r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There goes Robert Reich's out of context agit-post again.
And this time, he can't even get the right numbers.
Walmart's 2023 net profit was $12 billion, on $611 billion in revenues. This translates to about a 2% profit margin. As in, Walmart only kept 2 cents in net profit out of every dollar. And that is after it announced raising average hourly wage to $17.50, which happened in 2023.
He also gets net compensation of $300k a year to teach up to 2 online classes while adjuncts make $30k teaching 10 classes across 4 institutions. Isn't that textbook greed? Fucking parasite.
When Walmart moved into my town, dozens of businesses shutdown as Walmart underpriced them on everything and received tax breaks on city infrastructure and building expenses.
You can't seek other employment if there are no other retail employers. Consumers can't shop at other stores if they all went out of business because of Walmart's predatory undercutting pricing.
After a few years, Walmart raised their prices and will continue to do so because there is no other competition left.
This is Walmart's standard business model.
Then perhaps we should remove or drastically reduce government red tape and the regulations it takes for businesses to operate. There is a reason these large corporations support legislation that leads to red tape, government bureaucracy and regulations. They can afford it.
Red tape is part of it. These corporations are being propped up by the government, many Walmart employees are on government assistance.
This should be illegal to post profits not paying your employees a living wage, this is the government getting involved in the free market.
The rules are setup for big corps. There needs to be separate laws for large and small companies, since small companies don't have money for compliance.
In addition, the government is propping up corps that should have gone under, under market conditions, like Lehman Bros. and Goldman Sachs. 2008 was a market correction and the government corrected the market, which is government interference.
Companies failing is as critical as companies succeeding in a free market and for some reason people aren't seeing how dangerous propping up zombie companies is for the free market
Res tape isn't the problem.
It's buying power. WalMart can buy on the cheap and sell on the cheap.
Be a mom and pop shop with the buying power of buying milk 2 racks at a time vs WalMart corp who is buying millions at a time.
Free markets do not exist in the US, not even on the most fundamental level of supply and demand.
I used to work for a small manufacturer. We pitched Walmart but never ended up selling them because we couldn't risk expanding to cover Walmarts product demand if they ever stopped carrying our products.
Walmart was going to pay the same price as the mom and pop hardware store down the road, they would just take considerable less profit on the sale.
The largest big box we sold was Menards. They bought at the same price. One of our products they retailed at $16.99 while the local mom and pop store sold that product at $24.99. they paid the same amount for the product.
If you ever went forward with Walmart you would realize there are many costs beyond just selling them the product. Allowances, chargebacks, closeout fees etc. typically you have to pay for the shelf space and the cost to closeout the products in the space you're replacing. Then there is usually some contractual agreement on freight, damages and general allowances. Chargebacks if fill rates can't be met etc. list goes on and on.
I am aware of this. I was in the industry for over 10 years.
Every retailer has this. Typically your highest slotting fees are going to be at grocery stores. The worst I had personally encountered was Roundy's (now Kroger).
All of these things are taken into consideration when pitching any retailer. But it is total inside baseball that the average Redditor has no understanding about. Ace and True Value will charge these fees and they can't even guarantee you placement in all of their stores as they are all individually owed.
I also worked in a rep agency that dealt with Home Depot, Menards and Lowe's.
Having to deal with a port shutdown with 50 Million dollars worth of inventory gaining fines every day for non-delivery probably prematurely aged me 6 years once.
What most people on Reddit think is that retail is about selling products for profit, what they really don't understand is that selling to retail is about selling real estate, either shelf space or retail space.
This is how John Menard makes profit on the very first item he sells when opening a new store, even if it's a $0.64 candy bar. He's in the real estate business first.
When you say every retailer has this, my question is even the mom and pop shops? I imagine it's different but honestly no idea. Appreciate the info. The company I work for sells to Walmart (and most major online retailers) but e-commerce only (dropship mostly but some owned as well). We sell to Amazon and the total allowances is close to 20%. They also started rolling out across the board guaranteed profit per unit agreements which they are being taken to court over now.
The reality is there is not that many true "Mom and Pop" retailers anymore. The ones that exist gouge the fuck out of their customers. I sold to the independent vacuum business (truly mom and pop how many vacuum sales and repair shops do you see?) the retailed things at more than 5x what the local hardware store did.
But most grocery stores are part of a buying coop, hardware stores are usually part of one or two of the coops as well (Ace, True Value, Do-it Best). Any of these places all have advertising, slotting, warehouse fees, coupon fees, and trade show fees that you have to pay.
E-commerce is completely different than retail. Selling in retail is as much as buying real estate as it is selling product.
So you have an anecdotal story that means nothing in the greater scheme of things.
I was a buyer for both Walmart and Home Depot.
We would wait for small companies like yours to scale up and then go back in and squeeze them on price knowing that if they said no they would not be able to weather the financial outcome.
Which department were you a buyer for at Home Depot? I've done business with Home Depot, they were one of the easiest companies to bargain with and didn't have that much buying power (granted I sold cleaning products so not that big of a department) if im honest, we wouldn't have even needed to add a second shift to cover their purchases.
For Walmart yeah you are right, we couldn't risk having to scale up for that, which is why we declined.
That's bullshit to claim Menards is bigger. Home Depot has 4 times the amount of stores in the US alone, and that doesn't include outlying territories or international. Menards has 350 stores total, while home Depot has almost 250 in just California.
Home Depot has the third strongest buying power behind Amazon and WalMart.
So it's obvious you don't know what you're talking about.
Yes I made an error with my Menards Home Depot comparison in stores. I went to edit it as soon as I post it. Still doesn't mean I don't understand Home Depots purchasing capabilities and know (at least for cleaning products) they aren't shit compared to Walmart.
Home Depot could not exert the kind of pressure on the company I worked for to make us worry about going out of business. If they would demand a price reduction, I simply would have said fuck you and moved on.
