LOBLAW 1

[robharris]

As Galen Weston Jr. in February 2007, which issues at Loblaw would you
address firs? Why?

[r_nei...@yahoo.com]

I think I would address the whole inventory distribution structure
first. This is the most important aspect to fix before any other
items are addressed, if the other items are addressed at all. Before
establishing a basis for sales increases by any percentage, Loblaw
needs to ensure that inventory is available for sale on the shelves or
easily assessable in the store. Multiple out of stock item are not
acceptable in any Loblaw store. An appropriate distribution system
needs to be in place to ensure that not only the shelves are properly
stocked, but also they are stocked with items the customers would tend
to purchase. Items that a perishable in nature need additional
attention that the freshest product is stocked as well as any older
items are properly discarded or donated before completely perishing.
This may entail a different distribution channel for perishable goods
compared to items with a longer or indefinite shelf life.

[Priscilla Scotland]

The key to improving the distribution structure would be dependent on
their information system (communication between stores, warehouses,
and suppliers) Increasing the flow and quality of information will
aid in building supplier relationships that put Loblaw in a position
of higher buyer power to leverage in the future should new products/
processes need to be implemented.

[christi...@yahoo.com]

When Galen Weston took over the company in 2007, one of the first
issues he should have addressed is the distribution structure. Due to
the poor distribution system, Customer satisfaction decreased because
the stores were poorly stocked and seasonal items made it to the store
to late. In addition, the communication between suppliers and Loblaw
was poor. Due to the lack of proper communication, Suppliers and
Loblaw did not know what each other was doing or what products were
needed. Inventory would sit in trailers for months and some shipments
would be refused. Fixing the distribution structure would increase
customer satisfaction and lower cost for the company.

On Nov 18, 4:36 pm, robharris <rob.harris....@gmail.com> wrote:

[Stephanie Kruthaupt]

I agree with all comments that the distribution system needs to be
addressed first. However, since that is a incredibly expensive
venture, the company would have to set up a "task" team to get this in
place and working effectively in a certain time frame. The first step
in the process ( other than identifying the team) is to identify
suppliers and warehouses of this. The task team would have to have a
good understanding of all current systems used, as well as what could
be more effective. Say they chose an SAP based system as the best
system, they would have to shutdown the system for a few days while it
is all updated. This could cause error in order, or it could cause
buyers to buy more in a previous month and that could affect monthly
sales. So all in all, it's the most effective first step in helping
them solve the challenges they are facing, however the implementation
if this is a big obstacle.

On Nov 20, 9:34 am, Priscilla Scotland <priscilla.scotl...@gmail.com>
wrote:

[snk...@yahoo.com]

I would address product mix at The Real Canadian Superstores and
distribution. Loblaws discount formats make up 50% of Loblaw's sales
and are positioned as the future for Loblaw based on multiple closures
of Loblaw's upscale grocery stores, the four year contract with union
leaders, and new entrants (Walmart). Loblaw's reputation for quality,
value, and service is diminishing due to lack of focus on its food
offerings and a terrible reorganization of the distribution system.
Expired inventory, empty shelves, poor buyer-supplier relationships,
and delays in product delivery have resulted in the loss of millions
of dollars for Loblaw as well as market share and market value. If
Loblaw does not address product mix and distribution soon, they will
continue to hemorrhage and lose market share.

Shannon Rathel

On Nov 18, 4:36 pm, robharris <rob.harris....@gmail.com> wrote:

[robharris]

Leave your name please

[Priscilla Scotland]

I think that all of the observations so far do a great job of
discussing how to fix it... just wondering if anyone has come up with
a plausible explanation as to why the company would commit to
reconstructing a historic site for one of their stores (second to last
bullet point in case) when it seemingly has no impact on any of the
issues we've all identified as critical to changing their poor future
outlook.
Priscilla.Scotland

On Nov 18, 4:36 pm, robharris <rob.harris....@gmail.com> wrote:

[rddiaperman]

I agree the postings all have done a great job of identifying the
problems and listing corrective steps to address the issues. The
Gardens used to be the heart of Toronto. Hockey to a Canuck is like
basketball to a Hoosier or football on Friday nights in Texas.
Canadians live and breath hockey. It is THEIR national sport and the
Leafs have won 13 Stanley Cups! They are the N.Y. Yankees of hockey.
Buying the old gardens in order to reconstruct it is a great idea. The
publicity around renovation of such a historic site will be good for
the company. You are correct it will do nothing to fix their other
issues but the new store can become the "flagship" of what their
future stores can strive to be. Sometimes the best way to change a bad
image to get good publicity. People have VERY short memories and they
will begin to forget about many of the other issues the company has.
That will give Loblaw's some time to begin the needed corrections.

