<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Joe, Your correct that I asked for example of an
inferior business besting a superior one but that is about all you got right.
The way I read your response is I don't care how many facts you present,
everything I say is right and everything you say is wrong. It seems clear
to me that any further discussion will boil down to my facts vs. your feelings
and Lord knows I'll run out of facts long before we plumb the depths of your
feelings. If you would like to bring this discussion out of the realm of the
'touchy- feely" hows about you explain where my "analysis" is incorrect. I
am afraid that what your example "proves" is that KB Toys could'nt
make it in this market and is gone. I think that you might be doing a better job
of making my point then I am.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>G. Crabtree</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=joekc@adelphia.net
href="mailto:joekc@adelphia.net">joekc@adelphia.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=jampot@adelphia.net
href="mailto:jampot@adelphia.net">g. crabtree</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=ophite@gmail.com
href="mailto:ophite@gmail.com">Andreas Schou</A> ; <A
title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, January 27, 2006 7:36
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Wal-Mart - was Doug Jones
Says It Clearly</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P>Gary, </P>
<P>You asked for an example where an inferior business beat out a superior one
and I gave one. You might analyze why KB Toys is no longer in Moscow
differently than I would but the main point is that they are not here any
longer and the average person has fewer choices because of that. What the
example proves is that the free market does not always lead to the best
businesses and the most choices. That claim is nothing but a rhetorical
slogan.<BR>--<BR>Joe Campbell<BR><BR>---- "g. crabtree" <JAMPOT
adelphia.net="#DEFAULT">wrote:<BR><BR>=============<BR>Joe, Excellent try but
short of the mark I'm afraid. Stand alone toy stores are struggling everywhere
for a variety of reasons, not the least of them being the internet. Perhaps we
should argue against E- commerce? Almost all of the complaints that you make
would apply, plus no local jobs, no local taxes, and all money made goes out
of the area. Moscow does not have a population large enough to effectively
support a toy store. KB toys was undergoing a certain amount of financial
disorganization at the time the local store closed. The latest trends in toys
tends toward computer/video games which are heavily marketed at other retail
outlets such as Circuit City, Hastings, Costco, Shopko etc. And last but not
least, the fact that you are using a subjective, anecdotal example. If it were
valid then I would think that Hodgins would have been toast long ago. Wal Mart
sells all the products that they do, (prescriptions, OTC remedies, toys,
sundries ) and yet they still exist. Might this be attributed to superior
service, good product selection (toys) and an over all commitment to their
customers?<BR><BR>I am rather fond of Moscow also. We already have a Wal Mart
and I'm fairly sure that it isn't killing us. Plucking out of thin air numbers
like 98% 2% and attaching them to a poison pill arguments is pure
sophistry.<BR><BR>Try agin?<BR>Gary<BR>----- Original Message -----<BR>From:
joekc@adelphia.net<BR>To: g. crabtree<BR>Cc: Andreas Schou ;
vision2020@moscow.com<BR>Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 5:24 AM<BR>Subject:
Wal-Mart - was Doug Jones Says It Clearly<BR><BR><BR>Gary,<BR><BR>I didn't
think Mr. Schou's analogy blew but here is a real world example of an inferior
business beating out a superior competitor. The mall used to have a toy store:
Kay-Be Toys, or something like that. I went there frequently when my son was
younger and my wife let me spoil him more. Wal-Mart drove Kay-Bee Toys out of
business. Kay-Be Toys had a far superior selection of toys and was by any set
of standards a better toy store than Wal-Mart. (Neither are as good as Hodgins
Drug Store but that's another issue.) What happened was that kids go to toy
stores with their parents but parents buy other things besides toys, things
that are not sold at Kay-Be Toys. In short, Wal-Mart offers low-cost and
convenience. That is it. It is 'superior' to other stores for these two
reasons only. But that is enough to drive out some businesses. Once those
businsesses leave, the folks in Moscow will have fewer choices, not more
choices.<BR><BR>You note that "many communities that are co-existing with the
worlds largest retailer to the betterment of its residents." But many are not.
It was noted in Tom Trail's post that two communities like ours were "sucked
dry" after a Super Wal-Mart moved in. For the sake of argument suppose that 98
communities like ours were not sucked dry. Would you take a pill that had only
a 2% chance of killing you if you didn't need it and you were getting along
fine without it? I don't think so. I love Moscow and low-cost and convenience
are not enough reason for me to risk sucking it dry.<BR><BR><BR>--<BR>Joe
Campbell<BR><BR><BR><BR>---- "g. crabtree" wrote:<BR><BR>=============<BR>Mr.
Schou, Your analogy blows. It seems clear to me that you have very<BR>little
understanding of how an 'all in" bet works but rather than educate<BR>you on
the finer points of poker allow me to propose an analogy of my own.
A<BR>player comes to the game and bluffs outrageously each and every hand.
Soon,<BR>his fellow gamblers see him for what he is and call him. His weak
hands are<BR>revealed, his resources dwindle and very soon he is out of the
game.<BR><BR>This appears to be the tactic of the common garden variety
wal-mart<BR>opponent. Exclaim loudly how WM will be the ruination of
civilization and<BR>will bring about the heat death of the universe and so on.
When folks see<BR>that there are many communities that are co-existing with
the worlds largest<BR>retailer to the betterment of its residents our
protester is revealed as at<BR>best, wrong and at worst, a
dupe.<BR><BR>Getting back to the original heart of the discussion, hows about
some real<BR>world examples of inferior business' beating out superior
competitors. I'll<BR>be waiting, watching the pages of my calendar flit
by.<BR><BR>gc<BR><BR><BR>----- Original Message -----<BR>From: "Andreas
Schou"<BR>To: "g. crabtree"<BR>Cc: ;<BR>Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 4:48
PM<BR>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Doug Jones Says It Clearly<BR><BR><BR>>You
are right about my confidence in a free market. Perhaps you could
give<BR>>me a few examples where an inferior business beat out a superior
one.<BR><BR>Let me use a poker analogy. If I had a trillion dollars, played
poker<BR>for a living, and won every poker game I played by going "all in"
on<BR>every hand, would I be the best poker player that ever lived?
Hint:<BR>no, I would not.<BR><BR>This is Wal*Mart's business model: saturate
the market, make<BR>monopsonic agreements with suppliers, and run as thin a
margin as<BR>possible in new stores until all the other business goes under.
Is<BR>this a good business strategy? Yes. Does it contribute to
market<BR>efficiency -- which is generally how a "superior business"
is<BR>understood to work? No. It does not.<BR><BR>--
ACS<BR><BR><BR></P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>