The poster in the window

ILW

If a retailer of mass market goods offers the best combination of service and price, they will tend to get the most customers. Are you suggesting that Tesco should offer worse service and higher prices to stop them getting too big? They are not in a monopoly position. Anyone is free to set up against them.

Going4TheDream

ILW wrote: »

If their plan was to offer what customers wanted, then yes. Is that wrong?

Tescos do not put their competition out of business, the customers do.

No, the plan was to offer customers what Tescos wanted, but cleverly market it, so as customers thought that was what they wanted.

I think its called marketing strategy.

ILW

Going4TheDream wrote: »

No, the plan was to offer customers what Tescos wanted, but cleverly market it, so as customers thought that was what they wanted.

I think its called marketing strategy.

I do not believe that the 70% of the population (or whatever it is) are all that stupid.
Please give an example.

Going4TheDream

ILW wrote: »

I do not believe that the 70% of the population (or whatever it is) are all that stupid.
Please give an example.

I am not saying people are stupid, infact many people who now shop maybe don't remember life before Tesco and it is all they have known.

Like I said in my previous post their business model is unquestionable for aggressive growth, expansion and profitabilty. It is the ethics and social impact and consequence that it has been built on I cannot stomach and many people feel the same . This has happened by stealth, slowly and steadily over the last 10 to 15 years. It happened so slowly people probably didn't notice it was happening until they look back now and really see the impact, and if they had foreseen the consequences would not been so quick to readily accept them.

It was once said of Sir Terry Leahy 'he could alter the face of a town centre by deciding where to put his shops. He really does have the power to change people’s lives' and pretty much that is what he did, and not necessarily for the better in many cases

Perhaps some want cheap prices and lots of choice in one place, however is is the short term low cost really worth the long term high price we are all paying?

ILW

What is this high price we are all paying?

Going4TheDream

ILW wrote: »

What is this high price we are all paying?

Perhaps you find the decimation of towns, the loss of local businesses and the knock on effect that causes in local communities acceptable. You may find the the low paid 'jobs' that require the government assistance for people to get by, whilst Tesco make billions in profit acceptable. Maybe it is the suppliers that supply Tesco being hammered down continually on often suicidal terms just so you can buy a £4 chicken of dubious quality so they can make and take market share that you find acceptable

Again I state on paper their business model is unquestionable, however the causality and its negative effect is

ILW

A couple of points.
Small local butchers, bakers etc tend to pay wages no better than Tesco and never have.
No supplier is forced to supply to Tesco.
I quite like the option of buying a £4.00 chicken, whether I decide to but it is my choice.
I cannot see that going back to a time when the daily shop meant it was not possible for women to have anything but pin money jobs and the food bill could be 50% of household income would be that great in reality.

kabayiri

ILW wrote: »

...
Small local butchers, bakers etc tend to pay wages no better than Tesco and never have.
...

Very true.

I know my local butcher in the village. In fact you see him spending the money he receives in the local barber shop, the diy shop, the news agents, etc.

He doesn't employ a shipping company in the British Virgin Islands to disguise how much the actual profit is on a pork chop.

But..in a true open market you/me/all of us have a choice. We can choose the local shop or Tesco.

If we choose Tesco then I don't want to see people here bemoan the death of our high streets in our towns and villages. For it will have been our choice.

Losing_the_way

It isn't just Tesco's that have the grocery market tied down, it's all the others as well. What has always interested me is the way that we, the customers, constantly demand more for less. It has resulted in a general lowering of quality of our foods. I used to know a buyer for one of the largest chains and he openly admitted that they always looked to buy products that only just met the minimum acceptable standard so as to give the lowest prices to their customers. The Ratner effect as it were.

We can all see that although many moan about the cost of food our waistlines tell a different story. If there was a problem with our food we really only have a few sources of food, is it wise as it were to put all our eggs into such a few baskets.

Cleaver

ILW wrote: »

No supplier is forced to supply to Tesco.

This is a grey area for many reasons. I know what you mean, but a lot of suppliers are forced to deal with the big four supermarkets as who else are they going to supply? And many suppliers once supplying supermarkets, especially Tesco, will find it very, very hard to leave once they start supplying.

The classic Tesco technique is to find, say, five suppliers who each provide (for example) potatoes, carrots, tomatos, cabbage and parnsips. After buying their entire crop of everything for a year or two they'll say to the first one, "right, either we pay you 10% less or you convert your entire crop to carrots so it's cheaper for us. Or we'll happily stop the contract." What does the farmer do? Pretty much screwed down now.

I guess it's like being the sole supplier to any big business: regular income, but a real risk that they can screw you. And now with the big four supermarkets dominating if you don't supply them then who do you exactly supply? They've all been caught working together to screw suppliers before too, with milk being an example.