Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
gruffydd

Asda Welcome Us To A New "age Of Austerity" As Sales Fall

Recommended Posts

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/aug/17/asda-age-of-austerity-falling-sales

...A separate report commissioned by Asda also points to a tough outlook for consumers and warns of a potential spending crunch at Christmas.

...Andy Clarke, who took over as chief executive in May, talked of an "age of austerity" and said the retailer had been cutting the price of staples such as milk and eggs. "These are increasingly uncertain times for millions of families across the UK," he said.

Edited by gruffydd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/aug/17/asda-age-of-austerity-falling-sales

...A separate report commissioned by Asda also points to a tough outlook for consumers and warns of a potential spending crunch at Christmas.

...Andy Clarke, who took over as chief executive in May, talked of an "age of austerity" and said the retailer had been cutting the price of staples such as milk and eggs. "These are increasingly uncertain times for millions of families across the UK," he said.

I would have thought the large supermarkets rely on high foot flow to make profits from lower margins...two points more new supermarkets are opening in high density areas and people are throwing less food away..".bubble and squeak" springs to mind :P , less money to go around more stores....this Christmas it will be a choice between more toys or more food. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asda are owned by Walmart- champions of the lowest possible wage, which always strikes me as an odd combination- a retailer who's core belief is that wages should be kept as low as possible.

Maybe someone should point out the link between wages and spending power? If they follow their own philosophy to it's endpoint that means they go bust, as no one has any cash to spend in their empire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the supermarkets here are much the same - low wage and casualised workforce - I recall finding out that shelf stackers in the US got £18,000 (a few years ago) - over 40% more than for the same job here. Henry Ford's lessons haven't been learnt.

If prospects are dire for Asda...

Edited by gruffydd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the supermarkets here are much the same - low wage and casualised workforce - I recall finding out that shelf stackers in the US got £18,000 (a few years ago) - over 40% more than for the same job here. Henry Ford's lessons haven't been learnt.

If prospects are dire for Asda...

Unfortunately that has gone down since those evil unions were busted....

The average Walmart worker doing a 34 hour week for 52 weeks a year (e.g. no paid holiday) would earn $20k nowadays.

Oh and add in the fact that their health care "provided" by Walmart is next to useless too. Staff have to pay $700 per year for it and they have to pay the first $5000 per year for any treatment too! Good bless the USA!

Edited by Timak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the supermarkets here are much the same - low wage and casualised workforce - I recall finding out that shelf stackers in the US got £18,000 (a few years ago) - over 40% more than for the same job here. Henry Ford's lessons haven't been learnt.

If prospects are dire for Asda...

wrong, walmarts pay for grocery/shop worker is $8.05 to $11.58 this year, its maximum is one of the highest out of all the supermarkets, thats $24,000 yearly if you are on maximum, few years ago xchange rate was 1.90 dollar to the pound, so would have been £12,677 back then. now, if you where talkiong about a supermarket in beverly hills, then you are probably right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asda are owned by Walmart- champions of the lowest possible wage, which always strikes me as an odd combination- a retailer who's core belief is that wages should be kept as low as possible.

Maybe someone should point out the link between wages and spending power? If they follow their own philosophy to it's endpoint that means they go bust, as no one has any cash to spend in their empire.

Ahh, but SNACR solved this problem. You see ASDA can just trade with it's suppliers, and this means they don't need customers outside of other businesses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the supermarkets here are much the same

I understand that aldi and lidl pay very well, but the staff have to work there socks off... Edited by AteMoose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that aldi and lidl pay very well, but the staff have to work there socks off...

It's a bit of a myth really. Their staff don't seem to have to work any harder than staff in any other big supermarket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs024.htm - there's some interesting info on US grocery store pay here - not the best! I stand corrected. Though I'm not sure to what extent union busting and recession has depressed salaries.

My cousin was earning a good salary down in San Diego around 5 years ago, but not sure who she was working for...

RE: Walmart...

In the USA, Wal-Mart's wages are well below the American average for the industry with many of their employees able to claim the equivalent of UK income support.

Wal-Mart are famously anti-union and practice the hiring of part-time, temporary and casual labour to try to get around employment legislation, usually dismissing workers before they are entitled to claim redundancy and unfair dismissal.[68]

http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=2606

Edited by gruffydd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that aldi and lidl pay very well, but the staff have to work there socks off...