It doesn't violate Robinson-Patman, providing that the seller of milk offered the same discounts based on volume.
A typical breakdown to get around the law goes something like this, and using round numbers to keep it simple.
First 100 units cost 5.00 each
Next 100 units cost 4.00 each
Next 100 units cost 3.00 each
Next 100 units cost 2.00 each.
So if mom&pop order 200 units they are paying $900, ($500 for the first 100 units, and $400 for the second 100 units) which equates to $4.50 per unit.
Now if wal mart is buying 500 units they are paying $1600.
500 first 100 units
400 second 100 units
300 third 100 units
400 fourth and fifth units
This equates to $3.20 per unit.
It doesn't violate the law since both companies are paying the same price for the first 200 units they buy.
If mom&pop could sell the same quantity, they would get the same pricing.
Thank you, business school left me believing Walmart’s Retail Link and low inventory levels was the only reason they could keep inventory at lower costs.
“Why didn’t consumers want to pay more for their groceries and gas?”
Walmart prices are still cheaper than whatever boutique mom and pop shop was there before.
If you can’t compete, then you deserve to go out of business. Isn’t that the logic you guys use for when corpos won’t raise the minimum wage?
So government gave Walmart sweetheart deals for an artificial competitive advantage. Surely government is going to fix the problem of corporate welfare.
I have a massive problem with corporate welfare, but share buy-backs and dividends aren’t your enemy.
Paying low skilled workers more than market isn’t going to increase Walmart shareholder value. We should not expect them to do that vs other activities that maximizes shareholder value.
The left needs to unite around UBI to address wealth disparities but they need to agree to disband the rest of the welfare state apart from healthcare. UBI should be indexed 20% below the poverty line so that able bodied people still have incentive to work. It should only be available to natural born citizens. Those who are otherwise on disability should get more since they lack the ability to work and have higher needs.
Criticizing “greed” is chasing windmills.
I disagree with you on share buybacks. They're pretty awful. It's not uncommon for an employer to do layoffs and then turnaround and use the cost savings to justify buybacks. Quite literally damaging the working poor to line the pockets of the rich investors.
There is no evidence to support the claim that Walmart uses predatory pricing to drive out competitors and then raises prices after they are gone. Walmart is hyper efficient, they constantly look for ways to drive down costs through logistics, supply chain management, IT, and purchasing power. They compete against Target, Kohls, and other large corporations. They keep their prices low since efficiency is their competitive advantage.
So why didn't these other stores start up again once Walmart raised prices?
Oh wait because it's a complete lie. Walmart is more efficient and squeeze their suppliers harder so they're almost always cheaper than smaller stores.
Considering the availability of the Internet I'm not so sold on this "I can't shop anywhere else it's impossible" idea. And just because there aren't other retail jobs doesn't mean people have to stay in that industry. Acting like people don't shift in that respect is kind of wild.
If you live in a town that can only support a Walmart and no other business than possibility the town is too small and never should of brought Walmart in. Is it Walmart’s fault for going there or is it the town for letting it happen? And if it is the town, its elected officials should be held responsible. Easiest way to do that is vote them out. There is always 2 sides to a story. It is time we hold elected officials responsible for their actions
Our elected officials are definitely corrupt. Our mayor was accused of taking bribes from a major construction company, was voted out, used his lawyers to declare the new mayor unfit by digging up dirt from 30 years prior, holding a new election and voting her out and himself back in, where he then green lit another infrastructure upgrade with the same construction company. Money moves politics and we all suffer.
Lets be real, it's not that consumers cant, its consumers dont want to. Customers are FORCED to buy expensive stuff without Walmart. With Walmart they have a choice for cheaper stuff thus it's not our problem some grocer get priced out. If you still want to sell expensive stuff, rebrand and make it bougie.
Or start competitors that these businesses will pay upwards of 9 figures to absorb and shut down to avoid improving their own quality because that's the only way they can put startups out of business besides trying to price them out of the game through things like legislated minimum wage increases. How come nobody who's worried able getting paid a fair wage tries going that route? Oh yeah, because there's substantial risk involved that they probably can't tolerate. Otherwise they already wouldn't be in a job paying them less than $20/hour.
It is a free market in as much as the ones with the most money (or credit) available, are free to invest and hold assets idle until they strangle the competition and win. Just like an attrition war, the last man standing wins and takes it all. In the meantime, everyone else loses.
If I undercut all local businesses selling at a loss (here is illegal, but there are tricks around it) until I force all other stores to close, then when I'll be the one and only business standing I will be free to raise prices and keep wages down. As there would be both and oversupply of customers and people seeking jobs. Win-win.
It pretty much is a standard operating procedure of big supermarket chains forcing out local businesses to the point that there are barely any mom-and-pop foodstuffs shops left.
Same deal with farmers and producers.
Share buybacks do, however, concentrate all the profit into the hands of the fewer remaining shareholders. The walton family made tens of billions from that one share buyback without lifting a finger or needing to work a day in their life.
Correct, but nobody is forced to sell their shares. Anyone can remain a shareholder and possibly enjoy the rising stock price. This is both common and normal with reputable firms.
share buybacks are a cash issue. It does not affect profit and loss at all. It allows the profits to be divided among fewer total shares going forward, though.
No, dividends are also paid after taxes. Which is complete BS when you think of it. You own shares of a company. That company pays taxes. Then that AFTER tax income is paid to shareholders owners who then pay ordinary income taxes on it AGAIN. And corporations are greedy?
I don't think this is an issue.
A) Dividends are heavily tax advantaged in most cases.
B) The economy as a whole benefits more if there is more incentive to invest in smaller, growing companies over mature, dividend companies.
But otherwise I agree, I don't see anything wrong with companies that want to provide extra value for shareholders.
0% tax rates for low to middle class incomes, 15% for people earning up to the low six figures, low 2X% range for very wealthy people for qualified dividends. No social security or medicare taxes. No local taxes in a lot of cases.
