1.

Howi
sWal
-Mar
t'
sWebsi
tedi
ff
erentf
rom AmazonandOf
fi
ceDepot
?

Themaj
ordi
ff
erencei
nthewebsi
teofWal
mar
tandt
hatoft
heAmazonandOf
fi
ceDepoti
s

i
nit
swebdesi
gn.I
nther
eal
i
zat
ionoft
hisf
act
,Wal
mar
tacqui
redawebdesi
gncompany

andt
askedi
twi
tht
her
esponsi
bil
i
tyofr
ebui
l
dingt
heent
ir
ewebsi
teoft
hecompanyi
nor
der

t
omakei
tmor
eseaml
ess.Addi
ti
onal
l
y,t
hepr
oduct
sthatar
efeat
uredonWal
mar
t'
swebsi
te

ar
ebasi
cpr
oduct
sthatar
eneededi
nev
ery
dayl
i
feofi
tsconsumer
s,unl
i
ket
heot
hert
wo

compet
it
ors.Wal
mar
t'
swebsi
tei
sal
sodi
ff
erentf
rom t
hatofAmazonandOf
fi
ceDepot

becausei
tof
fer
stheoppor
tuni
tyf
ori
tscust
omer
stobuypr
oduct
sonl
i
ne,
butr
athert
han

wai
tfort
hedel
i
ver
ytobedone,
whi
chcoul
dpot
ent
ial
l
ytakeal
ongt
ime,
theyhav
ethe

opt
ionofpi
cki
ngt
hepr
oduct
satt
hei
rlocal
Wal
mar
tst
ores.Thi
s,unl
i
keOf
fi
ceDepotand

Amazon,
off
erst
heconv
eni
enceofonl
i
neshoppi
ngandspeedyacqui
sit
ionoft
hegoods.

-DoesWal -MartandBestBuyf acethesamepr oblemsordi ff

erentones?BestBuyandWal mart
arebot hAmer icanmul t
inati
onalsoperatingi
nt her etailbusiness.Itistruethattheset wo
multinati
onal r
etail
ersf acepr obl
ems.Howev er, t
hesepr oblemsar emor ediff
erentt hatt
heyare
similari
nnat ure.Oneoft herecentproblemsthatWal mar thashadt oendur ewast hatof
predatoryprici
ng.Inf act,manycompet i
torshav eat t
empt edtosueWal martf orsell
ing
mer chandiseatav erylowcosti nordertoedgeoutcompet i
torsinthemar ket.Forinstance,i
n
the1995caseofAmer i
canDr ugs,I
nc.,vs.Walmar tSt ores,Inc.,t
hedr ugretail
erarguedt hat
Walmar twassel l
i
ngi temsatacostt hatwast oolowwi ththeintentionofdest r
oying
compet it
ionandi njuringcompet it
ors.ToWal mar t
'sr eli
ef,Amer icanDr ugs.
,Inclostt hecaseat
theSupr emeCour tinAr kansas.

2.

