If any of them were honest, they would explain that the supermarket problem is borne out of a simple mathematical equation. You divide the number of supermarkets by the population. The most glaring example of why the problem is unsolvable comes from the United Kingdom. With a population close to 70 million they have only FOUR supermarket chains. That equates to one chain per 17.5 million people. With two supermarket chains we have one chain per 2.5 million. A third player in the market would mean one chain per approximately 1.6 million. As Mike Hosking succinctly put it – “We don’t have many people”.
Can anyone tell me how that is a viable business model. It obviously is not because no overseas entity has shown interest in coming here. They have no doubt done the maths. So that leaves us with only the current domestic players to work with to try and solve what is an unsolvable problem. The ideas produced so far resemble the result of brain explosions, knowing the chances of them happening are next to zero. If you’re going to the electorate with an idea then at the very least it has to look believable. So far none are.
One is communistic in nature, another is blatantly interfering in an established business and the third is nothing short of a joke. Of the three, National’s, stolen from NZ First according to Winston Peters, looks to have the most chance of perhaps coming to fruition, but Willis herself admits it is full of maybes from the start and from other comments she has made it looks pretty much a non-starter. In fact, one is left somewhat confused. According to Willis the current owners will retain their businesses and their brands. So what changes? They are still basically as they were before but somehow expected to fight against each other to achieve National’s dream of lowering prices.
As far as I can see, each city, town or community will remain unchanged in terms of the number of supermarkets, with Woolworths being the main or sole competitor. Most of New Zealand’s towns will still likely have only one of each so the so-called ‘competition’ remains as it was. I can’t see this policy lowering prices at all. Am I missing something here? You’re going to bust up private family-owned-and-run businesses to try and achieve the impossible dream. The next time National tells you they’re business friendly, feel free to laugh your head off.
This is, once again, National employing its liberal approach to solving a problem.
I would have talked to the Warehouse, which already has a small grocery section in their stores. My suggestion would be for them to expand and become the third major player. I would have offered some government assistance at the start if needed. Short of an overseas operation coming here, expanding the Warehouse is the nearest you’ll get to a new player in the market. It is certainly preferable to National’s current policy offered in what can only be described as desperation. This sort of nonsense does nothing to increase the party’s credibility with voters.
The Greens’ idea of government run supermarkets is no surprise. What the taxpayers would save from shopping in these supermarkets would be more than cancelled out by the taxes people would have to fork out to pay for the cost of running them.
Labour are coming at the problem from a slightly different angle. They are going to keep the businesses intact but stop them price gouging. This policy was launched in a store with sincerity and with a straight face. They will have the Commerce Commission oversee this particular piece of comedic brilliance. By the time the commission gets to determine the possibility of price gouging on a product, it will be time for the next, and the next and the next. On and on it will go with the supermarkets always one step ahead of the commission. It risks becoming a farce.
The end result of these election policy announcements, from a voters’ point of view, is one of despair. Is there no one in that den of iniquity that possesses an original idea? Can they not do a simple maths equation to alert them to the fact we simply don’t have enough people living in this country for a third chain to be viable? Mike Hosking calls the ideas “fanciful”. A bit of honesty would be preferable to trying to hoodwink the electorate with unworkable policies. Give me strength.
You might fool some of the people some of the time but you won’t fool all of the people all of the time.
JC is a right-wing crusader. Reached an age that embodies the dictum only the good die young. This article was first published HERE
Can anyone tell me how that is a viable business model. It obviously is not because no overseas entity has shown interest in coming here. They have no doubt done the maths. So that leaves us with only the current domestic players to work with to try and solve what is an unsolvable problem. The ideas produced so far resemble the result of brain explosions, knowing the chances of them happening are next to zero. If you’re going to the electorate with an idea then at the very least it has to look believable. So far none are.
One is communistic in nature, another is blatantly interfering in an established business and the third is nothing short of a joke. Of the three, National’s, stolen from NZ First according to Winston Peters, looks to have the most chance of perhaps coming to fruition, but Willis herself admits it is full of maybes from the start and from other comments she has made it looks pretty much a non-starter. In fact, one is left somewhat confused. According to Willis the current owners will retain their businesses and their brands. So what changes? They are still basically as they were before but somehow expected to fight against each other to achieve National’s dream of lowering prices.