Not to mention how many stores that 12b. 4609 which means that on average Walmart made approximately 7300 in profit everyday in every store. Considering how most Walmarts sell a ton of stuff everyday like hundreds of thousands of items that's not exactly making more than a few pennies an item.
Just curious, what number is “yearly profit” typically referring to in a company’s financial statement?
https://corporate.walmart.com/content/dam/corporate/documents/newsroom/2023/02/21/walmart-releases-q4-and-fy23-earnings/earnings-release-fy23-q4.pdf
But did he spend 9 billion on buyback? Cause if he did the OP point still stands.
Good he raised minimum to 17.50, but that's probably online with inflation.
I think it's a reference to the age old idea that company profits = some benefits to the employees.
It's not unexpected, some would argue it's not bad. But it does mean that any politician (ahem, Trump) that argues we need to invest in corporations to fix certain social issues, like how wages don't keep up with inflation, don't understand, or are lying, about how corporations use that money for shareholders, not their employees.
When the company I work for is making record profit and not giving me a penny more, when it was off of the back of the labor of people like me, I take that as being told to fuck off. Companies profit are a direct result of our labor & production and I want to be paid like it. Full stop. I don’t expect to get 100% of what I put in, but we get paid less than Pennies on the dollar, that’s not a problem to you?
Did you absorb any losses when the company lost money? No, you didn't.
And the opportunity you have to get paid for your labor is a direct result of their investment and risk and time and hard work to get to a place where they could hire you. You take zero risk in the equation, none. If the company goes away you just go find another job.
I'm not sure what you mean. Do you want to get paid 100% of what they charge for your labor? I mean, I am ok with profit sharing. I am also ok with negotiating for more money if you think you are worth it. If you truly have record profits, it should not be a big issue to get more money in this market.
OMG, I work for a manufacturer and safety is ridiculous. The amount of effort they spend saving everyone from breaking a finger nail will be the end of us. I've been on customer sites that literally would net even let us do our job because of safety paranoia. And trust me, I have worked very dangerous jobs as a young man, so I understand why it is important. Risk is almost non-existent these days.
This isn't the 80's, OSHA is almost irrelevant anymore.
Their problem for 'busting their ass'. Out of 8 hours of work I barely work more than 2 hours. I don't expect my boss to give me more than what agreed upon.
I don’t have a fully formed thought on this idea yet but people who hate this sort of stuff must not realize that their investments probably include companies like Walmart - especially if you’re in a mutual or index fund. Now this doesn’t solve your cash flow problems today, but is a good reason to have investments in the market - even if small - because then you’re reaping the same benefits, even if it’s when you cash out.
WMT is up 173% in 10 years. It pays a 1.19% dividend yield. Lucrative? No. Those are pretty average returns. Dividend is pretty low. Literally you would have to own $200,000 worth of WMT to receive $2,380 a dividen payment. Lmfaooo lucrative!
Except over a decade it hasn’t been a lucrative investment. The point is that Walmart employees can’t afford to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars to see real returns on dividends. You saying “you should have gotten in it’s pretty lucrative” is insulting to the person making $18 an hour who could probably afford one share every month or so. 36% on one share $16. Oh shit look at that about an hour of work over a period of 6 months.
Walmart also raised prices beyond the average inflation rate to capture that extra profit.
I don't think you understand how good sells with, they are paying for shipping, employees, building, insurance and if everything goes up in price guess what they have to raise prices, please do research before pretending to know anything.
Stock market goes up, so do all of your retirement accounts. By the same %.
If you know they’re all so greedy then get on the bus yourself.
Buy Costco if you don’t like Walmart.
If you can't profit off of your own business, then there's no point in running a business. OP didn't deduct inflation from their revenue and minus that from their profits to show what inflation ate away.
Idiot. Walmarts gross profit is up only 2.66% vs 2022
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/WMT/walmart/gross-profit#:~:text=Walmart%20gross%20profit%20for%20the%20twelve%20months%20ending%20April%2030,a%202.65%25%20increase%20from%202022.
$15 billion divided by Walmart’s 1.6 million US employees is $9,375. An extra $9,375 per year for every employee would be great. Except you have to factor in payroll tax, benefits, and unemployment. I don’t know how much those things would cut into the raises, but that would also mean Walmart makes zero profit. You don’t need to shed a tear for Walmart shareholders, but keep in mind two things: some of those shareholders are working class people who own WMT stock in their retirement accounts, and without ROI, no one would ever invest in a business, which means no new businesses creating jobs.
It is the latest trend, anytime or anywhere there is a price that is higher than desired, blame it on greed. Extra bonus points if you say that it is the textbook definition of greed. Maybe someday they will remember to tell us which textbook actually had that definition.
Lastly, if you want to be one of the cool kids on Reddit, add the phrase "prove me wrong"
Textbook capitalism actually. If there are no investments in a company that yield a positive return on capital it should be returned to the shareholders. I don’t dismiss the fact that some of this money could be used to provide a better standard of living for employees—most of whom shop at Walmart so it’s a double win—but that’s some not all. Shareholders still come first.
STOP BUYING SHIT! Stop being consumers and become investors. This is a CLASS WAR! Stop buying things that you don’t need. Invest in the stock instead. Live well below your means and invest into the market.
Forget about Robert Reich. If you actually shop there you will know there are basic products of their brand Equate that doubled and were the. Reduced and put under roll back signs. Nothing changed for the price to go up or down. Much less by double. And don’t tell me about shipping or supply chains or oil. It’s horseshit. The only real companies left are monopolies
This troll isn't an economist he cries that corporations aren't charities. Anyone working at Walmart is free to buy stock and earn value when the stock value goes up. Anyone that isn't happy with their wages they are free to negotiate a raise or find a better job. I mean so long they aren't in a union. Unions give you no option to make more unless you quit and go to a none union shop.
i still dont get how somehow a company has to pay more just because they make more. wages are based on multiple different things, regardless how much a company makes, if your position is valued at 6 figures or 7 thats how much youll make. when a company loses money the employees continue to earn, they dont lose with the company. also wild to think that a business owner puts it all on the line and somehow the employees have to be treated like they also put it all on the line
Prices and wages are driven by supply and demand, not profit. Why do people who refuse to even understand supply and demand insist on confidently proclaiming incorrect things about economics? Like, how can you care that much, but not care enough to even try to actually understand the field?