-Similaraccusat ionwasl eveledagainstWal martin2000byt heDepar tmentofAgr i

cultur
e,
TradeandConsumerPr otectioninWi sconsinforsell
ingmi lk,
butter,l
aundryproduct si
n
additi
ont oot herst apleproduct satext r
emelylowcost s.Theaccusat ionwast hattheretai
ler
i
ntendedt of orceoutcompet itorsinordertomonopol i
zelocal markets.I
twasdet erminedin
2003byaGer manHi ghCour tthatitslowcostpr i
cingst r
ategiesunder mi
nedt heprinci
pleof
compet it
ion.Al ongsidet woot herretailout
lets,Walmar twasor deredtoincreasetheirpri
ces.
Althought her etai
lerwont heappeal ,t
heappeal wasov ert
urnedbyt heGer manSupr emeCour t
result
inginthesal eofal lit
sst oresinthecount r
y.
Anotherproblem t
hathasf acedWal mar ti
slaborandempl oyeer elations.Ther et
ailerboastsof
2.2mi l
l
ionglobalempl oyeeforce.Thel aborissuest hatther etail
erhasf acedincludepoor
workingconditi
ons,lowwages, t
hest rongant i-
unionpol i
cythatt hecompanyhasadopt edas
wellasinadequateheal t
hcare.St ati
sti
csshowst hatt heempl oy eeret enti
onatWal martisv ery
l
ow, withover70%ofi tsworkforcel eavebef oretheendoft hef i
rsty ear.Thepr oblemswi thl ow
wagesamount i
ngt o10.11dollarsanhour .Ov erall
,theannual wagesar eopinedt obel esst han
theneedsofat woper sonhousehol dby10000dol lars.Therehasal sobeenaccusat i
onst hat
thepaycapsi nst
itutedbyther etail
eronhi ghlypaidwor kingv eteranswer eatt
empt stopush
them outofthecompany( Brunn, 2006).

Ont heot herhand, BestBuyi sfacedbypr oblemsofwar ranties.Consumer sf rom Floridalevel

ed
alawsui tagainstBestBuyf orf
raudulentbusi nesspracticest hatrel
atedtothesal eofser vi
ce
plansf ori t
sel ectronicpr oducts.Inthelawsui t,t
hepl ai
ntiffsar guedthatther etai
l
er
mi srepresent edt hewar ranti
esof f
eredbyt hemanuf acturerssot hattheycouldsel ltheirown
productofser vi
cer epl acementpl ans.Additi
onal l
y,t
her et ai
lerhasendur edcl aimst hat
l
egi ti
mat eser v i
cepl ancl aimswer edeniedt ot hosecust omer swhoboughtt heext ended
ser v
icepl ans.Ot herpr oblemsthatBestBuyf acesar eint henat ureofmisleadingpr ices.An
i
nv estigationi ntothi sissuewasor deredbyt heAt t
orneyGener alofConnecticutafter
al
legat ionst hatani n-storewebsitemi sl
edt heconsumer sont hepri
cesofv ar i
ousi t
ems.

3.

Howi
sWal
-Mar
t'
sWebsi
tedi
ff
erentf
rom AmazonandOf
fi
ceDepot
?

Themaj ordifferenceint hewebsi teofWal mar tandthatoft heAmazonandOf fi

ceDepoti sin
i
tswebdesi gn.Inther eali
z ati
onoft hisfact,Wal martacquiredawebdesi gncompanyand
taskeditwitht heresponsi bili
tyofrebuil
dingt heent i
rewebsi t
eoft hecompanyi nor dertomake
i
tmor eseaml ess.Additionally,t
hepr oductst hatarefeaturedonWal mart'
swebsi t
ear ebasic
productsthatar eneededi nev erydayli
feofi t
sconsumer s,unli
ket heothertwocompet i
tors.
Wal mart'
swebsi teisalsodi f
ferentfrom thatofAmazonandOf f
iceDepotbecausei toffer
sthe
opportunit
yf oritscustomer stobuypr oduct sonline,butrathert
hanwai tforthedeliverytobe
done,whichcoul dpotent i
allytakeal ongtime, theyhavet heopti
onofpi ckingtheproduct sat
theirl
ocalWal mar tst
or es.Thi s,unli
keOf f
iceDepotandAmazon, offer
stheconv enienceof
onli
neshoppi ngandspeedyacqui sit
ionoft hegoods.

