INTRODUCTION

Are lower prices always a good thing? It depends who you root for . . . David or Goliath. Over the years, the retail sales environment has changed drastically. Retail stores used to specialize in certain areas. They were small stores and existed as part of a community. However, times have changed. Smaller, specialty retailers have been forced to try to compete with huge stores selling high volumes of all types of items at reduced prices. Recently, the most successful of these large retailers has been Wal-Mart. It has become the largest company in the Fortune 500 (Fortune.com). Wal-Mart stores have developed a reputation for building superstores and undercutting area competition.

The presence of Wal-Mart stores brings many things to a community. There are some benefits. These stores generally offer convenience, a variety of selection, and low prices. However, these stores also come with negatives. The mere opening of a Wal-Mart often causes controversy. Then, once the stores are established, their size and purchasing power allow them to cut prices compared to their competition. This makes it very hard for the traditional, entrepreneurial retailers to compete. This problem is compounded by the strong emotions involved in entrepreneurial ventures.

The pricing and location strategies of Wal-Mart are very successful for the company, but in many cases, they are harmful to the communities in which they operate. They harm the communities by forcing out traditional small-business and niche retailers, causing economic and emotional harm. This report first looks at the background of Wal-Mart and possible ethical explanations for their actions. Then, it examines Wal-Mart’s current location and operation strategies. Location strategies include small-town locations and the use of eminent domain to secure land for store construction. Operation strategies include low prices and elimination of competition. It then looks at the negatives brought to communities from the loss of traditional retailers and the emotional attachment of entrepreneurs. Next, it highlights aspects of an ethical model suggesting a change of current actions. Finally, it recommends measures to improve Wal-Mart’s relationship with the community.

BACKGROUND

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. is a publicly held company traded on the NYSE that operates in three segments: Wal-Mart, SAM’s Club, and an international segment. The Wal-Mart store segment includes both discount stores and supercenters operating in all fifty states. These stores offer a large variety of goods such as apparels, domestics, fabric, stationery and books, shoes, housewares, hardware, electronics, home furnishings, small appliances, automotive accessories, cameras and supplies, health and beauty aids, pharmaceuticals, and jewelry.

There are 1,736 domestic Wal-Mart stores with an additional 888 supercenters (Yahoo Finance, 2002). The popular SAM'S club segment is comprised solely of warehouse membership clubs operating in forty-eight states. These clubs display name brand hardgood merchandise, some softgoods and institutional size grocery items, and selected items under the "Member's Mark" store brand. Currently, there are 475 SAM’s Club operations domestically. The International segment is comprised of wholly owned subsidiaries in Argentina, Canada, Germany, Korea, Puerto Rico and the United Kingdom. It also maintains operations through joint ventures in China and through majority-owned subsidiaries in Brazil and Mexico (NYSE Corporate Info, 2002). There are 1,004 international entities operating under Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

The company’s 2001 sales were $193 billion with costs of sales and operations a little over $150 billion. The company as a whole employs over 1.1 million people, and has over 300,000 shareholders (Wal-Mart Balance Sheets, 2001).

The focus here is on the Wal-Mart segment of the corporation and how the company competes in local markets. Wal-Mart prides itself on offering deep discounts on all merchandise it sells. It calls this low price policy “rolling-back” prices. Research conducted by the National Trust for Historic Preservation found cases of Wal-Mart selling products at 15% below cost (Flieger, 1997). These low-cost stores are typically located in less densely populated areas. They target communities of less than 50,000 people because small towns typically have no stores that can seriously compete with Wal-Mart's ability to sell at or near cost and still turn a profit. Most stores in these smaller communities are small-business, entrepreneurial ventures, and for them, competition with a superstore like Wal-Mart is nearly impossible. The purpose of Wal-Mart’s location strategy is to pull customers in from many miles around in rural areas for one-stop shopping. Wal-Mart attempts to control an “area of influence” where local people can think of them as solving their many shopping needs all at once.

