Economics by liaoguiguo


									 Economics 308
Managerial Economics
       Second Exam
            Fall 2006
         Back of Room (JH 1125 11AM)
Row        1           2            3              4            5              6              7

      Khosrovian, Kebede,      Manukyan,     Parker,      Valdez,    Setting,            Gaylord,
 1    Elina       Seble        Vahan Van
                               Deji,         Sterling L   Brenda Rae James R             Matthew
                               Suolang                                                   Sellars,
      Edwards,    Romero,      Sonam         Johnson,     Lamont,        Mandagi,        Jason
 2    Noel        Jose Alberto Dickey        Austen E     Gina Marie     Edric           William
      Tifanie     Klonsky,     Romaldo,                    Rountree,     Flores, Carla   Sandoval,
 3    Sharon      Chad         Hugo          Lomeli, Julio David Paul    Beatriz         Sergio
                  Morallos,    Elmachtoub,   Brown,        Levin,        Waltman,
                  Joseph       Amal          Daeus         Simon         Matthew         Ireland,
 4                Edward       Yasser        Katroyd       Nicholas      Ryan            Peter Paul
                               Pleitez,                    Samantilla,                   Johnson,
                  Avetisyan,   Arely         Ayuyao,       Sarah Lynn    Berke,          Christopher
 5                Lilit        Yesenia       Michelle D R                Michael         Lucas
                  Jennifer     Gunnels,                   Brass,         Lobo, Sattva Szamody,
 6                Renee        Jason         Flores, Jose Debra L        Tamas        Veronika A

                              Front of Room
      Back of Room (JH 1125 1230 PM)
Row       1           2              3           4           5             6           7
                 Dzhalalyant                           Dustin,
      Hernandez, s, Vadim       Masjedi,    Gonzales, Arielle        Ayeva,      Cohen, Erin
      Vanessa    Eduardovic     Babak       Mark James Nicole        Maawiya     Rachele
                 Aroutiounian   Nagy,       Asadornda Casillas,
      Kasumian, , Levon         Alexander   mrongchai, Efrain                     Lei, Chong
      Edgar      Edgar          Joseph      Kunakorn   Ezequiel      Lee, Hak Bin Man
      Fonacier,                             Paniagua,                             Richardson,
      Jonathan   Phillips,   Sandoval,      Erika      Nguyen,       Lawrence,    Alisa
      Rivera     Daniel W    Elizabeth      Kimberly   Anh Tuan      Neil Eric    Michelle
                             Sanchez,       Perello,   Aljuraiban,                Young,
                 Liberman, Timothy          Pamela     Abdullah      Tantra,      Margaret
                 Lloyd Aaron Joseph         Maria      Sulaiman      Widya        Louise
                             Delgado,       Ballard,   Siek,
                 Veis, Scott Mario          Michele    Vannak        Casey, Ryan Ie, Sean
                 Ryan        Alberto        Marie      Paul          Macdonald Flora
                             Pingel,        Figgins,   Bernice                   Meyers,
                 Kolchanova, Cayla          Stephanie Rhodora                    Brad
                 Elina       Helene         Erin       Tolpo         Zhou, Li    Matthew

                          Front of Room
Grocery Unions Battle to Stop Invasion of the Giant Stores

Wal-Mart plans to open 40 of its nonunion Supercenters in California. Labor is fighting the expected onslaught, but
the big retailer rarely concedes defeat.
By Nancy Cleeland and Abigail Goldman
Times Staff Writers

November 25, 2003

Inglewood seemed to offer the perfect home for a new Wal-Mart Supercenter, with low-income residents hungry for bargains
and a mayor craving the sales-tax revenue that flows from big-box stores.

But nearly two years after deciding to build on a 60-acre lot near the Hollywood Park racetrack, Wal-Mart is nowhere near
pouring concrete. Instead, the world's biggest company is at war with a determined opposition, led by organized labor.

"A line has been drawn in the sand," said Donald H. Eiesland, president of Inglewood Park Cemetery and the head of Partners
for Progress, a local pro-business group. "It's the union against Wal-Mart. This has nothing to do with Inglewood."

Indeed, similar battles are breaking out across California, and both sides are digging in hard. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. wants to
move into the grocery business throughout the state by opening 40 Supercenters, each a 200,000-square-foot behemoth that
combines a fully stocked food market with a discount mega-store — entirely staffed by non-union employees. The United Food
and Commercial Workers and the Teamsters are trying to thwart that effort, hoping to save relatively high-paying union jobs.

