Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

foxbusiness.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 410 posts

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#401

Post by mcv »

droopyEyelids wrote: post #393
rlpb wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of abuse is apparently common enough that there's an EU directive that limits this abuse in the EU: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2... In the UK, for example, even before the EU directive, unpaid commercial debts accrue interest and late payment penalties and can be claimed retrospectively for up to six years. This means that you can quite legally wait until you've stopped doing…

This is the first concrete example I've read of the EU being drastically more pro-business than the USA. Very interesting. And for someone who wants to point out the lack of that regulation in the USA is still "pro-business" I'd say it's pro-monopoly, and against the 'culture of business' that was traditionally a large part of the US.

It seems to me that the US's attitude of being pro-business is to have as little regulation as possible and allow many forms of anticompetitive behaviour, whereas the EU is actively involved in regulating the market to keep it free and accessible for everybody.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#402

Post by macNchz »

stephenhuey wrote: post #242
jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wal-Mart have always been pure bastards to their supply chain. My family had a small manufacturing business that went bankrupt years ago. At one point we were making a part that ultimately ended up on a WM product. Periodically WM's folks would come around and do a strong arm routine trying to renegotiate the contract. It got bad enough my dad adopted the habit of bringing a couple of the very burly folks that worked…

Someone close to me related the story of when they almost put one of their products in Wal-Mart's stores in Canada about 2 decades ago. One big showstopper was that they were asking for the quality to be reduced so that the price could be lower. The vendor I know refused, saying that their product lasts a long time and they are proud of it and they wouldn't sign unless that stipulation was removed. A few months later…

This is very common among big box stores as far as I know–often companies will make a special cheaper version just to get the deal done so they can sell in these big chain stores.

I often keep an eye on the product number if I'm every buying electronics or tools at a big box store to see if it's different than what I find online for what is ostensibly the same exact product, as that can be an indication that you're buying a cheapened version.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#403

Post by zaccus »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #397
zaccus wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a publicly traded company, yes they do. Customer satisfaction only matters to the extent that it increases shareholder value.

> Customer satisfaction only matters to the extent that it increases shareholder value. Which it does, so it is a completely valid option. There is absolutely nothing forcing them to pick any particular use for the money. Both uses benefit the company in some way. Both uses are fine. It's not like they're burning it.

It may, it may not. If not lowering prices benefits shareholders more, then that is what they have to do.

>There is absolutely nothing forcing them to pick any particular use for the money.

Except this legal precedent right here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#404

Post by gumby »

__d__ wrote: post #220

I sold to Walmart for 4 years. In the beginning we believed we were lucky to become vendors. Then we realized how much stress they created. Every single year they would short pay our invoices. We would have to submit a claim with Walmart accounting. This process was completely and utterly time consuming. But the worst of it, they wouldn't pay the invoices owed until a year later. It's hard to float a $100,000 short p…

In the 90s I had this problem with Sun Microsystems (it's called "aging payables"). If you give a discount for prompt payment they take the discount and pay when they want. If you charge a penalty they pay when they want and ignore the penalty.

I needed to make payroll so drove over to HQ to try to get payment. They wouldn't even let me in past the lobby. Finally I just asked everyone who walked in, "Oh, are you here to try to get them to pay their overdue bill as well?"

Eventually a confused looking guy came out and handed me a check.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#405

Post by emodendroket »

astrodust wrote: post #400
emodendroket wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're liquidating the business, as the OP describes, I doubt that's your biggest concern.

Lawsuits are expensive and utterly pointless if you can't see them through to completion.

I don't see what one objection has to do with the other.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#406

Post by emodendroket »

throwawaymanbot wrote: post #398
emodendroket wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure small and medium businesses are really the "bedrock of American capitalist power." Maybe you could argue they're the bedrock of American values or something like that.