JUSTIFICATION OF ACTIONS

In their desire to become the most dominant force in the retail market, we feel that Wal-Mart’s actions have some justification. Wal-Mart is by far the most powerful company in the world today, which means that they make the rules. It is important to view their practices through the eyes of a common capitalist. From this perspective, an individual can learn to appreciate Wal-Mart’s business strategy and view it as capitalism in its most basic form.

The United States of America was built on the notion of independence. One definition of capitalism is, “a social system based upon private ownership of the means of production which entails a completely uncontrolled and unregulated economy where all land is privately owned.” (Shadab) This statement emphasizes the fact that Americans can freely establish and operate businesses as they see fit, so long as they abide by the laws and regulations. Wal-Mart is an example of such an entity. The company plays by the rules and is benefiting from the capitalistic system in place.

Looking at the Wal-Mart model summarizes the theory behind capitalism. The company creates employment opportunities for those who do not have jobs, they offer consumers “everyday low prices” in the retail market, they donate large sums of money to charitable organizations, and they collect high profit margins. In essence, Wal-Mart affects all ends of the spectrum in a positive manner. “Capitalism causes wealth to be created in the most efficient manner possible which ultimately raises the standard of living, increases the economic opportunities, and makes available an ever growing supply of products for everyone.” (Shadab) Wal-Mart is a prime example of this point, which highlights the reasoning behind this system.

Utilitarianism is a philosophical theory that supports Wal-Mart’s system. Their entire existence is founded on this utilitarian framework. Lawrence Hinman writes, “The fundamental imperative of utilitarianism is to always act in the way that will produce the greatest overall amount of good in the world.” More simply put, the greatest good for the greatest number. In addition to this, Hinman also elaborates this definition by saying that utilitarianism is a morally demanding position for two reasons. For one, it requires people to do the most to maximize utility; not the minimum. And two, it asks them to ignore personal interests at the same time. Wal-Mart is doing the most good for the most people, which is why this concept works so well.

When we think of Wal-Mart, we use capitalism and utilitarianism as a basis of analyzing their actions. We disagree with many of the company’s practices. Other people feel that the company is unethical and ruthless. However, this does not mean that Wal-Mart is wrong or unethical in their choices. Remember than an opinion does not necessarily represent the truth. Wal-Mart maintains a utilitarian structure when making decisions that influence how they do business. We find it necessary to confront this issue before saying that their business practices are in need of modification. Instead of standing back and seeing the big picture, Wal-Mart uses a utilitarian approach without paying much attention to sensitive issues. In a game of survival, only the strong survive. It is obvious that Wal-Mart is the fittest creature out there.

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

There are several major problems in this corporation that can be identified through an evaluation of Wal-Mart’s location policy and strategic planning. To begin, consider the following scenario. Imagine living in a small town of 15,000 people in the Great Lakes region. Like many small towns, yours has a small downtown area where local merchants operate “mom and pop” stores. You are part of this since you own a small hardware store in the area. All of the stores around you have existed since as far back as your memory can recall, and you couldn’t imagine your town any other way. The town’s economy is healthy, with local people providing many of the necessary goods and services for the townsfolk to live happy and fulfilling lives.

Eminent Domain

Now imagine that Wal-Mart has its sights set on your town, and a vote of the town planning committee allows the sale of land to Wal-Mart. Political pressure is often applied to planning committees to help large corporations get their way. Any vote against a large company is seen as a step against progress, and politicians are afraid of looking bad. Wait a minute; it gets even worse. Part of the plan for the location and construction of a Wal-Mart calls for the acquisition of your hardware store, several other stores, and the land around them. However, it is not your choice to sell your property. Wal-Mart is getting your land against your will because the local government is using its power of eminent domain to obtain you property. Similar situations have happened in Clemson, South Carolina; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Denton, Texas; and across the rest of the country. Now, it’s happening to you.