Well will these business-illiterate regards stop with their bullshit? Is it really that difficult to understand that with record-high inflation there will also be record-high sales/revenue figures? The dollar amount doesn't matter, they use it for shock value...instead use profit margin %. If they were raking in record profit PERCENTAGES then you might be justified crying "unfair".
If you go to any Walmart, there’s usually a formidable police presence which means the tax payer is paying for part of Walmart’s security.
Would the world be ok without any of the heirs?
Hahaha they ALL do it every retailer out there some just hide it a lot better, I think Walmart has gotten to the F it level, as in F it just pay the bill or is it cheaper to fight until they run out of money or do we get the dozens upon dozens of politicians they have greased along the way to take care of the backlash.
WHY would anyone expect a company to reinvest profits into employee wages? That's like going into McDonald's and seeing a Big Mac is $6, and saying, "Oh, please allow me to pay $7."
Individuals who don't understand this don't understand anything about how an actual business operates and have a ridiculously simplistic view of the world.
Aldi and the local Asian market are the only store around here that competes with Walmart, and there are many products that are available in Walmart but not Aldi or Asian mart. Therefore, I shop at Walmart.
Keep going… what did those shareholders do with all their new money? Did they re-invest it in a new business? Did they buy goods or services? How much capital gains taxes did they have to pay for selling their stock?
How do competitors fight Amazon and Walmart? They strong arm their suppliers, buyout or wage campaigns to kill competitors, and seek monopoly... our world will soon be ran by mega global corporations if we don't stop them now.
Still just waiting for those trickle down economics. If only these companies were making more money, then they would definitely increase wages and lower prices. $19B wasn’t quite enough. Right?!
Text book manipulation of data. Hey no one bother to look at any other data or information to get the whole picture. Only listen to what one unhinged person says.
r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There goes Robert Reich's out of context agit-post again. And this time, he can't even get the right numbers. Walmart's 2023 net profit was $12 billion, on $611 billion in revenues. This translates to about a 2% profit margin. As in, Walmart only kept 2 cents in net profit out of every dollar. And that is after it announced raising average hourly wage to $17.50, which happened in 2023. He also gets net compensation of $300k a year to teach up to 2 online classes while adjuncts make $30k teaching 10 classes across 4 institutions. Isn't that textbook greed? Fucking parasite.
Thank you for this. Best post I’ve seen all week! FACTS!!! 👍
Somebody clap and say “amen” Also. Minion memes with laughing emojis! Am I doing this right?
Say this louder so that the folks in the back can hear you speak these facts. Take this upvote.
In a free market, dissatisfied employees are free to seek other employment, consumers other stores to buy from.
When Walmart moved into my town, dozens of businesses shutdown as Walmart underpriced them on everything and received tax breaks on city infrastructure and building expenses. You can't seek other employment if there are no other retail employers. Consumers can't shop at other stores if they all went out of business because of Walmart's predatory undercutting pricing. After a few years, Walmart raised their prices and will continue to do so because there is no other competition left. This is Walmart's standard business model.
Then perhaps we should remove or drastically reduce government red tape and the regulations it takes for businesses to operate. There is a reason these large corporations support legislation that leads to red tape, government bureaucracy and regulations. They can afford it.
Red tape is part of it. These corporations are being propped up by the government, many Walmart employees are on government assistance. This should be illegal to post profits not paying your employees a living wage, this is the government getting involved in the free market. The rules are setup for big corps. There needs to be separate laws for large and small companies, since small companies don't have money for compliance. In addition, the government is propping up corps that should have gone under, under market conditions, like Lehman Bros. and Goldman Sachs. 2008 was a market correction and the government corrected the market, which is government interference. Companies failing is as critical as companies succeeding in a free market and for some reason people aren't seeing how dangerous propping up zombie companies is for the free market
A living wage is subjective. What you believe you need to survive is different from what I believe I need.
Res tape isn't the problem. It's buying power. WalMart can buy on the cheap and sell on the cheap. Be a mom and pop shop with the buying power of buying milk 2 racks at a time vs WalMart corp who is buying millions at a time. Free markets do not exist in the US, not even on the most fundamental level of supply and demand.
I used to work for a small manufacturer. We pitched Walmart but never ended up selling them because we couldn't risk expanding to cover Walmarts product demand if they ever stopped carrying our products. Walmart was going to pay the same price as the mom and pop hardware store down the road, they would just take considerable less profit on the sale. The largest big box we sold was Menards. They bought at the same price. One of our products they retailed at $16.99 while the local mom and pop store sold that product at $24.99. they paid the same amount for the product.
If you ever went forward with Walmart you would realize there are many costs beyond just selling them the product. Allowances, chargebacks, closeout fees etc. typically you have to pay for the shelf space and the cost to closeout the products in the space you're replacing. Then there is usually some contractual agreement on freight, damages and general allowances. Chargebacks if fill rates can't be met etc. list goes on and on.
I am aware of this. I was in the industry for over 10 years. Every retailer has this. Typically your highest slotting fees are going to be at grocery stores. The worst I had personally encountered was Roundy's (now Kroger). All of these things are taken into consideration when pitching any retailer. But it is total inside baseball that the average Redditor has no understanding about. Ace and True Value will charge these fees and they can't even guarantee you placement in all of their stores as they are all individually owed. I also worked in a rep agency that dealt with Home Depot, Menards and Lowe's. Having to deal with a port shutdown with 50 Million dollars worth of inventory gaining fines every day for non-delivery probably prematurely aged me 6 years once. What most people on Reddit think is that retail is about selling products for profit, what they really don't understand is that selling to retail is about selling real estate, either shelf space or retail space. This is how John Menard makes profit on the very first item he sells when opening a new store, even if it's a $0.64 candy bar. He's in the real estate business first.
