Because of the political reasons, Japanese airplane market is fully dominated by American companies until recently, European company Air Bus announced a $9.5 billion order from Japan Airlines for 31 A350 wide-body jets and overtook his major competitor—Boeing in Japanese market.

So why Boeing lost its market? One reason might be that Boing had trouble with its most popular plane—the 787 models as they cannot solve the publicized battery problem and have to delay the deliver date. In this case, Boeing lost their points of parity for a plane—a plane needs to work safely. And as a result they lost their market share in Japan.

This deal is a milestone for the Airbus’s effect to explore Japan’s market, because the other airplane company also  plan to add Airbus’s plane to their list. In order to avoid more lost in Japanese as well as the world market, Boeing needs to achieve the points of parity first, and then establish new points of different in their plane, for example the new 777 model, which will have a giant wing made of carbon composites and the lighter 787 model which can cut the fuel cost by 20%. Only in this way can Boeing stop losing their market share.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/08/business/international/jal-orders-9-5-billion-worth-of-airbus-jets.html?ref=international&_r=0

Blackberry, which used to be the dominated player in smartphone’s industry, is now in deep trouble. As we all know, Apple is the first brand to enter full-touchscreen smartphone market, it helps them to be easier remembered by the customers. For the blackberry, things becomes challenging because they have to enter the new market and convinced customers with better features and successful marketing strategy. Obviously, blackberry failed to do that.

As its market share shrinks rapidly and its new products do not meet customers’ expectation, the company’s key partner, Rogers will no longer keep their new product in stock. In other words, with blackberry’s frustrating performance in recent years, even the local Canadian wireless telephone company begins to lose confidence and patience to their hometown partner. The no-stock decision shows that, in the past blackberry’s smartphone must be stocked quite a long time by Rogers, which in turn added extra cost for them. Although the spokesman emphasize that Rogers are not their only partner, it is hard to deny that other wireless telephone companies face similar problems.

What we can learn from blackberry is that, one company should always be sensitive to the emerging new technology, or they will be left far behind in the new competition, although they are at leading position right now.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/as-blackberry-struggles-it-sets-a-date-for-its-latest-device-in-canada/article14676924/

A recent survey of the price of Starbucks unveil atruth that the company charge 26% higher in Beijing (4.81$) compared withthe same product they provided in London (3.82$). As a global company, Starbucks get their ingredient from South America. The transportation fee to deliver ingredient from South America to China and Britain are relatively no difference. On the other hand, the total expenditure to hire employees in China is no higher than those in Britain. Then why the price in China is higher?

The reason behind this phenomenon, I believe is the value proposition. For European and American costumers, coffee is just commodity, in other words the target market are literally every citizenship. However, about 10 years ago, when Starbucks first come into China’s market, its relative high price means they positioning their brand for high-income citizens. Compared with other kinds of daily drinks in China, such as tea and other coffee brands, the biggest point of difference of Starbucks coffee is its high quality and the western lifestyle they stand for. So, as a result Starbucks set a high price for China’s consumer in order to meet their perception of this brand. This may explain the high price of Starbucks in China.

http://www.theatlantic.com/china//2013/09/why-is-starbucks-so-expensive-in-china/279394/