Slashdot Log In
Wal-Mart Threatens Studios Over iTunes Sales
Posted by
Zonk
on Sat Sep 23, 2006 06:15 AM
from the how-dare-they dept.
from the how-dare-they dept.
Y-Crate writes "It seems Wal-Mart is threatening retaliation against studios who decide to offer movies on iTunes. The Bentonville, AR retailer seems a bit miffed that someone would dare to undercut their prices. This wouldn't be the first time they've turned on a supplier for dealing with Apple." From the article: "Last year when Disney announced it would begin offering episodes of the hit shows 'Lost' and 'Desperate Housewives' on Apple's iTunes, the reaction of the world's largest retailer sent shockwaves through the entertainment industry. Wal-Mart, worried that offering the shows for viewing on iPods would cut into DVD sales at its stores, sent 'cases and cases' of DVDs back to Disney, according to a source familiar with the matter."
Related Stories
[+]
Slashback: ITunes, Debian, ATMs 122 comments
Slashback tonight brings some clarifications and updates to previous Slashdot stories, including: iTunes 7.0, Wal-Mart threatens studios over iTunes sales, debate over a proposal to fund Debian, and Googling for ATM master passwords. Read on for details.
[+]
Apple in Talks with Wal-Mart over Movies 176 comments
Alex, Variety.com writes "If you can't beat 'em ... Apple and Wal-Mart are in discussions over an alliance that could allow the giant retailer to profit from iTunes video downloads. Apple would then gain access to titles from every major studio." From the article: "A deal could take the form of a digital download 'coupon' that would allow consumers to buy movies, TV shows or music on iTunes with Apple paying the retail giant a percentage of the proceeds, one industry insider said ... Hollywood has been closely watching Disney's relationship with Wal-Mart in the wake of the deal. When Wal-Mart caught wind of talks between the studios and Apple, it threatened to cut its order of 'High School Musical' over the summer. Disney CEO Bob Iger did the deal with Jobs anyway, and the rest of Hollywood has been watching to see if and when the other shoe drops."
[+]
Retailers Pressure Studios on Web Deals 202 comments
mikesd81 writes "Over at the Associated Press, there's an article about retailers pressuring movie studios for the same deals that online servies are getting. Target has sent a letter warning 'that Target might have to reconsider the amount of shelf space allocated for movies if studios undercut the wholesale price of DVDs by giving online services a better deal on digital offerings.' At issue is the low price some studios charge for films downloaded through such fledgling services as MovieLink, CinemaNow and Amazon.com's recently launched video store. The two-disc rerelease of Disney's 'The Little Mermaid' now retails for $14.87 at Wal-Mart and $14.99 at Target. The movie can be bought for $12.99 on iTunes."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Egads!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Egads!! (Score:4, Interesting)
Distribution channels have nothing to do with it; it's all about money and a perceived threat to someone's way of making it. "The more things change, the more they stay the same..."
Parent
Re:Egads!! (Score:4, Insightful)
My point is that Walmart's value added *IS* their distribution channel. They don't make anything - they distribute products. That's what they do, and iTunes electronic distribution of movies threatens (one aspect) of that. So, since Walmart's business model is basically a distribution channel, that has EVERYTHING to do with it.
Parent
Re:Egads!! (Score:5, Insightful)
While I have issues with Wally World, this is not one of them. Wal-Mart performs a valuable service: they stock thousands of items on their shelves that I really don't want to have to buy straight from the manufacturer. They handle some of their own shipping and distributing, i.e. moving stuff around. Sure, I could drive to another state to buy something from the manufacturer directly. I could also pay a shipping company such as UPS to deliver it for me. Or, I could go to a store that stocks it on their shelves (e.g. Wal-Mart) and have the convenience of a short drive from my house 24 hours a day to buy it.
Middlemen definitely have advantages in a supply chain. True, too many will drive up prices and down quality in some cases (e.g. food items that spend too much time shuffling around and have a short shelf life by the time you purchase them). However, do you really want the inconvience of having to pursue the hundreds of items you need on a weekly basis yourself? Personally, I prefer to use stores.
