http://247wallst.com/2011/06/22/247-wall...in-2012/2/

For those of you who hate "greedy capitalists" this should delight you. Big business going under.

For those of you who insist that it's "greedy capitalists" who won't give you a job, this should teach you to understand.

For those who insist that "greedy capitalists" aren't paying their fair share, well, they're broke.

For those of you who think that we need more regulations, understand that those regulations just make it harder for small businesses to get started and grow to replace these big businesses.

Your "Queer Themes in Ancient Mayan Drama" professor probably didn't teach you this.

Well... among the ones I'm familiar with (Kmart/Sears and Sony), I'd say they were extremely poorly run and the gov't had nothing to do with their issues.

Kmart and Sears never kept up with times in retail... specifically inventory management. Walmart is definitely a shining example of IT's place in the day to day operations of a retail store.

Sony, on the other hand, would probably be in better shape had they actually taken IT security seriously. They had no comprehensive strategy to deal with security and they paid the price (and have been hacked multiple times). Microsoft took their network security seriously and it is now paying dividends to them. Had there been more stringent regulations on safeguarding customer information then Sony would probably be in better shape today... not that I'm arguing for more regulation in general.

Anyway... I think, at least among those 2 brands, you can blame poor management over any kind of gov't intervention that has caused them to be in their current situation.

(11-29-2011 02:12 PM)mlb Wrote:  Well... among the ones I'm familiar with (Kmart/Sears and Sony), I'd say they were extremely poorly run and the gov't had nothing to do with their issues.

Kmart and Sears never kept up with times in retail... specifically inventory management. Walmart is definitely a shining example of IT's place in the day to day operations of a retail store.

Sony, on the other hand, would probably be in better shape had they actually taken IT security seriously. They had no comprehensive strategy to deal with security and they paid the price (and have been hacked multiple times). Microsoft took their network security seriously and it is now paying dividends to them. Had there been more stringent regulations on safeguarding customer information then Sony would probably be in better shape today... not that I'm arguing for more regulation in general.

Anyway... I think, at least among those 2 brands, you can blame poor management over any kind of gov't intervention that has caused them to be in their current situation.

I agree. I didn't suggest gov't had anything to do w/ these potential failures. I'm just pointing out that big business fails frequently. Often b/c of competition. They don't need bailouts, b/c they're proven losers. And we don't need gov't safety nets getting in the way of the winners.

While tragic, I won't miss My Space. It seemed like a good idea at first but along came a better mouse trap - Facebook - and they didn't compete.

(11-29-2011 02:12 PM)mlb Wrote:  Kmart and Sears never kept up with times in retail... specifically inventory management. Walmart is definitely a shining example of IT's place in the day to day operations of a retail store.

I thought I read an article once that an MBA at Sears had an online Amazon-esque business plan for Sears, years before Amazon, but it was dismissed by Sear's famously buttoned up management.

Interestingly enough, the management at Sears was one of the first to embrace MBAs and college edumakation as advancement requirements within Corporate and at the Store level. Is that indicative of their failure? Not sure but there have been a wealth of business cases written about Sears' failure and missed opportunities.

My grandfather was the only store manager in all of Sears-land without a college degree by the time he retired in the late 70's. In his will, he stated he wanted to be buried with only two accutrements; his wedding ring and his gold Sears retirement ring.

(11-29-2011 02:55 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(11-29-2011 02:12 PM)mlb Wrote:  Kmart and Sears never kept up with times in retail... specifically inventory management. Walmart is definitely a shining example of IT's place in the day to day operations of a retail store.

I thought I read an article once that an MBA at Sears had an online Amazon-esque business plan for Sears, years before Amazon, but it was dismissed by Sear's famously buttoned up management.

Interestingly enough, the management at Sears was one of the first to embrace MBAs and college edumakation as advancement requirements within Corporate and at the Store level. Is that indicative of their failure? Not sure but there have been a wealth of business cases written about Sears' failure and missed opportunities.

My grandfather was the only store manager in all of Sears-land without a college degree by the time he retired in the late 70's. In his will, he stated he wanted to be buried with only two accutrements; his wedding ring and his gold Sears retirement ring.

Sears was the WalMart of its day. Very successful, nearly omnipresent, and very reliable. It too bullied suppliers and dictated its own terms.

That being said, they didn't address the changing marketplace, particularly starting in the '80s.

Walmart has been incredible in terms of efficiency, and customer service. They changed the country, maybe the world, w/ their demands for inventory management and price controls. However, I'm not a fan of their treatment of suppliers.

Will they be dislodged like Sears? Maybe, but their target is basics needed by everybody. Sears changed to target the preferences and fashions of the middle class who's tastes changed w/ affluence (or affluence gained by borrowing).

(11-29-2011 02:29 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(11-29-2011 02:12 PM)mlb Wrote:  Well... among the ones I'm familiar with (Kmart/Sears and Sony), I'd say they were extremely poorly run and the gov't had nothing to do with their issues.

Kmart and Sears never kept up with times in retail... specifically inventory management. Walmart is definitely a shining example of IT's place in the day to day operations of a retail store.

Sony, on the other hand, would probably be in better shape had they actually taken IT security seriously. They had no comprehensive strategy to deal with security and they paid the price (and have been hacked multiple times). Microsoft took their network security seriously and it is now paying dividends to them. Had there been more stringent regulations on safeguarding customer information then Sony would probably be in better shape today... not that I'm arguing for more regulation in general.

Anyway... I think, at least among those 2 brands, you can blame poor management over any kind of gov't intervention that has caused them to be in their current situation.

I agree. I didn't suggest gov't had anything to do w/ these potential failures. I'm just pointing out that big business fails frequently. Often b/c of competition. They don't need bailouts, b/c they're proven losers. And we don't need gov't safety nets getting in the way of the winners.

Yes...That is why only coercive government granted monopolies remain in place for ever. Market monopolies must constantly respond to signals from the consumer and continue to compete for their business...otherwise...they lose market share and disappear.

Seems Sears would have adopted the Amazon-esque idea since their catalog service was what built them initially. Seems they just stopped innovating.

(11-29-2011 05:02 PM)Raider_ATO Wrote:  Seems Sears would have adopted the Amazon-esque idea since their catalog service was what built them initially. Seems they just stopped innovating.

Don't hate Sears too much. They had a tough time w/ branding. Their fashion goods became out-of-vogue in the 1980s, and started to decline. Many other in-store departments fared reasonably well, and they were flexible enough to establish Sears Hardware stores, and leverage a strength.

However, when you look at some of the competition they faced over the decades, Chess King, The Gap, American Appearal, JC Penney, Banana Republic, Montgomery Wards, etc, you see those companies have done as bad, or even worse, than Sears.

Many of those companies went all out against traditional dept stores, and in the end, both sides lost.

As for returning to their roots, I agree w/ you. Amazon is really just a high-tech catalog store, much like the Sears and Wards catalogs of yore. And yes, Amazon has a bed rep w/ its suppliers too.