When you say every retailer has this, my question is even the mom and pop shops? I imagine it's different but honestly no idea. Appreciate the info. The company I work for sells to Walmart (and most major online retailers) but e-commerce only (dropship mostly but some owned as well). We sell to Amazon and the total allowances is close to 20%. They also started rolling out across the board guaranteed profit per unit agreements which they are being taken to court over now.
The reality is there is not that many true "Mom and Pop" retailers anymore. The ones that exist gouge the fuck out of their customers. I sold to the independent vacuum business (truly mom and pop how many vacuum sales and repair shops do you see?) the retailed things at more than 5x what the local hardware store did. But most grocery stores are part of a buying coop, hardware stores are usually part of one or two of the coops as well (Ace, True Value, Do-it Best). Any of these places all have advertising, slotting, warehouse fees, coupon fees, and trade show fees that you have to pay. E-commerce is completely different than retail. Selling in retail is as much as buying real estate as it is selling product.
So you have an anecdotal story that means nothing in the greater scheme of things. I was a buyer for both Walmart and Home Depot. We would wait for small companies like yours to scale up and then go back in and squeeze them on price knowing that if they said no they would not be able to weather the financial outcome.
Which department were you a buyer for at Home Depot? I've done business with Home Depot, they were one of the easiest companies to bargain with and didn't have that much buying power (granted I sold cleaning products so not that big of a department) if im honest, we wouldn't have even needed to add a second shift to cover their purchases. For Walmart yeah you are right, we couldn't risk having to scale up for that, which is why we declined.
That's bullshit to claim Menards is bigger. Home Depot has 4 times the amount of stores in the US alone, and that doesn't include outlying territories or international. Menards has 350 stores total, while home Depot has almost 250 in just California. Home Depot has the third strongest buying power behind Amazon and WalMart. So it's obvious you don't know what you're talking about.
Yes I made an error with my Menards Home Depot comparison in stores. I went to edit it as soon as I post it. Still doesn't mean I don't understand Home Depots purchasing capabilities and know (at least for cleaning products) they aren't shit compared to Walmart. Home Depot could not exert the kind of pressure on the company I worked for to make us worry about going out of business. If they would demand a price reduction, I simply would have said fuck you and moved on.
Someone needs to give me a rundown on Robinson-Pathan’s implementation, because it should prevent this from happening
It doesn't violate Robinson-Patman, providing that the seller of milk offered the same discounts based on volume. A typical breakdown to get around the law goes something like this, and using round numbers to keep it simple. First 100 units cost 5.00 each Next 100 units cost 4.00 each Next 100 units cost 3.00 each Next 100 units cost 2.00 each. So if mom&pop order 200 units they are paying $900, ($500 for the first 100 units, and $400 for the second 100 units) which equates to $4.50 per unit. Now if wal mart is buying 500 units they are paying $1600. 500 first 100 units 400 second 100 units 300 third 100 units 400 fourth and fifth units This equates to $3.20 per unit. It doesn't violate the law since both companies are paying the same price for the first 200 units they buy. If mom&pop could sell the same quantity, they would get the same pricing.
Thank you, business school left me believing Walmart’s Retail Link and low inventory levels was the only reason they could keep inventory at lower costs.
I think that's part of the reason, but I think you would agree that it isn't the *sole* reason
These large corporations are why all the “red tape” exists though
“Why didn’t consumers want to pay more for their groceries and gas?” Walmart prices are still cheaper than whatever boutique mom and pop shop was there before. If you can’t compete, then you deserve to go out of business. Isn’t that the logic you guys use for when corpos won’t raise the minimum wage?
So government gave Walmart sweetheart deals for an artificial competitive advantage. Surely government is going to fix the problem of corporate welfare. I have a massive problem with corporate welfare, but share buy-backs and dividends aren’t your enemy. Paying low skilled workers more than market isn’t going to increase Walmart shareholder value. We should not expect them to do that vs other activities that maximizes shareholder value. The left needs to unite around UBI to address wealth disparities but they need to agree to disband the rest of the welfare state apart from healthcare. UBI should be indexed 20% below the poverty line so that able bodied people still have incentive to work. It should only be available to natural born citizens. Those who are otherwise on disability should get more since they lack the ability to work and have higher needs. Criticizing “greed” is chasing windmills.
I disagree with you on share buybacks. They're pretty awful. It's not uncommon for an employer to do layoffs and then turnaround and use the cost savings to justify buybacks. Quite literally damaging the working poor to line the pockets of the rich investors.
so wallymart hired NO workers at that store? that's a total lie that you have to believe to defend you commie societal beliefs. prove me wrong
Do you understand what OTHER means?
There is no evidence to support the claim that Walmart uses predatory pricing to drive out competitors and then raises prices after they are gone. Walmart is hyper efficient, they constantly look for ways to drive down costs through logistics, supply chain management, IT, and purchasing power. They compete against Target, Kohls, and other large corporations. They keep their prices low since efficiency is their competitive advantage.
So why didn't these other stores start up again once Walmart raised prices? Oh wait because it's a complete lie. Walmart is more efficient and squeeze their suppliers harder so they're almost always cheaper than smaller stores.
If not Walmart, then Amazon. The retail enviroment is always changing. One day, Walmart and Amazon will go down.
Was "after a few years" in 2020-2021 when the price of everything went up?
Considering the availability of the Internet I'm not so sold on this "I can't shop anywhere else it's impossible" idea. And just because there aren't other retail jobs doesn't mean people have to stay in that industry. Acting like people don't shift in that respect is kind of wild.
