Gold

Retailers are constantly faced with a major issue – consumer choice.  Being able to tailor ones products to capture consumer’s choice is vital in both marketing and manufacturing.  If you do not know what the consumers want, how will you be able to run an effective company?

When looking at Dell, it is clear that being able to meet consumer choice is positively correlated with inventory turnover and revenue.  In the year of 1993 Dell reported a loss, and in the following year withdrew from retail.  However in 1996 with the creation of Dell.com, Dell saw massive increases in inventory turnover and decreases in week inventory.  Since Dell was able to offer more to the consumer from the website, allowing them to successfully tailor each order to the customers requests and to earn more revenue simultaneously increasing inventory turnover.  With increasing competition from such companies as Apple and shifts in consumer demand, Dell decided to re-enter the retail market by selling its products through Walmart and other retailers worldwide in 2007.  Being pushed back into the retail market, Dell is forced to get it right the first time when manufacturing its products.  Consequently by not being able to offer every option at the retail level, Dell has shown almost a %50 decrease in inventory turnover.  With the limits on consumer choice offered at the retail level and more appealing products from its competitors, Dell has to become innovative and meet consumers constant changes in taste.  From this it is clear that consumers choice highly affects inventory turnover and most importantly revenue two crucial numbers in determining effectiveness.

As Patent Ends, a Seed’s Use Will Survive

Currently under the review of the Justice Department for violating antitrust laws, Monsanto has engaged itself in what some call an unethical business practice.  The underlying cause of such controversy — a soybean.  The genetically engineered Roundup Ready seed, whose patent expires in 2014, has resulted in many court cases and accusations attacking Monsanto.  The bacterial gene used in Roundup Ready makes herbicide glyphosate, commonly known as Roundup also sold by Monsanto, ineffective.  Monsanto has been accused of attempting to “remove Roundup Ready from the market prior to the time when competitors will be able to produce a generic product” (As Patent Ends, a Seed’s Use Will Survive).

Recently Monsanto has enginered a new soybean — Roundup Ready 2.  This new soybean has been tailored to place the same bacterial gene as Roundup Ready in a different location in the soybean and take the place of Roundup Ready with the expiration of its patent in the near future.  By doing so Monsanto claims that Roundup Ready 2 will have a higher yield and that over time different demanded traits would be added.

Even with this movement to the Roundup Ready 2 seed there is still much controversy.  Over time Monsanto has done its best to do whatever it can to protect its patent.  An example of this is how Monsanto forces its customers to engage in a contract that demands they must purchase the seed annually and not hold onto previous years seed.  Monsanto has been seen in thousands of instances taking legal action, prosecuting customers who violate this contract.  This further shows Monsanto’s unethical business practices.  If Monsanto was engaging in ethical business and enforcing their social responsibility this seed would have no brand name, no patent, and would just become the universal soybean.   However by forcing contracts, patenting its products, controlling the market and prosecuting their customers Monsanto expresses its lack of social responsibility.

A good business strategy?  Yes, Monsanto has been very successful and very profitable with their Roundup Ready seed.

Ethical? I don’t think so.