I am opposed to the ‘one for one’ business model because…….

The first moment I heard Toms Shoes’s “Buy-One, Give-One” model, I thought it was a brilliant idea because this model can provide aid to so many people who are living under poverty. However, after reading some articles about Toms Shoes’s business model from COMM101 class, I have to say I couldn’t agree with this model anymore.

There is an old saying in China,” It’s better to teach a man fishing than to give him fish.” And what Toms has been doing is “giving people fish” instead of “teaching fishing”. Though the start point of this business model is to provide help for people who are unable to buy a pair of shoes, actually, this model did more “harm” than “good”. As Cheryl Davenport’s article “The Broken “Buy-One, Give-One” Model: 3 Ways To Save Toms Shoes” indicates, the Buy-one, Give-one model does not solve a social problem, but exerts negative effects on the local economy (nobody will buy shoes if they can get free shoes). But I don’t agree with Davenport’s second flaw: “Toms is designed to make western consumers feel good.” I think the reason consumers buying shoes from Toms is not simply because that purchase makes them feel good, however, I believe most of the consumers truly want to help since they realized there are thousands of people can’t afford a pair of shoes. But it cannot be admitted that social problems cannot be solved by giving out relief supplies. Because this may lead people to have dependency of those supplies and therefore stop working with their own.  People living in poverty doesn’t mean they are deemed to live in poverty, they are just lacking of strategy, ability, skills, ideas etc. to make a change in their life. So I think what Toms need to do is to help those people find their own way to make changes instead of giving them shoes.

As far as what we learnt from COMM101 class, Social Entrepreneurs are someone who recognizes a social problem and uses entrepreneurial principles to make a social change. Toms has already recognized a social problem, now it requires Toms to do something to make a social change and they should do more improvements on their Buy-one, Give-one model.

reference:

http://www.fastcoexist.com/1679628/the-broken-buy-one-give-one-model-three-ways-to-save-toms-shoes

-Comments on Fengge Yang’s blog post “#5 Target now shipping to Canada: Another Failed Venture?”

According Fengge Yang’s blog post, her opinion is that the re-enter of Target into Canada’s market is a another failure. And she provided reason to support her opinion. Firstly, consumer will be unacceptable toward the high shipping price from U.S to Canada. Secondly, she indicated that Target put itself at wrong position in the Canada’s market.

So I would like to say I agree with her ideas. Personally, as a consumer, I feel that I can’t accept the shipping fee either. I had several experiences of buying products from U. S’s online retailers and the shipping fee is normally ranged from $15 to $100. SO from the perspective as a consumer, it makes no sense to me if I buy low-price products from Target with higher shipping fees. And I also want to point out another thing, any imported item valued over $20 is subject to duty and sales tax. So if a consumer wants to buy Target’s products online, he or she also needs to pay much more in tax. So I also think that it’s not an easy thing for Target to re-enter Canada only if this firm could solve the higher shipping fee and tax problems

blog post link:

#5 Target now shipping to Canada: Another Failed Venture?

-Comments on Wen (Susie) Zhang’s blog post “One-Child Policy”

I think it is the right time for China to stop its One-child Policy otherwise the aging population will be larger and therefore will lead to several social issues (e.g  lack of labor force, gender imbalance, uneven distribution of medical system…).  I am the only child in my family, so I also have the same feeling as Wen Zhang. For example, I often felt alone during my childhood and was dreaming of having a brother or sister to play with me. So in my opinion, stopping the practice of One-child Policy is a wise decision. And I think the breakdown of One-child Policy will bring some positive impacts for China’s economy, for example, this will lead to increased consumption on baby-related products. And I also saw an interesting news, baby-related stock surged after the announcement of stopping One-Child Policy.

blog post link:

One-Child Policy

11^th November is famous as China’s Single Day, however, it becomes a new “holiday” in China in recent years—China’s Black Friday.  Can you imagine that, thousands of Chinese were waiting online on the midnight of 10^th November in order to buy the limited amount of discount commodities online. Many of my Chinese friends were kind of crazy on that day, they were extremely excited to shop online and they spent a huge amount of money to purchase commodities with e-commerce retailers.