Just to see if we were right or wrong, I found this article. https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/77398 Here are stand out ones from the article. For just small business alone. I actually thought middle size business would have had figures like this. * Small businesses create 75 percent of the net new jobs in our economy. * Small businesses pay more than 44 percent of the nation's private payroll. * More than 50 perc…

Those numbers are certainly much better than I expected, but "capitalist power" is kind of abstract and I was thinking such a thing was better represented by GM, Lockheed Martin, Apple, etc. -- i.e., companies with resources and influence to rival some sovereign powers.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#407

Post by Bartweiss »

jjeaff wrote: post #375
Bartweiss wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot like this, as I understand it. Publicly traded companies have a fair bit of information generally available, but for a private supplier you might well demand some financials to establish enough confidence to pair with them. What's distinctive here, I guess, is that Walmart has the weight to get that info and then start making demands instead of just deciding whether to trust the partner.

It's not like you are required to sell to Walmart. You can always refuse. Plenty of successful companies don't sell anything to Walmart.

The FastCompany article linked in the comments is interesting on that, though. (https://www.fastcompany.com/47593/wal-mart-you-dont-know)

In 2002, Walmart did more business than its next 6 grocery and general-good competitors combined. Something like that is presumably still true if you restrict to brick-and-mortar spending. If you sell something mass-market (e.g. pickles), a huge portion of all shopping happens at Walmart - you can get beaten by a competitor just for not playing ball with one retailer. Similarly, struggling companies can be saved by Walmart (e.g. Levis), but only if they concede to whatever Walmart demands.

I'm not going to take the anti-capitalist tack, here. When Walmart tells Levis to fix their supply chain and introduce products at a lower price point, that's how markets should work. They demanded reform, and that's what saved Levis - they might not even have needed to sell at Walmart if those changes had come sooner.

But the larger pattern is troubling. Walmart has so much power over smaller suppliers that it's like informal ownership - they're vertically integrating with none of the legal conditions or risk. And that helps them drive pretty serious ethical issues without ever taking direct action. Everything from monopoly creation to violation of labor laws to environmental devastation (mostly overseas) stems from Walmart's pricing demands.

They may not ask for anything unethical, but asking for a 5% price cut every year means something has to give. With such enormous legislative influence, they can bend laws and trade agreements to favor their model. With the freedom to change suppliers and limited legal accountability for their suppliers' actions, they can work with whoever's willing to behave worst, and give them a market that cripples everyone better behaved. So you don't have to sell for Walmart, but in a lot of industries you can expect to suffer for those scruples.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#408

Post by vgt »

JPKab wrote: post #394
__d__ wrote: post #220

I sold to Walmart for 4 years. In the beginning we believed we were lucky to become vendors. Then we realized how much stress they created. Every single year they would short pay our invoices. We would have to submit a claim with Walmart accounting. This process was completely and utterly time consuming. But the worst of it, they wouldn't pay the invoices owed until a year later. It's hard to float a $100,000 short p…

Just to be clear, there is nothing new here. I did retail data analytics on behalf of large CPG companies with their Walmart, Target, Costco data for a few years. Walmart made it very, very clear for several years now that their sales/inventory data, and any apps the vendors build using it, couldn't be on AWS. It made things very challenging for us, because Azure is too expensive and Google Cloud (especially at the t…

Googler here. I apologize if you had a bad experience with Google support. We've had various tiers of support, all the way up to dedicated engineers. Can you please share your viewpoint here, or your experiences?

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#409

Post by throwawaymanbot »

emodendroket wrote: post #406
throwawaymanbot wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to see if we were right or wrong, I found this article. https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/77398 Here are stand out ones from the article. For just small business alone. I actually thought middle size business would have had figures like this. * Small businesses create 75 percent of the net new jobs in our economy. * Small businesses pay more than 44 percent of the nation's private payroll. * More than 50 perc…

Those numbers are certainly much better than I expected, but "capitalist power" is kind of abstract and I was thinking such a thing was better represented by GM, Lockheed Martin, Apple, etc. -- i.e., companies with resources and influence to rival some sovereign powers.

yea, I hear ya! I can live with that :)

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#410

Post by acoard »

andrewl wrote: post #382
tomsthumb wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a great writeup on a company that experience similar: https://www.fastcompany.com/54763/man-who-said-no-wal-mart

That story, by Charles Fishman, is part of his book The Wal-Mart Effect: How the World's Most Powerful Company Really Works--and How It's Transforming the American Economy : https://smile.amazon.com/dp/0143038788 It's worth reading.

"Buy it from Amazon!" Oh, how fitting.
Post reply on HN