Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday October 24 2015, @11:54PM   Printer-friendly
from the bigger-they-come... dept.

James B. Stewart writes in the NYT that for the past 16 years Walmart has often acted as though it hoped Amazon would just go away. When Walmart announced last week that it was significantly increasing its investment in e-commerce, it tacitly acknowledged that it had fallen far behind Amazon in the race for online customers. Now, the magnitude of the task it faces has grown exponentially as e-commerce growth continues to surge globally. "Walmart.com has been severely mismanaged," says Burt P. Flickinger III. "Walmart would go a few years and invest strategically and significantly in e-commerce, then other years it wouldn't. Meanwhile, Amazon is making moves in e-commerce that's put Walmart so far behind that it might not be able to catch up for 10 more years, if ever."

In 1999, Amazon was a fledgling company with annual revenue of $1.6 billion; Walmart's was about $138 billion. By last year, Amazon's revenue was about 54 times what it was in 1999, nearly $89 billion, almost all of it from online sales. Walmart's was about three times what it was 15 years before, almost $486 billion, and only a small fraction of that — 2.5 percent, or $12.2 billion — came from Walmart.com. Walmart's superefficient distribution system — a function of its enormous volume and geographic reach — was long the secret to Walmart's immense profitability. Ravi Jariwala, a Walmart spokesman, says that Walmart is building vast new fulfillment centers and is rapidly enhancing its delivery capabilities to take advantage of its extensive store network to provide convenient in-store pickup and adds that 70 percent of the American population lives within five miles of a Walmart store. "This is where e-commerce is headed," says Jariwala, which is to a hybrid online/in-store model. "Customers want the accessibility and immediacy of a physical store," along with the benefits of online shopping.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by RedGreen on Sunday October 25 2015, @12:49AM

    by RedGreen (888) on Sunday October 25 2015, @12:49AM (#254159)

    "And then there's the question of overhead. Amazon's operations require far fewer people, far less real estate in far cheaper parts of town, no real estate wasted on parking lots, much lower electricity bills, and on and on and on. The exact same box of laundry detergent costs Amazon much less to stock, store, sell, and deliver than it does Walmart -- and if Walmart can't compete on expenses, how are they supposed to compete on their core marketing spiel of low prices?

    No, I'm afraid Walmart is toast -- at least, so long as they continue to think that the bricks-and-mortar model is the way of the future, not the past."

    Meh call me when they actually make a profit then Walmart may have something to worry about.

    http://www.ibtimes.com/amazon-nearly-20-years-business-it-still-doesnt-make-money-investors-dont-seem-care-1513368 [ibtimes.com]

    --
    "I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 25 2015, @04:18AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 25 2015, @04:18AM (#254229)

    That's facile. Amazon has been spending their profits on infrastructure. Walmart hasn't. A business that invests in its own future the a business that has a future.

    • (Score: 2) by VLM on Sunday October 25 2015, @11:50AM

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Sunday October 25 2015, @11:50AM (#254313)

      Both pretty much have to financially position themselves as wall street demands or the stock price will tank, and the street doesn't want profits from amazon at this time. Which could change.

    • (Score: 2) by RedGreen on Sunday October 25 2015, @01:58PM

      by RedGreen (888) on Sunday October 25 2015, @01:58PM (#254333)

      Yeah right, Walmart just this last year spent tons of cash upgrading the local store here to sell all kinds of additional products. Fact remains Amazon as far as I know has never made a profit Walmart on the other hand rakes it in hand over fist year after year even with spending mega bucks opening new stores/re-doing the older ones. The pie in the sky oh it is on the web so it does not have to make a profit routine is getting old and eventually the bubble is going to pop on that survivor of the past bubbles and it will go tits up.

      --
      "I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen
  • (Score: 2) by Bot on Sunday October 25 2015, @09:12AM

    by Bot (3902) on Sunday October 25 2015, @09:12AM (#254288) Journal

    Profit matters, but whose profit?

    Amazon reminds me of Schlecker here in the eu.
    They open up 4 stores in a small town and dump products.
    Then they go belly up.
    In the meantime the competition falls in hard times, and they ask for loans. -> Profit for the banks.

    Therefore banks have all to gain from cutthroat competition even if the players go eventually under. Ikea, Walmart, Amazon, it doesn't really matter if they stand on their own.

    The funny thing is that people don't even notice. Yesterday HEY, DISCOUNT PRICE, COOL. Today SORRY PAL I CAN'T EMPLOY YOUR DAUGHTER, SHOP IS CLOSING DOWN.
    When the first supermarkets appeared some people I know said: I'm not gonna shop in them, they kill stores. Turns out such naive luddites were more accurate than everybody in TV and mags who was praising the efficiencies of the system.

    --
    Account abandoned.