As far as I can see, each city, town or community will remain unchanged in terms of the number of supermarkets, with Woolworths being the main or sole competitor. Most of New Zealand’s towns will still likely have only one of each so the so-called ‘competition’ remains as it was. I can’t see this policy lowering prices at all. Am I missing something here? You’re going to bust up private family-owned-and-run businesses to try and achieve the impossible dream. The next time National tells you they’re business friendly, feel free to laugh your head off.
This is, once again, National employing its liberal approach to solving a problem.
I would have talked to the Warehouse, which already has a small grocery section in their stores. My suggestion would be for them to expand and become the third major player. I would have offered some government assistance at the start if needed. Short of an overseas operation coming here, expanding the Warehouse is the nearest you’ll get to a new player in the market. It is certainly preferable to National’s current policy offered in what can only be described as desperation. This sort of nonsense does nothing to increase the party’s credibility with voters.
The Greens’ idea of government run supermarkets is no surprise. What the taxpayers would save from shopping in these supermarkets would be more than cancelled out by the taxes people would have to fork out to pay for the cost of running them.
Labour are coming at the problem from a slightly different angle. They are going to keep the businesses intact but stop them price gouging. This policy was launched in a store with sincerity and with a straight face. They will have the Commerce Commission oversee this particular piece of comedic brilliance. By the time the commission gets to determine the possibility of price gouging on a product, it will be time for the next, and the next and the next. On and on it will go with the supermarkets always one step ahead of the commission. It risks becoming a farce.
The end result of these election policy announcements, from a voters’ point of view, is one of despair. Is there no one in that den of iniquity that possesses an original idea? Can they not do a simple maths equation to alert them to the fact we simply don’t have enough people living in this country for a third chain to be viable? Mike Hosking calls the ideas “fanciful”. A bit of honesty would be preferable to trying to hoodwink the electorate with unworkable policies. Give me strength.
You might fool some of the people some of the time but you won’t fool all of the people all of the time.
JC is a right-wing crusader. Reached an age that embodies the dictum only the good die young. This article was first published HERE
11 comments:
If you don’t like the price you are paying for food don’t shop at that store. Go to a local market on Saturday to buy your shopping. Don’t buy the biscuits and make your own. Start growing your own veggies. But that is too hard.
But ACT stand out from the madness.
Electorate vote National and party vote ACT.
It will never happen.
I have rattled on about The Warehouse giving the groceries market a good shot. They have staff, infrastructure, and logistics in place.
It has been a tough gig for them.
If I recall correctly. The break up of the electricity sector was supposed to result in lower prices for the consumer . Look how that panned out.
Don't know if the writer has ever lived in the UK, I did for many years. There were 4 big supermarket chains, PLUS Aldi and Lidl, and smaller chains such as the Co-op, Somerville and more. Aldi has since overtaken Morrisons to become the 4th biggest. It's not about how many chains to population ratio. It's about competition, that's what brings prices down.
I am very pleased that ACT have the grace, decency and common sense to stay out of this supermarket debacle .
Instead ACT have provided policy on the real NZ issues of Government WASTE of taxpayers funds, smaller government and bureaucracy, less compliance and reducing debt .
Therefore Party Vote ACT and only give National an electorate Vote tick if appropriate .
Luxon must welcome this futile food price squabble as it diverts attention from his total failure to address He Puapua as the election approaches. I so hope his MPs give him the shove once assured of a further term.
I have no positive expectations from parties that dwell on the left. Labour on everything but clandestine Maori sovereignty policy and actions were wholly incompetent. They are of the academic lanyard class who have little idea of reality in the world. The Greens are even worse, as are their twins TOP, and TPM are largely motivated by hate.
But on the nuovo left, I thought National were more common sense. Wrong on that count.
Nicola Willis has incinerated her credibility that was not that great anyway.
