They're not taking them over "as in buying them out" but they are certainly swamping them out of the market.
Several reasons,
1. Big supermarkets have better buying power which means they can keep their costs down. They can then pass this to the customer which means we pay less than we would if we went to a smaller shop. They are more concerned with volume than margin to achieve their profit.
2. Building "out-of-town" means they can build larger shops, which offers a far bigger choice of product to the consumer than a smaller shop.
3. We are all so fat and lazy these days that we would rather drive to a big supermarket than walk to our local shop.
4.........and following on from 3, we can now order from the big supermarkets on-line and never leave the house
We only have ourselves (and I include myself in this) as consumers to blame. We constantly want something for nothing and will go to the cheapest and most convenient place to buy. If we want to keep the smaller shops, we need to use them.......not bleat about the heart of our village disappearing when the local shop shuts, while jumping into our 4x4s and driving off to a Tesco's superstore 20 miles away because they have some simply divine pate on offer this week !
2006-12-10 00:13:29
·
answer #1
·
answered by the_lipsiot 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
monopolies commission stops 1 large player taking over another smaller player to a degree.....tesco(the anti christ) stop competition by purchasing prime sites but not developing them so stopping a rival setting up nearby The anti christ benefits from price of land showing on the accounts,future sale of the land will be to non retail operators..good news that smaller retailers are going more organic & ethical which by nature tesco unable to do as they are committed to squeezing margins off their providers eg big bust up with major milk supplier who refused to be squeezed.
2006-12-10 00:20:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
By cutting prices to financially not viable in an area where there is competition until the opposing competition can no longer compete and has to close. because they are so successful that they can easily carry the loss
2006-12-10 02:11:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because the people who decide what constitutes compettitve trading, and unfair trading, have seemed to throw the book out of the window.
I think the larger chain stores give better bribes :D
2006-12-10 00:11:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by bluegreenash 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its the consumer.
(1) Price. For many of us, there's a significant savings in a year's grocery bills if we get to buy beans at $1.29 / lb instead of $1.89/lb and milk for $2.20 / half gallon vs. $2.90 / half gallon. That saved money goes to enhancing our lifestyles in other ways. In this regard, th low prices have the largest impact on the people with the smallest budgets because it enables them to save what is to them a significant percentage of their grocery bill.
Low prices reflect mass bargaining on the part of the larger stores. They also are a consequence of volume purchase and sales; (1) buying "in large bulk" reduces vendor prices, and (2) you can make the same profit selling a few higher-priced items or many cheap ones. Larger stores are more likely to run efficiently in terms of labor, reducing their overhead as a function of shelf space.
(2) Selection. We all like choice. This is a function of two things on the part of the store .. floor space that allows for greater variety, and larger purchasing networks that are funded by the company. As a personal anecdote, I remember a time when the only vegetables the local stores provided were apples and oranges in the winter. You only bought pears "in season". "Fresh vegetables" was a phrase heard June - September, and in June that meant peas and lettuce, July it meant carrots and corn, August it meant squash and onions. Improved food transportation, largely pioneered by those "big supermarkets" and competitive pressure has changed the landscape of options tremendously, and I cannot decry the improvement.
(3) Convenience
Although some people are decrying folks as "lazy", there's a tremendous gain in personal time for not having to run around to ten different stores all over town (including for many of us in areas with poor public transportation a savings in gas). If we go to a supermarket where we can get not only our groceries but cleaning supplies, bakery goods, flowers and cards, get medications, wine to go with supper, and handle our bank transactions at once, we've spared ourself a considerable amount of time and stress. That time and stress can be used in ways we find more valuable, such as spending time with our families. Moreover, the large markets often offer assistance for the handicapped, such as electric carts or a personal grocery delivery service, that few small stores provide, making them particularly attractive to the elderly.
The truth is a great many people do not live in large cities; they do not have amenities of large-city lifestyle such as a grocery store, pharmacy, bank, florist, liquor store, and bakery all within a block or two of our homes. It would be impossible given the population density of most suburban and rural areas to even attempt such a business plan, regardless of the presence or absence of large shopping centers.
(4) Strategic marketing
Large stores carefully plan their business model and marketing strategies to be competitive in the markets that they enter. They invest a great deal of time and money into studying how they will profitably attract people into their stores. Most mom-and-pop operations lack focus, direction, and future goals other than "staying in business" and "selling groceries". While these are sweet ambitions, they won't take one too far.
I live in a community of 100,000 where both major grocery stores are locally owned (and by grocery stores I mean they operate supermarket-style grocery shopping at multiple locations). This is not because big chains haven't attempted entering the market; they have. The local businesspeople have practiced the same clear strategic planning, however, and being responsive to the local market could move faster to local needs. For the last fifty years, the little folk have been buying out the big chains within a few years of their entry into our market. This is not a decision made by the local government; it has to do with some very good businesspeople being in the grocery market here.
These arguments hold forth as well for the penetration of the large shopping center (Target, Walmart, Kmart) into smaller communities as well.
2006-12-10 05:33:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by Tomteboda 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Money,cheaper products.
2006-12-12 06:41:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by Ollie 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Greetings, they in affect are running the independents out.
2006-12-10 00:12:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Do you mean how, or why?
How: They pay money for them.
Why: It reduces competition, and increases market share.
2006-12-10 00:12:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