|
September 12, 2006 –
Perishable Pundit Overview:
Wal-Mart Distractions
Hannaford Looks To The Stars
Extortion By Government
Happy To Meat You
Wal-Mart
Distractions
When Wal-Mart
announced that it was going to retool its stores over the next two
years to focus on six target groups — Hispanics, African Americans,
“empty-nesters/boomers,” affluent, suburban and rural shoppers — it was
popularly portrayed as an end to Wal-Mart’s cookie-cutter format.
Yet the whole thing is really a quandary. First, although the idea is to
drive “customer relevancy”, it was also explained that the approach
would require the change of only around 3,000 items out of over 200,000
items sold by a typical Wal-Mart Supercenter.
This indicates that without any such change, Wal-Mart believes it is
already selling 197,000 items per store relevant to people in these
various groups!
Besides, Wal-Mart has traditionally empowered store managers to buy
items they judged would appeal to the local community and, on a
corporate level, has made a big deal of its “Store of the Community”.
Wal-Mart even went so far as to have individual stores with rabbinical
supervision over the appropriate perishable areas.
It is not clear whether this new program will supersede the “Store of
the Community” program or complement it, but in many ways it sounds like
a step backward, trying to broad-brush the issue, rather than deal with
differentiation of shopper base head on.
In fact, the six categories sound just a hint like the pronouncements of
a market research program on steroids, not real-life retail.
Hispanics, for example, sound like a target audience, but it is harder
to do a store that appeals to both impoverished Mexicans whom just
crossed the border and affluent Cubans whose parents fled Castro in 1959
than it is to create a store that would appeal to either of those groups
and their Anglo neighbors.
And look at the overlap between the categories. Surely a lot of people
who are “empty nester/boomers” also would fit into “affluent” and
“suburban”. It just doesn’t feel like a merchandising-driven revamp.
I've urged Wal-Mart with its big Mexican operation and its experience
with Mexican American shoppers to consider launching a separate concept
targeted toward Mexicans. That might work.
The “Store of the Community” is the perfect idea. What happens is that
Wal-Mart has gotten a little remiss in execution, as I reported
here. So the answer is a more vigorous and rigorous approach to
implementation.
These six categories are not specific enough to make Wal-Mart the
shopping venue of choice for these groups, and yet are just specific
enough to turn off others in the community who don't fit the cookie
cutter.
Wal-Mart’s low-price card is gold; all these things are distractions
from the prime appeal.
Hannaford
Looks To The Stars
Hannaford has launched an exceedingly ambitious
program to rank the nutritional merit of almost the whole supermarket
with a one-star, two-star or three-star system. It is a good, better,
best program and, implicitly, leaves a lot of products at zero stars.
It will probably help a lot of people as it takes random information
about products — this one has no trans-fat, this one has no saturated
fat, this one has whole grains and this one has vitamin C — and
attempts to integrate the data into valuable information about food.
It is not easy to do, and one could find issues with the Hannaford
program: most particularly a decision to evaluate all products based on
consumption of 100 calories. Although I understand the logic of making
everything comparable, I think an argument can be made that looking at
customary serving sizes might more accurately reflect the nutritional
impact of consuming any product.
How do different product categories rate in the stars? Here is some info
from the Hannaford Guiding Stars Frequently Asked Questions page:
Q. How many foods were
evaluated?
A. More than
27,000 have been scored to date.
Q. How
many products in the store have received stars?
A.
Approximately 23% of the 27,000 analyzed food products have one or more
stars.
Q. How
many foods in each section of the store get stars?
A. The
percentages of foods with stars, by store section, are as follows:
• 94% of produce
• 55% of cereals
• 43% of seafood
• 24% of meat
• 18% of dairy
• 12% of soups
• 8% of deli
• 5% of bakery
Learn more about this pioneering program right
here.
Extortion By
Government
Price Chopper paid a $10,000 fine to make a
lawsuit from the Attorney General of Vermont go away.
The gist of the matter was that the attorney general in what some of us
affectionately call The People’s Republic of Vermont sued the Golub
Corporation, the parent company of Price Chopper supermarkets alleging
fraud because it advertised its fresh produce as “Farm Fresh”.
The basis of the lawsuit was that a publicity-hungry attorney general,
who should be ashamed of himself for harassing honest businesses for no
reason, decided that only produce that was delivered directly from
Vermont farms to stores could be considered farm fresh.
This is obviously ridiculous. First, in many cases, produce from a New
York or New Hampshire farm may actually be closer to a store than
Vermont produce. Second, the fact that Price Chopper uses a distribution
center tells us nothing about the actual freshness of product offered to
a consumer. What if a retailer takes store delivery direct from a farmer
once a week but Price Chopper gives daily deliveries from its
distribution center?
Third, it is an advertising term, fluffery, with no specific meaning.
There is zero evidence that any consumer was deceived or harmed in any
way.
I understand why Price Chopper settled. Ten thousand dollars is less
than what the lawyers would charge the first week they began working
toward a trial. Still, I wish they hadn’t settled. Businesses have to
stand up against this kind of extortion by government or it is bound to
happen again and again.
Happy To Meat
You

Apparently this
human face on the pork-based luncheon meat has been manufactured
and sold in the UK for well over a decade.
We wrote about Tesco opening up in America
here and
here. The British are always welcome, but, please, leave your lunch
meat home.
|