Author Archives: AlexPayandeh

After reading my colleague Carolina Hodgins’ thoughts on the Apple Pay, and how they are a threat to PayPal, I was compelled to do some research on the subject. After investigation, I have reached a contrasting opinion to those stated in my peer’s post.

The Value Proposition of the Apple Pay is providing consumers the opportunity to leave your wallet behind. However, without a complete integration of this new method of payment among all retailers, the Apple Pay will fall short, just like predecessor Google Wallet.

Pay Pal, on the other hand, is not aiming to replace the wallet. Instead, they are adding extra features which would compel consumers to choose their service over traditional methods of payment. Features such as being able to order and pay ahead at food and drink retailers, or being able to directly pay for a meal at a restaurant, from your mobile device, at your table.

However, for the company to further succeed where others have failed, other strategies need to be employed. The main strategy should be having a positive environment for merchants. PayPal needs to showcase to merchants that a partnership with the company would result in possible customer expansion, lowered marketing or operational costs, or greater spends per purchase.

Apple Pay and PayPal are competitors in a new game, the digital wallet game. The success of either player will not be determined by success over the competition, but success of the industry as a whole.

Sara Damber, CEO of social enterprise Reach for Change has been fighting for children’s rights since 1997. The organization aims to find individuals with driven to promote children’s rights and who posses an innovative idea to change the lives of children. These individuals are given a salary, as well as support in their project. Sara has a blog, in which she documents personal experiences in her career as well as her thoughts.

Reading her blog strengthened my opinion on social enterprise stated in my previous post. The UN can never match the individual level of commitment brought by a social entrepreneur.

Reading about these people opens one’s eyes to the fact that people marginalized by poverty and injustice are in fact, people. They are not numbers or statistics. Helping these people should not be a onetime, ego-boosting event of “voluntourism“, but a lifestyle. The personal connection that social entrepreneurs can make with the people they are helping really sets them aside from other aid workers.

Even if the United Nations was fully funded, social enterprise would still be needed. While it is true that the both work towards a common goal, the way they work to achieve their goals is very different.

The United Nations aims at maintaining international peace and security as well as aims at creating better living standards and human rights. However, obstacles are often encountered which hinder success. An example where social enterprise is needed is the involvement of the UN in Rwanda.

During the Rwandan Genocide, the UN was sent to help find a peaceful solution to the civil war. Unfortunately, due to limitations on their rules of engagement, the missions was ultimately a failure.

As the dust of the tragedy is settling, both Social Entrepreneurs and the UN are trying to help the people of Rwanda. Currently, the UN is trying a pro-active solution: trying to educate the people of Rwanda so a similar travesty will not occur again. On the other hand, Social Entrepreneurs are aiming to solve specific problems of the people. The organization Climate Concern LTD is an example of such organizations. The organizations aims to produce low-cost solar-powered lights to help people in rural Rwanda who use health problem causing kerosene lamps.

Children in Rwanda holding up products from Climate Concern LTD

The pursuit of solutions to specific problems by social entrepreneurs in Rwanda showcases why even if they UN was fully funded, social entrepreneurs would still be needed. Working in depth with communities and individuals to help them prosper as opposed to working on vague and general goals is what social entrepreneurs do, and is why we need them.

Robert Plant, the ex-lead singer of Led Zeppelin, one the most influential bands of all time, has recently passed up $800 million in exchange for his taking part in a reunion of the band. The band, which broke up in 1980 after the death of drummer and founding member John Bonham has only been reunited a few times. When asked about these reunions, Plant responded, comparing the experience to “seeing an ex-wife, but not spending the night”.

Robert Plant: Then and Now

From a monetary standpoint, this is a poor decision, but at the end of the day, which is more important for the musician, artistic integrity or making profit? The music industry, like most industries, is a for profit. Ultimately, however, the musician does not owe anything to fans, or more importantly, financial stakeholders.

Music has always been about creating a feeling. Happiness, sadness, unrest, anger, it has always been an outlet for these emotions. Plant has not been able to re-create the feeling brought about through his time with Zeppelin, and should not be forced to just for the sake of a large paycheck.

