
Wal-Mart isn't just the world's biggest company, it is probably the world's most written-about. But no book until this one has managed to penetrate its wall of silence or go beyond the usual polemics to analyze its actual effects on its customers, workers, and suppliers. Drawing on unprecedented interviews with former Wal-Mart executives and a wealth of staggering data (e.g., Americans spend $36 million an hour at Wal-Mart stores, and in 2004 its growth alone was bigger than the total revenue of 469 of the Fortune 500), The Wal-Mart Effect is an intimate look at a business that is dramatically reshaping our lives.
Suppose a larger company is selling a product that competes with yours at a loss so as to undercut you due to other sources of profit. Do you think that sort of competition is fair? Does that result in the best product winning the most market share?
> I challenge you to point out an example of a one grocery-store city where that strategy has worked to keep competitors out.
Not the GP, but recommend The Wal-Mart Effect by Charles Fishman.
https://smile.amazon.com/dp/0143038788
It's worth reading.
I came across Walmart Effect by Charles Fishman (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/74915.The_Wal_Mart_Effect), but much of the world has changed since that book came out 13 years ago - There has been an economic recession, a protectionist regime is now present in US, and Amazon has taken over as the giant killer.
Would really appreciate any inciteful comments from the community here.
Context: Walmart recently acquired majority stake in Indian ecom leader Flipkart for $16-19bn, and as someone from the Indian startup ecosystem, I want to gather a better understanding of the Walmart culture.
I got the impression they would turn the screws on industries to get cost savings via scale. This move seems odd.
