Low, low prices: Target beats Wal-Mart...

[Thomas Rogers]

...beats them in prices on many everyday items as the article linked below states.



I think Target also beats Wal-Mart in the "average number of teeth per customer" statistic. However, Wal-Mart will not be totally beaten as they lead Target in the "number of customers wearing NASCAR t-shirts" area.



TJR

 

[Andy Chase]

I like to shop at the "high class" discount Target over Wal-Mart. Partly because my mom has worked in their corporate offices for 25-30 years. The stores are much cleaner, and I think their quality is better too IMO.

 

[H D]

Their products are definitely better. Their stores are definitely cleaner. Their employees are of the same standard. Their business practices, as far as I know, are not quite as ruthless. If there was one closer than 50 miles from me, we'd probably shop there more often. We do have a Wal-Mart but I refuse to shop there. Not for any reason other than their product quality though. In every other aspect, I believe Wal-Mart is an incredible business model.



Good for Target. Reminds me of how Subway has overtaken McDonalds.

 

[Tom Schindler]

But Wal*Mart said they have the best prices, period.



I prefer to shop at target over Wal*Mart. At least when I leave Target, I don't feel the need to take a shower.



Theresa also works for Target, so I get a discount on everything. They are a great company to work for and they offer their employees things that Wal*Mart would not dream of.





Tom

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Hugh,



Subway has surpassed McDonalds in number of store locations, worldwide, but that's about it, IMHO. I think they have grown too quickly, ala Boston Market and Krispy Kreme. Also, like another doughnut franchize (Dunkin), Subway locations seem to pop up almost on top of one another, and in small areas of existing locales (convenience store / gas station, etc).



I'm not trying to stick up for McDonalds, just bring up a cautionary. I too think WalMart's business model (and technology behind it) is superb. Also, as for WalMart quality (oxymoron?) for me, its a non-issue, because when I shop there it is for a low price on a national brand.



We just got a super Walmart opened up near us. It is a converted, older Walmart that was expanded. It is still being worked on. I've checked their grocery prices. Better on the national brands than the competitors, but I suspect I'd do better on the value brand items by simply going to Aldi.



As for fresh stuff, I prefer to go to a true produce, butcher, and fish market., and am lucky enough that all are conveniently located.



TJR

 

[H D]

I don't disagree with you assessment of Subway, just thought of making a comparison to a smaller chain surpassing a dominant chain in some way. I'd say Subway's quality is more akin to that of Wal-Mart. When compared to Firehouse Subs or even Quiznos, they are inferior in quality. Luckily for me, we have a local sub shop called Brian's Subs which is amazing and the owner is always there and makes it a point to know his customer's by name and with time memorizes their favorite subs. No chain will ever beat that.



I've heard of Aldi, but never been in one. Where I live now, we have a Kroger and a Piggly Wiggly. Kroger is the obvious choice. And for fresh stuff, I agree. Farms are a great portion of this area so locally grown produce is easy to come by. The butcher we use is second to none. My venison processor is really good, too. No good fish market unfortunately, but Savannah is close enough for a weekend trip.



As a former member of Wal-Mart products en-mass as an employee of Sam's Club while in college, I got firsthand knowledge of their food. I worked in the frozen foods, cooler, and dairy section mostly. It's cheap for a reason. I respect my body more than putting those foods in my body. But for toiletries and other easily purchased bulk items, it was great, especially as a college student.

 

[Tom Schindler]

Aldi is awesome. Double back guarentee.



You buy something and don't like it, you get your maney back AND another item to give you another chance to try it.





Tom

 

[Rick Kent]

Target good, Walmart bad.



Unfortunately, they both seem to share the same philosophy on checkout lanes.



38 checkout lanes, one at each end open and 36 in the middle closed. :angry:

 

[Thomas Rogers]

fkent,



It's called exercise... It's a good thing. LOL. Also, depending on which end of the store you came in, one of those two end lines will be close(r), right?



Target and its red color gets a little, well, much. And, what's with those "red balls" out front I'm just glad Best Buy didn't do the same with the balls.



