The threats to Wal-Mart’s business model of everyday low prices is under attack from unions, but so far that attack hasn’t gotten anywhere (although labor-oriented groups are having some success fighting new stores and there are some interesting developments in the tire centers as described in this interesting recent item).
However, I thought this thoughtful post lays out some interesting and more important counter-currents to the so-called “Wal-Martization” of the American economy. I think it is accurate, at least in my experience, to look at Wal-Mart as the place to go for “commodity” products where brand is less relevant (and occasional big-ticket items where price is most important and the brands are the same as in other specialty stores), but that for purchases of things like clothes, home decorating items, special foods and the like we look elsewhere (Target, Wild Oats, specialty retailers and boutiques – and a fair amount of shopping online as well).
This is another reason why I don’t see Wal-Mart (WM) as a threat to our economic well-being (and in fact a big plus to the communities it serves). It fills the need for commodities extremely well (and in many cases is the only place where a lower to middle class family can find affordable “luxury”-type items), but there will always be a demand for the unique, or more stylistic purchase and therefore stores (even if they are not always the brick and mortar variety) to meet that demand. This no doubt eliminates some of the small retail establishments that choose to compete in categories where WM excels, but creates opportunities to compete on style, local flavor, unique categories or selling “meaning.” Here in Tulsa there are a number of retailers who do well competing against WM (as well as a number getting killed trying to compete in the “commodity” categories with WM.