Parent
Re:Egads!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Grandparent goes a bit too far, while some original production is of course necessary, middlemen and distribution can also add value, depending on circumstances, exactly as you describe:
... however, this makes sense for products which are physical and tangible - it's not clear that it makes sense any more for intangible products which can be distributed at effectively zero cost. That's pretty much there now, for music/mp3's, even videos and films, software, and pretty much anything reduced to digital form. There's no reason to ever remove anything from the catalog, all you need is a slick interface and decent search engine.
Thus there's no longer any value-add to being a middleman for a wholly intangible product - maybe for a version of that intangible with a nice pressed disk, a nice case and professionally produced insert, but then those tangibles are what you're really paying for, not the digital bits on the disk. Sure, it's disruptive technology, and there are established players whose business model is being wiped out - but that's normal, to find that the normal state of the world is to be changing, and it's counterproductive (and, in the longer run, pointless) to try and freeze everything like a fly in amber and imagine it will always be the same
Parent
Re:Egads!! (Score:4, Interesting)
They are also able to lower costs by shipping en masse to this facility rather than shipping to a bajillion homes directly or a lot of separate stores, and there's other benefits in centralization that reflect in the costs, both to them and to you.
These benefits are not unique to Wal-Mart, which is, after all, why they are neither the first nor last retail chain. They've merely been the most successful.
Retail stores add plenty of value for the consumer. Do-nothing middlement would be the ones between Wal-Mart and the relevant factories, and I'd lay money the number of those has been undergoing a dramatic decrease in the past decade.
Given how screwed your understanding of business is in the first twenty or so words, I'm not even going to begin to try to take apart the rest of your message. I merely invite you to put your clearly awesome business skills to the test someday.
Parent
Re:Egads!! (Score:5, Insightful)
This has to be a joke. Wal-Mart is the antithesis of "too many middlemen" as they have crunched out so much inefficiency. They have built a distribution and logistics structure that would shame most armies. You might even say that Wal-Mart is Wal-Mart's product, and if it's not original, it sure is highly evolved.
Parent
Re:Egads!! (Score:5, Funny)
You should try Costco sometime. You can return things there they don't even sell.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Only if you make cheap junk; if you produce a high-quality product and are not willing to make compromises, then Wal-Mart is not your retail outlet.
Here is a good story about how the CEO of Snapper stood up to Wal-Mart - http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/102/open_snapp er.html [fastcompany.com]
Re:Egads!! (Score:4, Interesting)
As very nearly every product supplier to Walmart has found out, they throw their weight around. You sign on thinking you are going to make a profitable access to the market. Then they come back throwing weight around. Shortly you as a supplier have your profit margin (The reason you are in business) squeezed to zero and below. You can't make this up in margin. Shortly if you don't cave entirely, they find another supplier. If you cannot sustain, you go broke. This is no formula for profits. It is the formula to go broke. Walmart of course profits all the way to your funeral or bankruptsy.
I have some good news. Dollar General Store is about to slit their throat. Dollar store is locating in areas where Walmart lives and eating out their roots. Dollar store is paying their help and giving them benefits like insurance. Dollar store is serving their customers and I can already see that Walmart is headed for the ropes. You can only slit the throat of your suppliers for so long. Then you go broke too!
Parent
Re:Egads!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Slightly of topic, but reminds me of In'n'Out Burger. They pay decent wages to their employees, health benefits are the rule and what surprised me most: They use neither freezers, nor microwave ovens. The produce is delivered fresh, every day.
Tasting such a burger is an epiphany. When you order it with onions, for example, you bite into a real onion and not into some fuzzy crap, designed by a food lab.
Now, the surpising thing, acording to Fast Food Nation, The Dark Side of the All-American Meal [barnesandnoble.com] is the fact that In'n'Out Burger is highly profitable, even though their prices are quite reasonable.