-DoesWal
-Mar
tandBestBuyf acethesameprobl
emsordif
ferentones?BestBuyandWal
mar
t
arebot
hAmeri
canmul
tinat
ionalsoperat
ingi
ntheret
ail
busi
ness.Iti
struet
hattheset
wo
multinati
onal r
etail
ersf acepr obl
ems.Howev er,theseproblemsar emor ediff
erentt hatt
heyare
similari
nnat ure.Oneoft herecentproblemsthatWal mar thashadtoendur ewast hatof
predatoryprici
ng.Inf act,manycompet i
torshaveattempt edtosueWal martf orsell
ing
mer chandiseatav erylowcosti nordertoedgeoutcompet i
tor
sinthemar ket.Forinstance,i
n
the1995caseofAmer i
canDr ugs,I
nc.,vs.WalmartStores,Inc.
,thedrugretail
erarguedt hat
Walmar twassel li
ngi temsatacostt hatwast oolowwi ththeintent
ionofdest r
oying
compet i
tionandi njuri
ngcompet it
ors.ToWal mart'
sreli
ef,Amer i
canDr ugs.
,Inclostt hecaseat
theSupr emeCour tinAr kansas.

-Similaraccusat ionwasl eveledagainstWal martin2000byt heDepar tmentofAgr i

cultur
e,
TradeandConsumerPr otectioninWi sconsinforsell
ingmi lk,
butter,l
aundryproduct si
n
additi
ont oot herst apleproduct satext r
emelylowcost s.Theaccusat ionwast hattheretai
ler
i
ntendedt of orceoutcompet itorsinordertomonopol i
zelocal markets.I
twasdet erminedin
2003byaGer manHi ghCour tthatitslowcostpr i
cingst r
ategiesunder mi
nedt heprinci
pleof
compet it
ion.Al ongsidet woot herretailout
lets,Walmar twasor deredtoincreasetheirpri
ces.
Althought her etai
lerwont heappeal ,t
heappeal wasov ert
urnedbyt heGer manSupr emeCour t
result
inginthesal eofal lit
sst oresinthecount r
y.

Anotherproblem t
hathasf acedWal mar ti
slaborandempl oyeer elations.Ther et
ailerboastsof
2.2mi l
l
ionglobalempl oyeeforce.Thel aborissuest hatther etail
erhasf acedincludepoor
workingconditi
ons,lowwages, t
hest rongant i-
unionpol i
cythatt hecompanyhasadopt edas
wellasinadequateheal t
hcare.St ati
sti
csshowst hatt heempl oy eeret enti
onatWal martisv ery
l
ow, withover70%ofi tsworkforcel eavebef oretheendoft hef i
rsty ear.Thepr oblemswi thl ow
wagesamount i
ngt o10.11dollarsanhour .Ov erall
,theannual wagesar eopinedt obel esst han
theneedsofat woper sonhousehol dby10000dol lars.Therehasal sobeenaccusat i
onst hat
thepaycapsi nst
itutedbyther etail
eronhi ghlypaidwor kingv eteranswer eatt
empt stopush
them outofthecompany( Brunn, 2006).

Ont heot herhand, BestBuyi sfacedbypr oblemsofwar ranties.Consumer sf rom Floridalevel

ed
alawsui tagainstBestBuyf orf
raudulentbusi nesspracticest hatrel
atedtothesal eofser vi
ce
plansf ori t
sel ectronicpr oducts.Inthelawsui t,t
hepl ai
ntiffsar guedthatther etai
l
er
mi srepresent edt hewar ranti
esof f
eredbyt hemanuf acturerssot hattheycouldsel ltheirown
productofser vi
cer epl acementpl ans.Additi
onal l
y,t
her et ai
lerhasendur edcl aimst hat
l
egi ti
mat eser v i
cepl ancl aimswer edeniedt ot hosecust omer swhoboughtt heext ended
ser v
icepl ans.Ot herpr oblemsthatBestBuyf acesar eint henat ureofmisleadingpr ices.An
i
nv estigationi ntothi sissuewasor deredbyt heAt t
orneyGener alofConnecticutafter
al
legat ionst hatani n-storewebsitemi sl
edt heconsumer sont hepri
cesofv ar i
ousi t
ems.
4.

