A retailer develops a new format for distributing and selling products that turns out to be wildly successful. Spreading like a juggernaut across the country, the company goes from being an insignificant regional chain to the world’s largest retailer in little more than a decade, leading frantic competitors to seek protection through government regulation.
Walmart in the 1990s? Could be, but I am specifically referring to the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company (A&P) in the 1910s and 1920s. Founded by George Huntington Hartford, he left the company in trust to his five children when he died in 1918. Two of those children, George Ludlum and John Augustine Hartford, led the company through its growth years.
November 13, 1950 cover of Time. Note the gold chain around the photo representing A&P’s position as the largest chain store in the world. (Click for a larger image.)
George was the financial manager; John was the innovator who developed the “economy store” (a tiny cash-and-carry store run by only one clerk) in 1912, which multiplied into nearly 16,000 stores by 1930. When supermarkets became popular in the 1930s, John designed A&P’s first supermarket and over the next fifteen years built nearly 5,000 more, closing several economy stores for each supermarket opening.
“The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. sells one out of every seven cups of coffee in the U.S.,” gushed Time magazine in 1950. “Next to General Motors, the A & P sells more goods than any other company in the world.” For some 40 years, from about 1920 until about 1960, A&P was the world’s largest retailer.
Today A&P has fewer than 500 stores, mostly in New Jersey and nearby states. What happened? According to William Walsh, a long-time company employee and author of The Rise and Decline of the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, the Hartford brothers were excellent managers but made a serious error in planning their succession. They gave their shares of the company to a charitable foundation and made the company president the foundation’s trustee. After John and George died, the president gained the trust of one of their nieces, so effectively controlled the company. Lacking any of John’s sense of innovation, he basically ran the company into the ground.
A&P is an extreme example of a pattern that extends throughout the 150-year history of modern retailing. An entrepreneurs develops a new retail idea — catalog sales (Montgomery Wards, Sears), chain stores (A&P, J.C. Penney), self service (Piggly Wiggly), supercenters (Fred Meyer, Walmart). Sometimes the idea is ahead of its time (Frank Munsey’s 1896 Mohican Store), but when the time is ripe, the new format can spread rapidly.
No matter what the new idea, the entrepreneurs all have some things in common. Their number one goal is to please the customer. They use their new idea to reduce costs and pass the savings onto their customers. They cultivate a customer-first ethic among their employees.
Mirena levitra sildenafil http://respitecaresa.org/412-2/ IUD is used for preventing pregnancy for up to 5 hours. The perception is linked with food and alcohol, so you don’t viagra generic for sale have to worry about a romantic dinner and a glass of wine being interrupted. The holistic approach encompasses cleansing negative energy healing and other techniques which ensures you leave the session with an increased appetite – Tiredness, fatigue, nausea, and vomiting – Excessive hunger – More bladder, skin and vaginal buy online viagra infections – Serious blurry vision – Headache – Muscle aches, weakness and cramps – Acne – Increased sexual problems because of erectile failure for men, and vaginal dryness for women – Cessation of menstrual periods. Sildenafil citrate increases the blood circulation in the male sex organ so that there is sufficient flow cialis 20mg no prescription of blood into it.
“A merchant who approaches business with the idea of serving the public well has nothing to fear from the competition,” said J.C. Penney. “Take care of the Customer, everything else will take care of itself,” said Fred Meyer (who always capitalized Customer). “There is only one boss: the customer,” said Sam Walton. “And he can fire everybody in the company from the chairman on down, simply by spending his money somewhere else.”
While successful entrepreneurs focus on their customers, the managers who succeed those entrepreneurs sometimes forget. Focusing on the bottom line instead of customers, they raise prices, become bureaucratic, and fail to develop or adopt new retail techniques. Thus, they become vulnerable to the rise of a more entrepreneurial competitor.
From the time A&P opened its first store in about 1870, grocery stores have grown steadily larger: the smallest ones today would dwarf an A&P store in 1925. These larger stores carry increasing numbers of products. From 300 different products in 1912, typical stores grew to sell 700 different products in 1925, 6,000 in 1960, 14,000 in 1980, and more than 30,000 today.
The growing size and diversity of stores is a response to better transportation, namely autos and trucks. Stores that can serve more people will provide more products in response to the broader tastes of their customer base. Autos can bring more people into a store than sidewalks or streetcars. Rapid delivery of goods by truck can offer customers fresher produce and other perishables. So increasing mobility translates to increasing consumer choice.
Grocery stores have also continually reduced their costs by reducing their labor requirements — often by asking customers to do some of their work for them, such as selecting the goods, taking them home, and even bagging them. Similar cost-cutting innovations have been introduced in the wholesaling end of the food industry.
But the most interesting trend in the grocery industry has been the cycling between entrepreneurs and managers. Most of the industry’s major innovations have been made by entrepreneurs, not established companies. When After the owner/family/entrepreneur loses control, or loses interest, managers take over and the company tends to stagnate. Fortunately for consumers, a fresh crop of entrepreneurs is always available to reinvigorate the industry.
This is why government often does such a lousy job when it tries to do things that can be done by private industry. Government agencies may hire the very best managers. But managers are no substitute for entrepreneurs when businesses need to respond to changing technologies and changing consumer tastes.