To me this proves that you don't have to fuck your suppliers, employees and ultimately customers left right and center in order to turn a buck. This is somewhat encouraging in a world where greed and cheap seem to turn more and more into religious mantra.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Costco, in terms of how they treat their employees, and how they negotiate with suppliers, is the anti-walmart.
Re:Egads!! (Score:4, Insightful)
"Now, at the price I'm selling to you today, I'm not making any money on it. And if we do what you want next year, I'll lose money. I could do that and not go out of business. But we have this independent-dealer channel. And 80% of our business is over here with them. And I can't put them at a competitive disadvantage. If I do that, I lose everything. So this just isn't a compatible fit."
Parent
What about Amazon? (Score:5, Interesting)
Either they aren't particularly worried about Amazon being a threat or they have it in for Apple.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Which is very odd because Amazon and Target are partners. This press release is from 2001 - http://news.com.com/2110-1017-275199.html [com.com]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Either they aren't particularly worried about Amazon being a threat or they have it in for Apple.
Amazon are still limited by the fact that they're selling boxed media that have to be stored, tracked, delivered by hand, etc. The fact that you're buying the same boxed media online instead of in a shop is just a matter for regular competition, territory that Walmart is familiar with. Apple is distributing media entirely digitally, which means the costs and profit margins are very different. I suspect that'
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Whoa whoa whoa... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
However, there are antitrust laws that this certainly seems in the realm of. Not that they're enforced, but there are laws...
Re:"shopping your way out of a job" (Score:5, Insightful)
Huh? Companies were moving production overseas decades before Wal-Mart became popular. They would keep doing that even if Wal-Mart died overnight. Blaming off-shoring of manufacturing on Wal-Mart is like blaming off-shoring of technical jobs on Fry's. It's quite possibly the silliest logic I've ever heard.
Wal-Mart started really being able to apply price pressure by the 1980s. By that time, Japanese automobiles were more popular than American, every toy I bought by then was made in China/Taiwan/Singapore, etc., and this had been true for a couple of decades. The big push towards manufacturing of products overseas began shortly after WWII in the 1950s and 1960s. Wal-Mart didn't even open its first store until 1962.
I'm not saying Wal-Mart hasn't encouraged some companies to do this, but the fact remains that they would have done so eventually anyway to make a greater profit. Expecting them to do otherwise is like believing in the tooth fairy.
As to the filing of complaints, some local governments have found they have a way to fight back-just not allowing them to build stores with zoning regs. Granted, not a perfect solution, but it's something that can be done. Say some area does it, some of the people local will still travel to the next town over. But if THAT town does the same, eventually the distance travelled means the consumers will stay put locally and use the smaller stores.
It's a terrible idea. Most of those local stores are already thoroughly screwed by availability of products on the internet. So now in ten years when they find themselves unable to survive (Ace Hardware and K-Mart in Santa Cruz, anyone?) even without Wal-Mart, those towns will find themselves without any way to buy the things they need to survive and will have to drive large distances to buy basic products.
Further, lower prices are better for everyone in the long term. All the knee-jerkers say "Oh, look at all the stores that will close" and forget that Wal-Mart brings consolidated shopping, which causes stores to be able to survive that otherwise could not. It brings down prices of groceries and gasoline dramatically. It brings down the overall cost of living dramatically.
And small stores can survive and even thrive with Wal-Mart because of the proximity effect. Stores physically close to Wal-Mart actually get more business after Wal-Mart moves in. Stores do, however, have to specialize and carry the stuff that Wal-Mart doesn't. Wal-Mart has to cater to general audiences, so it can only provide the most common basic needs in any category. A hardware store does just fine with Wal-Mart next door because it carries lots of stuff that Wal-Mart doesn't and can't---screws and fasteners, higher quality tools, possibly building materials, etc. A clothing store does just fine because teenagers want brand names. And so on.
