Why Wal-Mart Failed in Germany

no-walmart-logoThe American retail giant Wal-Mart Stores Inc (WMT) is the largest employer not only in the U.S. but in the world. In the U.S. the company’s thousands of huge stores can be called as the “Cathedrals of Capitalism” where millions of people shop every day.The lowest-prices offered by Wal-Mart is the key that keeps Americans attracted to this store. Though the company has been highly successful in replicating its success in many other countries, it has miserably failed in some countries such as Germany.

Recently I came across an interesting article on Amazon and other U.S. companies operating in Germany. From the article:

US Firms vs. German Labor Laws

Amazon is playing according to its own rules, and thus finds itself in the best of company with numerous other US corporations that have difficulty accepting Germany’s so-called “social partnership,” which is the traditional relationship that exists between employees and employers.

US technology giant Apple tried for months to prevent works councils — the powerful bodies that represent employees inside a company — from being established at the firm’s own sales outlets. And even after the works councils were set up, its members dared to make only anonymous statements in the public sphere.

US retail chain Wal-Mart failed in Germany in part because it misjudged German labor laws. Wal-Mart banned its employees from having romantic relationships, or even flirting with each other. They were also urged to wear a permanent smile, and the company didn’t understand why this was perceived as an infringement on their personal rights.

US conglomerate Honeywell put plans in place to close a plant in the eastern German city of Fürstenwalde — without consulting the works council or giving any thought to severance schemes, both of which are required by the Works Constitution Act, the legislation that governs the system of workplace labor relations in Germany.

Fashion chain Hollister, which is owned by Abercrombie & Fitch, used cameras to monitor its employees — and paid no attention to the issue of whether this was compatible with German data protection guidelines. After each shift, employees are frisked and their bags are checked as if they were potential shoplifters.

All of these companies have one thing in common: They have their problems with Germany’s particular brand of capitalism, known as theSoziale Marktwirtschaft, or social market economy. They view employee representatives with suspicion, and they see the worker participation enshrined in the Works Constitution Act as a hurdle that has to be sidestepped. Furthermore, they get around Germany’s dismissal protection laws by giving short-term contracts to as many workers as possible.

“In contrast to Germany’s old and well-established industry, many of these companies are relatively new to the market,” says Christoph Dörrenbächer, a professor for international business organization at the Berlin School of Economics and Law.

“It took Siemens 150 years before they conquered the international market, whereas Amazon and Apple did it in 15 years. They are not about to allow the side issue of worker participation to diminish their competitive edge,” says the researcher.

Source:  Cowboys on the Rhine: US Firms Flout German Labor Practices, Der Spiegel

My online research on the failure of Wal-Mart in Germany lead to an interesting research paper by Andreas Knorr and Andreas Arndt of Universität Bremen.

Here is the abstract:

Clearly dominating the US retail market, Wal-Mart expanded into Germany (and Europe) in late 1997. Wal-Mart’s attempt to apply the company’s proven US success formula in an unmodified manner to the German market, however, turned out to be nothing short of a fiasco. Upon closer inspection, the circumstances of the company’s failure to establish itself in Germany give reason to believe that it pursued a fundamentally flawed internationalization strategy due to an incredible degree of ignorance of the specific features of the extremely competitive German retail market. Moreover, instead of attracting consumers with an innovative approach to retailing, as it has done in the USA, in Germany the company does not seem to be able to offer customers any compelling value proposition in comparison with its local competitors. Wal-Mart Germany’s future looks bleak indeed.

The authors of this study note the following four reasons for the failure of Wal-Mart in Germany:

  • “a fundamentally flawed entry-by-acquisition strategy,
  • a management by “hubris and clash of cultures”-approach to labor relations,
  • a blatant failure to deliver on its legendary “we sell for less – always“, “everyday low prices” and “excellent service” value proposition, and
  • bad publicity due to its repeated infringement of some important German laws and regulations”

The whole paper is fascinating and is definitely worth a read. You can download the entire paper here.

Source: Why did Wal-Mart fail in Germany?, Andreas Knorr and Andreas Arndt, Universität Bremen

The moral of this debacle is that no matter how big a corporation is it can still fail if it is lead by stupid leaders and violates local customs and laws.

