Just thinking you know the way .those in the know talk about price index ,inflation and other business jargon .Well what if there were less businesses chasing the market .Instead of 26 big supermarket chains we had less ,that way they would do better business as people have to eat and buy ,clothes ,household stuff etc .So does it all boil down to greed .
If there's too many in the market some go to the wall or get taken over leaving fewer to serve us customers. It's the way it works. If anything one would then expect prices to rise as there would be less competition giving an incentive to keep profits lower.
I'm unsure what point you are making regarding greed. That's a given surely ?
By your way of thinking, the fewer the better and a monopoly is best? A monopoly is best for the owner of that monopoly but what about the prices paid by its customers, especially if they supply essentials such as water or power? Without competition, where is the need to become more efficient or to develop?
Although I wouldn't mind if we could acheive a reduction in choice when it comes to cheap tacky Christmas stock transported half way round the world, and imported by the container load! Bah humbug.
What I ment was that if all the big companies were not making enough then it must be slow down in the spending but actually it because too many are after the same pound .Say there are 10 shops each make a million so others get in on the act ,another 10 say .So each make now only half a million ,so the original lot have lost 50per cent of their profit .Looks like people have spent less but actually have spent the same amount.
It means you need more data to understand the reasons why it was down and what percentage of the fall is attributable to what. But as far as the company is concerned it simply means they didn't do as well as they wished and must 'pull their socks up'.