How does this make you feel as an individual, as an entrepreneur, as a risk taker, as an American? This is your property; you paid for it. This is your business that you personally created. You have sacrificed yourself and dedicated your time and talent to the success of the store. You should be thinking; can the government really do this? Can they take my property and give it a private corporation?

The answer is yes . . . through the power of eminent domain. Eminent domain is a government tool to take private land for public good as long as they provide just compensation. This allows the purchase of land even against the owner’s will. Justifiable uses for eminent domain include construction of schools, parks, roads, highways, subways, fire and police stations, and other public buildings.

However, these uses of eminent domain are not the same as the eminent domain used to take property for private corporations. Another justification for the use of eminent domain by local authorities is for the elimination of blighted and substandard property. This area of the law is wide open for interpretation and gives local government tremendous power. If a local authority declares property blighted and substandard, then they can use eminent domain to take the property—even against the owner’s will. They can then turn this property over to a private entity. This is what happened when Wal-Mart has taken property.

The taking of property by eminent domain can have several consequences to you, the entrepreneur. First of all, the whole situation can have drastic personal and emotional effects. Eminent domain is a very stressful process because tensions are extremely high with so much at stake. Eminent domain also can take a huge economic toll on the business and the entrepreneur. Eminent domain proceedings take a long time, often up to 10 years. This matter is very complicated, so legal representation is a must. These costs add up very fast with legal rates from $75 to $500 per hour. Then, there are the costs incurred from loss of business. It is possible for a business to be shut down and the property turned over to the government before the business has time to relocate. This cost will vary with each situation. The final area that affects the cost incurred by the entrepreneur comes from the final settlement with the governing authority. According to the law, the government is required to pay fair market value for the property and pay for moving expenses. However, these are numbers that the government determines. There is no guarantee that the amount of money paid by the government will be enough to replace what was once had.

Economic Effect

Now, set aside your personal problems, and look at this effect on your whole town. Very soon after the store is built, it begins hiring many people. The employment surge sounds fine, but then your town begins to change. Wal-Mart begins to undercut the local merchants’ prices so severely that your local merchants lose 19% of their sales within one year and are forced to lay-off some of their workers (Banner, 1997). Up to 80 percent of Wal-Mart’s business comes from the loss of customers experienced by local merchants (Norman, 1994). According to Wal-Mart Watch, a consumer protection organization, for every two new jobs created at Wal-Mart, the existing town loses three (2001). Then people begin realizing that they aren’t given quality health care insurance or a pension plan through Wal-Mart (Limmerick, 1998). Directly following the lost jobs, the tax base of the community begins to erode in a fashion similar to that caused by the “white flight” phenomenon in inner cities. When less public funds are available after the loss of jobs, the city has a more difficult time maintaining parks, school, public services, and other necessary public goods (Flieger, 1997). About two years after Wal-Mart opened its doors in your community, the “mom and pop” stores began closing theirs. Those stores you remember buying candy from as a child are soon gone, and the once bustling main street is left lacking quality businesses and the critical mass of shoppers. This is not a fictional story. It happened in Holland, Michigan, and is also happening across the country (Grand Rapids Press, 2001).

Like any other developing monopoly, once Wal-Mart has driven out the competition, prices begin to rise. In fact, Wal-Mart's prices aren't as great as they appear. Wal-Mart employs a method of retail deception known as price stacking, which is purposely displaying low priced items in the front of the store and at other strategic locations throughout. This gives the appearance that the prices are all low, but the further back into the store you go, the higher the prices get (Flieger, 1997). Therefore, the more you look, the higher the prices. Wal-Mart's “talent” at eradicating other businesses brought the company to court in 1993 when the State of Arkansas found the chain guilty of predatory pricing, defined as the process of selling products at or below cost in order to drive other stores out of business (Flieger, 1997). Currently there are similar lawsuits in 22 other states across the United States. Small towns welcome Wal-Mart in hopes of bringing general welfare to the community, but many times when it’s too late, they realize the seriousness of their mistake.