Disclosure: No Positions

You may also like:

  1. World’s Biggest Retailer Wal-Mart Closes Up Shop in Germany (DW)
  2. Wal-Mart pulls out of Germany (The Guardian)
  3. Success and Failure: Strategies to Improve Success (Boundless.com)
  4. This Is Not America. Why Wal-Mart left Germany (The Atlantic Times)
  5. Heading for the exit (The Economist)
  6. Why Did Walmart Leave Germany? (Huff Post)
  7. Wal-Mart Finds That Its Formula Doesn’t Fit Every Culture (NY Times)
  8. WAL-MART: WHY DID IT FAIL IN GERMANY? (PKWard)
  9. Walmart in Germany: Cultural Problems (kwintessential)
  10. Case, example of product failure: Wal-Mart in Germany, 1997 to 2006 (Open Text Books, HK)
  11. What Do Chinese Consumers Want? Walmart Can’t Figure It Out., WSJ, June 2022

Also checkout:

  1. Target learns Canadians aren’t like Americans, Marketwatch, Jan 15, 2015
  2. Target’s spectacular Canadian fail: A case study in what retailers shouldn’t do, Financial Post, Jan 15, 2015
  3. The Last Days of target – The untold tale of Target Canada’s difficult birth, tough life and brutal death, Canadian Business

Knowledge is Power: Greece, Flying, Emigration Edition

EM sell-off may have further to run (beyondbrics)

World’s Largest Oil and Gas Companies (Petro Strategies)

Europeans emigrating in droves (MarketWatch)

Which of the emerging economies is afraid of higher interest rates? (Deutsche Bank Research)

Greece first developed market cut to ‘emerging’ status after 83% stock plunge (Financial Post)

Global Report: The uncomfortable truth about Bangladesh (Canadian Business)

Carmignac Gestion piles in to frontier markets (Trustnet)

Cyclical Stocks Appeal After Defensive-Led Rally (AllianceBernstein blog)

Why is flying so awful? (McClean’s)

Click to enlarge

 US-Tire-Mkt

 

 

Source: Continental Sells to Tire Salesmen in the U.S., Bloomberg BusinessWeek

Why Income Investors Should Consider Foreign Dividend Stocks

Many developed equities generally have higher dividend yields than U.S. stocks. For example, the dividend yield on the S&P 500 has remained around a low 2.0% for many years now. However it is possible to earn much higher yields by investing in companies in other developed markets such as Germany, Australia, Singapore, etc.

In countries such as Singapore or Australia, the dividend culture is deeply-rooted. Companies there return a good chunk of their profits as dividends to shareholders. This is vastly different from the U.S. where most companies retain a major portion of their profits for expanding operations, increasing R&D expenditures, share buybacks, acquisitions, etc. Many decades ago U.S. investors bought stocks in order to earn a steady income in the firm of dividends. However that expectation changed in the past few decades when  investors focused more on capital appreciation than income. As a result, companies are more than happy to hold on to earnings and spend them as they wish. Though corporate profits has soared in the years since the financial crisis and only limited growth opportunities exist, most firms continue to have low payout ratios.  Some firms have artificially boosted their earnings and stock prices by implementing share buyback programs. Since short-term mentality drives how U.S. public companies operate on a daily basis and management’s compensation is mostly tied to rising stock prices, accounting gimmicks such as share buybacks are unlikely to go away anytime soon.

From an article on global dividend stocks in Financial Advisor magazine:

When advisors and investors seek dividend yields, many think U.S. only. U.S. companies are expected to pay $300 billion in dividends in 2013, according to S&P Dow Jones Indices.  But foreign companies yield more, on average, and overseas dividend growth is expected again for this year. Dividend yields received from U.S. companies currently average only 2.1 percent, compared to nearly double that — 4 percent to 4.5 percent — from foreign companies, according to Thomson Reuters MSCI.

About 66 percent of the world’s dividends come from outside the U.S., according to Thomson Reuters MSCI, and advisors can easily diversify client portfolios with a dollop of foreign dividend-paying stocks.

Within the global market for dividends, the practices and policies surrounding dividend payments varies. The UK, Europe and Asia-Pacific maintain strong dividend cultures and companies tend to distribute high percentages of earnings in the form of cash dividends. Meanwhile, the U.S. and Japan have less emphasis on returning profits to shareholders via dividend payments.

Source: Going Global For Dividends, Bruce W.Fraser, Financial Advisor

The following two charts show how foreign companies pay higher dividends and have more total return opportunities :

Click to enlarge

Percentage of MSCI ACWI stocks with dividend yield of 4% or more and market capitalization of $1.5 billion or more

Foreign-US-Dividend-Stocks

Data Source: MSCI All Country World Index. Data as of 03/31/13

International Markets Offer More Total Return Opportunities

Number of stocks by sector with dividend yield of 4% or more and market capitalization of $1.5 billion or more.

Foreign-Total-Returns-Opportunities

Source:  Market View: Attractive Dividends? Earnings Growth? A Way to Get Both,  Lord Abbett

It should be noted that though factors such as withholding taxes, currency exchange rates, etc. can affect overall returns from investments in foreign stocks, one can still come out ahead since the base dividend yield rates are higher.

