Given An RFID Inch, Will Sam’s Club Suppliers Try Taking A Mile?

Written by Fred J. Aun
January 27th, 2009

Sam’s Club, which wants suppliers to apply EPC/RFID tags on all pallets they ship to its stores and warehouses by next year, is significantly reducing the fee it will charge those who don’t comply, from about $3 per tag to 12 cents per tag. Some suppliers will simply opt to pay the fee, potentially risking the wrath of Sam’s Club—and its owner, Wal-Mart.

“Why would you want to invest in technology, training, software and people when Wal-Mart can do it for you for 12 cents?” asked Louis Bianchin, senior RFID analyst and program manager at VDC Research. “The risk there is that they (Sam’s Club) could have sent the wrong message to the supplier community. That is not the message the supplier community needs to get.”

Sam’s Club told suppliers it is reducing, to 12 cents-per-tag, the fee it will charge them if it is forced to print and apply EPC/RFID tags to pallets that do not come with the tags in place, according to this story in the RFID Journal. The Journal noted the 12 cents fee is a huge reduction compared with the $2.50 to $3 Sam’s Club had been threatening to charge.

According to a letter to suppliers from Sam’s Club CEO Doug McMillon that discussed the pricing change, the company “remains committed to the vision of 100 percent EPC labeling on selling units.” These units are the large items typically found in retail warehouse stores. McMillon said Sam’s Club realizes its suppliers need a year to 18 months “to prepare and implement selling unit labeling,” but it is expecting to have a “chain-wide rollout of pallet level labeling” by next year.

Some analysts are speculating suppliers will weigh the costs of implementing RFID labeling against the 12-cents-per-pallet fee mentioned in McMillon’s letter and decide it’s more cost-effective to just pay the fee. VDC’s Bianchin said Sam’s Club appears to be giving its suppliers “some breathing space and some time” to get their RFID ducks in a row. But cost-conscious suppliers are probably questioning the ROI of pursuing RFID labeling on their own.

Stephen Hull, product manager at SATO America, which produces both RFID and barcode labels, said the 12 cents figure is “pretty much the tag cost.” He also agreed that suppliers might look at the Sam’s Club fee and see no good reason to implement tagging systems.

However, Hull said he’s heard from others in the industry that Sam’s Club isn’t going to look kindly on suppliers who play that game. “From what I understood, they will look pretty hard when the time comes for this next deadline and they could be willing to drop those suppliers,” Hull said. “I could see that happening to some smaller guys.”

The Business Of RFID Tags

Essentially, while Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart is doing all it can to push RFID and ease its adoption by suppliers, the company does not want to be in the business of RFID tagging, Hull added.

But what if Hull and Bianchin are wrong? It’s not unrealistic, given the no-end-in-sight recession that might make it hard for some suppliers to afford the RFID labeling. And if they can’t, it’s not out of the question to think that Sam’s Club might opt to not crack down on RFID laggards. The company may instead continue to let suppliers pay the 12 cents per pallet. Such a scenario might not bode well with the RFID tag manufacturers who have been counting on selling their products to Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart suppliers.

“That would have an impact,” Bianchin said. “I was talking with two key RFID suppliers. The impact could be that, if you are a reader supplier and all of a sudden your potential clients, the Wal-Mart suppliers, do not want, need or care about deploying those readers, this will have a potentially negative impact.”

That’s not the only thing worrying RFID equipment companies. “Wait until the Chinese come into town,” Bianchin said. “We have been approached, exposed, made aware of Chinese suppliers that are producing them (RFID readers) at a serious fraction of the cost.”


2 Comments | Read Given An RFID Inch, Will Sam’s Club Suppliers Try Taking A Mile?

  1. Bryan Larkin Says:

    If they are dropping the cost that much is Sam’s saying there isn’t as much value in tagging as they thought? And if the tagging is really for use internally at Sam’s, then this supports the research that has shown closed loop environments are the best ways to get value out of RFID. Once something hits Sam’s dock, it is essentially in a closed loop. In many ways it might be more effective for Sam’s to do the labeling themselves rather than risk errors in what’s delivered by suppliers. At least Sam’s has total control at that point.

    If the tags are wrong when they come in from suppliers, will Sam’s know it right away? If they do, they are auditing the products anyways and adding their own tag will require little effort. If they don’t know it is wrong, they’ll figure it out some time later and that will cause significant problems for Sam’s – that would warrant much costlier fines rather than lower ones. I’m guessing Sam’s is auditing all pallets anyhow, so they’re prepared to relabel anything that is bad.

    If the labeling then is for their own closed loop purposes, I can see many suppliers paying the 12 cents. There is little incentive to do otherwise until many, many more retailers demand the same functionality from them.

  2. Bill Bittner Says:

    There are a lot of possible answers here, but the obvious one is that Sam’s Club has realized a lot of benefit from pallet labeling and that having RFID tags on every pallet is worth it even if they have to apply them themselves. All their handling procedures can be developed with the premise that every pallet has a tag and they don’t have to support multiple procedures.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.