EMOTIONAL CONSEQUENCES
When considering the effects of the establishment of a Wal-Mart, or any other type of major business, you must realize the emotional consequences of these actions on the local business community. When an entrepreneur sacrifices the time and money to build something that becomes their livelihood and life, they are deeply involved with each turn the business takes. These owners are not satisfied with failure, nor are they willing to accept anything less than perfection. If the business is in a bad situation, they are in a bad situation. If the business is suffering, they are suffering. Successful owners relate to their business better than anyone else can, which helps create a strong bond between the two. When this special relationship is threatened, owners stop at nothing to prevent this from happening.

Seeing Wal-Mart take advantage of a situation is disturbing. To those who have experienced the repercussions of such actions, the act seems ruthless. Whether abolishing local businesses by undercutting prices or playing the political game behind eminent domain, Wal-Mart can easily destroy the competition. Small businesses are not safe from Wal-Mart’s powerful reach. Keep in mind that the owners nurtured these small businesses from birth. From conceiving the initial plan to implementing the necessary strategies, owners do not want to see their life’s work become obsolete. They will fight the opposition until they have nothing left, but that does not guarantee they will achieve the result they desire. Is it fair that Wal-Mart can exert such a powerful force over other businesses? And should they be held more accountable for the effects of their actions on everyone involved? Either way, the entrepreneur will have to accept the plight and consequences that follow the arrival of a Wal-Mart.

Think about all of the alternatives associated with an entrepreneurial business declaring bankruptcy or selling their stake to an outside investor or fellow competitor. The options are endless, but here is an example of what might transpire. A local business owner must sell the food store because Wal-Mart has stolen their customers. It can no longer afford to be open since the store is losing money on a consistent basis. Nobody in town feels confident enough to buy it since everyone realizes how much business has shifted to Wal-Mart. Without any potential buyers, the owner must close the doors knowing that the business will not turn a profit anymore. With that in mind, owners begin searching for other ways of paying off their loans. Having no way of earning additional revenues, the owner faces a tough choice: act immediately to save anything that can be salvaged or confront stressful financial burdens head on. Tackling the latter is obviously not the preferred option. Yet, you cannot always control what takes place.

In doing so, it is important to recognize that many stakeholders will be negatively affected as well. Remembering this will not make things easier for the owner. Owners have a hard enough time getting through this period themselves, let alone when they know they are causing havoc for others involved. Keep in mind that stakeholders may or may not have an interest in the company’s financial operations. Each individual’s equity position can differ greatly, but the fact that they have invested money in the company does not change. Investors might choose to take an active part in managing the business or they could simply remain passive so long as they receive a decent return on their money. However, investors are not as passionate about the business as the ones who physically started the whole thing. For an investor to lose money and a seat on the board is upsetting, but it is nothing compared to an owner seeing a life’s dream evaporate in front of their eyes. Not only do owners feel responsible for letting the stakeholders down, but also they feel completely empty and hopeless as well.

Have you ever thought about losing everything you owned? Entrepreneurs will pin that “guilt” factor on themselves while they soak in the misery that comes with failure. Depending on what personal assets are tied to the business, an entrepreneur can lose everything if their business goes under. People who borrowed money from family members may never have the opportunity to pay them back, which can result in family disputes that last a lifetime. Small business owners who borrowed money from friends could lose those friendships forever if they fall short of repaying loans. It does not seem like a big deal until it happens, but then the mistakes are irreversible. Having your house confiscated, embarrassing your family and friends, experiencing depression, and battling severe debt are all emotional side effects from the ordeal. It would have been much easier avoiding the problem altogether. Things do not work out like that though—it would be nice if they did.

ETHICAL MODEL
Now that we have seen the current strategies of Wal-Mart and some of the effects of their actions, we must address the question of why they should change their current approach. As we conceded earlier, the current Wal-Mart strategy is clearly within the reach of the law. However, for this answer, we turn from the law as it exists today, to business ethics.