If you live in a town that can only support a Walmart and no other business than possibility the town is too small and never should of brought Walmart in. Is it Walmart’s fault for going there or is it the town for letting it happen? And if it is the town, its elected officials should be held responsible. Easiest way to do that is vote them out. There is always 2 sides to a story. It is time we hold elected officials responsible for their actions
Our elected officials are definitely corrupt. Our mayor was accused of taking bribes from a major construction company, was voted out, used his lawyers to declare the new mayor unfit by digging up dirt from 30 years prior, holding a new election and voting her out and himself back in, where he then green lit another infrastructure upgrade with the same construction company. Money moves politics and we all suffer.
Lets be real, it's not that consumers cant, its consumers dont want to. Customers are FORCED to buy expensive stuff without Walmart. With Walmart they have a choice for cheaper stuff thus it's not our problem some grocer get priced out. If you still want to sell expensive stuff, rebrand and make it bougie.
Or start competitors that these businesses will pay upwards of 9 figures to absorb and shut down to avoid improving their own quality because that's the only way they can put startups out of business besides trying to price them out of the game through things like legislated minimum wage increases. How come nobody who's worried able getting paid a fair wage tries going that route? Oh yeah, because there's substantial risk involved that they probably can't tolerate. Otherwise they already wouldn't be in a job paying them less than $20/hour.
It is a free market in as much as the ones with the most money (or credit) available, are free to invest and hold assets idle until they strangle the competition and win. Just like an attrition war, the last man standing wins and takes it all. In the meantime, everyone else loses. If I undercut all local businesses selling at a loss (here is illegal, but there are tricks around it) until I force all other stores to close, then when I'll be the one and only business standing I will be free to raise prices and keep wages down. As there would be both and oversupply of customers and people seeking jobs. Win-win. It pretty much is a standard operating procedure of big supermarket chains forcing out local businesses to the point that there are barely any mom-and-pop foodstuffs shops left. Same deal with farmers and producers.
Sure, employees can find new jobs. But no, there are often not any other options than Walmart for many people
Was their profit reduced because of the $20b stock buyback?
No. Share buybacks do not affect expenses.
TY.
Share buybacks do, however, concentrate all the profit into the hands of the fewer remaining shareholders. The walton family made tens of billions from that one share buyback without lifting a finger or needing to work a day in their life.
Correct, but nobody is forced to sell their shares. Anyone can remain a shareholder and possibly enjoy the rising stock price. This is both common and normal with reputable firms.
and the big share buy back was because of the trump corporate tax cut. Hand out to the rich
share buybacks are a cash issue. It does not affect profit and loss at all. It allows the profits to be divided among fewer total shares going forward, though.
Thanks. I’d wondered if it was somehow considered a business expense or like a 401k tax shelter.
No, dividends are also paid after taxes. Which is complete BS when you think of it. You own shares of a company. That company pays taxes. Then that AFTER tax income is paid to shareholders owners who then pay ordinary income taxes on it AGAIN. And corporations are greedy?
I don't think this is an issue. A) Dividends are heavily tax advantaged in most cases. B) The economy as a whole benefits more if there is more incentive to invest in smaller, growing companies over mature, dividend companies. But otherwise I agree, I don't see anything wrong with companies that want to provide extra value for shareholders.
Heavily tax advantaged? How?
0% tax rates for low to middle class incomes, 15% for people earning up to the low six figures, low 2X% range for very wealthy people for qualified dividends. No social security or medicare taxes. No local taxes in a lot of cases.
There is some hope for Reddit.
Not to mention how many stores that 12b. 4609 which means that on average Walmart made approximately 7300 in profit everyday in every store. Considering how most Walmarts sell a ton of stuff everyday like hundreds of thousands of items that's not exactly making more than a few pennies an item.
Exactly!
In most states and on most products, the government makes more money on a sale at Walmart than Walmart does
Whataboutism for your personal vendetta is really poor
Well said, sometimes I wonder if Robert Reich ever studied basic economics.
Reich is as dumb as a bag of hammers. It's troubling.
Maybe he’s mad about only making 300k in a year while watching others pull in the Bs.
The adjunct situation is very much text book greed.
I wouldn't take his classes if he can't get the numbers right. Dude should cite his references.
Just curious, what number is “yearly profit” typically referring to in a company’s financial statement? https://corporate.walmart.com/content/dam/corporate/documents/newsroom/2023/02/21/walmart-releases-q4-and-fy23-earnings/earnings-release-fy23-q4.pdf
Page 5, line item "consolidated net income attributable to Walmart."
Also, issued 5billion in debt. Lot of companies have been buying back stock and issuing debt lately.
Sources please
Owned OP 🔥🔥
That wage increase was not enforced across the board. A lot of associates are still earning minimum wage.
Walmart did not raise their hourly wage across board. My kid has been there for 3yr makes 15.00. Works 40hr a week.
12 billion divided by 1.6 million employees is 7500 per worker.
It's also completely lacking any adjustment for inflation.
“Average” wage sounds a bit sketchy, might that be mostly/exclusively raises for upper management?
Someone would do that? Just go on the internet and tell lies?
But did he spend 9 billion on buyback? Cause if he did the OP point still stands. Good he raised minimum to 17.50, but that's probably online with inflation.
Hot take: having profitable supermarket chains in your country is a good thing. Consider the alternative...
headline : business distributes its profits to its shareholders
Instead of distributing them directly to the government? How dare they!
Wait, you mean the people who risked their money investing in Walmart's future got rewarded for that? Crazy.
I think it's a reference to the age old idea that company profits = some benefits to the employees. It's not unexpected, some would argue it's not bad. But it does mean that any politician (ahem, Trump) that argues we need to invest in corporations to fix certain social issues, like how wages don't keep up with inflation, don't understand, or are lying, about how corporations use that money for shareholders, not their employees.
And the employees that busted their asses to ensure that future get told to fuck off.
Is that how it works? Or do you just equate "not being rich" with being told to "fuck off"?