NZ's dollar is sick, as is our economy. Auckland has been in recession for years, not helped by Auckland Council and Wayne Brown. But the real levers available to the Minister of Finance are untouched whilst some woman called Nicola who had no experience or idea on how wholesale or retail food sale and distribution works, wants to drive a wrecking ball through this ecosystem with no idea what the consequences will be.
If Willis survives the thumping National is about to receive, I can safely predict this countries economic woes will only worsen should she remain Finance Minister. She has a track record for it. So, she must be shown the door. And surely Nationals coalition partners will demand that.
NZ Supermarkets.
1. NZ "grew up" on the independent shops that sold a variety of food products, many weighed at the counter according to what "the Housewife [then]" wanted.
2. If anyone can "cast" their minds back to who operated a business that equated to what we have today - let me know.
I can think of 1 - William" & Kettle Hawkes bay.
3. Expansion - Foodstuffs was a "growing" child, their HQ was at Silverstream in the Hutt valley till they moved to Auckland.
That is where I was introduced to them, the forward thinking was expansion - to open supermarkets that offered a range of food related product.
4. Woolworths - that the Australians brought and they too has expansion ideas.
Now as this was happening where were the Nicola Willis's of NZ - rising and "complaining" of prices ?????
Did not happen - the NZ public embraced what was happening - and then we had Pak & Save - the idea to offer " a lower price" on a variety of food product.
Foodstuffs knew how to read "the room", did we hear any Nicola Willis's rise and say other wise? - Nah!
The Warehouse "tried" to enter the market - and it was well noted by our "esteemed MSM" just how that was 'ankle taped ' - do we see the same MS returning to those stories to remind us - Nah!
But as commented here The Warehouse is 'slowly' beefing up the product range.
Other 'foreign' players - who in their right mind would want to set up a supermarket chain in NZ - when it has been proven both Woolie's and Foodstuffs would 'stifle' such an attempt, as they have done so previously, even against one another.
Oh and they are not the only NZ Company that has done that - McCains have a 'track record of doing likewise'.
Finally - we are but a small Nation, stuck at the the bottom of the Pacific Ocean, and to import food product we pay for the shipping from to - thus when the A - rabs, those that produce the oil - "blah, blah" (which America needs to make their cars and trucks tick over) - have a 'hissy fit' the cost of bunker fuels for ships climb - so does the cost of shipping freight.
We also have production issues here in NZ with those who 'farm' the veggy & fruit orchards - their respective costs - which includes use of machinery, that plant, spray, harvest, also add to the cost of the end product.
Also not helped by both McCain's & Wattie's changing where they get their raw product.
So Ms Wills - to consider what you have verbalized, to quote from an esteemed Aussie movie (a scripted line, by one of the actors) - "You must be dreaming".
.
Blow me down, someone is already doing it... successfully.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/kai-co-on-the-verge-of-second-christchurch-supermarket-as-sales-surge/premium/EBYEEDMX7RB6ZLYNTVSNIPIDXM/
Lots of wishful thinking,...and plenty of politicians willing to help you dream!
Surely government's job is simply to police a 'fair trading' statute to make sure there is no collusion and no obstruction to competition, plus all the miscellaneous dishonesty...true labelling/honest weights/& so on....all things that I am sure could be improved if politicians looked in their own back yard.
Public opinion about trading of goods might change if it was better informed. The simple economic reality is that we are 2 small dots on the bottom of the world & our people have champagne tastes on a beer income. If we want to continue to buy frigs, cars, tv's, etc., etc all coming from overseas, we have to pay for them,...in hard currency, not our monopoly stuff. Ie we have to sell our products overseas, usually to big players who will only take our best quality ,...at the cheapest price. Our next biggest customers, often locally have to accept the second grade at a higher price. And for growers at least, the third grade is what they eat themselves!
No amount of saying..."I could buy NZ wine cheaper in London than I paid at the local vinyard , gets around basic economic facts...unless of course you want governments to compel.
The Russians tried that, which led to the old Soviet era joke, that "if Russia took over a desert country, in a short time there will be a shortage of sand."
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.