The most important thing, though, is that the store owners have to do exactly the opposite of what they usually do. Most of them try moving away from Wal-Mart thinking that they can be closer to the population and thus people will go there instead. Doesn't work that way. People will drive 20 minutes to a Wal-Mart store. That means that the best place for any store to be is within a block or two of Wal-Mart. That's why zoning laws to block Wal-Mart don't work. The end result is that the vast majority of people drive there anyway, then bitch about how much fuel costs.
It's a shame to see the fraction of a percent of people who are so anti-Wal-Mart spoil it for the rest of us. *Sigh* I guess the loudest voice really is the only one heard... but it shouldn't be.
Parent
nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
You make money by manufacturing wealth, and having it be good quality and fair priced, not over priced ridiculous stupid crap or the cheapest possibly falling apart crap. Wealth is grown, mined, manufactured or a combination of that, everything else is wealth re arrangement or wealth service.
We have swapped making wealth to trying to just manage it and service it. Nuts! Insanity! It will not work for the long run. It can for the short run,then you'll see it starting to crumble in the medium run (now, today) and it will eventually collapse in the long run. They can run their printing presses all they want, it won't matter. It's been tried before, it doesn't matter.
We have forgotten the middle ground, the middle ground which at one time had the strongest middle class with real wealth ownership in the world, now we have the largest class of debtors ever. Only took one generation to pull that off. BUT, we sure do have a lot more billionaires now! Damn funny how that worked out....
Yep, you can show a ton of paper profit by being a tradesman and selling off your tools friday night,and getting a loan on your work truck and handing over the keys and parking it at the lot, but come monday morning you are going to be hurting. Sure, you'll seem "rich" over the weekend,you can go out and buy all sortsa stuff with that flush cash, but it won't last.
That's all we have been doing for a long time now and they are running out of options, and I don't care how much the goons at the Fed try to tweak things, eventually we won't have a dang thing that other folks want and then they'll even stop buying up your grandkids debt. Aren't you just a teeny bit ashamed that little babies not even born yet will be born into debt? Just a little?
And walmartization is a big part of it. When they first started, and I remember it clearly as well, it was buy american there, keep you and your neighbor working, and it was fine. then..well, he passed on and now it is FU america, we are gonna milk this baby out and retire multibillionaires and go pound sand. sure, they got cheap crap now, and people with some money to buy it, but it won't last. It just can't
Parent
so many ERRORS, so little bandwidth... (Score:5, Insightful)
-1, reading comprehension problem.
No one was blaming the off-shoring of manufacturing on Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is blamed for grossly accelerating it. There's a major difference there.
-1, worst example EVER
Wait, people are going to pay shipping and wait x days to purchase a drill & batteries online (which they may need today) instead of going to Ace Hardware/Home Depot/Lowe's? Exactly what planet is this version of Santa Cruz located on?
-1, tunnel vision
It also brings down the wages, too. And cheaper gasoline & groceries mean nothing when you're out of a job because your store closed down. Also, Mom & Pop music stores had employees who knew their product; ever asked a Wal Mart employee where the industrial rock/pop/hip hop/country/etc. section is, or who's the new up&coming artist in that genre? Try it sometime.
Also, consolidated shopping is even more fun for superior products that Wal Mart decides they don't want to carry. So instead of you getting your favorite brand that you want, now you're railroaded into buying whatever Wal Mart dictates is okay to sell, because no one else is around to compete and sell other brands. So much for consumer choice there.
Also, so much for employee choice. The old adage, "if you don't like the working conditions here, QUIT!!! and find another job" doesn't work as well in a city with a Wal Mart store. By the time they're done, there's not many other places to work, except Burger King.
Oh, and Wal Mart stores are also known to close down from time to time; leaving an entire town without a department store at all. You want to talk about driving times?
And another thing: Wal Mart is also known for refusing to sell some artists' music because it's "objectionable". Where do you go to get those artists, then? Cue this article. Now, Wal Mart wants to cut out your online alternatives to preserve their outdated business model. And the consumer gets hurt if Wally World gets their way.
