Wal-Mart VP: We lost the \'philosophical argument\' with Steve Jobs
Wal-Mart on Tuesday said sales during this year's "Black Friday" shopping bonanza faired much better than last, due partly to a more desirable selection consumer products like Apple's iPod.
According to Fitzsimmons, this year's Black Friday event was more successful because Wal-Mart stepped-up marketing efforts and picked better items for early-bird specials and other ad blitzes.
Some of the hot items included laptop computers for under $400 and a 15-inch LCD TV for less than $200 — both of which sold out within minutes.
"Last year, we had a fair number of blitz items left (on Saturday), meaning we picked the wrong items," Fitzsimmons said.
Fitzsimmons also noted that Apple Computer's iPod digital music players were among the items conspicuously absent from Wal-Mart's shelves last year. He attributed the company's decision not to cary the iPod to a "philosophical argument" with Apple chief executive Steve Jobs over whether the iPod player should play music from more varied sources.
"He won, we lost. Now we have nanos in the stores," Fitzsimmons said.
The Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart operates nearly 5000 locations worldwide and is also largest private employer in the United States, with over 1.1 million U.S. employees.
Apple and Wal-Mart entered into a sales partnership earlier this year, running pilot programs to test sales following the release of Apple's iPod shuffle and updated iPod mini players.
59 Comments
He didn't win. The number of people buying tracks from iTMS and iPod owners won. He's just part of a big team. It's not like he's solely responsible for the success of iTMS/iPod. We should give credit to Apple as a company, not feed Jobs' already giant ego.
"He won, we lost. Now we have nanos in the stores," Fitzsimmons said.
I believe that statement show be, "The consumer won, we lost..." Sometimes, they have to listen to the consumer...
I believe that statement show be, "The consumer won, we lost..." Sometimes, they have to listen to the consumer...
Yes, because the consumer certainly wouldn't want to be able to have more choice as to what they can put on their expensive mp3 players.
Yes, because the consumer certainly wouldn't want to be able to have more choice as to what they can put on their expensive mp3 players.
I think we can see from the sales of the iPods vs other players, and the sales from iTunes vs other sites, that very few people indeed, care.
As long as iTunes has the vast amount of music it does, and as long as that satisfies the needs of the vast part of the buying public, and as long as the prices are in line, why would most people care about going anywhere else?
Walmart tried to force Apple to put Windows Media songs on their iPods? Why in the world should Walmart care what plays on an iPod?
[edit] Oh, nevermind, I forgot that Walmart had its own music download store.