The unions have amassed a seven-figure war chest and are calling in political chits to fight Wal-Mart. The giant retailer is
aggressively countering every move, and some analysts believe that Wal-Mart's share of grocery sales in the state could
eventually reach 20%. The state's first Supercenter is set to open in March in La Quinta, near Palm Springs.

"If we have an advantage," said Robert S. McAdam, Wal-Mart's vice president for state and local government relations, "it's that
we are offering what people want."

In fact, Wal-Mart has won allies by providing people of modest means a chance to stretch their dollars.

"We need to have retail outlets that are convenient and offer quality goods and services at low prices," said John Mack,
president of the Los Angeles Urban League. "I really think that there are potential economic benefits for this community with the
addition of a Wal-Mart."
Yet the Supercenters also threaten the 250,000 members of the UFCW and Teamsters who work in the supermarket business in California.

For decades, the unions have been a major force in the state grocery industry and have negotiated generous labor contracts. Wal-Mart pays its grocery
workers an estimated $10 less per hour in wages and benefits than do the big supermarkets nationwide — $19 versus $9. As California grocery chains
brace for the competition, their workers face severe cutbacks in compensation.

"We're going to end up just like the Wal-Mart workers," said Rick Middleton, a Teamsters official in Carson who eagerly hands out copies of a paperback
called "How Wal-Mart Is Destroying America." "If we don't as labor officials address this issue now, the future for our membership is dismal, very dismal."

The push for concessions has already started, prompting the longest supermarket strike in Southern California's history. About 70,000 grocery workers
employed by Albertsons Inc., Kroger Co.'s Ralphs and Safeway Inc.'s Vons and Pavilions have been walking the picket lines since Oct. 11, largely to
protest proposed reductions in health benefits. The supermarkets say they need these cuts to hold their own against Wal-Mart, already the nation's largest

Rick Icaza, president of one of seven UFCW locals in Southern California, has taken issue with much of the supermarkets' rhetoric since the labor dispute
began. But he doesn't doubt that Wal-Mart is the biggest threat ever posed to the grocery chains — and, in turn, his own members.

"The No. 1 enemy has still got to be Wal-Mart," he said.

The unions and their community allies have stopped Wal-Mart in some places and slowed it down in others. They have persuaded officials in at least a
dozen cities and counties to adopt zoning laws to keep out Supercenters and stores like them.

Homeowner groups, backed by union money, sued to stop construction of two Supercenters in Bakersfield, arguing that the stores would drive local
merchants out of business. Contra Costa County and Oakland also have passed measures that could block Supercenters.

In Los Angeles, several City Council members are drafting an ordinance to require an examination of how large-scale projects such as Supercenters would
affect the community, including the possible loss of union jobs. As envisioned by supporters, the measure would allow the city to insist on higher wages as
a condition of project approval.

"We want Wal-Mart to be able to help us with our economic development," said Councilman Eric Garcetti, who is co-sponsoring the measure. "We just
want to be able to do it on our terms and not theirs."

Wal-Mart, however, can more than match its foes in resources and resolve.
To soften its outsider image, the retailer has hired local political insiders to coax projects through planning bureaucracies. It has promised jobs and sales-
tax bonanzas to cities struggling with deficits and unemployment.

When the answer is "no," Wal-Mart rarely concedes defeat. At least nine times during its latest California push, the company has responded to legal
barriers by threatening to sue or to take its case straight to local voters by forcing referendums.

That's what happened in Inglewood after the City Council in October 2002 adopted an emergency ordinance barring construction of retail stores that
exceed 155,000 square feet and sell more than 20,000 nontaxable items such as food and pharmacy products. The measure was tailored to block a
Icaza declared victory. "Wal-Mart's plans to enter the retail grocery business in Inglewood are dead!" he crowed in a union newsletter.

But they weren't. Within a month, Wal-Mart gathered 9,250 signatures on petitions, more than enough to force a public vote. The company also threatened
to sue the city for alleged procedural violations. Looking at a possible court battle or an embarrassing failure at the polls, Inglewood officials withdrew the
ordinance they had passed a month earlier.

Furious with the council, Icaza ran his own candidate in city elections in June. Ralph Franklin, a former supermarket clerk and manager and now a UFCW
business agent, won with 70% of the vote, ousting a council member who had gone against the union.

