Covering 2 subjects with one mail to save time:
First:
The discussion was about a signed contract with Walmart. I think I was able to prove, that there was indeed a signed contract in my previous post. As this point had been cleared it is then not surprising that it would not end there, so I am glad to take it up as well.
The question was , if this contract would still be in place?
I would say no, as every contract has a term: subject to ………… If you cannot deliver within certain terms (and the reasons for this have been explained in detail ) then of course there is an exit clause for both parties. For Walmart as any other retailer, there are no costs involved in signing a contract as they are not out to build a special place for a product and neither are doing any promotion for a product unless of course it would be under their own brand or if they would get paid for doing so. But then it depends what kind of contract Walmart or any other retailer had or has with the client. A top name client like Red Bull or Monster if I may name 2 is even for Walmart a must to have them in their stores. So it is not always Walmart putting the string. Retailers want to have customers in their stores and they are smart enough to know, if the generation of Energy Drinks (to stay with this example) of a certain brand does not get it in Walmart then will get it with another retailer and once being in another store they may buy the rest there as well. Every marketing-fuzzy knows this. The worst what can happen to a retailer is when a Client turns his back on him.
But to go back to DECN subject: DECN should not have any problem to return to Walmart and work out a new agreement under the condition of course, that DECN would be in a position to manufacture the quantity and then of course both parties have to agree on pricing terms. I would guess, that DECN should soon be in a position to go back and start negotiations for direct delivery to certain retail chains including Walmart but then as well ready to negotiate deals under the terms of private labels. Such a decision to go Forward at all fronts of course is subject to the understanding: That orders could be filled or better said manufactured and then as well manufactered and priced in a way that allows enough leeway when it Comes to the margin.
But to have this said as well: Walmart is not the must any longer for sellers to get their product sold. The consumer world has changed and the shopping behaviour as well.
Second:
One comment was: For those who know Walmart they put clauses in their contracts that keep companies from issuing PR's because some small public companies have abused it and tried to increase their share price with PR's. "
On the contrary and besides to break-down this statement as fabricated I will as well quote a statement from somebody who deals with Walmart. Walmart as a matter of fact even promotes such kind of press-releases like any other retailer would do as well. If Walmart would be worried about share price PR from a seller, then they should not deal with those suppliers that are listed. I would guess there are plenty other billion dollar companies on this world who have so-called small cap suppliers and then this would mean, that all would put such a clause into their contracts. If somebody believes that, then one will believe everything.
Why: It is for Walmart the cheapest public relation and they do not even have to pay for.
Why do you think certain brand names are falling over each other to have their products sold through online stores like Amazon, Zalando, Ebay, Alibaba and more. It gives them a recognition their advertising budget could not carry worldwide and it serves both sides: The online store get’s free public relations from the seller and the seller get’s free public relation through the Web-presence of the online store.
Every company who has a contract with Walmart or any other retailer to have their products sold in the various stores is actually a walking advertising column.
The consumer of today and here I am talking about the early baby-boomers (IT generation) and the youngsters (multi-media) generation orients itself today through the world-wide web, where he can buy his products and at what price. It keeps competition under constant pressure to adapt to it. More and more companies therefore are covered through mobile apps. Designed to run on smartphones, tablet computers and other mobile devices. It was the public demand and the availability of developer tools that drove rapid expansion into other categories. The logic behind of course is to direct the consumer to the nearest store where he can buy his product at the cheapest price. Now if, based on your statement, Walmart would put a clause in their contracts that would keep companies from issuing PR’s of any kind, Walmart would close itself out of an explosive demand of customers. And Walmart is not known as being stupid if it comes to promote themselves.
I got some feed-back from a friend of mine that works for a company who is selling a certain kind of Energy Drink as well through Walmart. His comment: This made statement that Walmart has such a clause implemented is 100 % not true (and not true for every other retailer) on the contrary, Walmart supports any kind of public relation. His quote: With such a clause, Walmart would exclude themselves from a public- or advertising event of a product, because a seller as a rule will let the market know, where it can be purchased.
AI
