While there are many successful small businesses, the reality is that these are usually price makers. The likes of plumbers, electricians, engineers, lawyers and alike all have one distinctive advantage, that being that they set their prices and some have seen massive increases in recent times, especially in mining towns.

Then there's the price takers, those in retail, hospitality and farming who have little choice other than to take the price on offer, or as set (in the case of retail) by the big players who, with little constraint from governments have all but killed off the little guy.

I just wish when people speak of small business that they would actually categorize things a bit more as the price makes all too often crow about how great things are, while the price takers slip further and further behind their counterparts.

Butch, I agree with you. it is always an advantage to offer a service rather than selling commodities. The outlays are totally different. With the emphasis on service, it's surprising how many service providers like plumbers etc, fail on that score. In boom times when demand is there, if you upset a few customers with poor service you can get away with it, but when things get tough they are the first to suffer. Plus there are few, if any big players in the service industries except for banking and insurance, and they are not all that great on service anyway.
You say <<Then there's the price takers, those in retail, hospitality and farming who have little choice other than to take the price on offer, or as set (in the case of retail) by the big players who, with little constraint from governments have all but killed off the little guy. That becomes a philosophical argument, in a free market why shouldn't the big retailer kill off the small guy? I happen to believe its not in the public interest for governments to allow that to happen, but they do.

Paul, if we continue to allow the big guys to squash the little guys, we will all loose.

While some may think the likes of fruit and veggies have seen a moderate price increase over the past ten odd years, the reality is that the farmers are not making more money, it's just that if they don't get a price that covers their costs, they simply allow the crop to rot in the paddock.

If our lawmakers don't act now, I seriously doubt that we will have anything other than phone jockeys in this country in thirty years from now.

In fact, my prediction is that one in ten will have a job, they will employ another three as security guards and the remaining six will be trying to rob you.

Butch, when you talk retail in this country, you talk Coles and Woolworths, the big two retailers, they have become the market, they control the market from both end, the supply price and the sell price, that gives them a huge advantage, and I must say a very profitable advantage at that. The 'Big Two" is preferable to the "Big One", I suppose, heaven help us if that was the case, just the big one 'Colesworth'. How does the government save the little guy from these monsters with their unfair tactics, things like predatory pricing etc. One answer is to encourage foreign competition into Oz the 'Aldi' types, but that ain't going to help the little guy at all, helps the consumer, but not the small retailer. There is always going to be a niche market for some, but it can't apply for all small retailers. What do you think? How about co-ops, buying groups, franchises. I'm afraid the stand alone retailer in a lot of areas of the game looks doomed, not the least in your business.

How is this one; On Saturday we went shopping, my partner "T" is partial to avocados (she used to pick them years ago back home in NZ). here in Sydney for some time avos have been retailing for about $3 each for good ones. We went to Aldi's and "T" sees avos, nice ones, she look's at the boxes and they are from NZ, in fact picked and packed by a the mob she used to work for all those years ago. They are selling for 99c each, buys 5 or 6, good. After, we went to Coles in the same shopping center, to pick up some little thing, lone behold they have the very same avocados, picked and packed by the same mob from NZ, but theirs were not 99c each, but rather $2.98 each, and people were buying them! No wonder Woolies can retail a loaf of bread for 85c.

That idea might have been right once Paul, but today, with so many of the kids who may be just about bright enough to become a plumber, going off to uni, mostly at our expense, to do arts degrees, don't expect it to last.

With so few training, you will shortly find yourself begging even the most incompetent plumber/electrician to even consider looking at your job.

Hasbeen,the people are the backbone of the nation, I'm not going to argue that one with you. Skilled productive people are the main wealth producers. in a complex economy like ours we need academics, accountants, bankers, lawyers etc, but not to the detriment of basic productive people. like farmers and trades people, we need a sustainable balance of all types of workers. We need the butchers the bakers and the candle stick makers, I dare say we even need you! LOL.

And there in lies the problem Paul, a huge disparity in wages.