On Nov 21, 4:24 pm, Priscilla Scotland <priscilla.scotl...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> > address firs? Why?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[erzim...@yahoo.com]

With regards to Priscilla's comment, I agree. I don't believe there
is another motive for the reconstruction of that facility other than
for image and to showcase Loblaw's significance in the future of
Toronto. The key word in that bullet point is evolution. Toronto is
changing and Loblaw wants to be a part of it. Walmart is showing
fierce competition and Loblaw needs change. On the original posted
question, Weston is in a tough spot. We've addressed operations
problems and product mix, which i think are key. But I think more
from a ten thousand foot level, they still need differentiation.
Walmart has created a unique position, for example, with their Fresh
Market and Home & Living store layouts. Just copying Walmart will not
result in future growth. As Target is doing, they need strategic
positioning (variety-based and access-based). Still a little confused
how they are doing sales forecasts between the large outlets and
smaller supermarkets.

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[erzim...@yahoo.com]

Well how bout that...the new store at the Maple Leaf Gardens opens
next Wednesday. Guess everything worked out.

On Nov 22, 9:14 am, "erzimme...@yahoo.com" <erzimme...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

[Patrick Casey]

I wanted to add to Eric's point about copying Walmart. I do not think
Loblaw was set up to be a low cost competitor with Walmart in the
first place. I find it curious that they decided to try to copy their
styles, but only in part. I think the strategy of Walmart has been
widely known, understood, and broken down in classrooms, boardrooms,
and company offices. I can't believe that they did not realize the
parts where they still differed from Walmart would not allow them to
compete with low prices with them. Walmart does not have Unions to
deal with, they do not own their buildings, they built stores around
warehouses, and not vice-versa. They were mostly built from the
ground up and not from acquiring other stores that may or may not have
shared the same culture. I understand that when it comes to retail
everyone needs to be aware of Walmart, and their ability to conquer a
market, but at the time of this case there was no guarantee that they
were actually coming and it seemed that Loblaw essentially threw out
everything had gotten them where they were at the time and tried to
start over as a Walmart clone, but without the ability to clone many
of the core parts. The reason Walmart can participate in the cost
wars and win is because they are so lean every where else. The
current status of Loblaw is extremely wasteful, if Walmart were to
enter the market it would not take them long to overcome Loblaw.

On Nov 22, 9:14 am, "erzimme...@yahoo.com" <erzimme...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

[Curtis Lucas]

Since I am one of the last ones to weigh in I am left with the table
scraps. If I were Weston I would immediately focus on what their core
competencies have been. The discount business is not their bread and
butter. The are built on fresh quality products.. Revamping the
distribution and communications platforms will aid in this endevaour.
This needs to be their key component. Walmart leveraged its core
competencies to get into the grocery business. Loblaw ignored it
compentencies and tried to be something it wasn't. The bigger
question here is how does loblaw leverage its core comepetencies in
order to rectify the situation??

[Priscilla Scotland]

IMHO, to rectify the situation Loblaw should position its different
brands to sell different product offerings so that they can focus on
creating efficiencies that only compete with Walmart on one aspect.
But as a whole Loblaw brands would be competing with all aspects of
the Walmart model, just under different brand names (ie Real Canadian
superstore for general merchandise and services, and Loblaw grocers
for fresh produce...)
Priscilla Scotland

[Patrick Casey]

I agree with Priscilla here, Loblaw needs to get back to basics and
focus on being great at what they do (fresh products, Loblaw brands,
and the Loblaw image), not trying to be good at what Walmart does

On Nov 22, 6:44 pm, Priscilla Scotland <priscilla.scotl...@gmail.com>