Comments on: Wal-Mart or Not?

By: Greater Falls, Montana! » Blog Archive » Walgreen’s On The Way

Wed, 08 Mar 2006 13:01:00 +0000

[...] nd of course to the City Commission and Mayor Dona. Now let’s see if we can get the Wal-Mart project greenlighted…

[link]

[...]

By: ZenPanda

ZenPanda — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 05:26:21 +0000

BIllings has 2 Wal Marts…one is a super store and the other is small. Both do very good business. The larger one has the same traffic headaches we have here. I see no reason to stop the second Wal Mart. I just wish it were proposed further down 57th.

By: Aaron Weissman

Aaron Weissman — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 03:40:58 +0000

I read a lot of these comments and I just want to scream one word;

Bull.

Why does Wal-Mart want to build ANOTHER store here? Simple; the traffic and revenue at the existing store exceed its capacity.

With an existing Wal-Mart supercenter here, what business stands to lose the most revenue when the new Wal-Mart opens? Only one — the existing Wal-Mart on the West side.

In reality, this is not a “new” store, it is only a cross-town expansion of the existing facility.

So what is the downside of a new Wal-Mart opening for our town? I really don’t see one. What I do see is lots of new (albeit low-paying) retail jobs, no real impact on existing businesses and the possibility for extensive development on the East side of town.

By: CalMan

CalMan — Tue, 07 Mar 2006 00:32:22 +0000

A couple of points regarding what others have mentioned:
-The net result of the opening of a Wal-Mart Supercenter in an area is, on average, an overall net reduction of retail jobs of 5%. For example, if a new Wal-Mart creates 200 new jobs, 210 will be lost at other retail enterprises through closures and job reductions. Several studies have been conducted on this phenomenon. The main reason for this is that Wal-Mart sells far more per employee than virtually all of its competitors. It simply requires fewer employees to conduct a given amount of business.
-The impact of a second Wal-Mart Supercenter in a community in attracting out of town visitors is very small in comparison to the first. The most important decision out of town visitors make is in actually undertaking the trip in the first place. The existence of a second Supercenter will have very little impact on their decision to come to Great Falls – travelling a few more miles to one or the other Supercenter simply makes little difference. In this instance, whatever additional trips are made are sure to be more than offset by the opening of a Supercenter in Havre later this year. Havre will become the end destination of many shopping trips rather than Great Falls. Clearly, this will not eliminate all shopping trips from northern Montana to Great Falls, but it will definitely have a serious impact on the frequency of those trips. It will also have an impact on the number of overnight stays in Great Falls – especially on weekends.

By: firefly

firefly — Mon, 06 Mar 2006 18:28:35 +0000

“And those people who are affected by Wal-Mart’s practices are
usually the less fortunate. They are single mothers working 2+ jobs
to feed their kids” Um, are these not the same people that benefit from shopping at shopping at WalMart?
I also happen to know personally several people in this town who
work at WM and I have never heard them complain about getting a
paycheck.

By: GeeGuy

GeeGuy — Mon, 06 Mar 2006 16:41:35 +0000

Anne: One question. How many of those single mothers working 2+ jobs shop at Motif’s? You’re making yourself sound like an elitist.

I was in Bozeman this weekend. The McDonald’s there is seeking labor with a big sign that says $10.00 per hour. What industry is booming in Bozeman to force those wages up? Retail.

By: WolfPack

WolfPack — Sun, 05 Mar 2006 16:16:15 +0000

It’s hard to take any one serious who thinks Great Falls needs to be worried about urban sprawl. There has been no visible resistance from the business community to the new store. Wal-Mart is the shopping place of the working poor because of low prices. If a government program was selling goods to the poor at the same below market prices as Wal-Mart, we would be hearing from the same anti Wal-Mart people screaming for more funding and expansion of the program. The low wages of WM are not low for GF, we are not Seattle. That’s probably why Anne, like many others, moved away.

The argument against a second store is not supported by the GF business community or the working poor. Only self interested labor groups are sounding the alarms. I still haven’t had it explained to me how a second WM prevents potential employees from taking a higher paying job elsewhere.

