Harvest and supermarkets have long been linked, but it’s now becoming clear that their relationship is far more complex than previously thought.
The supermarket as store of values and the value of the store itself, they both have a role to play in the global economy, but they have different objectives and different motivations.
It’s not surprising that they have diverged from each other over time, given that both aim to maximise their profits.
What’s surprising is that, at the heart of their different approaches, they are both about making money.
Harvest stores are about increasing sales through a range of techniques, from “selling through” to “bagging” or “buying in”.
But this strategy is less profitable than it once was, thanks to an increasingly complex global economy.
For supermarkets, the economics of profit have changed over time.
In the early 2000s, it was easy to make money by selling on shelves at prices that were high.
But that changed in the late 2000s when the prices of goods fell and the global economic crisis hit.
This time around, as we reported in our 2017 article, the demand for cheaper goods has made it more difficult to do business, and that means supermarkets have had to find other ways to make a profit.
The rise of the “banking” business