-1, Theory conflicts with reality
Yes, but few stores can survive just on selling the things that Wal Mart doesn't. Wal Mart's strategy is to sell the lowest common denominator products at the lowest common denominator prices, to maximize foot traffic (and sales). There simply isn't enough profit to sell other products to uphold a store.
Yeah, yeah, I know what you're thinking... if there isn't enough profit to uphold a store selling product B, C and D, then product B, C and D don't deserve to exist. That's the worst lo
Parent
Good move for walmart (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's a good move for Walmart (but not for us) because everyone knows that Walmart is "evil" (read: more able to use power in a negative fashion than most companies, which are relative lightweights) and most people don't give a damn because that's how they afford all their stuff. I doubt there will be serious backlash, come monday everyone will still be going to fill up their big boxes at Walmart.
I'm going to have to disagree with you now.,.,. (Score:3, Interesting)
Why can't they handle this kind of distribution model? they have a music store, they have a on-line photo gifts store- they have-- gosh -every feature amazon has except panache...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Walmart can't make the same money when the distribution model isn't physical, at least not yet.
Walmart uses their selling power to get what they want from manufacturers. If your DVD doesn't get sold in Walmart, you automatically lose something like 15% of
Studios Testicularly Challenged? (Score:5, Interesting)
Wal-Mart may hate the idea and threaten and moan, but if all the studios jump onto the iTMS then Wal-Mart will buckle. They can't drop their entire DVD line unless they want to drop a whole market.
The power rests with the studios here, but they're scared.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The MPAA is the movie's industry cartel. They are SUPPOSED to strength the industries negotitating power when it comes to disputes like this. As a group, if the MPAA stood up to Walmart, not to say, "Fuck You", but instead to say, "Wally, we can't do that", it would change the market.
Unfortunately, I truly believe that the MPAA spends all of its time pursuing piracy and the like, and couldn't be bothered to suppor
What I'd like to know (Score:3, Insightful)
The article assumes that Wal-Mart sent DVDs back to Disney out of spite, but what if Wal-Mart merely made an accurate assessment of the situation? Did Wal-Mart sell out of the whatever titles they returned? Were there customer complaints about lack of these titles? Or was Wal-Mart correct in its assessment that the demand would be lower?
I don't know if it's right or wrong, but from what I've read Wal-Mart requires its vendors to agree that they'll take back overstock if demand is less than expected. If Wal-Mart can send back "cases and cases" of DVDs and still keep the titles on the shelves than they're simply behaving sensibly.
If they can't keep the titles on the shelves then this seems to be a classic case of "cut off your nose to spite your face". We're talking purchase here, right? Not rental? If you're renting a DVD and they don't have the one you want you might rent a different one. If you're shopping to buy a specific DVD, I can't imagine that you'd simply buy something else if the store doesn't have the one you're looking for.
We're not talking about interchangeable products here. If you want "Lost" on DVD and Wal-Mart doesn't have it you'll go elsewhere. Personally I find deepdiscountdvd.com to be a great source, but there are countless others. What percentage of the US is really so cut off from civilization that if Wal-Mart doesn't carry "Lost" they can't get it some other way?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The sad part is most people don't seem to care
Let Wal-Mart Go (Score:4, Funny)
Boycott Wal-Mart!
Boycott Sam's Club!
Girlcotting is not the same thing!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Boycott Sam's Club!
I will boycott neither Wal-Mart nor Sam's Club. In fact looking forward to Sam's club coming to our city to kick some stupid price gouging by the local business.
What convinced me is I had to get a set of tires fast from Sam's in the US. Later we had a flat, took it into a local Canadian Walmart and when they fixed it free! This was the only tire purchase I ever had go right. I purchased from a Canadian company years earlier and it took me two years, 4 wheel alignments and tire repl
Yeah, but it's the NY Post (Score:5, Informative)
Comment count on the front page? (Score:4, Informative)
That's odd, all the stories after Microsoft Vista User Interface Guidelines Published don't show the comment count...
