I’m not really sure where he is going with this. Is he saying that no sales are better than lots of sales with a side of theft?
Now I don’t actually condone or support theft but it is a reality and constant challenge of the retail business. Telling your paying customers that you’ll close stores because of a theft problem? How about having more employees in the store? Retailers have gone out of their way to make more items self-serve to increase sales and reduce labour. Maybe Wal-Mart pushed the model too far?
Anyway, I am no supporter of Wal-Mart. Have not stepped inside one of their stores in many years. But if there’s a way to get them to close a bunch of their stores I have to honestly say I’m in favour. There are a lot of retailers out there who balance the needs of customer and suppliers better than Wal-Mart. I’d rather see them winning and customers getting better service as a result. Now I do come from the perspective of having worked for a company that supplied Wal-Mart and other mass merchants. When I started my business I vowed that I would never supply Wal-Mart unless they needed me so badly that I could do it on my terms, not theirs. They do not treat their vendors well at all.
It's not uncommon. Walgreens and a few other major brands have closed stores all across the country because of theft. Local mom and pops are doing it, too. They're tired of the stress and the expense, especially when Law Enforcement will do little to help the problem. Even store security isn't allowed to do anything but call the cops. They can't even detain you.
It is common for stores to close at least in the Pittsburgh area to close due to theft. I remember when I was a lifeguard for the City of Pittsburgh at the Ammons Pool in the hill district there was a mom and pop grocery store across the street. It was commonplace for them to be robbed every week when I worked there. By the end of the summer that store closed. Every week the police would come and investigate but nothing ever happened.