Nicholas Buse’s blog post about Chevron being fined for an oil leak brings up an interesting topic. Oh wait— wasn’t this the topic of conversation just the other day it seems like, but regarded BP instead?  Company’s producing oil leaks seems to happen much too often, so the question lays with why aren’t the regulations deterring the company’s from being careless and disregard public safety? If these big corporations were actually scared of the fine they would get from the governments they could perhaps be more inclined to further their precautions, since it is understandable that mistakes do happen.

A non-governmental Organization which lobbys for more punishments and reparations is Peta. With their influence that should be enough to deter companies from risking the offchance of spilling. PETA has a strong following, and if PETA were to do a campaign about boycotting a corporation that hurt animals, that would surely ruin that corporations brand. However, from what I’ve seen in the past, this boycott only lasts so long, and eventually people forget the harm that company caused, that is until they make the same mistake yet again.

In response to Anastasyia’s blog post

I found this strategy very interesting. The best marketing campaigns sell not just a trivial product, but an entire lifestyle. That’s obviously what Molson is striving to achieve, but one wonders if selling an ideal that does not include your product is in fact productive. Obviously those with healthy lifestyles will in fact enjoy the cool, refreshing taste of a quality beer, and probably switch to Molson after that because it’s cheaper, but these are exceptions, flaws in an otherwise wholesome program.

Grassroots marketing is a good idea because a company can then take another angle in the market. However, I am curious to find out how successful it actually is. Understandably, it improves a brands image, and puts them on a the ‘socially responsible’ map-but realistically does Molson sell more at the end of the day? Does seeing Molson programs supporting community healthy lifestyle increase profits? I know that as a consumer that might not necessarily go out an buy that product, what I would do is talk about it, thus promoting the product for free.

SInce its foundation, Nike’s brand strategy has more or less been limited to adopting the most dominant athletes in the world and aggressively promoting their talent and dedication, contributing considerably to the phenomenon that is celebrity athletes. Having spent the last decade learning the painful lessons of celebrity, Nike shifted its focus towards whole teams, and particularly dominant collegiate ones. Considering the deep ties that Nike has with the University of Oregon, the brand having been forged on the asphalt track of Hayward Field, Nike expanded its already massive visibility, introducing the Pro Combat line of football equipment and issuing Oregon’s teams the most distinctive and progressive uniforms in sports. While this worked brilliantly for a while, with Oregon’s team becoming the national darling, filling the role USC previously held. However, 2011 has proved to be something of disappointing year for the football team, and an absolute disaster for the running program, with perhaps the most prestigious quasi-amateur running team in the world faling to qualify for the NCAA Cross Country National Championships and the absolutely flashiest football team in the world suffering a disappointing loss to USC and dropping from 4th in the nation to 9th and losing any shot at the BCS final. This raises the question, is sports marketing essentially gambling? Is the policy of only selecting a few, albeit extremely talented athletes and teams dangerous to an entire brand? Is Nike’s new practice, that is, issuing multiple teams with the prestigious Pro Combat gear a safer bet? Or does it simply dissolve the power of such endorsements? Does it reflect a crack in Nike’s extremely well designed and lightweight armour? Is Nike’s infallibility dependent on the teams it endorses?

In other news, the Stanford Pro Combat jerseys are coming on to the open market soon and I’m definitely getting one.

The article “Making it to the top 1%, with a little help from dad“, from the Globe and Mail caught my attention because I have seen some version of this-maybe not the top 1%- in my life. This article brings up the fact that some children are just given a position in their parents company, resulting in them receiving a high salary and a big title. However, this also brings up the fact that some children do have to work just as hard as anyone else to get somewhere in their family’s company and are not given a ‘free ride’. What because troublesome here is that children then have to fight the people who assume no matter what kind of  effort that is put in, the child will get way more than anyone else, despite their levels of productivity or effort. This adds even more pressure to the child, however, if the pressure hits him or her the right way it could add as motivation to do even better in the workplace-proving all those nay-sayers wrong, which in the end improves the company as a whole.

Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/

Vision Critical is an online market research company that exploded over the past 10 years, making it one of the top tech/market research company’s in Canada, and even the world. My brother-in-law founded the company due to the hole he saw in the market for market-research, and not the annoying telephone calls at dinner time kind of market research, the innovative kind. After reading the article I saw a link between his company and how they  indeed do focus on Social responsibility (and of course the company’s bottom line too). Being a “social entrepreneur” and a conventional capitalist entrepreneur do have their differences, however I see how a large company such as Vision Critical which has over 500 employees around the world, still stays involved within the community, and is consistent with their work. Large organizations should have the conscious to be involved within society to benefit others, such as Vision Critical does with Children’s Hospital and Variety. It is important to stay on top of the market as well, but equally as important to be socially responsible.

http://www.visioncritical.com/

A quote from the article:

”

Social entrepreneurs look for
a long-term social return on investment. Social
entrepreneurs want more than a quick hit; they
want to create lasting improvements. They think
about sustaining the impact."