Investors looking to add international dividend stocks can consider some of the options listed below:

1.Company:Singapore Telecommunications Ltd (SGAPY)
Current Dividend Yield: 4.35%
Sector: Telecom
Country: Singapore

2.Company: Eni SpA (E)
Current Dividend Yield: 4.91%
Sector:Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels
Country: Italy

3.Company: Telstra Corp Ltd (TLSYY)
Current Dividend Yield: 6.43%
Sector:Telecom
Country:  Australia

4.Company: Edp Energias De Portugal SA (EDPFY)
Current Dividend Yield: 4.68%
Sector:Electric Utilities
Country: Portugal

5.Company:Reed Elsevier NV (ENL)
Current Dividend Yield: 3.03%
Sector: Media
Country:  The Netherlands

6.Company:Syngenta AG (SYT)
Current Dividend Yield: 2.13%
Sector: Chemicals
Country: Switzerland

7.Company:Diageo PLC (DEO)
Current Dividend Yield: 2.32%
Sector: Beverages
Country: UK

8.Company: Total SA (TOT)
Current Dividend Yield: 5.16%
Sector:Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels
Country: France

9.Company: Swedbank AB (SWDBY)
Current Dividend Yield: 6.50%
Sector: Banking
Country: Sweden

10.Company: National Grid PLC (NGG)
Current Dividend Yield: 5.39%
Sector: Multi-Utilities
Country: UK

Note: Dividend yields noted are as of June 11, 2013. Data is known to be accurate from sources used.Please use your own due diligence before making any investment decisions.

Disclosure:  Long SWDBY

Download: Credit Suisse Global Investment Returns Yearbook 2013

Every year Credit Suisse publishes their famous Global Investment Returns Yearbook. This year’s version was released in February. As usual this year’s report include a ton of fascinating charts and data. Here is one chart:

Click to enlarge

Likely-Returns-Stocks-and-Bonds

Figure 11 highlights the contrast with the past. The two sets of bars on the left are taken from Figure 1 and represent historical annualized real returns since 1950 and 1980 – the high-returns world. The bars on the right represent our estimates of the expected real returns on equities and bonds over the next generation. The bond returns are based on current yields, while the equity returns are based on expected cash returns plus an annualized equity premium that averages 3½%,but which varies with the systematic risk of each country/region.

Download the full report in pdf click on the image below:

CS-Yearbook-2013-Cover

 

Past Versions:

Credit Suisse Global Investment Returns Yearbook 2012

Credit Suisse Global Investment Returns Yearbook 2011

Why Holding Bonds is Important in a Well-Diversified Portfolio

The yield on the 10-year Treasury note rose about 0.08% to close at 2.16% on Friday.The 30-year U.S. Treasury bond rose 0.07% and closed at 3.32%. The yield on the 10-year Treasury bond rose dramatically by 27% in last month alone. Bond yields and prices are inversely related to each other. Hence as yields rise bond prices fall.

Currently investors expect the Federal Reserve to wind down its bond-buying program later this year and interest rates to rise. A rise in interest rates would lead to a fall in bond prices. So investors may be tempted to dump bonds now and hold only other assets such as stocks, cash, gold, etc.According to a research report published by The Schwab Center for Financial Research (SCFR), bonds still play a role in an overall portfolio for the following reasons: Diversification and reduced volatility, Income, Time, Capital Preservation and A Stable Foundation.

To support the argument for holding bonds in a portfolio, the authors of the report Kathy A. Jones, Rob Williams and Collin Martin included in the following neat chart comparing the performance of stocks and bonds when stocks declined 14% or more since the 1970s:

Click to enlarge

Bond-vs-Stock-Returns

 

Source:  Schwab Bond Insights: Timing the Taper, Charles Schwab

The above chart shows that when stocks declined heavily bonds yielded a small positive or even a substantially higher return. Hence holding bonds can provide a cushion effect to a portfolio of stocks. In addition, bonds tend to reduce a portfolio’s volatility as equities are generally more volatile.

During the recent global financial crisis (from November 2007 thru February 2009), when stocks plunged by over 50% as measured by the S&P 500, bonds yielded a decent return of 6.57%. When the dot com bubble popped in early 2000, stocks fell by about 45% but bonds had an excellent return of about 23.0%.The positive impact of holding bonds during such periods cannot be understated.

It is a wise idea to hold bonds as of part of a well-diversified portfolio.  However the question of how much fixed income securities should one hold depends on many factors including age, tax bracket, goal, investment horizon, etc. of an investor.

Five bond ETFs with their current yields are listed below for consideration:

1. iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD)
Distribution Yield = 3.61%

2. iShares TIPS Bond ETF (TIP)
Distribution Yield = 2.97%

3. Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND)
SEC Yield = 1.65%

4. iShares Core Total U.S. Bond Market ETF (HYG)
Distribution Yield = 2.11%

5. SPDR® Barclays High Yield Bond ETF (JNK)
30-Day SEC Yield = 4.97%

Disclosure: No Positions