I remember building a shop in 99 and the electrician was on $17.50 per hour. My butchers were on about $15. About 17% more for the sparky.

Today, a butcher is on about the $22 per hour, while the electrician is on more like $45, a difference now of 105%.

Why! Because the country needs an electrician and can't just arrange for a cheaper one from the likes of Coles. Not yet anyway.

As for governments, they can control it, but they are simply not game to go there.

They could say that a company owning and running a business can not be actively involved in any other business that offers a distinct completive advantage I.e. Fuel.

They could put a stop to the unchallenged expansion of these big two, in that they (large retailers) can only operate one store for a certain amount of permeant population.

At Caboolture, a small rural town in the 80's we got one Coles. The population was then around 50,000.

By mid 2000's, the population was more like 130,000 yet, there were no fewer than ten Coles/Woolies so a ten fold increase to service a three fold population increase.

The reason they build so many is to occupy the available commercial land so as to keep the foreigners out.

And our governmentS, all of them just sit back and watch it unfold, to the point now where the big too are simply too big and too powerful and virtually nothing can be done now.

The worst thing governments ever allowed was discount fuel and extended trading hours.

Butch, I'll relate a story to you about a good mate of mine in retail. Tom the Pom, years ago, Tom ran a small retail shoe shop in a small main street shopping strip, done okay, not a millionaire but okay living, was there in the same shop for over 10 years. About 3km away they started to build a new 'Westfield'. Before the shopping centre is even completed the Westfield's sales and marketing people approached all the local shopkeepers with offers to join Westfield, Tom included. Tom had a good look at the offer and it didn't stack up for him. Westfields came back, and Tom gave them the knock back. They told Tom straight he was being foolish as "they" with their big monster of a shopping centre would put him, and anyone else who didn't join them, out of business! Tom had to move to another location, it didn't work, and he lost his business, now works for a wage.
The "deal" was totally in Westfield's favor, there was no way Tom could survive long term, and small retailers in Westfield's don't, they are in Westfield's view 'a dime a dozen' people to be simply profited from. Westfield;s are complicate with the big retailers in putting small business out of business. What do you think on that. We had two small butchers in the Westfield's plus 3 supermarkets Coles, Woolies and IGA selling meat, one small bloke has now gone. He had plenty of customers t/o was very good. Not staff wagers were the killer but Westfield's costs killed him off. The other bloke near Woolworth s is now copping it. Woolworth have meat specials all the time legs of lamb @ $6.99/Kg, then it was $5/kg, The best price else where is about $10/kg, including othe Woolworth stores. Same with two F&V markets there is now only one.

Yes Paul, and while the big retailers are to blame, so too are the consumers. As for small butchers, I'm the first to admit that many have caused their own problems with their dishonesty and deceitful practices, something that has hurt the honest ones as well.

But, the main problem for small retailers are costs and, because in most cases their sales have actually fallen over the past ten years, their is no future because they have already maxed out their margins so there is nowhere left to go. The future is bleak.

The Butcher who went belly up in the Westfield's, had great t/o, but even that was a problem he would put out specials like chicken breast fillet @ $6.99, lamb griller's 2kg/$12 etc, but that would draw customers for the specials, but they buy nothing else. Plenty of t/o but as you say no margin, then the two chicken shops would match his price. I suppose its competition. these big shopping centres want more than just rent, they even take something like 2% of your t/o, a sort of private tax. you can't blame the consumer for going after the best deal, that's human nature.
What do you think of things like buy groups, co-ops, franchises etc for small retailers, must help with wholesale, advertising etc. Mitre-10 hardware is an example, up against Bunnings (Westfarmers Coles) and Masters (Woolworths) both with mega stores.
On the big retailers, they do donate large amounts to the LNP and their board members and CEO's have influence with poly's all around the country, they also employee lobbyists in Canberra etc. When it comes to legislation its hard to beat that kind of clout.

Yes Paul, but surely if we can legislate against media domination, surely we can do similar about retail, especially multiple sectors being owned by one chain, fuel, electronics hardware as examples.

