Outline the argument supermarket power is a zero -sum game

Outline the financial statement super trade violence is a zero - philia lame BY bluebell Outline the rock that super market place force play Is a zero-sumgame in the first place we discuss the argument let us understand first what the stipulations antecedent and zero-sum pissed. Power is a complex term used denote influence, control and domination, (Taylor, et al. 2009,p. 59). The part used by supermarkets includes acquire and market power. The self-aggrandisinggish four supermarkets in the U. K. answer for for ap proximately 75% of the food and groceries market and then giving them signifi dopet market power.Their buying power Is the talent they bring in to negotiate prices with suppliers and the rage trains thitherfrom be able to demand dis amounts when buying In much(prenominal) vainglorious quantities. This gives them the ability to influence things such(prenominal)(prenominal) as pricing, for role model rendering penny-pinchings at below constitute pr ices. The term zero-sum game is used when adept partys gain allow be anothers detriment then equaling a zero sum. A good font of this is slicing a pie, if angiotensin converting enzyme person takes a large slice there is less for either wholeness else.The pro supermarket campaigners argue that the supermarkets use their power for good and all parties Involved upbeat to virtually ex tent creating a positive sum gain scarce he the succeeding(a) argues to the contrary__ As shoppers they offer us a wide renewal of products at low-priced prices, in retrieveible locations. Additionally they offer employment, boosting local skills and helping to draw in other businesses such as restaurants and retailers to sometimes failing local economies but at what cost to others?Do the low prices mean that somewhere raze the supply train someone elses profits argon being squeezed? Has the out of town retail viridity been a catalyst In the winnow out of Britains high streets? In 2006 r etail reader Judi Bean reported hat the big four operated around 3900 stores with Tests alone pickings one pound at the tills for e rattling three we spend. Since then they have move to grow branching out into the box shop concept and opening an supernumerary 1500 stores in a bid to enthrall even more trade.In years bypast by our towns would have a variety of indie shops do up of butchers, bakers and fishmongers, but these atomic number 18 in decline and we argon now dominated by by big chain stores offering us practically Identical goods at very similar prices. If this Is the case are they in truth offering us any hospice at all? Across the country they monopolies towns and areas where slight local businesses are unable to fight on pricing being obligate to shut down.Food writer Joann Blackman, (2005) uses Dundee as an example and recalls that in the sass the town had ten bakers now there are twain left, five fishmongers with one remaining and ogdoad or nine butcher s only one of which has survived and six grocers where again only one has survived.. In their place are four Testes, two Sad, a Morrison and a Kingsbury. In her pollen there Is a distinct correlational statistics between the arrival of the gig fetter and the demise of the small independents, thus implying a zero-sum game.The supermarkets have an immense buying power and their supply chain stretches across the globe. When transaction with the large conglome grade like Proctor and Gamble, hatter and Nestle the balance of power is slightly much even, as their global musculus puts them in a strong point to negotiate. However the farmers, such a blushful position. Small suppliers birdsong that the supermarkets are continually putting pressure on them, coercing them into prices cuts that bear on them to the point that there economic maintenance is in doubt.This relationship between the suppliers and supermarkets can be depicted as a David and Goliath affair, with the small indep endents up against the big multiples Just as the small independent stores on the high street are up against the big chain stores as previously mentioned. With this pressure being apply to suppliers to keep costs down they in turn pass this on to their employees. here(predicate) in the I-J we have low salaried(a) often migrant workers cutting, sorting and fisticuffs vegetables and salads for the big stores.Felicity Lawrence has written about the growing of these workers in her book Not on the Label (2004) and in newspaper investigations. She highlights how force workers, often from eastern European countries such as Romania, Poland and Bulgaria, are employed by gang masters to work on farms and in processing and packing plants and are frequently paid hourly rates below the minimum wage, are subjected to black-market deductions and are bussed from Job to Job at their employers will.These people are not like a shot employed by the supermarkets but, she claims, that they are alert of the practices and turn a blind spunk to it so they can continue to benefit from he situation. Additionally she points out that you will not see any such evidence of this on labels of the packets of salad or bags of grumbler pieces which line their shelves. Lawrence implies that we as consumers can corrupt in cheap products at the disbursement of those exploited and often vulnerable workers.You could therefore infer that the supermarkets are using their power or dominance to control the pains market. For us to gain from the low prices at the checkout someone else must pull away out in the case it is the suppliers and their workforce. With this in mind let us appearance rather field at the workers in such places as Bangladesh. In 2006 and 2007 The contend on Want, a U. K. Based non-governmental organization, made accusations against Sad and Tests that they were boosting profits and the expense of the workers in the sweatshops of Bangladesh.They carried out a survey in six large facilities in Dacha, apiece employing between 500-1200 workers. The results of the survey showed that the worker, of which the majority are female, had been subjected to overcrowding and unhygienic work conditions along with coerce overtime and verbal intimidation, tit access to trade unions being refused. All the factories surveyed were cognize to be supplying cheap robes to the I-J market, specifically Tests and Sad and all were paying wages below that needed to hand over for themselves and their family.The pressure applied by the stores on the factory owners to keep costs down means that they have no manner to maneuver. The war on want claim that it the absence of a living wage in such places that keep our Jeans, post and other clothing at such low prices. Taking all of the above into account we can conclude that although we as nonusers benefit from low pricing and teemingness of choice and the supermarkets continue to increase their profits, there are many wit hin the chain that dont benefit so greatly.We can therefore say that supermarket power is definitely a zero sum game. Word count 1134 Bean, J. (2006) Trolley state of wars The Battle of the Supermarkets, London, indite Books Blackman, J (2005) Shopped The shocking Power of British Supermarkets, London, Profile Books Lawrence, F (2004) Not on the Label, London, Penguin War on Want (2006), fashion Victims The unbowed cost of cheap clothes at Primary. Sad and Tests, London,