Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (NYSE: WMT) will soon be allowing customers of its UK-based Asda retail chain to tell it what to stock. Instead of the usual retail "you'll buy it since we ordered it" mentality, Asda will be e-mailing its customers with pictures and descriptions of items available to them from Far East suppliers for feedback. In a word, this is a paradigm shift for retailing.

The idea of real-time (or near-to-it, anyway) feedback from consumers on product trends and other valuable data is an excellent one. It saves frustration from the consumer end and it allows for huge gains in merchandising productivity, inventory turns, and efficiency from the retailer's end. I hope this is successful for Asda, and that Wal-Mart carries the concept into more of its holdings throughout the globe.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (NYSE: WMT) had great plans for the Asda grocery chain in the United Kingdom when it purchased it back in 1999. It wanted to gain a strong foothold in a growing international market and start dominating the retail landscape like it had done so mercilessly in the U.S. with its grocery-laden supercenters.

After almost a decade, Asda hasn't worked out as planned in terms of overall market dominance. It's still in third place behind market leaders Tesco and J. Sainsbury. Just like Wal-Mart's plans in Germany and South Korea -- which the retailer exited in 2006 -- the UK's Asda hasn't turned into what the world's largest retailer has hoped for.

So, with almost a decade under its belt in the UK, is Wal-Mart ready to pull out of there as well? Is it realistic to think it can dominated the grocery business in every foreign market it enters? Asda was prevented from buying the Safeway chain by the UK Competition Commission, which smacks of too much regulation, and probably contributed to why Wal-Mart may be think the UK a lost retail cause. After all, India and China are turning out to be much hotter markets in the last nine years anyway. Would Wal-Mart take part of Asda public, wait a little while, then sell it altogether? Don't put it past Bentonville.

When Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (NYSE: WMT) reported it had achieved its first $100 billion quarter in the company's history Tuesday, it was probably a time to celebrate at its Bentonville headquarters. But even a $100 billion quarter doesn't make for good feelings sometimes, as much of that growth came from the company's international division. Yes, that's the one I've lamented over frequently in the past. This time, it was shining brightly.

Wal-Mart's Q4 sales came in showing a 19% international growth rate that pushed those sales to $27 billion for the just completed quarter. At the same time, the retailer's U.S. sales rose only 5%. Is international becoming the company's growth engine like it has frequently wanted to happen? This quarter proved it -- yes, it has. Wal-Mart's Asda grocery chain in the UK even showed same-store sales growth in the "mid-single digits" for all of 2007. Wal-Mart indicated that its Asda operation was the fastest growing food retailer in Europe, ahead of competitors Tesco and Sainsbury.

Is "Everyday Low Prices" winning over customer groups outside the U.S. now? That was the reason given behind Asda's growth, as customers seeking out the lowest prices more frequently shopped at Asda. Is this the beginning of the "Wal-Martization" of all its global markets? Commodity and energy prices aren't doing anything to help, but it's too early to make that call. Give four quarters of outstanding international growth, and finally, Wal-Mart investors may have something to cheer about.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.'s (NYSE: WMT) clothing and apparel business is not in complete shambles yet, but by some indications, it's not that far off from that status. When the top apparel executive for the world's largest retailer resigned less than a month ago, it was most likely because Wal-Mart's strategy to break through into becoming mid-flight clothing retailer fell flat on its face. It's quite a thing to think Wal-Mart would try to compete with clothing lines from Dillard's or even discounter-in-hiding Kohl's. Ever ventured into a Kohl's store? The atmosphere is fantastic (upscale all the way), and many of the clothing prices are as deeply discounted as Wal-Mart. Guess what? Customers know this.

In another apparel executive departure just released this week, Angela Spindler, the global managing director of Wal-Mart's George apparel line has now left the sinking ship. This time, it was an exec at the retailer's Asda chain in Britain, which is apparently not selling much in terms of higher-end clothing at Asda stores as well. The name "George" just is not resonating with customers anywhere from where I sit.

Problem? Well, where in the world is the brand "George" marketed? If customers don't see the name and associate some kind of high-end image to it, it's just a name. And, a bad-selling one at that. Although the exec left Asda "to spend more time with her family," this was a push out the door from all indications. The "George" line in Asda stores was just launched in 2006 and has already been trimmed back, and now its future may be shaky (although the brand will live). Hint to Wal-Mart: make sure your customers know what "George" embodies and get it positioned away from $0.99 flip flops if possible. Customers do notice.

With Wal-Mart getting into the health care and banking businesses, why not sell real estate? That is precisely what is happening in the Asda chain of stores in the UK. Asda is owned by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and it's launching estate agencies directly inside stores as a way to trial the service in 10 stores before launching this service all over the United Kingdom. Should real estate brokers in the U.S. and UK be worried? I very seriously doubt it.

Will real estate agents -- or estate agents in Britain -- in stores add value for customers? My prediction for UK-based Asda is that the estate agent trial will fail miserably, which will probably make Wal-Mart not even consider something similar for its own stores here in the U.S. or anywhere else, for that matter.

There is a limit to what customers expect and need from a supermarket, and real estate selling and support seems to not only push the envelope if you will, but it crushes the envelope and then burns it. It's an interesting experiment by Wal-Mart-owned Asda, but one that will ultimately not work. But, hey, you have to take risks sometimes to grow marketshare and enter new markets, yes?

Wal-Mart strapped in, buckled up and rode with roller coaster down the hill with the rest of the market today, closing down to $44.16, a drop of $0.99 or 2.19%. Seems like most of the big movers did the 2% dance today. With the DJIA down over 160 points and the NASDAQ sinking over 36, it was a sell-sell-sell day all over the trading floor. Wal-Mart shares trading hands topped over 25 million today alone.

With Wal-Mart seeking ever-so-clever ways to reduce costs, it's now only going to prosecute shoplifters who steal over $25 worth of merchandise from its stores. Ahh, how quaint. Seriously though, this is probably a good move for the Wal-Mart of 2003 -- in other words, this is a late date to the party. Although I don't have statistics to back me up, something in me says that it costs way more to prosecute shoplifters than the actual cost of the items (not retail prices, but costs) that end up being stolen, and, er, recovered. That is, unless your local court fees and police manpower are free to the public. Oh wait, don't we pay taxes for that?

Asda, the supermarket retailer in the UK that's owned by Wal-Mart, avoided a warehouse staff strike that could have potentially disrupted a very critical shopping time. With Wimbledon and the World Cup in full swing, it's a busy time at Asda stores as well as the warehouses that feed all those stores.

The dispute that nearly caused a strike centered around Asda's refusal to allow unions to negotiate nationally on behalf of Asda's 24 warehouse depots, which supply merchandise for all Asda stores located in Britain. Asda says that 11 of its warehouse depots have such a low level of union membership that it does not make sense for a union to represent all the depots collectively. Asda warehouse workers are upset over pay as well as collective representation, according to unions involved in the dispute.

So, which perspective is right? Do a majority of workers at each Asda warehouse need to be interested and/or involved in union representation in order for a national union representation action to occur? Does Asda's perspective of allowing union representation in its warehouses where only a majority of employees have shown interest make sense?