<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>BloggingStocks</title>
<link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com</link>
<description>BloggingStocks</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[No swimsuit edition at Wal-Mart (for now)]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/06/no-swimsuit-edition-at-wal-mart-for-now/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/06/no-swimsuit-edition-at-wal-mart-for-now/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/06/no-swimsuit-edition-at-wal-mart-for-now/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/wmt/" rel="tag">Wal-Mart (WMT)</a></p><em><a href="http://www.blueluxe.com/press/sports-illustrated-large.jpg" target="_blank"></a>Sports Illustrated</em>'s swimsuit edition has long been a magnet for controversy, mainly from parents who do not like the contents. To each his own, but I find it interesting that this year's installment may not find its way to <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/wal-mart-stores-inc/wmt/nys">Wal-Mart</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/wal-mart-stores-inc/wmt/nys">WMT</a>) shelves, for a totally different reason. <br /><br />WMT's problem with the magazine is really a problem with the wholesaler's demand for a seven-cent surcharge on delivery of each copy of the magazine. However, this <a href="http://www.nypost.com/seven/02062009/business/wal_marts_empty_racks_153845.htm?page=0"><em>New York Post</em></a><em> </em>article notes that the problem goes far beyond WMT and the swimsuit edition. <br /><br />The article says that the problem boils down to two wholesalers: Source Interlink and Anderson News. The duo enacted the surcharge three weeks ago in hopes of "shoring up" a money-losing business. However, it certainly appears that this strategy may have backfired, as Time Inc., Bauer Publications, and American Media (three publishing giants) all refused the surcharge.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/06/no-swimsuit-edition-at-wal-mart-for-now/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>No swimsuit edition at Wal-Mart (for now)</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/06/no-swimsuit-edition-at-wal-mart-for-now/">No swimsuit edition at Wal-Mart (for now)</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 06 Feb 2009 19:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/06/no-swimsuit-edition-at-wal-mart-for-now/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1452502/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/06/no-swimsuit-edition-at-wal-mart-for-now/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>dispute</category><category>magazine</category><category>magazine sales</category><category>MagazineSales</category><category>sports illustrated</category><category>SportsIllustrated</category><category>swimsuit edition</category><category>SwimsuitEdition</category><category>wal-mart</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 19:00:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
