actually, it was plucked easily from years' worth of computer data.
Then YOU stupidly claimed that a particular
number is nothing like what was actually measured.
IT ISNT EVEN POSSIBLE TO GET THAT PARTICULARLY NUMBER
THAT YOU MADE SUCH A SPECTACULAR FOOL OF YOURSELF
ABOUT FROM YEARS WORTH OF COMPUTER DATA.
> You must not be an IT person,
Guess which pathetic little prat has just got egg all over its silly little face, yet again ?
> or you'd know how unbelievably simple it is to query a relational database that's been properly
> designed for a company that wants to mine information in every way possible.
Cant get data out of a database that doesnt actually contain that info in the first place, fool.
THERE IS NO WAY THAT WALMART CAN EVER KNOW WHAT EVERY CUSTOMER
DOES ABOUT PURCHASES OF NON GROCERYS IN THEIR STORE.
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of why no one is actually
stupid enough to employ you to do anything technical at all, ever.
Rod Speed
> Define "turnover",
Try a dictionary.
> or your fun is over.
Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.
> It is a word not related to what you're trying to discuss.
Pig ignorant lie.
> Perhaps you intend it to be synonymous with a valid word,
Nope.
> but I'll need to know what that word is before we can continue.
No such animal.
Try a dictionary on what the word turnover means.
JoeSpareBedroom
It's getting late. Get me the numbers to back up that last statement of
yours. Most retailers have IT people at work all night long. I'll be back
online by 9:00 AM tomorrow. I'll expect to see your numbers. I'll also need
to confirm them, so I'll need to know who you spoke to, and their direct
phone number. It would also be helpful if they can provide a description of
the database query they used to give you the information that you based your
statement on.
Pick any major metropolitan market you like.
Have a lovely evening.
Rod Speed
> It's getting late.
Your problem.
> Get me the numbers to back up that last statement of yours.
YOU made the claim.
YOU get to do the backing up.
THATS how it works.
> Most retailers have IT people at work all night long. I'll be back online by 9:00 AM tomorrow.
> I'll expect to see your numbers.
Hold your breath, please.
> I'll also need to confirm them, so I'll need to know who you spoke to, and their direct phone
> number.
In your dreams.
> It would also be helpful if they can provide a description of the database query they used to give
> you the information that you based your statement on.
> Pick any major metropolitan market you like.
The TOTAL Walmart operation is fine.
> Have a lovely evening.
Have a shitty sleep.
JoeSpareBedroom
Let's back up, insult boy. You're getting nasty again.
Two separate issue. Please address them separately.
I told you WM knew that 35% of all transactions involved only items from the
grocery category. This is inarguably true. Are you saying it is not true
because the data cannot be stored in a way that would allow WM to get this
information?
You told me that the data misses one thing: Which customers who "owned"
those transactions may have bought things from different departments at
another visit. You are correct with regard to WM. To eliminate further
clutter, please focus on the 35% number, above. Focus on what it DOES say,
not what it does NOT say.
JoeSpareBedroom
I made the claim because I'm in the grocery business. I can pick up the
phone whenever I want and ask someone at WM or Kroger how many cases of an
item, a brand (i.e.: Kellogg's cereal) or an entire category (all cereals)
they move in a given period, and get that information. My claim is based on
experience.
You claimed that YOUR numbers are correct. Why should I have to prove YOUR
claim? You must've read or heard about the data somewhere. Where? What is
the basis for your claim??? You've mentioned NOTHING.
>> Pick any major metropolitan market you like.
>
> The TOTAL Walmart operation is fine.
No, it's not. Wal Mart in a major metro area, competing with highly
successful grocery chains is one thing. Wal Mart in a small town with no
competition for 50 miles in any direction - that's a totally different
story.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> JoeSpareBedroom <dishbo...@yahoo.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> JoeSpareBedroom <dishbo...@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>>> About 35% of their customers shop there ONLY for groceries.
>>>> That number has just been plucked out of some fool's arse
>>> Actually, it was plucked easily from years' worth of computer data.
>> Then YOU stupidly claimed that a particular
>> number is nothing like what was actually measured.
>> IT ISNT EVEN POSSIBLE TO GET THAT PARTICULARLY NUMBER
>> THAT YOU MADE SUCH A SPECTACULAR FOOL OF YOURSELF
>> ABOUT FROM YEARS WORTH OF COMPUTER DATA.
>>> You must not be an IT person,
>> Guess which pathetic little prat has just got egg all over its silly little face, yet again ?
>>> or you'd know how unbelievably simple it is to query a relational
>>> database that's been properly designed for a company that wants to mine information in every way
>>> possible.
>> Cant get data out of a database that doesnt actually contain that info in the first place, fool.
>> THERE IS NO WAY THAT WALMART CAN EVER KNOW WHAT EVERY CUSTOMER
>> DOES ABOUT PURCHASES OF NON GROCERYS IN THEIR STORE.
>> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of why no one is actually stupid enough to employ
>> you to do anything technical at all, ever.
> Let's back up,
This isnt a car.
> insult boy. You're getting nasty again.
Corse you never ever do anything like that yourself, eh ?
> Two separate issue. Please address them separately.
I always do.
> I told you WM knew that 35% of all transactions involved only items from the grocery category.
No you didnt. You ACTUALLY said
>>>>> About 35% of their customers shop there ONLY for groceries.
which is a different matter entirely.
> This is inarguably true.
It may be, but its NOTHING like that previous claim.
> Are you saying it is not true because the data cannot be stored in a way that would allow WM to
> get this information?
Nope, that it isnt possible for WM to have the data to substantiate
the claim you ACTUALLY made, that
>>>>> About 35% of their customers shop there ONLY for groceries.
> You told me that the data misses one thing:
No I didnt.
> Which customers who "owned" those transactions may have bought things from different departments
> at another visit.
And that is what that statement of yours involves.
> You are correct with regard to WM. To eliminate further clutter, please focus on the 35% number,
> above.
No thanks, I'll keep rubbing your nose in what you ACTUALLY said instead.
Here it is again.
>>>>> About 35% of their customers shop there ONLY for groceries.
> Focus on what it DOES say, not what it does NOT say.
Thats fine, you're STILL wrong. IT ISNT EVEN POSSIBLE
FOR WM TO KNOW JUST WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THEIR
CUSTOMERS SHOP THERE ONLY FOR GROCERYS.
Rod Speed
Pity neither of those are the numbers actually being discussed.
TOTAL CUSTOMER NUMBERS AND TOTAL TURNOVER.
> You claimed that YOUR numbers are correct.
And even the most superficial scruteny of what WM
reports in their financial reports proves those numbers.
> Why should I have to prove YOUR claim?
No one ever said you did. I actually said that YOU get to backup YOUR claim.
> You must've read or heard about the data somewhere. Where?
Forbes, Bloomberg, WSJ, etc etc etc. Plenty of online sources too.
> What is the basis for your claim??? You've mentioned NOTHING.
I assumed that even you should realise where those numbers are available.
>>> Pick any major metropolitan market you like.
>> The TOTAL Walmart operation is fine.
> No, it's not.
Yes it is. Thats what I was talking about all along.
> Wal Mart in a major metro area, competing with highly successful grocery chains is one thing. Wal
> Mart in a small town with no competition for 50 miles in any direction - that's a totally
> different story.
And what matters is the TOTAL WALMART OPERATION COMPARED WITH ANY
SPECIALITY OPERATION YOU CARE TO NOMINATE'S TOTAL OPERATION.
Trivial to find with any listed operation.