Walmart is evil (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, i realize that until they are declared a monopoly that they have a right to choose who they do business with, but it doesnt make it right.
Funny, I just finished reading a book..... (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.amazon.com/Wal-Mart-Effect-Powerful-Tr
Basically, the author looks at Wal-Mart's tactics in terms of squeezing it's suppliers to get the absolute lowest price and figures that while consumers benefit from this (even if they don't shop there), it doesn't exactly make Wal-Mart "evil." But there are troubling aspects to their behaviour that gives one cause to pause so to speak (like how they treat offshore workers for example).
Having said that, I think they'll find that Apple may be a different sort of challenge. I don't think studios will cave the same way that Wal-Mart's suppliers usually do.
Made with Pride... (Score:4, Interesting)
"Made with pride" was a joke (Score:5, Informative)
Wal-Mart's made with pride campaign meant that if your product was the exact same price or cheaper than the Chinese or Mexican product, it would be carried. One penny more and it was out.
Wal-Mart was forced to discontinue the campaign after a slew of state AG's sued them for misleading advertising.
Parent
Except they say they aren't... (Score:3, Informative)
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?ty
So let me get this straight (Score:5, Funny)
Good one Wal-mart.
Walmart wants something else (Score:3, Insightful)
My bet is someone at Walmart asked to talk with the Board of directors at Disney, and the board snubbed them. So Walmart punched them in the arm with this little stunt like a petulant child and is demanding attention. The real life answer to this is to ignore it, but I'm sure they'll have a meeting now and work something out.
Personally I hope they eat each other alive but whatever, that won't happen.
Wal-Mart has no leverage (Score:4, Insightful)
I can't imagine studios would lose money if Wal-mart didn't carry their albums, especially if they replace physical sales revenue with digital. Of course the studios would like to keep physical and digital revenue flowing, but steady revenues are better than declining revenues.
If the studios did cave to this threat they are short sighted and craven.
Better news links (Score:3, Informative)
I'm sorry... but this article is drivel. I mean, this is bad for slashdot. It's a month old story, from a joke of a newspaper source.
This is a bit of an old story... CNN.com allready has a story about how Wal-Mart is looking into opening its own movie downloads [cnn.com]. It makes sense, seeing as they allready have a working music download service.
The article posted is a bit... Let's just say that the Businesweek article covering this [businessweek.com] has a much less "Wal-Mart is EEEEVIL" ring to it. I know it feels good to pat yourself on the back with the Coorporate hate feelings, but this NY Post article has a pretty blatant and nasty slant that shouldn't have make it to the slashdot front page.
admission of monopolistic practices (Score:3, Insightful)
Is the Vitriol added? (Score:3, Informative)
If I was a retailer and I saw 'supply' magically expanded at a HUGE rate while demand stayed mostly the same, I would want to get rid of some of my inventory quick. If I had the option of giving it back to someone else I'd do that. I might be a little angry at the lost revenue, but it doesn't mean I'm using dirty tactics or, 'trying to send a message.' I'm just evaluating the market and adjusting supplies.
Saying "Selling movies online will cut into DVD sales" is like saying, "If you open another McDonalds across the street, the existing McDonalds won't have as much business." That's not a threat.
They could have put a little heat on it. "Excuse me, we had a deal, you sent me this amount of product under false pretenses." That still seems complete reasonable, rational, and not in the least bit 'monopolistic' or 'threatening.'
After reading the article, I'm even more sure that Wal-mart wasn't trying to force them into anything. It was just letting them know that demand for DVD's would drop if they started selling music online. It sounds like Wal-Mart is thinking clearly, and Hollywood is wanting their cake and to eat it to.
Welcome to the First Battle... (Score:4, Insightful)
Today, I can download a perfect image of a DVD. I can burn it to a blank DVD that will work in my DVD player, just like the storebought version.
I can also take that DVD, and, if I have the right printer, print a full color "label" right onto it, just like the storebought version.