February of this year was a turning point in Egypt, when President Mubarak was overthrown. Civilans over the Canadian Thanksgiving weekend decided to protest against the 2am curfew, killing 24 people and injuring over 300. Violence has been a common occurrence every since the revolution, however, the security forces did not run citizens over with vehicles in the past. Most of those killed were Coptic Christians, a minority in Cairo. Hate crimes were being committed against the Coptic’s and nothing was being done about it, and in the end most of the 24 killed were of that religion. Protests ending negatively and deadly such as this one are a key example as to how there are still some groups who are not accepting of other religions, or races, forcing the minorities to protest and riot. If groups did not have a reason to feel the need to protest, then there would be the outcomes such as this one over this past weekend in Cairo. It makes me wonder why an actual neutral body, such as the UN hasn’t stepped in, or someone else in order to save the lives of civilians.

Source

Germany and France gave investors light at the end of the tunnel. There were no details to the plan, other than getting closer to euro zone integration in hopes of freeing Greece from the billions in debt. Although this is positive for investors, there is still the question of what this deal entails. The goal is to aid the non-existant european economy and bring it to a place where stability exists. The German candidate for the European Central Bank’s executive board said “that all systemically important banks in the 27-nation EU should be made to raise fresh capital simultaneously to avoid singling out individual lenders.”, bringing up what I think is a very important point, forcing those in debt to find capital instead of drying out and wiping clean one sole lender. The question now exists as to whether or not governments and banks and nations as a whole, have learned their lesson. Sending a whole country into bankruptcy should be considered as learning the hard way, but if greed gets in the way again, and regulations are not being followed or established the chances of seeing this re-occur are high.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-news/european/stocks-rise-on-optimism-over-eu-crisis-plans/article2196458/

In October of last year, the bike lanes were voted in and approved for downtown Vancouver. Within 24 hours, construction had already begun, raising a red flag that the cote was not a fair vote. As a twice-a-day commuter through the downtown core, I quickly saw the effects of firstly the construction, and secondly the removal of lanes for automobiles replaced with bike lanes. Hornby Street was my route home from school, which I chose based on the massive amount of congestion on Burrard, the street parallel. As luck would have it, the bike lanes were being installed on Hornby Street. This caused for one lane removed of paid-meter parking which allowed for now only 2 lanes of driving. Right hand turns were either limited or all together illegal, thus, causing for even more backups. The question is how effective are these lanes and how many people actually use them to commute instead of driving. To me the answer was simple, it was rare anyone would be using them at all. Not only is the city losing parking money, but the cost for the lanes was 3.2 million(http://www.vancourier.com/Vancouver+Hornby+Street+bike+lane+price+tops+million/3592236/story.html). Now, I don’t see how this can be paying off financially. Bikes don’t have to be insured, nor are licences needed. In order to make the lanes more efficient licences for bikes should be necessary.

In this video you can see just how busy the lanes are.

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/article/282254–bike-lanes-are-here-to-stay-anton

Apple has been the leading company in innovative and technological advancements since making a mark in the world with the first iPod in 2001. Since then, unforeseen pressure has been put on the company to invent and release products better than before and most definitely more advanced than competitors, such as Google or RIM. It is interesting to see what has happened to stocks after the unveiling of a new product. The jump from the iPhone 3G to iPhone 4 lead the stocks of Apple to rise to the highest they had ever been. On Monday, October 3rd, Apple disappointed consumers and investors by bringing out the iPhone 4S, which looks the exact same as the 4. With increasing competition with Google’s Android, Apple was expected to release the iPhone 5, offering quicker services and more applications to satisfy the demanding market of technology crazy consumers. With this being said, it comes as no surprise that stocks fell more than 4 percent  after closing due to the disappointment the iPhone 4S that was felt towards investors. It will be interesting to see how this will contrast to the future release to the iPhone 5, perhaps making it even more profitable since the iPhone 4G fell short. The question is, was this a planned tactic of Apple’s?

Source: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Apple+iPhone+fails+investors+fans/5501262/story.html

"Siemens to Pay $1.6 Billion to Settle Bribery Case "-2008

Siemens is a globally recognized German engineering company, which has tapped into many sectors, such as telecommunications, healthcare, renewable energy, oil & gas, to name a few. Understandably, it is one of the most influential engineering companies in Germany and the world, explaining the immense magnitude of the US $1.6 billion settlement regarding bribery. The company has since pleaded guilty to corruption, in the form of paying bribes for public works contracts.

The ethical issue here is bribery. In order to expand their company, Siemens took an illegal and alternative route to get there, disregarding the regulations against bribery. Bribery was a way of life at Siemens, it was embedding into their business strategy. Since joining the NYSE in 2001, Siemens was supposed to abide with American regulations, which states bribery is illegal. By being unethical the company has subjected themselves to financial loss, but also a tarnished brand, which is ironic since the organization broke the law in hopes of becoming a more profitable and known company. The consequences of their actions go far beyond money and profits.  A Chinese official who accepted Siemens’ bribes was sentenced to death this year, and another, a long prison sentence, showing that people will do just about anything for money.

Other stories:

http://www.businessweek.com/blogs/europeinsight/archives/2008/12/siemens_to_sett.html

Sources:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/16/business/worldbusiness/16siemens.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2008/12/15/AR2008121502926.html

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90776/90882/7417043.html