As for the butcher and his specials, yes, you're right as it's long been a battle. Many shopper are foxed to buy what's best fir their dollar and, if it means cooking chicken breast 101 different ways, then so be it.

I used to have this problem myself in my cheaper shops, so in the end I would limit the amount one could buy of specials, unless they purchased other meats. This only has a small effect and usually turns more off than you draw. I found the best advertising to be a loyalty card system, but even that has been flogged to death.

My other tact was to buy bacon for $650 Kg and sell it for 2.5 Kg for $13. A small loss, or chicken wings I woukd buy in bulk for $1.10 and sell them for 99c. Loss leaders but my theory was most people would buy cheap bacon, or wings, but they couldn't live on them. Of cause to get these specials they had to buy something else.

The trouble is that the big retailers may tell us they have lost leaders, but in fact it's now been proven that it's the suppliers who are taking the losses.

As for buying groups, while they can be a great idea, they can also be a logistical nightmare for suppliers. An example being meat dropped off when nobody is home. While it may have been paid for in advance, if it goes missing, or goes off it never the fault of the consumer.

Rehctub, the PC socialist view you hold that it should be legislated by governments that small business receive business advantages (business welfare in other words) is straight out of the Communist Manifesto.

Whether you like it or not we live in a capitalist society, where every business competes against every other business, and socially engineered level playing fields DON'T EXIST, nor should they. If you want government legislated business engineering , move to North Korea.

Take your socially engineered, government controlled business engineering elsewhere. If a business goes broke, it's their own fault. Stop blaming the lack of government business welfare. Long live capitalism.

May may, will you feel the same way when there a far fewer jobs, resulting in far less taxes, resulting in far fewer services I wonder!, because apart from the likes of retail, and a few services, most larger corporations can happily do business off shore.

Now as for business welfare, please explain to me how restricting the domination of the two majors is welfare, remembering welfare, by it's very definition is a hand out.

Finally, if by my actions of wanting to protect the rights of small business people, most of them being locals, with kids attending local schools is the wrong attitude to have, them I'm proud to be labeled by the likes of you as a socialist, and I'm willingly guilty as charged.

In the US, the home of big business, they have anti monopoly laws. I can't remember the percentage but no retailer is allowed to have more than say 25%. This means there are a number of large competing chains, & none become as strong as our big two.

I wonder how many Ozzies think enough to see the problem as these two start to control everything? Would they favor a party that wanted to cut back on opening hours, & market share, or would they just see a loss of convenience?

How many realise there is a growing problem?

...How many see there is a growing problem.

Yes hasbeen, not near enough I'm afraid.

Again, I will use butchery as an example, whereby in the late 80's, early 90's many of us were literally printing money, and that's when our gross margins were in the late 20'% to early 30's. Today, very few are printing money and few operate on margins below 50%, yet, many have either shut shop, or are considering to.

It's fair to assume in another five years, costs will drive these retailers from most centers and the ones who will survive will be those who are located in small, suburan strips with understanding land lords.

As for the US and their restriction policies, you're right there as well and yes, I do recall hearing Bob Katter saying it was somewhere in the order of 25%.

Here, our big two now control fuel, liquor, gambling and they are chasing pharmaceutic products, gold lotto and around the clock trading hours. Add to this the fact that they are also implementing ways to slash staff numbers, by installing the likes of auto checkouts and placing the packaging costs and burdens back on to the suppliers.

Yep, it all going to end in tears.,

"Yep, it's all going to end in tears" says rehctub.

I agree, it sure is. It's going to end in tears for the inefficient companies who won't or can't adapt, refine, change, invent, install efficiencies and stop blaming the government ... in other words bad, inefficient companies who don't deserve success.

THAT'S how capitalism works rehctub. If you're not smart enough, you lose, struggle and eventually go out of business. Apparently that wouldn't be so in the Peoples Republic Of Rehctub though, as the "government" would always be there to "help" business.