What is wrong with that......most would work their socks off if they were paid very well.....being paid very well does not always last forever, anyone if in that situation should make the most of it whilst it lasts.....then sit back relax and enjoy the fruits of your hard earn labour if fortunate to be able to do so.....the future is unknown, so make the most of the here and now and what is the known while it lasts. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asda are owned by Walmart- champions of the lowest possible wage, which always strikes me as an odd combination- a retailer who's core belief is that wages should be kept as low as possible.

Maybe someone should point out the link between wages and spending power? If they follow their own philosophy to it's endpoint that means they go bust, as no one has any cash to spend in their empire.

They've been doing very well with this philospophy for a very long time.

They will quite possibly collapse under their own weight eventually but, because their model of distribution becomes outmoded not because of what they pay staff.

What they don't pay staff largely goes to its customers (who it places first over employees, as any business probably should) in lower prices. Although, contrary to the evidence, you'll choose to believe it goes in evil profits or bloated salaries to fat cat directors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bit of a myth really. Their staff don't seem to have to work any harder than staff in any other big supermarket.

Their store and area managers certainly do and based on employees per sqft of sales space so do their shelf-stackers. Although, a lot of their product is just wheeled out on pallet boards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like ASDA because their staff have a smile, and their prices are the same for everyone....no need for a loyalty card...that non holders pay a high price and holders pay the right price in exchange for their personal information and purchasing practices. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've been doing very well with this philospophy for a very long time.

They will quite possibly collapse under their own weight eventually but, because their model of distribution becomes outmoded not because of what they pay staff.

What they don't pay staff largely goes to its customers (who it places first over employees, as any business probably should) in lower prices. Although, contrary to the evidence, you'll choose to believe it goes in evil profits or bloated salaries to fat cat directors.

I'm no expert but all the published evidence I've read show they pay bloated salaries to fat cat directors, that they make huge profits and that they receive huge subsidies despite driving down local wages and destroying all competition.

I'm certainly not arguing that companies should not make profits but I dislike the way it is the ONLY aim well above treating staff with respect or spreading some wealth around.

Edited by Timak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no expert but all the published evidence I've read show they pay bloated salaries to fat cat directors, that they make huge profits and that they receive huge subsidies despite driving down local wages and destroying all competition.

I'm certainly not arguing that companies should not make profits but I dislike the way it is the ONLY aim well above treating staff with respect or spreading some wealth around.

Fine, if Asda turns itself into Waitrose with a more even pay distribution from shopfloor to boardroom and better paid shelf stackers. How is this better for low-income shoppers whose budget won't stretch to Waitrose prices and don't really want to pay through the nose for fresh pheasant and vension steaks.

Whatever you think of Asda's pay practices it does deliver value to its customers and huge numbers of them gladly and voluntarily accept it each day.

Edited by Soon Not a Chain Retailer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine, if Asda turns itself into Waitrose with a more even pay distribution from shopfloor to boardroom and better paid shelf stackers. How is this better for low-income shoppers whose budget won't stretch to Waitrose prices and don't really want to pay through the nose for fresh pheasant and vension steaks.

I think the price Waitrose charges for fresh pheasant and venison steak is quite reasonable. They don't charge extra for helicopter parking either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like ASDA because their staff have a smile, and their prices are the same for everyone....no need for a loyalty card...that non holders pay a high price and holders pay the right price in exchange for their personal information and purchasing practices. ;)

All the same but out of all the businesses in existence , yes all, i have an innate loathing for the "big" supermarkets , the ability to run loss making

branches or a line of products at cost indefinitely gets under my skin.

I prefer lots of small, medium businesses everywhere.

Yes i know it's freemarket etc all the same , i hate them. Even though i bought 6x1ltr barcardi £13 each few weeks ago, local "offie" price £18

they've corrupted my "soul" my bigger picture instinct--- phuckers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine, if Asda turns itself into Waitrose with a more even pay distribution from shopfloor to boardroom and better paid shelf stackers. How is this better for low-income shoppers whose budget won't stretch to Waitrose prices and don't really want to pay through the nose for fresh pheasant and vension steaks.

Whatever you think of Asda's pay practices it does deliver value to its customers and huge numbers of them gladly and voluntarily accept it each day.

Waitrose are actually cheaper than ASDA for quite a few things, and ASDA don't sell poulet d'or, only freakshow intensively bred chickens that taste like plastic.

Edited by Boom Boom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the same but out of all the businesses in existence , yes all, i have an innate loathing for the "big" supermarkets , the ability to run loss making

branches or a line of products at cost indefinitely gets under my skin.

I prefer lots of small, medium businesses everywhere.