According to the application of the ethical model of Immanuel Kant, he would suggest that Wal-Mart should alter their current antics. Kant believes in the non-consequentialist approach to examining ethics. Judgments are not made based on their results but are valued based on the virtue of each individual action. According to Kant, all actions must fall within a universal maxim. This level of right is achieved when all voluntary actions can coexist in harmony with freedom. (Hastie)

Put simply, all of this means that people should treat humans as ends rather than as means to ends. Follow the golden rule--treat others as you would like to be treated. When this philosophy is applied universally, the highest overall ethical level and happiness is achieved.

The scenarios described earlier clearly show actions that hinder the potential for universal harmony. There have been cases where Wal-Mart has used the powers of eminent domain to gain control of property against the rightful owner's consent. In addition, the addition of a Wal-Mart to a new community can cause tremendous economic and emotional harm to the local entrepreneurs who are forced to compete with the $200 billion gorilla. These actions are too much for traditional entrepreneurs to handle.

ALTERNATIVES

According to Kant’s ethical models applied to business, Wal-Mart’s policy on invading small towns, selling at extremely low prices, and putting traditional entrepreneurs out of business is clearly not the most positive direction for the company to go. It hurts the communities where they operate, and it hurts their reputation. Given this, there is a need for Wal-Mart to explore alternatives to their current policy to help improve the relationship between Wal-Mart and local communities, including entrepreneurs. First of all, Wal-Mart could try to reduce or eliminate their use of eminent domain to acquire property. Possible alternatives to their pricing and product strategies include the use of local vendors to obtain as many of their goods as possible, the use of price constraints, or offering local stores buyout plans to minimize the inevitable loss.

Reduce Eminent Domain Usage

Wal-Mart could reduce or eliminate their usage of eminent domain to acquire property. This would help to improve first impressions with new communities and relieve some of the burdensome pressures on local entrepreneurs. Wal-Mart should institute a policy where they try to deal privately with property owners to purchase land instead of going to local governments first. The company should try to negotiate a fair price with the owner before using higher powers. Only if they are not able to make a deal should Wal-Mart seek the government’s assistance.

Using Local Vendors

The first alternative to putting local stores in small towns out of business is to use some of the local vendors for stocking and merchandise. By using these local vendors, money does go back into the community, therefore not only helping Wal-Mart’s profits, but everyone in the community as well. Some of the local stores may carry a large quantity of a product that they may be willing to sell. Others may have unique product that they could distribute to Wal-Mart for sale to the public. Finally, by using a local manufacturer of certain goods, the manufacturer and Wal-Mart could benefit. For example, if Wal-Mart were to buy all of its towels from a company clear across the country, the community will not be helped by this purchase, nor will the local towel manufacturer. However, if Wal-Mart makes a deal with this local manufacturer of towels, to use local goods, Wal-Mart is acting positively for the company and the community. This approach may not be the most effective for all retailers in the town, but it does contribute to the local economy in some way.

Price Constraints

Wal-Mart could take the action of having price constraints in their stores. With the prices being so terribly low, no local stores, especially the ones in the small towns, can afford to compete. If the prices could be a little more evenly matched, there would be room for the local stores to stay in business. Small town stores do not operate on high margins, and when a supercenter comes in and forces them to either lower their prices more or go out of business, the local stores will try to lower their price and compete, eventually going out of business with a greater loss of money and time. With constraints on the prices at Wal-Mart, these local entrepreneurs may have a chance to withstand the Wal-Mart competition and remain in business for years and generations to come.

Planned Buyouts

Wal-Mart could always offer the option of buying-out to local stores. Sure this does not help the entrepreneurs pass the family business down from generation to generation, but it allows them to recoup some of the losses that are sure to follow. Wal-Mart needs a community’s planning board to approve their purchasing of land and building a store on that land, but how much does that board know? All they are thinking about is growth and low prices, not what will happen to local businesses. With planned buyouts, a store that may have the option or chance to compete with the incoming Wal-Mart will have the opportunity to sell the business to Wal-Mart without losing everything. Hopefully, with this money, the community will be better off and so will these families. Local experts could then possibly be given better jobs working for Wal-Mart. This would give Wal-Mart strong ties with the existing community.