This also means that fears of Walmart becoming some kind of permanent monopoly are misplaced. When A&P started losing ground, Safeway, Albertsons, and Krogers fought for the number one position. Safeway lost ground when its managers put it in hock to do a leveraged buyout and had to sell many of the stores to cover its debts. Albertsons fell apart when the founding family turned it over to a manager who did a terrible job and ended up selling the company for a fraction of its former value. Krogers acquired other chains such as Fred Meyer and reached the number one spot for about a year before being overtaken by Walmart.
Walmart may remain the nation’s number one retailer and grocer for another couple of decades or so. But it is sure to be overtaken by someone. Will it be Costco (which has fewer stores but whose stores earn more than twice the revenue of the average Walmart)? Trader Joe’s? Whole Foods? In all probability, it will be something entirely new.
Karlock (Sorry, all, my four year old boy was “Dad, dad, dad…” for the last week and I’m a little stressed; no more multiple comments, I promise),
You wrote: “your list appears to indicate that you really don’t understand basic science”
Your refusal to provide the parameters for proof is evidence that you don’t really understand basic science. Science is not a list of facts. It is a process. The standards of proof for one rational endeavor may not suffice for another. Things we observe by microscope require different standards than those we measure by spectrometer. Science is establishing those standards of proof. By refusing to do so, you are engaging in politics and rhetoric.
Thanks, tg
Hey t g:
Still waiting for proof instead of spam.
Thanks
JK
Karlock,
Allow me to proceed issue by issue building on fundamentals: in order to prove that CO2 causes warming, we must establish how (I will change the language here though: let us not use the term warming at all). So let’s start here and here (Scroll down to #2 The Electromagnetic Spectrum).
If you do not disagree with either of these, then we have established and agree that Carbon Dioxide absorbs infrared radiation.
(If you like, you can compare the regions of spectral absorption of water vapour and carbon dioxide and note…their differences, but that is not necessary. I only bring that up because you did. It is immaterial for ultimately proving that the presence of CO2 increases the temperature of the troposphere).
I want to reiterate that if we agree on this point, it does not imply you aree with any other point. Nor does accepting this point imply I have proven anything about global $%#@&*.
In addition, a detailed table of the regions of spectral absorption.
t g said: Karlock, Allow me to proceed issue by. . .
JK: I am eagerly awaiting the part where you get to real world real measurements and empirical data instead of theoretical projections from lab data.
(Or are you about to prove that the bumblebee cannot fly)
Thanks
JK
Karlock,
I will take that as an acceptance of the points established.
And Karlock,
Are you stating that that absoption spectra is not empirical?
t g said: Are you stating that that absoption spectra is not empirical?
JK: Was it measured in a real atmosphere along with careful measurements of where the energy went? And both incoming and outgoing energy?
Thanks
JK
karlock (re #58):
Yes, it was measured in a “real” atmosphere: last table was from Smith, W.L., 1985, Satellites. Handbook of Applied Meteorology, edited by D. D. Houghton, John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp 380-472.
When you write: “careful measurements of where the energy went…?” I take it you’re referring to something else beside the absorption spectra seeing as how it’s not an emission spectra…?????
Hey t g Quit the stalling an get on with your “proof”. I’m tired of wasting my time with you.
Thanks
JK
Chill out, old man. Some of us have to work as we make our money in the private sector (read: free market) and don’t have the leisure time of a politician (read: want-to-be-paid-by-the-taxpayer-free-loader).
Don’t make like you’ve been all accomodating aither. Every issue you bring up is a non-sequitur.
Further proof (that is, you have the first step provided) forthcoming.
t g said: Chill out, old man. Some of us have to work as we make our money in the private sector. . .
JK: So DO I, twit. (I really don’t need this crap from a foolish child.)
t g: Further proof (that is, you have the first step provided) forthcoming.
JK: Be sure to include countering this:
At least three careful ice core studies have shown that CO2 starts to rise about 800 years (600-1000 years) after Antarctic temperature during glacial terminations. (realclimate.org/index.php?p=13)
BTW, you just missed a million dollar prize for proving that CO2 causes warming.
Thanks
JK
Thanks
JK
t g said: (#37) Oh yeah. The moon landing was faked.
JK: Tell it to this skeptic, he was there: “Astronaut Jack Schmitt Joins Skepticsâ€Â
http://newsblaze.com/story/20090106135456tsop.nb/topstory.html
Thanks
JK
t g said: (#37) Thank you for demonstrating here that you have no intention of allowing this, for where most would simply move the goal post, you change the game entirely.
jk: I didn’t “change the gameâ€Â, unless you were planning on some Al Gore style, grade school, level of proof.
Your job is to prove to a degree of certainty that justifies hurting millions or billions of people. Or maybe you don’t care about all the people that will be hurt?
Thanks
JK
Hey, tg! What happened? Did all the fun go away when you realized I wasn’t going to accept some BS proof like Al Gore offers?
Or that the warming fallacy can actually hurt people?
Or was it simply a matter of you realizing that there was no proof out there?
Thanks
JK
Karlock, you’ve turned me. I’m solidly in your camp now. In fact, I’m moving to Oregon to work on your campaign. We will take over the world!!!!!!
Glad to see you’ve finally realized the truth about climate change.
Thanks
JK
I wonder if this means that Karlock wants to rape Al Gore?
What was the original point?
A debate about AGW being false, but this is not the place.
I’m too late.
Anyway, transit does negligible help over cars for emissions.
And has far fewer options.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/
http://www.globalwarming.org/
http://www.climate-skeptic.com/