By: Anne

Anne — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 18:44:59 +0000

I read with interest the many comments in this section. As a native Great Falls 30-something who lives in Western Washington now, I have seen what the effects of sprawl and box stores brings. Great Falls has had box stores for as long as I can remember and adding another Wal-Mart makes little sense for the economy and the community. Unfortunately, many decisions are made for economic reasons and forget that “community” is often affected by the desire for more. There are better ways to improve the economy than bringing in (another) Wal-Mart.
The mention of Costco’s reign is not just about having superior products to Sam’s Club. The company’s ethics are far-superior to Wal-Mart’s and have made it their business practice to offer benefits/pay to their employees that is competitive. The result is better customer service, more freedom by the employees to offer suggestions about products sold at the stores (without fear of repercussion if they don’t sell), more security in their job, better quality of life and so much more. They are the shining example of a business that not only makes money, but treats its employees with dignity and resppect.
I wanted to comment on wolfpack’s opinion that “It is very telling that there was no one speaking from the groups that all the anti’s were trying to protect”. The people in power hold a responsibility to protect the less-fortunate in our society. And those people who are affected by Wal-Mart’s practices are usually the less fortunate. They are single mothers working 2+ jobs to feed their kids and they don’t have the time (or resources for child care) to spend 4 hours at a meeting to discuss pros and cons of bringing business into GF.
Furthermore, JohnT’s comments on GF council lacking vision: You contradict yourself when you say that businesses such as Motif’s, etc are examples of quality, service, etc – They are independent, small businesses that are what make city’s have an identity. Bringing in box stores and movie theatres do not create identity. There has to be balance of both and right now the money spent at box stores and casinos far outweigh that spent at interesting and unique establishments.
For the council to decide that another Wal-Mart is not needed in Great Falls is a bold move, but I whole-heartedly support that decision. Great job! There is more to creating a desirable, great town than bringing in big business. How about improving the programming that is offered within the park and rec department?

By: JohnT

JohnT — Fri, 03 Mar 2006 20:24:45 +0000

Calman,

Just want to comment on your post. I think that Sam’s is struggling because Costco provides a
superior product. The products, produce, meat, wine, and most benefits far exceed that of
Sam’s Club in terms of quality. I guarantee that if you buy comprable steaks at both businesses,
the Costco steak will win. In my opinion, people are more educated these days and know how
to pick the more premium product. Look at the brand new release of Consumer Reports. I don’t
think it is an accident that all of the top 10 automobiles of 2005/6 were Japanese made (quality).
I want to see the like in Great Falls. Oust the lackluster businesses (or make them rethink
their business strategies) by bringing in new competition. Another example is County Market.
The stores are severely outdated, dirty, and their parking lots are in bad repair. No pride of
ownership there. How do they think they can stay in business? Maybe because they are one of
only two grocery stores on 10th? Bring in Wal-Mart, and they’ll go bankrupt in less than a year.
It’s time for a reality check.

By: CalMan

CalMan — Fri, 03 Mar 2006 17:08:32 +0000

Wal-Mart is facing problems with their new developments all over the country especially on the
east and west coasts. In California, virtually every development is met with massive
opposition.

They are suffering a public relations crisis at the moment, and are viewed very negatively by
many important interest groups. They are perceived by many as being bullies. Wal-Mart is well
aware of these problems and are working very hard and at the very highest levels to correct
their image problems, but it is likely to take them a few years to sort it out.

In the meantime, Costco and Target are starting to infringe on their franchise.

Just read an article, for example, that mentioned that the average Costco store has vastly
higher sales and is far more profitable than the typical Sams Club (owned by Wal-Mart) store.

In Canada (I used to live is Great Falls), we hear that Sams Club has abandoned their expansion
plans because they simply cannot compete with Costco. Apparently the performance of the few
stores that they opened in Ontario has been very disappointing.

One more interesting fact that I read in an article recently. The median household income of
shoppers’ in the following stores is as follows:

Wal-Mart – $36,000
Target – $55,000
Costco – $74,000