beardyramen t1_ja88hux wrote on February 27, 2023 at 4:03 PM

Sadly there is ALSO a marketing reason:

People are more willing to buy when a store is well stocked, rather than an half empty one.

Thus any big grocer is willing to sacrifice a chunk of inventory, in order to maintain a good facade.

This is not sustainable, and promotes bad consumer habits... But this is how we want our world to go 'round.

Better to have everything ready at my fingertip, than to accept a more sustainable way of consuming.

EDIT: added the word ALSO for clarity

Silver-Ad8136 t1_ja8ez0g wrote on February 27, 2023 at 4:47 PM

No.

beardyramen t1_ja8ha3w wrote on February 27, 2023 at 5:01 PM

Very thourough exaplanation of your opinion. Thank you for your constructive feedback, that directed me to sources that improved my knowledge of the topic

Silver-Ad8136 t1_ja8o28g wrote on February 27, 2023 at 5:44 PM

Dude, that's just not how businesses work. Merchants see unsold stock as failure and they cry about it. That shit costs money.

Like really, math that in your head and see if you can balance wasting 30% of stock with another 2, 3 pts (maybe) net.

beardyramen t1_jabotel wrote on February 28, 2023 at 7:16 AM

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/stevensavage/2022/10/12/a-company-offers-an-alternative-to-food-waste-at-the-grocery-store-level/amp/ you can check Forbes for some data.

If you buy an apple for 1 and sell it for 5, you can easily afford wasting 1 apple in 3, if it nets you more sales.

Also you can afford to loose something in the fruit department, if you compensate with increased sales on a high-end product.

Ofc the small shop run by Roberto close to my parents' cannot afford this mindset, but big chains can.

Silver-Ad8136 t1_jabrb35 wrote on February 28, 2023 at 7:48 AM

Your citation tends to refute the idea retailers waste food on purpose.

beardyramen t1_jabun88 wrote on February 28, 2023 at 8:35 AM

It says that companies try to keep it to a minimum. But surplus means "more than needed".

So companies stock more than needed. In part to compensate for demand fluctuation, in part to optimize procurement costs, in part to provide the customer with a pleasing visual experience.

Sadly, to sell 10 apples we currently "need" a stock of 13.

Then, i'm not your mom, nor your boss. You are free to have your own opinion on procurement strategies of grocers. Not every retailer works the same way, some are more virtuos than others.

But as a matter of fact the western world wastes about 1/3 of its food pipeline.

I am telling that this is not due to incompetence of supply planners, but due to deliberate planning. We accept an inefficiency there for a positive outcome in another point of the chain.

Should you disagree with my opinion, you are welcome to. I will believe you to be naive in thinking that losses of this magnitude are not accounted for accurately, but I will respect your position.