Regardless of possible ticket sales, live recording sales, or increase in popularity by a reunion show, Robert Plant, or any other artist, should not have to be forced to compromise his artistic freedom and integrity for the sake of financial gain.

After reading Katie Applebaum’s statement on the current condition of the music industry, I was left with both agreeing and disagreeing opinions.

Due to the fact that anyone with a computer and internet connection can both create and listen to new music, there is an influx of creativity. Unfortunate for the aspiring artist, this surge of music makes it difficult to distinguish yourself from other artists, both new and existing.

However, current music can still change the world. It can still unite billions of people and cause shifts in social trends, it just needs to have a strong enough differentiation to cause the world to notice.

Hip-hop group, the Wu-Tang Clan, has found a way to get people to notice. The group, whose previous work has been noteworthy enough to be included in Rolling Stone’s list of “best albums of all time” release their music in the traditional method, physical copies of records, as well as digital versions of songs and albums. Their new album, “Once upon a time in Shaolin“, breaks this trend. Rather than selling millions of copies of the album, the group will release only one copy. Similar to a work of Monet or Van Gogh, the price tag will be in the millions. The album will be taken on a museum tour of the world, and the public can purchase a ticket to individually listen to the music.

Once Upon a Time in Shaolin

This unorthodox way of releasing an album has turned heads. The Wu-Tang Clan, after fading from relevancy after their initial surge, is making their way back into the spotlight. Perhaps this disruptive innovation will ultimately be a failure, but similar to a lot of other differentiation, the higher the risk, the higher the possible payoff.

Regardless of the quality of the album, its distribution will raise popularity for the group, but more importantly for them, profit. The group has always been known for making quality music, and has successfully found a way to do so, while still gaining a heavy payoff.

3:00 pm on a warm sunny, summer afternoon.

You’re sitting in your house, relaxing, when you hear a knock on the door. You open up and see Al Monaco, CEO of Enbridge inc, standing in front of a construction crew. He informs you that he plans on constructing a pipeline through your living room. He continues to tell you of your compensation, economic benefits of the pipeline, and other valid reasons behind the construction, but you stopped listening at “pipeline through your living room”. Before you can respond to his intrusion, he informs you construction will likely be starting in the next year.

Although this is a fictional story, it is not far from the reality some First Nations people have dealt with. Regardless of the pros or cons of their Northern Gateway pipeline, Enbridge should have given more consideration to the First Nations peoples when planning their project.

The First Nations people whose land will theoretically be used should have been the first group consulted when planning this pipeline. Perhaps through a building of mutual respect from day one, an agreement could have been made. Unfortunately, first impressions are the strongest, and the Northern Gateway Pipeline has made quite a negative impression on the First Nations Peoples.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/There+will+pipeline/10122968/story.html

After launching their new handset last week, the Passport, BlackBerry has made it clear of their focus: innovation of mobile technology for users who care about serious productivity. Unlike competitor Apple, who keeps product specifications secret until release date, information about the passport has been available for a while. The new phone sports new features such as the classic blackberry keyboard with a modern update, a 30 hour battery life, and more, while being the size of it’s namesake, a passport.

The phone does not is not the iPhone. It will not take back BlackBerry’s hold on the market. However, BlackBerry did not make it to be. The new phone was not made to kill the iPhone, BlackBerry is comfortable with their current customer segment. Through their ups and downs, BlackBerry has always had a devoted following from the business community. Rather than take on the behemoths of the mobile phone industry, BlackBerry chose to cater to their loyal customers.

The new BlackBerry will not give you a new high score in Candy Crush. Nor will it map out your jogging route. It is what BlackBerries have always been: a powerful tool for those who need to securely access their data.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102053583?linkId=9850056&linkId=9850613

Netflix Inc., an American supplier of on-demand Internet streaming media is once again ruffling the feathers of the entertainment industry. For the first time, the company is partnering with a major motion picture studio to release a feature film. Challenging the norms of the film industry, Netflix is releasing a sequel to the popular 2000 movie “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”. They plan on releasing the film both in theaters and on its own platform simultaneously.