Accor dingtostati
sticsbyWal mar t
,mor ethan90%ofpeopl eint heUni tedSt atesofAmer i
calive
withinf i
ft
eenmi nutesofaWal martr etai
lstore.Howev er ,
the10bi ll
iondol l
arsi nonli
nesales
i
ndi catesanothergroupofpeopl ewhoshopatWal mar tonlinest ores.Onlineshopper sar e
peopl ewhoenj oytheconv enienceofshoppi ngwi t
houtl eavingt hecomf ortoft hehomes.Thi s
groupofshopper siswill
ingt ospendt hreeper centmor et hant hemar ketpriceapr oductin
ordert omakel essertri
pst ot hephy sicalstores.Thisgr oupofpeopl ei salsomot i
vat
edbyot her
factorsinordertoshoponl ine.Fori nstance,onlineshopper sf r
om geogr aphical l
ocationsthat
aref urt
herawayf rom phy sicalstores,shoponl ineinor dertosav eonpr i
cesofgasol ine.The
electroniccommer cebusi nessatWal martisdependentont hisgr ouporpeopl e.Iti
sexact l
yfor
thisreasont hatWal marthasenabl eddi ff
erentpay mentopt ionsi nor dertoenabl eonline
shopper stomakeonl i
nepay mentwi thease( Chen, 2008).

Anotherdemogr aphicofpeopl eisincreasinglyshoppi ngatWal mart

,accordingtomar kettrends.
Mor eprecisely
,thisdemogr aphi cisthefastestgrowi ngdemogr aphi
c,accordingt ostatist
ics
dati
ngbackt o2007.Thi sdemogr aphicincludesAmer icanci t
izensandot hernationalsear ning
i
nexcessofsev entythousanddol lar
sannual l
y.From they ear2012, thenumberofshopper s
from t
hisdemogr aphichasincr easedbyt wel vepercent .Additional
ly,ayoungerdemogr aphi c
thatarever yparti
cularaboutlabelsandbr andnamesar eal sof i
ndi
ngt hei
rwayt owar ds
Walmar tfortheirshopping.Thiswast hefocusoft her etai
ler'
spr omot i
onalstrat
egiesi nthe
year2008.Thi snot wit
hstandi
ng, t
hemaj orf ocusofther etail
eriscustomer sinthemedi um
i
ncomebr acket.Thisisespecial l
ybecauset hisdemogr aphicofpeopl eaccountf orforty-t
wo
percentoft hecustomer sshoppi ngatbot hr etai
lstor
esandonl i
nestoresatWal mart.Thi sisa
demogr aphicwi thanannual i
ncomeofl esst hanfort
yt housanddol l
ars.

5.

Det
ermi
neast
rat
egyf
orWal
-Mar
ttoi
mpr
oveonl
i
nesal
es.

Adev elopingt r
endf ormanyoft heseret
ailoutl
etsist
hef actthatmostoft hei
rconsumersare
goingdi gi
tal.Assuch, anyretail
erhopingtoincreasei
tsonl i
nesalesmustf ocusont hi
s
changingt rend.Inthisregard,anyattemptbyWal marttochal l
enget heonli
nepresenceofan
AmazonandBestBuyhast of ocusinthedigiti
zati
onofthepr ospectiv
ecustomers.The
fol
lowingaspect sareimportantf ort
hestrategybyWalmar ttoimpr oveit
sonli
nesales:-
-Improvingtheretail
er'
swebsi
te:thewebdesignofthecompany '
swebsi teneedstoimprovei f
thecompanyi sgoi ngtomakeheadwayi nter
msofonl i
nesales.I
nt heprevi
ousfinanci
alyears,
Walmar thasinvestedheavi
lyi
nitse-commerceplat
form.Ratherthanhiri
ngwebdesi gnersto
i
mpr ovet hest
ateoft hei
rwebsi
tewithav i
ewofmaki ngitmorepower f
ul,Walmartshould
acquir
eawebdesi gncompanyandt askt
hem wit
hcont i
nuousimprovementoft hewebdesi gn
ofthecompany .

