????Strategic Resource Group的零售業(yè)顧問波特?弗里金格,，將沃爾瑪美國業(yè)務(wù)過去幾個季度的表現(xiàn)疲弱歸咎于“自毀前程”,，主要是指該公司決定縮減工作時間以及其廣為人知的拒絕大幅上調(diào)員工工資——弗里金格認(rèn)為，這是沃爾瑪門店變得日益雜亂和存貨不足的兩個主要原因,。（去年,，沃爾瑪推出了一項(xiàng)旨在提供開放調(diào)班的計劃。)

????所有這些背后是一個完全不為CEO掌控的因素：“[美國銷售額下降]很大程度上與[沃爾瑪]業(yè)務(wù)偏于低端消費(fèi)者有關(guān),，這些消費(fèi)者仍未恢復(fù)元?dú)?，”蘭德斯說。

????的確如此,。經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家伊曼紐爾?塞斯和托馬斯?皮凱蒂2013年的一項(xiàng)研究顯示，美國最富有的1%人群收入,，占2012年全體美國人收入的五分之一還多,。根據(jù)皮尤研究中心（Pew Research Center）的數(shù)據(jù)，在經(jīng)濟(jì)復(fù)蘇的前兩年,，最富有7%的家庭凈資產(chǎn)均值預(yù)計增長了28%,，而剩余93%的家庭凈資產(chǎn)均值下降了4%。這些趨勢已損傷到消費(fèi)者信心：蓋洛普（Gallup）去年進(jìn)行的一項(xiàng)調(diào)查顯示,，大部分美國人在年收入達(dá)到6萬美元之前,，對于必要支出都感覺肉痛。

????低收入消費(fèi)者仍在“減少購買非必需品”,，蘭德斯說,，即使在購買必需品時也會考慮節(jié)省支出，比如“買牛肉改為買豬肉”,。

????不要以為沃爾瑪沒注意到,。“基本面因素沒有改變,，家庭收入依然平平,，”西蒙5月份在沃爾瑪?shù)臉I(yè)績電話會議上表示?！半S著選舉季臨近,，各種言論升溫，它會繼續(xù)挑戰(zhàn)消費(fèi)者信心,?！?/p>

????這意味著如果美國不出現(xiàn)全面的經(jīng)濟(jì)復(fù)蘇，沃爾瑪要實(shí)現(xiàn)銷售額反彈的概率為零？不一定,，主要是因?yàn)槲譅柆斢幸粋€常年的優(yōu)勢：晨星的肯?波金斯表示,，其4,200家美國門店仍在運(yùn)送足夠的商品，為消費(fèi)者提供有競爭力的價格,。

????但要基于這個理由實(shí)現(xiàn)反彈并不容易,。以這樣低的利潤率經(jīng)營這樣大規(guī)模的業(yè)務(wù)，要實(shí)現(xiàn)銷售額增長很難,。從這里或那里流失一筆銷售或一個顧客,，都可能產(chǎn)生顯著的不同，波金斯表示,，“要讓沃爾瑪這樣規(guī)模的旗艦保持正確的方向航行很難,。”（財富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：早稻米

????Burt Flickinger, a retail consultant at Strategic Resource Group, for his part, attributed Wal-Mart’s poor U.S. performance in the past several quarters to “self-sabotage,” mainly its decision to cut worker hours and its well-publicized refusal to significantly raise workers wages—two big reasons why Flinckinger says Wal-Mart’s stores are increasingly sloppy and sparsely stocked. (Last year, Wal-Mart launched a program aimed at giving workers more access to open shifts.)

????Underlying all of these factors is one that’s completely out of any CEO’s control: “A lot of [the declining U.S. sales] has to do, quite simply, with the fact that [Walmart's] business is skewed to the lower-end consumer, and that consumer is still hurting,” says Landes.

????Indeed. According to a 2013 study from economists Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty, the top 1% of Americans earned more than one-fifth of all the income earned by Americans in 2012. And for the first two years of the recovery, the mean net worth of households in the wealthiest 7% rose by an estimated 28%, while the mean net worth of households in the lower 93% dropped by 4%, according to the Pew Research Center. These trends have made a dent into consumer confidence: the majority of Americans did not report feeling good about the amount of money they had to spend until their income reached the $60,000-a-year mark, according to a Gallup poll conducted last year.

????Low-earning customers are still “buying less discretionary items,” says Lande, and they’re resorting to cost-saving tactics when purchasing goods they must have, like “trading down from beef to poultry.”

????And don’t think Wal-Mart hasn’t noticed. “Fundamental dynamics haven’t changed, and household incomes are still flat,” Simon said during the retailer’s earnings call in May. “As we head toward the political season and rhetoric heats up, it will continue to challenge consumer confidence.”

????Does that mean that Wal-Mart’s chances for a U.S. sales rebound are nil, save for a full economic recovery? Not necessarily, mainly because the company has a perpetual advantage: its 4,200 U.S. stores still move enough goods to offer customers competitive prices, says Ken Perkins of Morningstar.

????For that same reason, though, a turnaround won’t be easy. With that big an operation running on such small margins, it’s difficult to generate sales growth. Losing a sale or customer here or there can make a noticeable difference, Perkins says. “It’s hard to move a ship the size of Wal-Mart in the right direction,” he said.