Yes i know it's freemarket etc all the same , i hate them. Even though i bought 6x1ltr barcardi £13 each few weeks ago, local "offie" price £18

they've corrupted my "soul" my bigger picture instinct--- phuckers.

The big supermarkets are only good for some things, this will vary from week to week.....buy their loss leaders, some tinned and packet and frozen foods...do not buy non food items unless a special offer that week, they cost well over what you can get them elsewhere....good meat and veg most of the time is far costlier in the supermarket, eggs cost far more in the supermarkets and so does bread unless you can buy in bulk or buy on the best before date and freeze it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big supermarkets are only good for some things, this will vary from week to week.....buy their loss leaders, some tinned and packet and frozen foods...do not buy non food items unless a special offer that week, they cost well over what you can get them elsewhere....good meat and veg most of the time is far costlier in the supermarket, eggs cost far more in the supermarkets and so does bread unless you can buy in bulk or buy on the best before date and freeze it.

OK, smart shopping.

But the ability to lose money to starve indefinitey out competitors to win business, is "wrong", or is it?

Soon there will a few big companies to shop in and with it their "best " types of food to eat..

Plus everyone will work for "em" eg they do travel insurance, real estate, mortgages etc etc top selling books, dvds,

list goes on, and on, products unrelated to their core business , soon they'll be doing open heart surgery over some

internet linked robot thingy while were picking up some fishfingers.

i'd like to hear a freemarket view of these monolithic enterprises.

Maybe they are a hint to what's happening on a global scale

Edited by Zngland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They've been doing very well with this philospophy for a very long time.

Based on their ability to source slave labour in the far east- any change there will kill them off pretty fast.

They will quite possibly collapse under their own weight eventually but, because their model of distribution becomes outmoded not because of what they pay staff.

What they don't pay staff largely goes to its customers (who it places first over employees, as any business probably should) in lower prices. Although, contrary to the evidence, you'll choose to believe it goes in evil profits or bloated salaries to fat cat directors.

Those 'customers' are somebody else's staff though. My point was a more general one- it's irrational for a big box retail operation to champion the idea of paying the lowest possible wage since their profits depend on volume- what they should be arguing for is a more equal distribution of wealth,- because this is in their long term interest- a society in which the top 5% control most of the wealth is bad news for Wallmart, because those 5% won't be spending that money with them.

My point is their policy of screwing the wage earner into the ground is ultimately self defeating since it destroys the demand they need to shift the volume they need to make money.

Even a small increase in the wages of the people they currently employ in China might be enough to eat their margin if their customers wages have been allocated according to the wallmart philosophy of paying the least you can get away with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on their ability to source slave labour in the far east- any change there will kill them off pretty fast.

Those 'customers' are somebody else's staff though. My point was a more general one- it's irrational for a big box retail operation to champion the idea of paying the lowest possible wage since their profits depend on volume- what they should be arguing for is a more equal distribution of wealth,- because this is in their long term interest- a society in which the top 5% control most of the wealth is bad news for Wallmart, because those 5% won't be spending that money with them.

My point is their policy of screwing the wage earner into the ground is ultimately self defeating since it destroys the demand they need to shift the volume they need to make money.

Even a small increase in the wages of the people they currently employ in China might be enough to eat their margin if their customers wages have been allocated according to the wallmart philosophy of paying the least you can get away with.

The whole Henry Ford paying workers enough to afford the products is flawed. High wages = high retail price of the product.

It's also false to argue it's better for the economy. If you could pay the staff a £1 more per hour or reduce the retail prices to consumers it's better to reduce the retail prices to consumers.

If they're consumers they're more likely to spend the money saved on more products and services which creates more demand and jobs.

If you start paying more to workers they may just save it rather than spend it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole Henry Ford paying workers enough to afford the products is flawed. High wages = high retail price of the product.

It's also false to argue it's better for the economy. If you could pay the staff a £1 more per hour or reduce the retail prices to consumers it's better to reduce the retail prices to consumers.

If they're consumers they're more likely to spend the money saved on more products and services which creates more demand and jobs.

If you start paying more to workers they may just save it rather than spend it.

So using this logic, the economy would be booming if all staff were reclassified as slaves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see their mentality shift from high volume low profit to lower volume with higher profit.

They have squeezed their suppliers to the max even when times were good. Entirely likely that they'll now see producers go bust reducing the supply as much as or more than the demand reduces - most especially on the essential staples for which demand is unlikely to actually reduce much irrespective of price.

Say hello to stagflation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 146 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.