Running a bike shop chain next to universities could be a big business because universities have new students every year and those students tend to have a bike. Probably they buy secondhand at other places, but still you can sell fenders and baskets and maintenance services which secondhand dealers and nationwide discount stores are not likely to provide. If the bike shop chain is nationwide or global, it is easy to buy and stock things massively and cheaply. Then it could provide cheaper services which local businesses cannot compete. And you would end up being rich, destroying local businesses.
I myself went to a bike shop next to the campus today to have my bike equipped with fenders. It cost me $28 for fenders and $4 for putting them on. The shopkeeper didn’t tell me he would charge me extra $4 when I asked him to put them on. He’s not honest very much L
I might be pro-globalization even though I know it’s not good to environment, small businesses, localness or whatever. Globalization is good for people with lower income like me. In this case today, if you go to Wal-Mart, and you could find cheaper fenders, maybe around $10, though you need to put them on by yourself. If you are rich, you may stand against globalization because you can afford to buy local things by paying more money. Mm, I seem to have reached a conspiracy theory. Globalization occurs to keep poor people poor or poorer. Who control globalization are influential rich people or influential rich corporations, right? So, as long as they make people with lower income happy with globalization, they can keep making things globalized by expanding their business. By writing this, I’m getting confused. It should be stopped here.