If you're a mom and pop-hugging traditionalist, maybe it's best to cover your eyes for the next few paragraphs. Wal-Mart
While the retail giant is looking to add 50 million square feet of selling space during the next fiscal year -- or nearly 500 new stores worldwide -- that's actually just an 8% increase from its existing chain base. Yes, when you're that big, even the smallest footsteps make the ground rumble.
The company also reaffirmed that it's on target to nail $0.46 a share in earnings during the current quarter, but let's get back to the expansion plans. Yesterday, Jeff Hwang took a look at the growing Wal-Mart empire and the implications of gargantuan living.
Oh, great. Here's another writer about to kick Wal-Mart in the shins for sport. No. Not me. I have no problem with Wal-Mart. I think the arguments against the company's growth spurts ignore how much the discounter contributes to the local community through jobs, benefits, and tax revenue. Providing cheaper goods also leaves more disposable income floating around the community, no?
But is it fair that Wal-Mart can sell groceries as loss leaders just to drive in store traffic and move higher-priced ticket items at modest markups? Won't that drive supermarket chains like Kroger
Perhaps, but what's the point? The same free market that let Wal-Mart blossom will roll out the welcome mat for the better mousetrap. Unfair advantages? Unfair playing field? That's just buggy whip talk.
Is Wal-Mart great for the country, or does it really manhandle its suppliers, workers, and communities to the point of doing more harm than good? Is there such a thing as fair competition when every company would like to think that it has distinct advantages? How will Wal-Mart fare over the upcoming holiday season? All this and more -- in the Wal-Mart discussion board.
