<!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 6.00.6000.16525" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>"<EM>On-line IKEA customers are obviously not very
happy giving an overall rating of 1.5 out of five, but Wal-Mart on-line gets
only 3 out of five, with quite a few "horrible service"
comments.</EM>"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Any way you look at it that's twice the customer
satisfaction. Point one</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>To assign brownie points to Ikea for taking
advantage of a state run health care system as though that were a feather that
was singularly in their cap is just plain silly. We might as well give
Wal-Mart major kudos for providing such great retirement because they pay into
the social security system. Also we have the little matter of the canuks and
euros who have to haul their sorry selves over to the states to receive their
health care in a timely fashion. I guess we should give Ikea credit for that as
well. Perhaps the blurb could read "When the health care we don't provide you
lets you down we provide first rate backup in the USA! (on your own dime, of
course) Point two</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Your assertion that Ikea is union friendly? Only as
friendly as they are forced to be.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><A
href="http://theunionnews.blogspot.com/2007/08/striking-teamster-pickets-shut-ikea.html">http://theunionnews.blogspot.com/2007/08/striking-teamster-pickets-shut-ikea.html</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><A
href="http://www.union-network.org/Unisite/Sectors/Commerce/Multinationals/Ikea_Australian_collective_agreement.htm">http://www.union-network.org/Unisite/Sectors/Commerce/Multinationals/Ikea_Australian_collective_agreement.htm</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><A
href="http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2002/03/inbrief/fr0203104n.html">http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2002/03/inbrief/fr0203104n.html</A>
Point three</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I guess that just leaves the environmental angle
that you vainly tried to exploit. Wal-Marts distribution system is very
efficient at delivering far more goods to far more destinations for a lower cost
per unit than Ikea could ever dream of. Also many of their new stores are being
built with award winning energy efficiency standards in place. Please
see:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><A
href="http://www.forbes.com/facesinthenews/2005/07/20/walmart-retail-environment-cx_cn_0720autofacescan03.html">http://www.forbes.com/facesinthenews/2005/07/20/walmart-retail-environment-cx_cn_0720autofacescan03.html</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><A
href="http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2006/05/24/notes052406.DTL"><FONT
face=Arial
size=2>http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2006/05/24/notes052406.DTL</FONT></A></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><A
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/29/AR2007082902204.html"><FONT
face=Arial
size=2>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/29/AR2007082902204.html</FONT></A><FONT
face=Arial size=2> Point four</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The argument you seem to be trying, unsuccessfully,
to make is that Ikea just has to be wonderful because they stink just the
tiniest bit less than Wal- Mart and are from europe seems just plain silly to
say nothing of being incorrect. The biggest difference I can see
is Wal-Mart's profits come back to Wal-Mart shareholders, many of them in
the U.S. Whereas Ikea's profits, they go to a single owner and he lives in
Sweden. Point five.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I believe that covers the "points" you seem to
think you earned in your heavily slanted editorial and your reply. I hope you
enjoy your trip to the lands of the raising tax rate and complete government
oversight. I'm sure you will feel as thought you were back in your loving
mothers arms.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Narrow"><FONT size=2> A<STRIKE>d</STRIKE>j<U>ö</U>´
så lä´nge!</FONT></FONT><BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>g</FONT></DIV><BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>----- Original Message ----- </FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>From: <</FONT><A
href="mailto:nickgier@adelphia.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>nickgier@adelphia.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>To: "g. crabtree" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>jampot@roadrunner.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Cc: <</FONT><A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 10:33
PM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Walmart vs.
IKEA</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><BR><FONT size=2></FONT></FONT></DIV><FONT face=Arial
size=2>> Greetings:<BR>> <BR>> Crabtree actually read more than two
paragraphs! With regard to the customer service URL, Crabtree neglected to
tell us that these are comments about IKEA's internet catalogue orders, not
customers at IKEA stores. Many of the dissatisfied on-line customers love
the products and their store experience, but disliked the service they received
on-line. <BR>> <BR>> On-line IKEA customers are obviously not very
happy giving an overall rating of 1.5 out of five, but Walmart on-line gets only
3 out of five, with quite a few "horrible service" comments.<BR>> <BR>>
Crabtree somehow wants to make a virtue out of Walmart providing minimal health
coverage but a vice out of universal health care in Europe and Canada, which
provides high quality care far more efficiently than America's private insurance
mess.<BR>> <BR>> Recently Toyota chose to build a new factory in Canada
rather than in Louisiana for two reasons: (1) the workforce was better educated;
and (2) they would not have to provide health care for their workers.
Many, many U.S. companies now regret the post-War policy of having employers
provide health care that should have been provided by the government at a far
less cost per capita.<BR>> <BR>> I made several more points in my
article. Your score is zero, Crabtree, so do you want to continue the
dialouge?<BR>> <BR>> Nick Gier<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
<BR>></FONT></BODY></HTML>