this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2024
806 points (99.9% liked)

News

22890 readers
3697 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

Kroger and Albertsons are the two major chains in my city (known as Fry's and Safeway here). If they merge, their only real competition left is Walmart.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if they haven't secretly merged decades ago already. Their products, prices, and branding are nearly identical. Even the commercials they play over the store speakers are the same.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

Does anyone get hanged when it reaches half a billion?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Awesome. While we're at it let's sue Kroger/Smith's for the absolute eyesore that is the hideous playmobil-lookin 3D people in their ads. The design is so bad it's a public nuisance. Lol

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

That and their excessive use of Flo Rida'"Low" in their radio ads.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Surely this merger is different from all the other ones where corporations lied their asses off then jacked up prices after the merger went through, right?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I’ve got three grocery stores near my house. One is owned by Kroger and two by Albertsons. I hate to think what would happen if there were zero effective competition.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Same situation but we have two Kroger-owned (FM and QFC) and one Albertsons-owned (Safeway). The Safeway is right across the street from Fred Meyer, so the chances are they will shut Safeway down if the merger goes through. No point in competing with themselves. So we're looking at fewer options, lost jobs, and higher prices. Wheee.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

I wonder how much Walmart paid for that lawsuit.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

Having a non-nationalized monopoly is stupid and bad.

But being champions of free market economics, and then being shocked pikachu when the free market does free market things is even stupider. Especially when nothing is done to reign in this free market crap.

The US wants to be socialist so bad, but can't get their populous to vote for it because of scary words they don't understand. Instead it's done as a random patchwork that of course doesn't work and corporate lobbying just makes it appear as an illusion of choice.

Next time you're out shopping in Walmart or Kroger or whatever look at the aisle you're in and the choices. Let's say cereal. 200 different choices of flavour. 50 different "brands". In reality it's all 1 company. There may be a couple outliers but it's all the same company selling the same sugary processed crap giving you the illusion of choice.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago

Prices are already outrageous. We don't need more of that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Okay we'll stop the merger. I just need to tell them tomorrow while I'm there to get some tortillas for lunch. Albertsons, ...it's my store! 🎶 🎵

[–] [email protected] 41 points 6 months ago (2 children)

My main takeaway from this article is that Walmart controls nearly twice the market share of Kroger and Albertsons combined - and needs to be broken up.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Yep, that was the conclusion I came to as well.

Stop them building more stores at the very least.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

There should be automatic break ups of companies that take up too much of the market share.

A hard limit would have an effect, but companies would intentionally just barely hover under the limit. Maybe if it was a chace based thing proportional to their market share. Might be worth looking into.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago
[–] [email protected] 70 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

As an Australian who has to deal with the duopoly of our grocery stores after we let them all merge years ago, it absolutely will drive higher prices and nobody who isn't a shareholder should want this.

They basically "collude" to fix and raise prices here and have whole teams of people who's job it is to monitor and extract as much money out of us as possible. They also force growers to accept shitty deals or they reject their produce due to "not meeting their quality standards" and there's basically nowhere else for them to sell it in the quantities they need to.

Nobody wins in grocery store mergers except the shareholders.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

With the current extreme price gouging, seems like the perfect political cover to anti-trust the hell out of them and break them up.

You'd know the Libs would moan and get the Murdoch media to pump out the propaganda, but I think the Australian public would be on board. The tax cut reversal went over totally fine, because I guess on average people aren't as stupid as the Libs would like.

(For international readers, the Liberal Party are the leaders of the conservative coalition, confusingly.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago (2 children)

In Canada we have multiple chains and they collude anyway

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

I feel the UK does it fairly well. Every supermarket has its place.

Waitrose for the middle class.

M&S for the people who think they're middle class.

Asda, Morrisons and Tesco for the masses.

Aldi and Lidl for the poor.

Heron Foods for the poor that can't cook.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Australia is super concentrated, the duopoly own 70% of the grocery store market as well as others like 60% of the alcohol market. The rest is made up of convenience stores (mostly one company, IGA) and Aldi, the latter having single digit percent.

You basically sell and buy groceries though these two or you don't exist. The CEO of one of them got so cocky during a recent interview he was forced to resign over it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

I guess we are pretty lucky over here in Germany then. We may have had some consolidation in the last few years, but there are still quite a few different grocery store companies competing.

The big ones are Aldi, Lidl, Rewe, Edeka, Netto, Penny and Norma. Quite a few of them own other supermarket chains as well, but those arent in my list.

Our supermarket market is so competitive that even companies like walmart failed to enter it (they also didnt do away with weird US customs, which probably didnt help).

[–] [email protected] 34 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Shittier services and higher prices/more fees, every merger ever.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Read yesterday about Wendy's rolling out new electronic menus this year so they can enact dynamic pricing. Can't wait until Surge pricing hits another non-negotiable like food.

Burn all these oligarchs down.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Yhgtbsm. Charge people more during a lunch rush because it’s convenient to do so. For fast food. Fuck them.

That’s stripping the “supply” out of “supply and demand” and just making it “demand pricing.”

They demand you pay more.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Kroger has promised to invest $500 million to lower prices as soon as the deal closes.

Kroger made 1.8 billion last year after expenses, so investing 500 million is a good gesture of faith but, I think that it should be required to be repeated yearly if they wish to make it as a condition of the merger, 500 million while likely wouldn't do much prices wise, wouldn't even be helpful if they aren't doing it past the first year anyway

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

It's such a backwards way of doing it though. If they're going to invest that much, that means they need to make a lot of money to cover for it, so they'll have to keep prices where they are until they get the money, then they'll make a show of spending it to lower prices, which really means they're paying the salaries of business analysts who will come up with ideas. Once they've spent $500m coming up with ideas, their obligation will be fulfilled, and they won't have to actually act on any of those price-lowering ideas.

Instead they could just make $500m less in revenue by directly lowering prices immediately.

But then they can't brag about all the good money they spent and will instead whine about how hard up they are, so we'll be stuck with high prices and no relief.

load more comments
view more: next ›