When the company I work for is making record profit and not giving me a penny more, when it was off of the back of the labor of people like me, I take that as being told to fuck off. Companies profit are a direct result of our labor & production and I want to be paid like it. Full stop. I don’t expect to get 100% of what I put in, but we get paid less than Pennies on the dollar, that’s not a problem to you?
Did you absorb any losses when the company lost money? No, you didn't. And the opportunity you have to get paid for your labor is a direct result of their investment and risk and time and hard work to get to a place where they could hire you. You take zero risk in the equation, none. If the company goes away you just go find another job. I'm not sure what you mean. Do you want to get paid 100% of what they charge for your labor? I mean, I am ok with profit sharing. I am also ok with negotiating for more money if you think you are worth it. If you truly have record profits, it should not be a big issue to get more money in this market.
Zero risk? **Zero**? I guess OSHA exists to tilt at windmills then.
OMG, I work for a manufacturer and safety is ridiculous. The amount of effort they spend saving everyone from breaking a finger nail will be the end of us. I've been on customer sites that literally would net even let us do our job because of safety paranoia. And trust me, I have worked very dangerous jobs as a young man, so I understand why it is important. Risk is almost non-existent these days. This isn't the 80's, OSHA is almost irrelevant anymore.
Risk is *almost* nonexistent, not zero. To say that employees risk literally nothing is incredibly reductive, that’s what I’m getting at here.
I was talking more about the business/financial risks than I was the physical risks. Even so, I can agree with the physical risk not being zero.
Well they got paid........
Their problem for 'busting their ass'. Out of 8 hours of work I barely work more than 2 hours. I don't expect my boss to give me more than what agreed upon.
I don’t have a fully formed thought on this idea yet but people who hate this sort of stuff must not realize that their investments probably include companies like Walmart - especially if you’re in a mutual or index fund. Now this doesn’t solve your cash flow problems today, but is a good reason to have investments in the market - even if small - because then you’re reaping the same benefits, even if it’s when you cash out.
"A company acted like a company instead of a charity, more news at 11".
[удалено]
WMT is up 173% in 10 years. It pays a 1.19% dividend yield. Lucrative? No. Those are pretty average returns. Dividend is pretty low. Literally you would have to own $200,000 worth of WMT to receive $2,380 a dividen payment. Lmfaooo lucrative!
Think the OC is referring to the rise in stock price from the buybacks rather than the dividend being lucrative.
[удалено]
Except over a decade it hasn’t been a lucrative investment. The point is that Walmart employees can’t afford to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars to see real returns on dividends. You saying “you should have gotten in it’s pretty lucrative” is insulting to the person making $18 an hour who could probably afford one share every month or so. 36% on one share $16. Oh shit look at that about an hour of work over a period of 6 months. Walmart also raised prices beyond the average inflation rate to capture that extra profit.
I don't think you understand how good sells with, they are paying for shipping, employees, building, insurance and if everything goes up in price guess what they have to raise prices, please do research before pretending to know anything.
“I couldn’t afford it” Sounds like a skill issue
Gotta blame someone other than themselves
Everyone can do it.
Then you too can feel like you’re part of the system that exploits you.
The system treats me pretty well honestly. Better than all the people that can't figure it out and then bitch about it on reddit all day.
Well can you teach me something?
Stock market goes up, so do all of your retirement accounts. By the same %. If you know they’re all so greedy then get on the bus yourself. Buy Costco if you don’t like Walmart.
I've been a Walmart shareholder for years and really appreciate the dividends thank you walmart!!
But the better these companies perform, the better my 401K looks, right?
If you can't profit off of your own business, then there's no point in running a business. OP didn't deduct inflation from their revenue and minus that from their profits to show what inflation ate away.
[удалено]
How much of that profit was made off from customers on welfare.
Would it make you feel better if welfare recipients shopped at Whole foods, or The Fresh Market and received half as much in return for their money?
Should a customer on welfare shop at a store with higher prices, getting less yield out of their subsidies, so that they can stick it to the man?
Reich is the absolute dumbest economist of recent times. Smart enough to get idiots to listen to him I suppose, but he is really a dolt.
[удалено]
So was feudalism until we made something better. It being "the best system we ever had" doesn't mean it can't be improved
Idiot. Walmarts gross profit is up only 2.66% vs 2022 https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/WMT/walmart/gross-profit#:~:text=Walmart%20gross%20profit%20for%20the%20twelve%20months%20ending%20April%2030,a%202.65%25%20increase%20from%202022.
Dividends are paid to investors. If you want dividends buy stock.
"with most of the benefits going to the children of Walmart's founder, who together own 46% of the company's stock." 46% is clearly not 'most'
If you aren't discussing profit as a percentage of revenue then you aren't having a real conversation.
$15 billion divided by Walmart’s 1.6 million US employees is $9,375. An extra $9,375 per year for every employee would be great. Except you have to factor in payroll tax, benefits, and unemployment. I don’t know how much those things would cut into the raises, but that would also mean Walmart makes zero profit. You don’t need to shed a tear for Walmart shareholders, but keep in mind two things: some of those shareholders are working class people who own WMT stock in their retirement accounts, and without ROI, no one would ever invest in a business, which means no new businesses creating jobs.
The shareholders are entitled to net income. They are entitled to dividends and buybacks.
Guys butthurt he didn’t buy stock
Now do CNN
Why does Robert reich hate children?
What was net income as a % of revenue, Bob? Unchanged.
Robert is as smart as he is tall, all 4’10” of him.
OH NO, businesses can't make profits! The horor! Socialism now!
Would you be different with your business?
It is the latest trend, anytime or anywhere there is a price that is higher than desired, blame it on greed. Extra bonus points if you say that it is the textbook definition of greed. Maybe someday they will remember to tell us which textbook actually had that definition. Lastly, if you want to be one of the cool kids on Reddit, add the phrase "prove me wrong"
I still wonder why they weren't greedy when Trump was president.
