This is, increasingly, the solution to the perceived threat of shoplifting. Put everything behind lock and key.
Of course, that kind of set up costs money. And then you need more staff to run around with keys and unlock everything any time it needs to be sold. Patrons find this annoying. Businesses find the security+labor expensive.
The solution to this is vending machines. So in the end, we turn every Walmart into a big wall of GACHA machines.
It seems really harebrained because it actively discourages impulse buys, which I think is most non-grocery transactions at Walmart. Like I don't think it's good for Walmart for people to have an extra 2 mins of going "Do I need this thing".
The problem is ultimately managerial in nature. Every manager needs to improve metrics over the last guy (and over their own historical performance). So every year, you've got to come up with a "new idea" to improve your figures. Installing all these gates to reduce the incidence of loss makes a key metric improve, even if it hurts revenues overall. So you get points for "fixing a problem" while your real performance is occluded behind the aggregate rise/fall of sales in your region.
And since locked cabinets are a fixed cost that (on paper) increases the value of your unit's capital, rather than a recurring expense, you can occlude the price of the "improvement" behind the rising book value of your real estate.
In the end, these devices are a consequence of our accounting mechanics and our profit-oriented rewards. Even if implementing a policy is bad in fact, we can make it look good on paper. And since all our superiors see are the metrics on that paper, the success/failure of our business isn't realized for years after we've received our bonus and our promotion and the shitty storefront becomes someone else's problem.
Well the ultimate goal is to push customers out entirely, just use pickup or delivery. Smaller parking lots, cheaper insurance, fewer staff. Every store becomes a last mile distribution center.
Smaller parking lots, cheaper insurance, fewer staff.
Amazon already has all that and they didn't need to install a bunch of cheapo clear plastic lock boxes to do it.
Walmart's stuck in their antiquated model, sitting on a bunch of worthless real estate in rural neighborhoods with declining populations. Which has more than a hint of irony behind it, given how Walmarts were instrumental in killing all the rival retail establishments and driving down the local wages that gave their turf value to begin with.
Storefronts as last-mile warehouses for distribution make sense when you're within a mile of your buyers. But Walmarts largely aren't, because that real estate was too expensive. They're built out on the fringe and deep into the suburbs where land is cheap. Even the big strip malls and mega-malls don't host Walmarts, because they're too damned stingy. I can get my basic-bitch white cotton shirts from the Academy down the street for the same price Walmart is having them caged and ball-gagged five miles further.
Capitalists will do literally anything except pay people more money so they can afford to not shoplift.
You might need more staff but I can tell you from experience that more staff is not hired, it's just additional work for the workers already there.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
I would rather DIE than lose $6 on a t-shirt I had already written off as shrink anyway.
This feels so counterproductive for low value items. Like if I need to find a person and talk to them to get an item, I'm probably going to question whether I need it and most of the time I don't.
So look at that image then read this article
"Waste from Adidas, Walmart, other brands fuelling Cambodia brick kilns"
"Waste from at least 19 international brands including Adidas and Walmart is being used to fuel kilns in brick factories in Cambodia, and some workers were falling ill, according to a report by a local rights group released on Monday."
... "It found pre-consumer garment waste including fabric, plastic, rubber, and other materials from the brands was being burned at seven factories. The factories were burning garment waste to save on fuel costs, it said."
I always think about the actual cost per garment is so inflated. I'm sure these shirts costs them pennies to make and they sell for $30 a pack.
Learning to make these garments actually made me angry because of how shockingly simple it mostly is
They'll do everything to protect their property but slightly improve material conditions in a community.
Reminds me of a Walgreens I stopped at in a poorer small town near me that kept all contraceptive, reproductive and sexual wellness items locked up like that. Way to ensure you barely sell any by forcing direct interaction with an employee to make the extremely personal purchase not once but twice.
Or my local Walmart (small town so limited shopping options) which keeps the $5 flash drives in magnetic electronic locks, so any time I buy more flashdrives I get to play Find the Walmart Employee
In case you don't know capitolist are preparing for the upcoming revolution.
Imagine being the worker who has to lock all the formula in a cage. I rarely go to Walmart but did this weekend and boy howdy it was bleak. They also had a bunch of televisions mounted in different aisles as a visual reminder that you're being monitored while you shop.
So paywalling food is next I’m guessing
Actually, private security for specific departments is probably more likely
Is food not already paywalled by merit of being in a shop?
You make a good point
But there has to be a way they can make it more absurd
Getting a sewing maching is the best thing I ever did for my wardrobe, there may be a learning curve but at least I'm not paying the price of the machine for two shirts that cost a cumulative $3 to make.