This is not the first time Netflix has re-positioned themselves in the entertainment industry. Founded in 1997, the company originally ran a DVD-by-mail service in the United States, where customers would pay a flat fee every month and would be mailed DVDs they request. In 1999, the began their digital distribution of media, and their streaming service has since put dvd rental retailers such as Blockbuster out of service. As society began to lean towards a digital age, Netflix re-positioned into the market of digital streaming, which has left them highly successful.

Netflix is constantly changing their value proposition. In a move that upset the television industry, the company released entire seasons of a show at once, rather than the usual serialized method. In a similar fashion, Netflix’s latest endeavor of simultaneous release of a film through theatrical release and digital streaming has upset the film industry.

Netflix’s innovation is the future. As consumers are leaning towards a more digital lifestyle, older companies are left with an ultimatum: follow the innovation, or follow Blockbuster and the dinosuar, to extinction.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/us-business/netflix-to-make-big-screen-debut-with-crouching-tiger-sequel/article20853176/

October 26th/2012, Microsoft released their new operating system, Windows 8. This new OS carried radical differences from their previously successful Windows 7. However, to quote Bert Lance, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.

October 17/2013, one year later, Microsoft releases another new operating system, Windows 8.1. After consumer complaints of a fundamental interface change that was forced upon them with Windows 8, Microsoft attempted to remedy this situation. Restoring some of the more traditional Windows features, Microsoft hoped to make their new OS the market leader, toppling their already successful Windows XP and 7.

However, after two years on the market, Windows 8 had only been able to take a control of 6.62% of the desktop market, followed by 8.1 at 3.94%. Although Windows holds a tight grip of the market at 90.72%, this number comes through it’s older operating systems, Windows XP and Windows 7.

September 30/2014, another year later, Microsoft unveils a third new OS in three years, Windows 10. Leaving all their troubles with 8 behind, Microsoft’s flagship OS skips version 9 to emphasis their change. Microsoft wants to stay far away from the lack of success of Windows 8. Two numbers away. This new OS leaves behind many features of their previous system, and brings back updated, more efficient versions of their older features.

Despite going back to more traditional Windows concepts, Microsoft aims to unite the personal computer world with their new OS. Where Windows 8 was geared towards newer, touchscreen devices, Windows 10 keep those features while staying accessible on all devices.

Works Cited:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/tech-news/microsoft-skips-a-number-to-unveil-windows-10/article20858320/

http://www.dazeinfo.com/2014/03/24/xubuntu-microsoft-corporation-windows-xp-os-alternative/

http://www.quickmba.com/marketing/ries-trout/positioning/

Inexpensive energy is becoming a thing of the past. The prices of oil and gas are rising. Due to depletion of fossil fuels, it is becoming increasingly difficult to harvest these natural resources. Canadian projects to develop the oilsands are being cancelled due to the excessive cost of the work. However, despite the high cost, businesses are still developing these resources due to an excessive demand. The International Energy Agency warns that $53 trillion will be needed by 2035 just to reduce emissions to the point where global warming is only two degrees Celsius. Despite this “Inconvenient Truth” and high cost to save this depleted public good that is our earth, fossil fuel is still in heavy demand, and heavily supplied.

What is the ethical thing for a business to do in this situation? Aiming for profit, a business will develop fossil fuels. Despite having a high production cost, there is a great demand for fossil fuels and they produce a high profit. However, these businesses have a social responsibility to the earth and the environment. The responsibility they hold is to innovate. Although fossil fuels are the primary good sold on the energy market, through innovation companies can change pollution habits.

Innovation may have a high cost relative to the cost of staying with Fossil Fuels, but is miniscule relative to the social cost of environmental damage.

References:

Freeman, Edward. “Stakeholder Theory.” YouTube. YouTube, Web. 11 Sept. 2014
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ih5IBe1cnQw

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/days-of-cheap-energy-over-iea-figures-show-1.2663195