Alibaba, as the biggest Chinese e-commerce retailer, announced on Wednesday that “Alibaba’s Single’s Sale surpassed their record of $9.3 billion in 2014 as they recorded sales of $14.3 billion”. I was shocked when I saw the huge selling volume that Aibaba made within one day. So I think Alibaba’s success also indicates the huge e-commerce market in China and the number of online retailers also increased rapidly in these years. But the truth is with the increasing market demand, there are a lot of problems exist as well. Firstly, the e-commerce market is lacking of monitor, I’ve heard so many people bought fake or poor-quality commodities online. So I think it’s necessary for online retailers to improve the quality of their commodities. And another problem is, the logistics and transportation industry is developing slowly with the rapid growth of e-commerce. So online retailers should cooperate with logistics and transportation companies to make sure the delivering process operates well and effectively. What is more, every online retailers are competing with each other, so personally I would say some online retailers are concentrating too much on competing with rivals.

resources:

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/111215/alibaba-kills-singles-day-shares-decline.asp

https://www.internetretailer.com/2015/11/11/alibabas-singles-day-sales-top-chinas-daily-retail-average

Apple announced its fourth quarter report on October 27, 2015, and this company posted “quarterly revenue of $51.5 billion and quarterly net profit of $11.1 billion, or $1.96 per diluted share.”(Apple). This result is quite impressive compared with compare to revenue of $42.1 billion and net profit of $8.5 billion, or $1.42 per diluted share, in the year-ago quarter. However, one thing should be noted, is the truth that Approximately 67% of Apple’s revenue growth comes from China. So China’s market plays a significant role in Apple’s business.

In my opinion, Apple’s success in Chinese market can be considered as a mixed signal because Apple might be too much overreliance of China. If markets in China shift away from Apple, what should Apple do?

Though Apple has occupied a huge market share value of China’s market, the truth is that there are more and more rivals are sharing this big pie in China. According to Fortune, Apple falls to 3^rd Place in China Smartphone market with Xiaomi leading first and Huawei right behind. (Xiaomi and Huawei are both local companies in China.) So I think it is a warning for Apple that Chinese consumers are moving gradually  towards to local smartphone market.

As a result, I think Apple needs to change its strategy by expanding markets in other countries, for example, some developing countries. And it is important for this company to be aware of overreliance in China. Meanwhile, this company should not give Chinese market in a short period of time because it still holds the majority of Apple’s revenue and still need to work on holding more market share value in China’s smartphone market.

resources:

http://fortune.com/2015/08/03/apple-third-place-china/

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/102815/china-put-shine-apple.asp?utm_source=NTU&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NTU-10/30/15&utm_term=news-to-use

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/110315/should-apple-investors-be-wary-overreliance-china.asp

Most people are used to drop their empty paper coffee cups into blue bins, but do those coffee cups actually go through the recycling process? The answer is “NO”. A CBC Marketplace investigation reveals the two of Canada’s largest coffee chains –Starbucks and Tim Hortons sent their used paper coffee cups to landfill instead of a recycling plant.

The reason behind this issue is the truth that the cups are difficult to recycle. Mark Badger, an executive at Canada Fibers indicates that “There is an extra cost of processing most types of hot drink coffee cups, teacups, because they’re a combination of paper and plastic” and therefore most of recycle facilities do not accept paper coffee cups. However, I don’t think this can be an excuse of not sending coffee cups to recycle process because the benefits of going through the recycling process outweigh its cost. And if Starbucks and Tim Hortons can take their social responsibility by recycling coffee cups, it will avoid a big waste of raw materials for producing coffee cups. For example, by providing ceramic mugs for customers who don’t need to take-out cup. This action can decrease the consumption of coffee cups and therefore reduce the material cost for producing coffee cups.

This news addresses me to the content what I learnt at COMM101 class about ethics and sustainability. It is important for companies to implement sustainable measures because it is a long-term process which can improve the overall productivity of the whole company by avoiding waste as well as promoting innovations. In other words, sustainability brings both economic and societal benefits to the company. For example, a sustainable business can be more attractive for ethical investors and therefore become more profitable. And a business with sustainability is more competitive in the markets.

resources:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/marketplace-tim-hortons-starbucks-coffee-cups-recycling-1.3278648

Do you have an experience of shopping online? I believe majority of people’s answer to this question is “yes”.  According to Statista.com,” the worldwide business to consumer e-commerce sales amounted to more than 1.2 trillion U.S dollars in 2013.”  However, the explosive-pace expansion of e-commerce intensifies the competition between online retailers. As the growth of e-commerce, consumers also intend to be more impatient—they want to receive their order fast. So despite the quality and diversity of products, online retailers also need to work on improving the delivering speed. For online retailers, it is a race for time with its’ rivals.