RECOMMENDATION

There are several options to consider when faced with the previously stated Wal-Mart alternatives, but we feel that there is only one reasonable solution. We strongly believe in recommending an answer that will benefit all the stakeholders involved, while allowing Wal-Mart to continue its standard operating procedures without much interference. The principles behind the current Wal-Mart plan are genuine, but they occasionally ignore some of the facets of small-town business as a result. Our idea encompasses the best interests from both sides and takes into account the enormous influence on the general public. In other words, we believe that our plan of action is the most workable situation given the circumstances.

Our explanation consists of offering entrepreneurs a lucrative buyout deal that gives these smaller-based stores an opportunity to cash in before it is too late. Wal-Mart should feel committed to serving these privately owned stores because they are entering their neighborhoods. Wal-Mart is sometimes an unwelcome outsider in traditional small towns. In the long run, most of these small-time industries do not have the financial means or the customer base to continue functioning as a single unit competing against a large powerhouse like Wal-Mart. We believe that raising prices to meet local competition, utilizing local vendors, or offering community support for local businesses are not manageable answers to the problem at hand. Wal-Mart is not going to compromise their strategy of “rolling-back” prices, encourage smaller firms to supply their hefty demand, or teach local store owners how to correctly manage their own companies. Planned buyouts are the only way that we can successfully improve the negative consequences of our presence.

IMPLEMENTATION

We think that planned buyouts will erase the misconceptions that Wal-Mart bestows upon people who feel Wal-Mart’s tactics are dirty and irresponsible. It also makes it easier for the entrepreneur to cope with the arrival as Wal-Mart as a competitor. Our prospective plan has three sequential steps that take the form of one positive unit. First of all, we maintain that Wal-Mart must notify local shop owners at least two years in advance before constructing a large facility in the area. This two-year window gives them a fair time period in which they can either prepare for arrival or take appropriate maneuvers in negotiating a settlement contract. We are giving them a fair warning to take necessary measures according to their personal schedules. They can remain put if they so choose, but they are running the risk of losing past customers the minute a Wal-Mart is built. In the event that a local owner decides to sell out, then Wal-Mart must objectively pay a fair market value for the price of the company. Not only should Wal-Mart pay enough capital to compensate all underlying assets, but also they must include a “goodwill” payment. This “goodwill” clause will provide the seller with additional funds to cover the entire customer base that will most likely begin shopping at Wal-Mart once their usual store is closed.

Another way to encourage local buyouts is to promise the newly unemployed workers a job at the upcoming Wal-Mart. We understand that family owned stores are extremely comfortable and include long standing personal relationships. For this reason, we are making it a fundamental policy to offer any preexisting employees at these shops an opportunity to work for Wal-Mart if they so choose. The choice is up to them, but we will make sure the option is available. Not only do we desire to attract workers that have previous retail experience, but also we wish to incorporate that closeness with the community that is already in place. Our goal is for Wal-Mart to assimilate and blend in nicely. The more connections we establish from the “get-go” with the people in that area, the better off the company is from a marketing standpoint.

The final issue deals with consciously checking in on anyone who sold his or her business to Wal-Mart in the past. We are dedicated to make sure that these people are financially sound and capable of continuing a lifestyle similar to that which they left. Not only does this concern the owners, but it also concerns the community as well. Certain industries have a large impact on the economy of a small town, and if their business declines, it could lead to the downfall of the town’s overall economy. It is Wal-Mart’s choice to intrude, so they are required to make this adaptation run as smoothly as possible. The more things that go right during the time of Wal-Mart’s rein, the more positive comments would be received from satisfied customers, families, and friends. Word of mouth is the most powerful way to promote a business in a marketing sense, yet the least expensive way as well. It spreads like wildfire and can reap huge benefits for everyone in the long haul.