Worried that the council might try to trip it up again, Wal-Mart went on the offensive. In late August, the company, through a group called the Citizens
Committee to Welcome Wal-Mart to Inglewood, began gathering a new batch of signatures to force a popular vote on the Supercenter. The initiative, which
calls for building permits to be issued without a public hearing or environmental impact study, is expected to be on the March 2004 ballot.

"When people feel they're not getting a fair shake with the legislative process, they take things to a vote" of the electorate, said McAdam, the Wal-Mart vice

Wal-Mart's opponents have vowed to sue to block the initiative on the grounds that it oversteps the limits of the ballot process.

UFCW and Teamsters locals have raised dues or diverted funds from other programs to bankroll anti-Wal-Mart campaigns. With more than $1 million now
available, thousands of members to draw from and encouragement from national leaders, local labor would seem to be in a strong position.

But union efforts have been hampered by personality conflicts and disagreements over strategies and goals, according to people close to the situation.

As in Inglewood, many union locals have focused on so-called site fights, winning zoning restrictions at the local level. That strategy can temporarily save
union jobs and give leaders victories to celebrate, but it does little to stop the long-term march of Wal-Mart, critics say. After all, there are 478 cities in
California, 88 in Los Angeles County alone.

Pushing for zoning restrictions also can backfire, stirring resentment among consumers and business owners — even those who directly compete with

Wal-Mart opponents "try to use the government to accomplish things that they may not be able to accomplish in the marketplace," said Alan Zaremberg,
president of the California Chamber of Commerce. "It's not government's role to interfere with what consumers want."

For their part, national labor strategists want local leaders to focus less on zoning campaigns and more on the daunting, long-term goal of unionizing Wal-
Mart employees. Few take the advice, and those who do quickly realize just what they are up against.

George Hartwell, president of UFCW Local 1036 in Camarillo, hired 18 organizers to hit the nine Wal-Mart stores in his jurisdiction. With few leads to go on
and employees in stores forbidden to talk about unions, progress was slow. Then in mid-summer, a group wearing union T-shirts was served with
trespassing papers and asked to leave a Wal-Mart in Lompoc. Lawyers tussled over that for months. Now Hartwell and his crew can enter the stores, but
with strict limitations. "We go through and say, 'good morning' or 'good afternoon,' just to be visible," he said.

Despite the long odds in taking on the company, many union activists insist they have no choice.
"I've put 29 years of my life into this job, and now they're trying to pull the rug out from under me," said Diane Johnson, a union cashier at a Pavilions store
in Los Angeles who is helping to coordinate anti-Wal-Mart efforts in Inglewood through the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy.

Johnson and co-workers have made door-to-door visits and spoken from church pulpits, hoping to turn public opinion against the discounter. "For me to go
backwards would just be hell," she said.

But Wal-Mart, the nation's largest seller of everything from toys to DVDs, has plenty of defenders too, some of them politically and financially powerful.
They range from prominent Los Angeles toy importer Charlie Woo, who recently took up Wal-Mart's case before Los Angeles City Council members, to
Jeffrey Katzenberg, a co-founder of Hollywood studio DreamWorks SKG. He lobbied former Gov. Davis against signing a statewide anti-big-box measure
passed by the Legislature five years ago; Davis vetoed the bill.

McAdam said Wal-Mart doesn't order its suppliers to lobby on the company's behalf. But it does spell out for vendors the consequences of anti-Wal-Mart

"It's our belief that on certain issues, they have a vested interest in seeing … that our company can continue to grow," McAdam said.

Wal-Mart also helps smooth entry into new markets by cultivating relationships with civic groups.

As it prepared last year to buy and renovate a former Macy's in the south Los Angeles community of Baldwin Hills, corporate officials met with leaders of
the Los Angeles Urban League and arranged to hire some employees through the organization.

Allies in organized labor tried to dissuade the Urban League's Mack from cooperating. Normally pro-union, Mack turned them down, saying the community
badly needed jobs and low-cost shopping options.

"I'd rather have a person on somebody's payroll — even if it isn't at the highest wage — than on the unemployment roll," Mack said. "We're not going to
punish job seekers by refusing to refer them to Wal-Mart for a job."

By the time the Baldwin Hills-Crenshaw Plaza Wal-Mart opened in January, Wal-Mart had doled out thousands of dollars, mostly in $1,000 grants, to local
institutions such as schools and youth programs. The company cut the Urban League a $3,000 check. It also provided $10,000 for new lights at the Martin
Luther King Jr. Little League Baseball field.