I can also download the keepcase cover insert and print that as well, so that the keepcase from the stack of empty AOL CD keepcases in my closet will look just like the storebought version.
Tomorrow, I will be able to legally download the DVD, the DVD "Label" and the DVD case cover insert and make my own DVD with case, with the blessings of the movie studio. (They're taking the halting baby steps already, via iTunes. They'll eventually see that there's money to be made by letting the consumer do all the work of making the DVD.)
Essentially, I have a replicator that takes data and makes a product in my home at my demand. A DVD in a keepcase.
While I don't think I'll live to see a "Transmetropolitan"-esque 'maker' in every home, it IS coming. I regret that I won't be around to hear the howls of outrage from WalMart over that leap of technology.
I won't regret, however, the societal upheaval that will occur when anyone can have anything, as long as they pay the power bill and can keep the source matter bin full.
Oh, and the lawsuits over cracking the DRM for the makers will be hysterically entertaining. I'll miss following them, as well.
Seriously, though. Who neds Gap, Old Navy, Victoria's Secret, Bananna Republic or Levi as a physical place to go and buy something, when you can download the maker source code for a fee, tweak that code for yourself for size and color, and push a button to have that garment drop down the chute 30 minutes later?
Go to Apple.com, pay a fee, get the source for the new iPod, and there it is the next day, courtesy of your home maker.
What need have you for the Apple Store? And what need has Apple for factories in China?
Yeah, the world economy is going to get very sporty for a while once the maker is perfected.
And if it can make anything, why, I can have ALL THE HEROIN AND POT AND E that I want!
I can have all the prescription medicines I want!
I can have all the Coca-Cola I want!
Imagine THAT table full of lawyers. The PRC, The Taliban and Colombian govts (Opium and Cocaine), EVERY pharm hypercorps, and Coca-Cola, INC.
All trying to maintain their monopolies over atoms and molecules that have been stitched together in a particular manner and that, by tradition, belong to them and them alone.
Good luck, guys. You'll need it.
Re:Always low prices... (Score:5, Interesting)
Target seems a little higher priced, but their prices stay the same, rather than changing from day to day, or they don't do it as frequently and I don't notice it. Now we just shop at our Kroger and Target and we buy only diapers and nothing else from Walmart because you can't trust their prices.
I also don't like them strongarming companies like this or how badly they pay their workers. I also know people who work there or who have and the managers will fire you if you don't check enough people per hour, or don't do various other things as fast as you can, and they pay so low the workers have to take Medicare because they can't afford the prices on the more expensive policies. Walmart is definitely wrong for America. Their low prices gimmick is a sham and at some point this company will have to act more ethical, I hope. Shame on you, Walmart!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Christ almighty, get out of the big box stores, and go shop around at conventional grocery stores and little vegetable shops.
Maybe it's all stuff I learned from my father, but you save MORE money by shopping at a series of "normal" stores, buying a few items you need at the places that tend to offer the best prices (and I'm not talking about cherry-picking the specials each week, but just heading to the stores that tend to offer the best boneless chicken breat prices
Re:I say let them do as they wish (Score:5, Insightful)
Furthermore, they way that they can afford such low prices is by squeezing the suppliers and producers. How's the farming industry in the US right now? Most farmers can barely afford to make ends meet, and it's not because they're buying premium goods at premium stores, it's because they're being told "we'll pay you 70% of fair market value, and you have no choice since we're the biggest buyer in the nation."
Consider how well they've benefited Vlassic, as laid out in this article:
http://www.fastcompany.com/online/77/walmart.html [fastcompany.com]
Walmart isn't about savings--it's about false savings, and short-term cash in pocket driving long-term economic ruin.
Parent
Re:I say let them do as they wish (Score:5, Insightful)
I prefer Target. I've found them to be cheaper for soap, paper towels, etc. The stores are clean and the clerks are friendly. Unlike wal-Mart. Hell, even 40 year old K-Mart stores look cleaner than Wal-Mart.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You can only hope they knock eachother out.
~X~