As employees are often referred to as the greatest asset of a business, human resources management is key to a company’s success. Every company employs a different strategy in terms of allocating its spending, and in Costco’s case, a lot of money goes into wages.

My fellow classmate, Carol has discussed the benefits that Costco reaped from such practice in her blog. In summary, by paying its employees almost twice the market rate, Costco created “true engagement among [its] employees,” which led to “increased productivity, better morale, and lower turnover rates.” She also pointed out the adverse effects of high turnover rates, stating that Costco has “established an incentive program where the return on investment has been worthwhile.”

I strongly agree with her on all of her points, except for the last one, in which she said that “companies wanting to improve their bottom line should look to incorporate sections from Costco’s business model.” There is no single formula for successful HR practices, and I believe that HR strategies are highly industry, or even firm, dependent. Paying high wages works well for Costco partially because they attract high-skilled workers who, of course, would rather work for a better pay. But what if the industry standard wage is not as clear as the one in retailing industry? Even within the same industry, different firms employs different positioning, marketing, and financial strategies. Not necessarily following Costco’s path, I think what the HR department needs to do is to find a strategy that works best with other practices that the firm is carrying out, whether it be increasing wages and benefits or spending more on training, etc.

Image taken from here.

Works Cited

Campeau, Melissa. “‘A Stick and a Carrot at the Same Time’: Why Costco Pays Twice the Market Rate.”Financial Post Business A Stick and a Carrot at the Same Time Why Costco Pays Twice the Marketrate Comments. 30 Oct. 2014. Web. 31 Oct. 2014. <http://business.financialpost.com/2014/10/30/a-stick-and-a-carrot-at-the-same-time-why-costco-pays-twice-the-market-rate/>.

Lee, Carolyn. “Carolyn Lee’s Blog.” Carolyn Lee’s Blog. Web. 12 Nov. 2014. <https://blogs.ubc.ca/carolynlee/>.

Slovacek, Randy. “Costco CEO Craig Jelinek on Paying a Living Wage.” The Randy Report. 11 July 2013. Web. 31 Oct. 2014. <http://randyreport.blogspot.ca/2013/07/costco-ceo-craig-jelinek-on-paying.html>.

YouTube has significantly influenced the younger generations, especially teens in North America. I refer to YouTube as a wormhole—one click to the videos and the next thing you know is that hours have passed by. Aside from being a time sucker though, YouTube has coined an entirely new job title: YouTuber. Among them is Lauren Riihimaki, a 21-year-old undergraduate student whose channel LaurDIY now has over a million subscribers and is making six-figure revenue per year. Although she claims that she does not “have a business plan, finance strategy, or anything intense,” she does, unknowingly, have a solid marketing strategy.

Image taken from here.

After Class 18, I had the opportunity to ask Paul Davidescu, the Co-founder and CEO of Tangoo, how he markets the app. His response was revolved around digital marketing: the effective use of social media, website and blog is the key in marketing tech start-ups. YouTube channel is not exactly a tech start-up, but is similar in that most traffics are online. Ms. Riihimaki promotes her videos through all three of the aforementioned tools; as a result, she has witnessed organic growth of her subscriber base.

List of Social Media Lauren maintains by herself

Image taken from here.

Though not necessarily has a background in business, Ms. Riihimaki displays many characteristics and qualities that take to be a successful entrepreneur. She loves what she is doing, she knows how to manage her time, and she is actively engaged with her viewers on a numbers of platforms. I agree with Ms. Riihimaki that LaurDIY will continue to grow, and my only recommendation to her would be to have a well-outlined financial plan so that she can readily respond to any change in the industry.

Works Cited

Israelson, David. “Student Fashions Herself into a YouTube Star.” The Globe and Mail. Web. 31 Oct. 2014. <http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/small-business/sb-tools/student-fashions-herself-into-a-youtube-star/article21370807/>.

Riihimaki, Lauren. “LaurDIY.” YouTube. YouTube. Web. 31 Oct. 2014. <https://www.youtube.com/user/LaurDIY>.

Riihimaki, Lauren. “LaurDIY.” LaurDIY RSS. Web. 31 Oct. 2014. <http://www.desireandinspire.com/>.

Jimmy Choo Quiet Lace Platform Pump that costs $625

Image taken from here.