The ordinance being considered in Los Angeles would ask planners to weigh the "community benefits" of a mega-store in any zone that receives federal,
state or municipal funding or incentives — essentially the entire city.

Like an environmental impact report, the community-benefits study would consider possible negative outcomes and propose ways to mitigate them. Wages
could be held to "prevailing standards." If supermarkets were deemed the standard, that would mean union scale.

Backed by Garcetti and Councilman Ed Reyes, the ordinance could be ready for a council vote next month.

Several studies commissioned in recent years by independent groups, including the Orange County Business Council and the San Diego Taxpayers Assn.,
found the state would suffer a net economic loss if union jobs were traded for jobs at Wal-Mart.
Wal-Mart had declined to respond with numbers of its own until a few months ago, when it commissioned the Los Angeles County Economic Development
Corp. to measure the effect of Supercenters on the region. Researcher Gregory Freeman said the study balanced wage losses with consumer savings,
noting that Supercenter prices are typically 20% lower than at union markets.

The study was completed two weeks ago, Freeman said, but hasn't yet been released.

As he began his study in mid-summer, Freeman told council members that other analyses haven't fairly measured all the pros and cons of the
Supercenters. For one thing, he said, savings from lower grocery prices could be used by working-class shoppers for other things, such as buying homes.

As for those merchants who won't be able to compete with Wal-Mart, others say, progress always carries a price.

"I grew up in Pennsylvania; my father had a corner market there. When I was 3 or 4, the A&P moved in and put him out of business," recalled the
Chamber's Zaremberg. "That was tough for us, but I don't think anyone would go back and say we shouldn't have supermarkets."
  Union Grocery Store
750 *15  250 *100  TC
11250  25000  36250
        18.125  ATC
        12.5  AVC
   Wal Mart Superstore
3000 *15  1000 * 50  TC
45000  50000  95000
       5.9375  ATC
       3.125  AVC

                                                        Wal Mart Superstore.

                                         16,000 units

                             Union Grocery

                 $36,250    2000 units

                                             If the price were P1, the
$/unit                        MCUnion        Superstore would produce
                                             where P=MC



  18.125                                           ATCSUperstore


    0                                               Quantity
           2000                         q2           (firm)
Price                                            The entry of the Superstore(s)
                                                 would shift the supply curve to the
                                                 right lowering price to P2.
                                                 In the SR, union grocery stores
                                                 will lose money and the
                                                 Superstore will make money.
                                                 Consumers and Wal-Mart are
                  SUnion Grocery Stores
                                                 better off in the SR and union
                                                 members and grocery stores that
                                                 use union labor will lose.
                              SAfter Entry of Superstore
                                                   In the LR, union grocery stores
                                                 will be replaced by non-union
                                     SAfter Long Run Adjustemnet
                                                 stores causing a further shift out
                                                 of the supply curve. The supply
                                                 curve will continue shifting until
                                                 the price falls to P3 where the
   P2                                            Wal-Mart superstore(s) are
                                                 breaking even.

 P3                                              In the LR, consumers are the
                                                 main beneficiaries.

        0   Q1                                              Quantity
                                            At price P2, the Superstore is making a profit
                                            and the Union Grocery store is losing money in
                                            the short run.
$/unit                            MCUnion
                                            In the long run, the Union Grocery store will be
                                            closed and more superstores will open causing
                                            a further shift out of the market supply curve.
                                            Gainers are consumers in the SR and LR and
                                            Wal-Mart in the SR.
                                            Losers are union members and owners of
                                            union grocery stores.      MCSuperstore


     18.125                                                      ATCSUperstore
      12.5            Profit

       0                                                          Quantity
                     2000                   q2                     (firm)
                    Summary Stats
        Secon Exam with              Quiz 4,
        d Exam Quizzes Quiz 4 Part 2 Part 1        Quiz 3
Mean      36        46           3.0         5.0    3.0
  σ       20        23           1.0         2.0    2.0
Count     72        73           52          51     67

Grade      Score          σ            Count          %
 A             80        1.5            11           15%
 B             64        0.8            13           18%
 C             46         0             20           28%
 D             34        -0.5           15           21%
 F             28        -0.75          14           19%
Administrative Details.

Mandatory one week cooling off period.
No discussion of quizzes, exams, or
 anything that effects your graded until next

To top