-Socialgi
fting:soci
algi
ft
ingisagr owingtrendthatisincreasi
ngonli
netraff
icinret
ailstoresby
exploi
ti
ngt heexpansiveandextensivepresenceofpeopl einthesoci
almedi a.Usi
ngpopul ar
socialmediapl at
for
msl i
keTwitterandFacebook, Walmar tcangivei
tscustomergift
st hrough
personali
zedr ecommendationsbasedont heprof i
l
est hatthesecust
omer shaveont hese
socialmediapl at
for
ms.Thiswillincr
easetheonl i
netraffi
candalsoenhancecust omerloy al
ty.

-Searchengi
neopti
mizati
on:i
nordertoi
mproveonli
nesales,
itisi
mportantforWalmartto
i
ncreaseit
sonli
nepresencet
hroughit
ssear
chengine.Thesearchengi
net hatisdesi
gnshoul
d
notonlybeuserf
ri
endly,
butal
soabletol
ocatethei
temssearchedbythecust omerswith
rel
ati
veeaseandspeed.

6.

Mobi leapplicat i
ons: t
hepot enti
alformobi leappli
cationsar easdi ver
seast heinnov ati
veideas
thatpeopl ehav e.Aspar tofthiscompr ehensivestrategytobr i
ngupt heonl i
nesal esatWal mart
,
amobi leapplicat i
onisindispensable.I
nt hisregard,Wal martwillnotdesi gnat ypicalmobile
application,butonewi thvoiceenabledcapabi li
ti
es.Thi smobi l
eappl i
cationi sintendedtobet he
i
nt er
facebet weent hecust omerandt hest ore.Thev oiceenabledcapabi liti
esar emeantt o
accommodat euser swhomi ghtnotthephoneskey padt otype.Thiscoul di ncl
udepeopl ewi t
h
disabili
tiestot hosewhosehandsar eindisposedwi thot herbusinessl i
kedr ivi
ng.The
env i
sionedmobi leappli
cationsearchesf ortheint
endedpr oductsandof fer
sal istofthe
product sincludi ngthelocationofthepr oductsinthecust omer slocal br
anchofWal mart.
Additionally
, t
hemobi leappl i
cati
onwi l
lofferproducti nf
ormation,includinganyof fer
sont he
saidpr oducts.-Theel ement softhiscompr ehensivest r
ategytobr inguponl i
nesal esarevery
i
mpor tant.

However,thi
selementi
scrucialt
othesuccessoft heenti
restrat
egy.Partoftheproblem at
Walmartisfal
teri
ngi
ntheshipmentofpr oduct
sthatareorderedfrom theonli
nesales.Ther
eis
al
soanel ementofpri
cewherecompetitorquotelesserpr
icescompar edtoWal mart.I
nthe
spi
ri
toflowpr i
cesandthemor t
artobr
ickbusinessmodel ,Walmartshouldrevi
ewi t
sshipment
chargessot hattheyr efl
ectthegeneralphilosophyoft her etai
loutlet.Addi
t i
onally,thenumber
ofday sthatpr oduct staketobeshippedt ot hecust omer si sofconcer n.Mostconsumer sare
notwi l
li
ngt owai tal ongtimefortheirproduct st obeshi pped.Assuch, customer swi l
lmi gr
ate
tothoseonl inest or esthatshowexpedi encyi nt heirshi ppingandhandl i
ng.Inor derf orWal mart
tocompet efav orabl y,i
tneedstoreformi t
sshi ppi ngandhandl i
ngdepar tmenti nor dert o
i
ncreaseef f
iciency .Inordertoimprov eit
sonl inesal es, Wal martneedst oat tr
actandr etain
mor ecust omer st hanot heronli
nestores.Thi scanonl ybedonei fWal marttakeschar geoft he
l
eadt imesi nt heshi ppi
nganhandl i
ngoft hepr oduct spur chasedf rom onli
nest ores.
Consideringt hatov er96%ofAmer i
canci t
izensandot hernat i
onalslivewithi
nt went ymi lesofa
physicalstore, Wal mar tcanbenefi
timmensel yf rom t hisaspectoft hi
scompr ehensi vestrategy
(Canak,2006) .