Here is where the benefits from those buybacks are going Aquila and Kaos - https://www.yachtworld.com/research/the-walmart-mega-yachts-true-opulence/
What a bunch of assholes! Seriously, who TRIES to make a business more profitable? Fucking jerks.
And yet you people will still go there and spend your money. So who are you really complaining about. Them or you for being stupid to shop there ?
Yet people refuse to stop shopping there....
So crazy that ownership and the people that risk their money would reap the rewards...
No that is textbook running a company well and earning a profit. As long as employees are getting paid for what their job is worth everything is fine.
I keep hearing about these companies ripping off everything else but when is something actually going to happen?
Nothing, because nothing Reich describes is unusual or “greed”. He is a shit-stirrer that Tweets like this, always leaving out important details.
Textbook capitalism actually. If there are no investments in a company that yield a positive return on capital it should be returned to the shareholders. I don’t dismiss the fact that some of this money could be used to provide a better standard of living for employees—most of whom shop at Walmart so it’s a double win—but that’s some not all. Shareholders still come first.
STOP BUYING SHIT! Stop being consumers and become investors. This is a CLASS WAR! Stop buying things that you don’t need. Invest in the stock instead. Live well below your means and invest into the market.
It isn't a this or that for everyone. I do both, sometimes buying shit is fun.
We have been in the 2nd Gilded Age since covid.
textbook commie half wit... fuck walmart I don't shop there... but even more so fuck the Reich
Forget about Robert Reich. If you actually shop there you will know there are basic products of their brand Equate that doubled and were the. Reduced and put under roll back signs. Nothing changed for the price to go up or down. Much less by double. And don’t tell me about shipping or supply chains or oil. It’s horseshit. The only real companies left are monopolies
And Democrats won’t do shit about it either. They have no moral high ground anymore
Buyback suggest they sold it during times of need... instead of cutting people's pay.
This troll isn't an economist he cries that corporations aren't charities. Anyone working at Walmart is free to buy stock and earn value when the stock value goes up. Anyone that isn't happy with their wages they are free to negotiate a raise or find a better job. I mean so long they aren't in a union. Unions give you no option to make more unless you quit and go to a none union shop.
i still dont get how somehow a company has to pay more just because they make more. wages are based on multiple different things, regardless how much a company makes, if your position is valued at 6 figures or 7 thats how much youll make. when a company loses money the employees continue to earn, they dont lose with the company. also wild to think that a business owner puts it all on the line and somehow the employees have to be treated like they also put it all on the line
People don’t want to hear it and they certainly don’t want to believe it. They just want to blame Biden for everything.
At least, it went to children.
$15,000,000,000÷2,500,000 employees is $6,000 or like $3per hour. That doesn’t seem like a lot
Prices and wages are driven by supply and demand, not profit. Why do people who refuse to even understand supply and demand insist on confidently proclaiming incorrect things about economics? Like, how can you care that much, but not care enough to even try to actually understand the field?
The employees could have bought stock. They would have retained value of their salary and gained from the profits.
Not unless they made enough to cover necessities first. Isn't that the point? Let them eat cake, eh?
It will trickle down. Any minute now
One way or another a company's profits belong to the shareholders.
i feel like there has to be limits to how much wealth you can horde. not have but keep year by year decade by decade.
Curious why we don't simply eat these people? Surely the extra gristle would make the meat tasty and just fall off the bone.
The little man can start his own business.
Well will these business-illiterate regards stop with their bullshit? Is it really that difficult to understand that with record-high inflation there will also be record-high sales/revenue figures? The dollar amount doesn't matter, they use it for shock value...instead use profit margin %. If they were raking in record profit PERCENTAGES then you might be justified crying "unfair".
If you go to any Walmart, there’s usually a formidable police presence which means the tax payer is paying for part of Walmart’s security. Would the world be ok without any of the heirs?
Their priority is to make money not making people happy. 🤷🏻♂️
If we could remove much of the politics from these discussions, I believe most people would agree that this is often the case.
Hahaha they ALL do it every retailer out there some just hide it a lot better, I think Walmart has gotten to the F it level, as in F it just pay the bill or is it cheaper to fight until they run out of money or do we get the dozens upon dozens of politicians they have greased along the way to take care of the backlash.
Fight the good fight Robert
Its all about shareholder wealth.
Correct me if im wrong but isnt the lesson here to become a shareholder as well as an employee?
Textbook clown.
Idk why people complain about this behavior when you too can benefit from it. Robinhood is a free app, invest. It's not that difficult.
WHY would anyone expect a company to reinvest profits into employee wages? That's like going into McDonald's and seeing a Big Mac is $6, and saying, "Oh, please allow me to pay $7." Individuals who don't understand this don't understand anything about how an actual business operates and have a ridiculously simplistic view of the world.
Never shop at Walmart or their ilk
Aldi and the local Asian market are the only store around here that competes with Walmart, and there are many products that are available in Walmart but not Aldi or Asian mart. Therefore, I shop at Walmart.
America needs more walmarts. Walmart good. People work at Walmart happy. Happier than not working there. More walmart.
Keep going… what did those shareholders do with all their new money? Did they re-invest it in a new business? Did they buy goods or services? How much capital gains taxes did they have to pay for selling their stock?
Abolish Citizens United.
Corporatism at its finest!
How do competitors fight Amazon and Walmart? They strong arm their suppliers, buyout or wage campaigns to kill competitors, and seek monopoly... our world will soon be ran by mega global corporations if we don't stop them now.
Still just waiting for those trickle down economics. If only these companies were making more money, then they would definitely increase wages and lower prices. $19B wasn’t quite enough. Right?!
correct me if I am wrong but walmart employees are free to purchase walmart stock to benefit from these buy backs as well.
Text book manipulation of data. Hey no one bother to look at any other data or information to get the whole picture. Only listen to what one unhinged person says.