<html>
<body>
Quite the contrary Andreas - <br><br>
Whitman County has moved considerably ahead of Latah County in economic
terms - driven primarily by the higher levels of funding at WSU versus UI
and the growth of Schweitzer Engineering. And, their ag sector is
larger than ours. This provides a catalyst for Walmart to view Whitman as
a separate market. It would seem reasonable to me that Walmart
expects the Pullman store to draw business from Colfax, Palouse,
Uniontown, Albion and Johnson. That would appear to be a sufficient
population base to support a supercenter in Pullman.<br><br>
In Latah, the Walmart Store draws from Moscow, Genessee, Potlatch, Troy,
Elk River, Bovill, Deary, Harvard and Princeton - a slightly lower
population base - and at the current time, from Pullman. Could
Moscow support its own Supercenter without Pullman shoppers?
Seemingly yes, but that is the real question. Walmart seems
positioned to take the gamble that the two stores would make it. At
the same time, the economic consequences to Pullman having a store and
Moscow not are also very real. <br><br>
I find it odd that in the convenient analysis of our local market - no
one seems to question the viability or appropriateness of having two
building centers owned by the same folks 9 miles apart. But Moscow
Building Supply and Pullman Building Supply both seem to do well - and
the Moscow store has to compete with JJ Building Supply and Spence
Hardware.<br><br>
The fundamental issue for me is not on the retail side - candidly, we
have a very diverse consumer population here on the Palouse and it
requires a considerable range of product to satiate their demands.
Who would have ever thought 5 years ago that Moscow could support
more than one Espresso Stand?<br><br>
No - our real challenge is to provide for value-added export - businesses
and jobs that produce goods and services for sale to customers outside of
our economic zone. If we can do that, we will not only want more
retail outlets, we will need them. Grow or die - that is our
choice.<br><br>
At 02:22 PM 1/9/2006, you
wrote:<br><br><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">
<dl>
<dd>I guess you would have to discuss the "two stores
model" with Walmart corporate strategists to know why they
think two stores is the best way for them to proceed. But it does
seem rather clear that they have identified two markets. And there
are significant differences in the two markets (Moscow vs Pullman).
Pullman does appear to have awakened to the realities of the need for
growth and economic development to support their infrastructure and
planned infrastructure. <br><br>
</dl><br>
You can't possibly plead ignorance about the purpose of the two Wal-Mart
SuperCenters, Jeff. There's almost certainly an insufficient market for
two SuperCenters in the Moscow-Pullman area; comparable populations are
sufficiently served by one. This is a long-term investment. WalMart can
afford to eat losses from one or both stores -- losses insufficient to
trigger an antitrust suit -- for basically eternity. Local businesses
that compete with WalMart cannot. <br><br>
What we are talking about is not the healthy competition of a
well-regulated market, and you know this. This is attrition. As soon as
local retail (and whatever national competitors aren't able to keep up
with WalMart's spend rate) is entirely choked out, they can feel free to
close one of the two WalMarts -- but before they do, they can entice
Moscow and Pullman into a bidding war to keep this albatross hung around
our neck. <br><br>
-- ACS</blockquote></body>
</html>