For example, in U.S, many retailers like Amazon, Walmart, Macy’s etc. are competing for delivering the online orders to customers faster.  So how do they improve their shipment efficiencies?

Online retailers’ strategy is to build more warehouses to meet customers’ demand. Large warehouses enable retailers to manage and deliver packages in an efficient way. To be more specific, more warehouses can store more items and its advanced sorting facilities allows retailers to manage orders effectively. I also want to note that Amazon is using about 30,000 robots in 13 warehouses to save packaging time.

What’s more, retailers also use sophisticated software and algorithms to help them make decisions. Software can calculate the cheapest, quickest way to deliver online orders. And when I was shopping online, I saw online retailers provide several shipment choices (e.g. free shipment for 5-7 days, if you want to get your package, you need to pay extra fees). This is a wise idea which can satisfy different customers’ needs and reduce the pressure of delivering. Another good thing is that many retailers provide services to help customers to track their order.  They upload tracking information to let customer know the precise location of their packages, and therefore minimizing customers’ impatience.

The coming Christmas holiday is a new challenge for online retailers, hopefully they can deliver holiday gifts faster this year.

Resources:

U.S. retailers race to deliver holiday gifts faster this year

“E-commerce” http://www.statista.com/markets/413/e-commerce/

E-books are popular among young people because they’re easy to carry and convenient to get access. When I am walking around compass, it is easy to see people are reading e-books on their smart phones, laptops, kindles etc. But today, I am shocked by a report says e-book’s sales fell by 10% and print books are successfully fighting off digital competitors.

Actually, compared with digital books, print books have a lot of disadvantages. E-books have competitive price to be purchased (they are cheaper than print books) and can be delivered instantaneously.  What’s more, digital can also be printed if necessary. So when e-books emerge at the market, people talked about the demise of physical books as if it was only a matter of time, but now print books still is a big chunk of the business.  So what’s the reason behind the decline sales of e-books?

The emergence of e-book brings potential threat to print book industries. In order to be more competitive, book publishers are working on lowering print books’ prices. They managed to wrest pricing control and as well as seek for cooperation with e-commerce business to ensure print books can be delivered quickly. Meanwhile, print book publisher emphasizes that traditional physical books offer a tactile experience that most other forms of media don’t. And finally, print books protect its’ status successfully. So what we can learn from this is that when a company is facing competitive rivals, it is very important to set up its strategy and recognize its uniqueness. Print book publishers understand that physical books have unique tactile experience for readers, so they can successfully fight off digital competitors.

resources:  http://www.canadianbusiness.com/innovation/print-books-are-successfully-fighting-off-digital-competitors/

On September 30,2015, Apple Music launches in China with discount price.

I just read an article titled “Apple music faces tough audience in China?”,which analyses the difficulties for this company to enter China’s market. Firstly, customers in China prefer local companies. Compared with several local companies with good reputation and customer loyalty, Apple music is somewhat a late entrant in this competition. (As the chart below shows, Kugou and QQ Music already occupied more than 50% of the local market.)

(https://atlas.qz.com/charts/N1Ukg4DY)

Secondly intellectual property issue in China is a serious problem. The truth is customers in China have already got used to download music for free, though new government regulations made some improvements on protecting intellectual property, customers still need some time to adapt themselves to truth of no more free-music.

However, I think launching China’s market isn’t a bad idea for Apple Music because China has the largest smartphone market and iPhone is significant successful there.  So Apple’s strong band recognition will attract a large number of users. Just as this article has mentioned, “Customers in China love the App Store and have made it the largest market in the world for app downloads”. Besides that, I noticed that Apple Music made some innovations to fit China’s market so I personally believe that Apple Music can launch China successfully.  For example, the pricing of the Apple Music service ($1.57 a month) is significantly below the U.S. Since customers in China are very sensitive at price, Apple Music’s low price will drive more users to get access to this service. Meanwhile, Apple Music made a wise strategy–launching Apple Music both on iOS and Android . Since Android phones are popular in China, this strategy will bring more potential demands for this company.

