Don't believe everything you read on Wikipedia. A week ago that was edited from $23 billion to $230,000 billion (i.e. $230 trillion), which is obviously preposterously wrong:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sam_Walton&dif...

A rather redundant comment, we wouldn't need to mention it as a source if at least the citation link worked, would we?

There is though still $120+ billion on his children in that list.

Yeah, but the Walmart stock price didn't start to really take off until the late 90's.

Pointing out the fact that the most successful store in history by a huge margin is one that neither you nor anyone you know shops at is a great way to illustrate the importance of market validation for startups.

Sorry, are you saying no one on HN shops at Walmart or that there is a more successful store?

It's a broad stroke for sure, but, yes, no one on HN shops at Walmart.

I hope you're joking. Shopped there tonight. It was there or a poorly stocked K-Mart. I find the local grocery store less ethical than the Walmart.

I'm not joking, but my point is lost in some confusion, so I'll add this caveat:

If your audience does shop at Walmart, or knows people who do, then pointing out Walmart's jaw dropping numbers will not be a good device for illuminating the importance of market validation. In fact it could encourage them carry on with the potentially mistaken assumption that the entire planet's needs/problems are the same as their own.

Silly comment. I don't especially like shopping at Walmart but there is one 5 minutes from me--in a fairly rural locale where there aren't a lot of especially close stores--so, yes, I shop there for a lot of items.

It depends on your audience of course. I probably wouldn't point that out in rural areas, where Walmart has more penetration.

Oh Wikipedia.

Sam Walton was listed as being worth $7.3 billion in 1990: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1990/...