Why did Wal-Mart give up the fight to build near the historic site? Business and finance homework help

1. Why did Wal-Mart give up the fight to build near the historic site? Do you believe those opposing the construction of the center had a solid foundation and did they considered the benefits versus the risks of not allowing the center to be built? Did anyone considered the possibility of building the center so that it blended with the historical nature of the area?

2. Do you think that Wal-Mart had a right to build on a site that was near an official historic site and that already had other retail stores? Explain.

please use information provided below :

Although many criticisms have been lodged against Wal-Mart, perhaps the most common complaint is the negative effects the retail giant’s stores have on the small communities they inhabit. After all, Wal-Mart has long been the enemy of local businesses that can’t compete with the company’s low prices. But recently in Fredericksburg, Virginia, anti-Wal-Mart troops gathered to combat another form of encroachment on the community—the construction of a new Supercenter near a Civil War battle site.

Nearly 150 years ago 185,000 Union and Confederate troops fought at the Battle of the Wilderness, a clash that took some 30,000 lives and marked the beginning of the end of the Civil War. Though the proposed store would lie one mile from the battle site’s national park entrance, historical preservationists and residents protested the plans even after Orange County officials approved construction. A lawsuit filed against the county’s decision soon garnered support from hundreds of historians as well as celebrities like actor Robert Duvall and filmmaker Ken Burns. According to the plaintiffs, county supervisors ignored the input of preservationists, who claim the proposed store site served as the Union’s “nerve center” during the battle.

Wal-Mart and government officials countered their opponents by claiming the land was zoned for commercial use and located in an area that already had a retail presence. With both sides armed and anxious, a looming January 27 court date set the stage for a lengthy legal struggle to overturn the county’s controversial 2009 decision. But a day before the trial was to begin, Wal-Mart abruptly announced it was abandoning plans to build on the site. The company’s sudden withdrawal came with a low-key response from a spokesperson saying, “We just felt it was the right thing to do.” Rather than face a protracted courtroom melee and an unsure outcome, Wal-Mart simply waved the white flag over the whole affair.[i]


[i] Sources: Kenneth H. Hammonds, “Harry Kraemer’s Moment of Truth,” Fast Company, November 2002, p. 93; Michael Arndt, “How Does Baxter’s Harry Kraemer Do It?” BusinessWeek Online, July 22, 2002; “Baxter Announces Harry Kraemer to Resign as Chairman and CEO,” PR Newswire; Keith Hammonds, “Moment of Truth?” Fast Company, April 2004; Bruce Japsen, “Baxter International Works to Resolve Drug-Delivery Pump Issues,” Chicago Tribune, October 21, 2005.