Last month, Jimmy Choo, a luxury shoe brand, has announced its plan to go public later the year, which will make it the “very first luxury shoe to make an IPO move.” As Nodoka pointed out in her blog post, such move is a risky one because there is a potential to lose some customers who won’t buy these shoes anymore when brand becomes less exclusive. However, I think the benefits of going public override the potential disadvantages, for the following reasons:

1. More Financial Inputs Available

Because of the nature of the brand, Jimmy Choo has many inventories, which translates to relatively less cash flow. IPO and further stock exchanges will help Jimmy Choo to achieve financial goals, meaning more “oxygen” for the business to operate with. In addition, more financial inputs, along with the exposure Jimmy Choo gets with the IPO, may “attract more talented designers, thus enhancing the brand.”

2. Going Public ≠ Losing Most of Loyal Customers

Since when did “overexposure” become a problem when it comes to marketing? And it is not like Jimmy Choo is bombarding consumers’ minds with annoying ads. Indeed more stores and publicity might shun high-end customers who prefer the brand to be exclusive; however, these customers are but a small percentage of the population who have the purchasing power to afford a pair of Jimmy Choo shoes. If taking into account how many new customers the brand can draw with its new publicity, the loss of sales from these high-end shoppers shouldn’t be a concern huge enough to interrupt the decision of going public.

I think that, in the short run, Jimmy Choo will get more cash to operate with while not experiencing the downsides of overexposure (if any), and in the long run, its customer segments will gradually shift to include more people, which translates to more sales.  Either way, their IPO will bring more advantages than disadvantages. It may seem have risks, but these risks are definitely worth taking.

Works Cited

Hashimoto, Nodoka. “Nodoka Hashimoto’s Blog.” Nodoka Hashimotos Blog. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Oct. 2014. <https://blogs.ubc.ca/nodokahashimoto/>.

Hill, Catey. “Jimmy Choo’s IPO could make the shoes less chic.” – MarketWatch. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Oct. 2014. <http://www.marketwatch.com/story/will-jimmy-choos-ipo-make-the-shoes-less-chic-2014-09-23>.

“Jimmy Choo.” Polyvore. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Oct. 2014. <http://www.polyvore.com/jimmy_choo/collection?id=3869617>.

Taseko Mining Ltd. faces a serious threat when the Supreme Court of Canada ruled Tsilhqot’in people to be entitled to the land of the proposed tribal park, which included Taseko’s mining site at New Prosperity. This new regulation would hinder Taseko’s development tremendously.

Unable to predict this critical regulatory trend, Taseko now has to deal with this 1.1 billion dollar investment sitting around idle. Tsilhqot’in people’s adamant opposition against gold-copper mining pushed Taseko toward nowhere but the cliff that leads to huge financial loss. Such corporate failure is closely linked to its incapability of identifying possible change in external factor and business’s constraint before making the investment. Had Taseko acknowledged the unwillingness and dismissal of their First Nations partners regarding the project, Taseko might have made a different decision.

This situation that Taseko now awkwardly finds itself in also exemplifies the uncertainty that managerial accounting cannot foresee: the New Prosperity project was portrayed as the expected “game changer,” as highlighted in the Taseko Fact Sheet 2012.  The said “growth potential” and expected production now seem nothing but ironic. Not only that, this “one of the largest gold-copper porphyries in the world” is now an inventory that is not generating any profit. Without a decent amount of cash flow, Taseko will encounter operation problems that eventually can lead to more deadly consequences.

The solutions to fix this catastrophe are hard to execute because of the multitudes of challenges Taseko faces: First Nations are unlikely to compromise their hard-won rights, and there are also environmental issues that Taseko hasn’t dealt with in the federal level. The solution in the short run, I think, is to measure the value of doing what is allowed on the land; if it is profitable, then Taseko should make use of the land first while negotiating with the external parties. 

Fish Lake Fightback in Court

Image taken from here.

Work Cited

Bush, Murray. “Fish Lake Fightback in Court | Vancouver Media Co-op.” Vancouver Media Co-op. N.p., n.d. Web. 3       Oct. 2014. <http://vancouver.mediacoop.ca/photo/fish-lake-fight-back-court/9174>.

Pynn, Larry. “Tsilhqot’in set to declare site of New Prosperity mine a tribal park.” www.vancouversun.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Oct. 2014. <http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/Unilateral+park+declared+Tsilhqot+includes+Prosperity+mine/10192766/story.html>.

“Taseko Fact Sheet.” Taseko Mines Ltd.. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Oct. 2014. <http://www.tasekomines.com/i/media/mce/factsheet/Taseko_Fact_Sheet.pdf>.