Replies

After the passing of the late Sam Walton, his heirs took the helm and the company started becoming rather well known in vendor circles for taking on new domestic vendors (in a wide variety of areas, not just textiles), accepting their prices and terms, taking up practically all their production capacity and then putting the screws to them mercilessly. Landing that account was a bittersweet thing. Many were forced to consolidate, reducing competition but gaining efficiencies via cutting redundancies such as IT, HR, marketing, sales forces and accounting. Over time this too proved insufficient and so offshore sourcing began to be sought on the vendor side. Walmart didn't go chasing after it themselves, not initially, vendors "innovated" their way into it to remain profitable. Disintermediation came later, after vendor sources were established and producing. This was the vanguard of offshoring. I saw it, lived it. Consolidation and merciless cutting of redundancies were more or less implemented in search of greater efficiencies in order to meet the pricing demands of a huge account that had them over a barrel.

I know someone to whom this happened. But this isn't a Walmart thing - it's a universal thing. With the destruction of local and regional chains, national price competition finally became a universal phenomenon. I am personally acquainted with someone who once operated a mom-and-pop grocery. There was no way she could compete with any large scale player. Big players have higher turnover and can dictate prices to the vendor. Mom-and-pop stores have inventory that sits for a while and definitely cannot dictate prices to their suppliers.

I also personally know someone who was a domestically-based Walmart supplier, and went out of business when he couldn't meet the price they demanded, and did not want to take the trouble to move his business abroad. It's the way of the world, and not a Walmart-specific phenomenon. Walmart is just bigger, so it touches more people.