From Jim Gilliam's blog archives
Shocker! Wal-Mart has a lousy Christmas.
January 2, 2006 6:12 PM
Despite a hugely aggressive Christmas campaign with big stars, $400 laptops, and falling gas prices, Wal-Mart posted their worst December sales growth since 2000. Yes, even worse than last year's abysmal performance which they were overly compensating for this year.
Wonder what happened? ;-)
Final numbers come out on Thursday.
Shocker! Wal-Mart has a lousy Christmas.
Next Entry: Congress: Save $700 million by killing (01.05.2006)
Previous Entry: Murdoch: This isn't Your Tube.. it's My Tube (12.23.2005)
Read the 11 comments.
Hey Jim! Hope you caught O'Reilly's latest Letterman appearance...Dave gave him the old fashioned treatment, and like that Rush interview a few years back, let his audience help him. I pasted a transcript of it on my blog, but my formatting is a bit screwed; the original is at http://newsbusters.org/node/3454 (right wing website, but the transcript seems unadultered)and you can find me by googling baja canadian.
Which is how I found you...googled letterman o'reilly.
I'll check in with you later, as I should have been fast asleep oh about three hours ago...
But keep doing the right thing, friend.
Wed Jan 4 2006 4:56 AM
Any count on how many people lost their job as a result of your making money on the movie Jim?
Wed Jan 4 2006 3:36 PM
Tom from Madison:
I would project a net GAIN in jobs as a result of Jim's movie--especially if the movie hurts the growth of Wal-mart. This is due to the simple fact that Wal-Mart's success comes at the expense of small business jobs.
The idea that having fewer larger employers is better than having many smaller ones just makes NO ECONOMIC SENSE. Powerful corporations with immense pricing power are a threat to labor and harmful to consumers in the long run.
If you're a patriotic American who wants to keep small town America alive, don't shop at Wal-Mart. Spend your $ at your local mom and pop operation when possible. Your kids will thank you!
Wed Jan 4 2006 5:39 PM
For the zillionth time, I don't make any money on the films, and have given up an awful lot to make them. The concept that someone can do something without pursuing profit is completely foreign to the right wingers.
Wed Jan 4 2006 6:23 PM
You are kidding yourself if you think your movie had anything to do with it.
Wed Jan 4 2006 7:27 PM
I blame Garth Brooks.
Thu Jan 5 2006 12:52 AM
FYI I have friend with a largish family including two teen boys. She and her husband are educated, socially conscious, and progressive but she kept shopping at Sam's for the deals. With the help of the movie (the last straw after years of gentle digs) she is now a Costco shopper. There's a $10,000 annual swing to the good guys!
Thu Jan 5 2006 3:15 PM
I have avoided Sam's Club and Wal-Mart for years! I recently had my dog's leash break and it was so painful to have to go into a Wal-Mart to buy a $10 leash for her. I had to go wo Wal-Mart because we were driving across California and it was the only store on the road we were on that was open at that time.
I do feel guilty of violating a personal vow and I swear that I will NEVER go there again! From now on, it's small local stores or Costco for the big stuff. I just got the Wal-Mart video and Outfoxed in the mail, watched them, and plan to share them with as many people as I can.
I'm glad to hear about their poor HOLIDAY SEASON (I refuse to say "Christmas" almost out of spite. I have Jewish friends too!)
Thanks Jim for all you've been doing for our country. You are a real patriot and I wish you the best. I am a strong advocate for organ donation and I hope that you find a match soon.
Thu Jan 5 2006 4:55 PM
What Jim's documentary does which is so important is to provide information to all the communities affected by WalMart, so that they can understand that what is happening to them is not unique. It is a pattern of abuse which is nationwide.
Previously, WalMart had all the information. Now, with Jim's documentary, we can all see what's going on, and we can act, both individually and collectively, to make WalMart (aka ChinaMart) pay for its unethical and, in some cases, criminal behavior (for instance, shifting employee hours in the computer to the next week, in order to avoid paying overtime).
Besides, I love the ending of the documentary. Very inspiring.
Thu Jan 5 2006 5:12 PM
I never liked Walmart for numerous reasons, from more serious to the petty (their parking lot is always a zoo). I haven't even seen the movie yet, but reading some of the info you've linked to helped me formalize my unofficial vow not to shop there. So, I and my family of 7 will take our business elsewhere. Sure, they have the choice to do business they way they want to and I have a choice too.
Fri Jan 6 2006 8:03 AM
It's a shame that people in Evergreen Park, Illinois just haven't received the message about how overwhelmingly evil Wal-Mart is and how working there is really a form of slave labor.
The new Wal-Mart Stores Inc. location opening Friday in suburban Evergreen Park received a record 25,000 applications for 325 positions, the highest for any one location in the retailer’s history, a company official says.
Despite the fact the company says these numbers underscore demand for Wal—Mart jobs in the community, critics wonder how many of these positions are lower—paying part—time work.
So what if many of these positions are part-time work? Maybe people would like those jobs. Maybe they're mothers or senior citizens who don't want to work full time. Maybe they're students who want to work after school. Why don't we grant these people the respect to expect that they know if they want these jobs and if the jobs fit their working needs?
It's clear that Wal-Mart haters have their standard criticisms to make whenever they're approached by a reporter and that facts don't really matter to them. So, they'll just cast aspersions without any basis.
“We just think them coming out and telling the press that they have 25,000 applications is disingenuous,” says Tim Drea, legislative director for United Food and Commercial Workers Local 881. “I think it’s a PR stunt.”
Mr. Drea says he’d like to see the applications himself before putting faith in that number.
Plus, he says overall he worries that the store will hire more part-time workers rather than full-time employees with benefits.
“Wal-Mart is lowering the bar in retail from what wages once were,” he said.
Does he really think that Wal-Mart, knowing that the jackals are circling around everything they do would risk putting out a fraudulent announcement of how many people applied for a job? And, of course, the allegations that they're hiring more part-time workers just happens not to be true.
He [the Wal-Mart manager in the Chicago area] said the 325 jobs include cashier, stocking, sales and back office positions. The average pay for non-management full-time positions is $10.99 an hour.
Wal-Mart said more than 70% of the new positions will be full-time.
So, what the union spokesman is reduced to claiming is that Wal-Mart is planning some time in the future to change these full-time jobs over to part-time jobs and the unions are on to this nefarious plan.
But, go back to that original statistic: "25,000 applications for 325 positions." That means that only 1.3% of the applicants will get jobs. Applicants have a better chance of getting into Harvard (10.3% admission rate in 2004) or Yale (9.9% admission rate in 2004) than you do of getting a job at this Wal-Mart store. Ponder that.
Thu Jan 26 2006 8:56 AM