As for me, I like the news that Apple Music is available in China no because I prefer Apple Music’s design style and it is simple to use.  On the other hand, I have to say Apple Music has competitive price in China. So once I come back to China, I will download Apple Music definitely.

resources: Apple Music faces tough audience in China by Leslie Shaffer <http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/30/apple-music-heads-to-mainland-china.html>

Article title

The slippery slope of getting away with small stuff     –By Bryan Borzykowski

reference:   http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20140806-the-slippery-slope

Opinions:

According to  this article, the slippery slope effect can be defined as a idea of an action that lead to unacceptable, extreme results. For example, within this article, people who are affected by slippery-slope effect all started from taking a little bit, and then gradually lost control by taking huge amount. As a result, those people crossed the line of ethic and committed unethical act at their works.

I understand the negative effect of slippery slope effect ,but how to avoid it? How to avoid people to commit to unethical actions during their works? I think the education of business ethic is crucial at this point,which means companies  need to make it clear to all of their employees that unethical behaviours are inhibited. Companies need to set up some policies to help employees keep away from unethical actions, then people will be aware of unethical acts. Someone may say that when they start to take things from the company , this action creates values for his or her own good. However, I disagree with this idea because  unethical actions in business disrupt the interest of the whole business company. The truth is that customers, employees, stockholders,suppliers etc. share the same interest together, so while the company’s interest is deprived, everyone’s interest is deprived as well.  So I think its necessary to build a brief idea of ethic in business and keep away from unethical behaviours.  Just as what Blair in this article says,

“Instead of staying two feet away from the line, I now need to stay two miles away. That’s the best protection for me, to not even get near a place where there could be danger.”

Reflection of first COMM 101 Class:

My first COMM 101 class in UBC is totally different from what I expected before. I thought what I need to do at class is simply listening to professor’s lecture and taking notes, however, unlike other courses that I took before, COMM 101 is more like a huge discussion within the whole class, which means anybody is free to make own comments. The first thing I learnt during the first COMM class is to read through title several times before making  a conclusion, which means I need to read everything very carefully and think deeply because sometimes things are not as easy as they look like.So COMM101 requires me to do more critical thinking.

And after taking my first class,I feel excited  because I know that I will “learn by doing” in the following classes. The best thing of this course is to hear opinions from so many people with different cultural background.However, I didn’t share my thought at the first class because speaking in front of a camera do make me feel nervous.But I will try to be more brave next class.

Business News Opinion

I read a news about Google’s action of re-entering China’s market. Since 2010, Google shocked down most of its operations inside China’s mainland and shifted rest of them to Hong Kong, and therefore Google services are unavailable in mainland China, but now, Google already made the it’s first step to come back to China:

“Motorola, its former handset unit (now owned by Lenovo, a Chinese firm), launched the first smartwatch supported by Google and powered by its operating system, Android, that understands Chinese voice commands.– Android in China:the Lure of the Mobile Kingdom”.

As we know, Android is a mobile operating system developed by Google,So this news can be seen as a sign that Google will re-enter China.Personally, I would like to see Google’s come back because it will bring me so many convenient .However, in my opinion, re-entering China is a long term process  for Google to accomplish and this firm needs to get over a lot of difficulties. Firstly, Google has left China for 4 years, which means during the intense competition with other competitors(for example Apple, Apple expanded it’s market in China successfully in the past few years), Google’ve lost the world’s biggest mobile device market since its exit, and thus  the biggest challenge for Google is to regain the customers they’ve lost.  Meanwhile, Google’s another challenge is to get the permission from China’s government, Google should seek for cooperation with China’s government as well as obey the rules that established by China’s government. Besides that, innovation is another key point, Google should make some changes otherwise it will lose it’s competitiveness compared with local companies from China.

source: http://www.economist.com/news/business/21664199-re-entering-china-will-be-hard-google-it-may-still-try-lure-mobile-kingdom