TJR

 

[gary s]

imo, the comparison is apples & oranges.

walmart provides more with garden, vehicle service, hair/nail, optical, and more.

you could argue quality, but from experience i can't agree.

i also shop target and i have to agree they have a better interior look of walmart. the items i feel are simalir to wmart are placed in a "nicer" enviorment. better appearance.

either way, both work and have good prices.

 

[Kevin Lang]

I think they have grown too quickly, ala Boston Market and Krispy Kreme.

IIRC, McDonald's had the majority share of Boston Market stock for much of its existence.

And, what's with those "red balls" out front I'm just glad Best Buy didn't do the same with the balls.

Maybe their designer went to Costa Rica? I've asked myself the same question many a time.



I'm going to weigh in and say that I too prefer target to walmart, mainly for the "classier" image. However, I find that with my local Targets, if you start to look closely at the details, it starts to fall back to walmart levels. (As was mentioned already, employees are pretty much of the same stereotype at each, and I find mislabeled products and the mothers of all dust bunnies on back shelves)



Still better than walmart where you have to dodge buckets catching rainwater leaking in, avoid weird brown stains on the floors, deal with the hellish din of screaming babies (The military could record its sleep deprivation tapes there), and have to speak Spanish to accomplish anything.



One thing I've noticed is that Walmart, when it is in an area that isn't still run by prudes, sells alcoholic products. Targets in the same areas did not.

walmart provides more with garden, vehicle service, hair/nail, optical, and more.

I wouldn't trust walmart with anything but garden, and that's only because I could easily hire a few illegals to do my gardening for me & buy the plants at the SAME place.

 

[Tom Schindler]

Unfortunately, they both seem to share the same philosophy on checkout lanes.

That is interesting that you say that. One of Targets policy is that when ever lines get more that so many people in it, they add more registers immediatly.



Almost all of the employees are cross trained for everything so they can call on the radio and employees grab a register.



Sounds like it is a manager issue at your store.

And, what's with those "red balls" out front I'm just glad Best Buy didn't do the same with the balls.

They are suposed to be a 3D version of the bullseye on a target. I agree they look goofy, but Target Corp. paid big money for someone to come up with that design and they are REALLY proud of it. I agree with you, I think they are pretty lame looking.





Tom

 

[Johnny O]

Did Target find someplace cheaper than China to buy their stuff from? If Wal-Mart ever went bankrupt, China would go under in a week.

 

[Tom Schindler]

Did Target find someplace cheaper than China to buy their stuff from?

No, they just don't need to mark up their prices higher.





Tom

 

[Thomas Rogers]

JohnnyO,



Funny about the China comment. I find it ironic that people still bash WalMart for being a big (the biggest) American retail importer from China. Well, they have to get that crap from somewhere. The textile industry died in the US long before WalMart came to the forefront.



Likewise, the cheap Chinese crap is only part of what they sell. They do sell good, old, American national brands at cheap prices. Those brands, their distribution and their production keeps Americans employed.



MSNBC had another program on last night about the "New Age of WalMart." It was interesting, and it talked a lot about the attempted unionization of WalMart. Actually, as I consider it, WalMart is probably one company that *might* benefit from unionization. I say that because I think it could work in their favor, especially in order to counter Target, etc. They certainly need to do something. Most of their new stores are nice, clean, and have pretty respectable looking employees. However, their "older", smaller stores in certain communities are simply depressing, with many employees that seem otherwise unemployable. Put frankly, many, respectable people don't want to shop in that type of an environment. Better pay, better benefits WOULD LIKELY bring a better class of employee.



TJR

 

[Johnny O]

Funny about the China comment. I find it ironic that people still bash WalMart for being a big (the biggest) American retail importer from China. Well, they have to get that crap from somewhere. The textile industry died in the US long before WalMart came to the forefront.

Yup.

My issue is with our Federal govt, which is largely responsible for making manufacturing in the U.S. unprofitable and uncompetitive, while doing nothing to level the playing field against China and other countries that operate with nowhere near the environmental and worker regulations that we have to abide.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

JohnnyO,



I agree with you on pointing a finger at our federal govt. I say "a" finger, because I think there is shared blame.