CONCLUSION

We hope that our report gives detailed insight into the dilemma faced by entrepreneurs who are forced to compete with corporate powerhouses such as Wal-Mart. We have examined the economic and emotional hurdles challenging small business owners. In addition, we have explored several alternatives to Wal-Mart’s currently dominating policies. By attempting to abide by this suggested plan, Wal-Mart can honestly adhere to standards above and beyond the typical business venue. Our plan is designed to improve the results of Wal-Mart and improve the relationship with existing community and entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurial ventures are the soul of a capitalistic nation, and their well-being should be protected.

GLOSSARY

Bankruptcy—a time when debts that, upon voluntary petition or one invoked by the debtor's creditors, is judged legally insolvent. The debtor's remaining property is then administered for the creditors or is distributed among them (Dictionary.com)

Blighted-- an extremely adverse environmental condition (Dictionary.com)

Causal Reasoning—decision making beginning with a pre-determined goal and a given set of means, and seeks to identify the optimal – fastest, cheapest, most efficient, etc. – alternative to achieve the given goal (Sarasvathy)

Effectual Reasoning—decision making beginning with a given set of means and allows goals to emerge contingently over time (Sarasvathy)

Eminent Domain--the right of a government to appropriate private property for public use, usually with compensation to the owner (Dictionary.com)

Emotion-- a state of mental agitation or disturbance (Dictionary.com)

REFERENCES

Banner, Bob. (1997). Get Smart About Wal-Mart. New York Times, p. 26.

Cowan, Chris. (1997) Eminent Domain or Domination? Available WWW: http://www.spiraldynamics.com/documents/cities/DRCreditorial.htm

Flieger, C.R. (1997). Wal-Mart: Evil Empire. God's Kingdom. Volume #2. Available WWW: http://www.misterridiculous.com/features/evilcorporations/walmartryan.html

Fortune 500. (2002). Wal-Mart Stores. Available WWW: http://www.fortune.com/lists/F500/snap_1551.html

Hastie. (2002). Kant—Science of Right. Available WWW: http://ethics.acusd.edu/Books/Kant/ScienceofRight/IE/Kant_ScienceofRight_IE.htm

               Hinman, Lawrence.  (2001).  Utilitarianism.  Available WWW:  http://ethics.acusd.edu/presentations/Theory/Utilitarianism/index_files/slide0026.html

               Shadab, Houman.  (2002).  Available WWW:  http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~shadab/capit-2.html#6

Innercitypress.. (2001). Available WWW: http://www.innercitypress.org/wal-mart.html

Kreegerlaw. (2001). Available WWW: http://www.kreegerlaw.com/article2.htm

Limmerick, Bill. Why Wal-Mart is Destroying America. Available WWW:

http://faculty.samford.edu/~bllimeri/walmart/

Miller, Eric. (2001). For the Public Good. Available WWW: http://www.newcolonist.com/em13.html

Norman, Albert. (28 March 1994). Eight Ways To Beat Wal-Mart. The Nation, p. 418.

New York Stock Exchange. (2002). Wal Mart Stores Inc (WMT). Available WWW: http://www.nyse.com/listed/listed.html

Sarasvathy, Saras D. (2001). What makes entrepreneurs entrepreneurial? Available WWW: http://depts.washington.edu/bapub/research/PDF/saras.pdf

Wal-Mart Home Page. (2002). Available WWW: http://www.walmartstores.com/corporate/

Wal-Mart Megastore. (11 April 2001). The Grand Rapis Press, p. 11.

Wal Mart Watch. (2001). US Labor Headlines. Available WWW: http://www.walmartwatch.com/info/

Yahoo Finance. (2002). Available WWW: http://biz.yahoo.com/p/w/wmt.html

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Mike Shafar is a senior at Creighton University. He will graduate with undergraduate degrees in marketing and Spanish. Mike is interested in a career in advertising.

Dominic Vaccaro is also a senior at Creighton University. He will graduate with an undergraduate degree in finance. Dominic is interested in business development and finance.