Illegal Holiday Sales?

The holidays have passed and the madness associated with holiday sales has as well. But what's so common in the United States is actually quite uncommon around the world, particularly in Europe. I read an article in the WSJ last Christmas Eve about how German stores are finally offering items on sale during the holiday season. Up until 2004, that practice was actually illegal! The stores are finally loosening up, extending store hours and offering significant discounts.

It's interesting why those laws existed in the first place. The simple answer is that it's a general controlled economy system that has existed in Europe for some time. Trade unions, churches, and small retailers all have traditionally argued that increased flexibility hurts store workers and benefits only the larger retailers. And then a more unusual reason was also included in the article:

In Germany, it took years of intense debate to eliminate a Nazi-era law that prohibited haggling and put limits on bonus schemes such as store-loyalty cards. Enacted in 1933 after the economic instability following World War I, the so-called Discount Law and another regulation passed at the time, the Free Gift Act banning giveaways except for trinkets, were seen as a way to protect the distribution of goods to consumers, and to protect consumers from the vagaries of the free market. For the Nazis, it was also a way to hurt the country's department-store owners -- many of them Jewish -- who had been experimenting with creative sales strategies.
The Discount Law lived on beyond the war years because many consumers saw a need to protect small shopkeepers from large retail chains. Some thought that consumers, too, needed protection. It wasn't until this set of laws was scrapped in 2001 that retailers could offer deals like gifts with purchases and discounts for volume buys.
"Germans tend to adhere to structures and rhythms that don't change," says Rolf Pangels, managing director of the retail federation BaG in Berlin. "And they tend to want a law for everything. An American wouldn't understand all the laws we have
here."

I'm sure a lot of traditions will have to change in the coming years.

Comments

Biofuels May Hinder Anitglobal-Warming Efforts

Read an interesting article a couple weeks back in the WSJ on how biofuels may actually increase carbon emissions in the medium to long-term. Apprently the shifts in land-use necessary to support the production of bio-materials like soybeans, corn, or palm could in fact release more carbon emissions. The time it takes to get carbon-neutral on some of these projects is pretty crazy - 319 years for soybean biodiesel from Brazil (assuming you're clearing rainforest), 93 years for corn ethanol from the U.S. (assuming you're clearing grasslands), 86 years for palm biodiesel from Indonesia (assuming you're clearing rainforest). I suppose biofuels really aren't meant to reduce carbon emissions, but just crazy that they potentially exacerbate the problem so much.

Nine Prescriptions for Building the Duke Entrepreneurial Community

I think Duke can have one of the strongest entrepreneurial communities in the world. Are we there yet? Well, not yet. But there's a tremendous amount of momentum that I saw build in just the past two years while I was getting my MBA at Duke. While leading Duke's 10th annual business plan competition, the Duke Start-Up Challenge (DSC) , last year, I witnessed a near doubling of participation on campus in just a single year. The interest on the ground was clearly there and building rapidly. But now that I'm an alum, I'm looking back and wondering ... how do we rev-up the Duke entrepreneurial community even more? I read a great article by Daniel Isenberg, a professor of management at Babson, called " How to Start an Entrepreneurial Revolution " in the June edition of the Harvard Business Review. Isenberg outlines nine prescriptions for governments that want to create entrepreneurship ecosystems in their countries. Although he was focused on governments an

Bloomberg for President?

We can only hope. I read an article in the WSJ about how business people across the country, from entrepreneurs to bankers, are all hoping for Bloomberg to run. The economy thus far seems to have taken an unusual backseat in this years election but seems to be emerging as an important issue. An interesting excerpt: As the economy has emerged as a dominant issue in the 2008 campaign, candidates have struck populist notes, from Republican Mike Huckabee's boast that he is not a "wholly owned subsidiary of Wall Street" to Democrat Barack Obama's visit to Wall Street to chastise finance executives for failing to protect the middle class. I can see the approach these guys are taking and I'm sure they have really smart campaign strategists. But I really wonder if this type of message of polarizing the "working man" vs. "big business" really resonates with voters anymore? Is the middle-class really that disgruntled with big business and income dispa

Power Pal

Search This Blog