Our country grew rapidly for several hundred years in population and exports because of its cheap, growing labor pool and its natural resources. Along the way, we created dirty, polluted cities and we had people working in harsh conditions. It took generations to get better working conditions, cleaner production, cleaner cities. We made these improvements because it was the right thing to do, in the long haul.



Over the past several decades China has become that "New world", that we were in the so many centuries before. The biggest difference is that they have BILLIONS of people, many living at or near what we would consider a poverty level and they are ready, willing, and able to work to produce...just as those coming to this country 100, 200 years ago were.



China will get there, both in human rights, worker rights, and environmental protection, but it will take time. The biggest difference between us and them, was that AS we were growing, prospering and producing for ourselves and the rest of the world, we were NEW, with an influx of new people, new ideas, and being run by a new and ever changing government, built first and foremost on democratic principles. China, in contrast is old (ancient), and until recently closed to foreigners, and not growing in its new ideas, new people (again, foreigners). But that is changing. For them, it will take time.



I'm not apologizing for China. I'm just commenting on the differences, and some of the similarities between China of today, and our country 100, 200 years ago.



Lastly, because of all this, China is the dominate producer for the world, for no other reason than the availability of "cheaper" labor, and the ability to set up more cost effective production facilities. That, again, is why our country started to dominate 100 and 200 years ago; for those very same reasons. We have matured. So too will China.



TJR

 

[Bill V]

Quote:



Unfortunately, they both seem to share the same philosophy on checkout lanes.

That is interesting that you say that. One of Targets policy is that when ever lines get more that so many people in it, they add more registers immediatly.

Yeah, I thought that was interesting too. At the Targets around here, I've never had to stand in a line--lanes seem to regularly open and close to adjust to the number of customers. While at any local Walmart, I always need to budget an extra 20 minutes for any visit to stand in line waiting to be checked out.



Then again, I live in the Twin Cities--I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Targets here within arms reach of corporate headquarters maintain a higher standard than many which are further away.



Re: the red balls outside Target (and similar items outside other stores, such as large sports balls outside Dick's Sporting Goods, etc.)--I always thought that they were cement barricades, to keep thieves from entering after hours by crashing a vehicle through the front door. I have nothing to back that up--it was just my hypothesis. If the hypothesis is correct, then the color/decoration would just be a way to make them look less conspicuous.



Re: Subway being compared to McDonald's, Dunkin, etc.--Yes, they've grown fast, but I don't think they've overextended their reach the way that Krispy Kreme did a few years ago. They've kept their stores small, their menu limited-yet-flexible, and from the consumer side, it seems to be working. Can't compare it to Dunkin, as there are none of those around here, so I don't know much about them. (Although the couple times I've visited one while traveling, I've thought their product tasted awful.) And Boston Market moved out of town about the same time I was moving in, so I never really have experienced them.



I would think a more interesting comparison for Subway would be to either Starbucks or Caribou--similarly limited menus, similarly small stores, similar rapid growth, etc. (Those comparisons are all from a consumer point of view. Don't know how they compare business-wise.)

 

[Mark K 2]

Around the country, I hear people complaining that Walmart is a pig sty. It must be a regional thing. The Walmarts here rival Target in clientele and cleanliness.

 

[Johnny O]

My dad is a retired sales executive who worked for S.C. Johnson (aka Johnson Wax). He told me that Target spends the most money per square foot on cleaning their stores, Wal-Mart isn't very far behind, and K-Mart spends the least. Looking at the stores where I live, I'd say that's accurate.

China will get there, both in human rights, worker rights, and environmental protection, but it will take time.

Agree. And don't forget that China had to shut the country down for three weeks prior to the Olympics so the athletes wouldn't die from breathing the air. My issue is that we make it costly to impossible to produce many things in this country but do nothing to limit imports from countries with little or no regulations, which (in my opinion) results in global net pollution that is the same if not worse than before. It's already been proven that a good bit of the air pollution in California wafted over the ocean from China.