The author illustrates some points of view on what is important to start a event company which I find it useful and want to add some more personal thought about how to make an event planning business to be more profitable and internally efficient.

I agree with the comment on pricing that an appropriate price should be placed by the company internally. For example, the personnel’s wage, which I think is better off be higher than many other companies expected. Because by raising this variable cost, a lot more benefits would be generated. The company will see it as a more considerable problem of how to make the best use of all personnel to yield higher production efficiency. On the other hand, it is also a motivation for personnel to do their job better.

But I find it most important to work on prospecting section. Because many event planning companies depend heavily on seasons. Take travelling companies as an example, there are always large customer flow on holidays, therefore the travelling companies should increase their investment on transportation vehicles, such as mini buses, coaches and drivers and parking space as well. These act will dramatically increase variable cost of the company in total. In that case, if the company failed to estimate the quantity of customers’ demand, the revenue would not be large enough to cover increasing variable cost.

Therefore, I think a second order can be placed when the sales period begins, which means after taking a second expectation based on initial expectation and budget and tendency that estimated from the first sales period. Then inventory and investment can be reduced and used more efficiently.

http://www.eventmanagerblog.com/start-event-company

An noticeable issue has been raised as over $900,000 tax revenue received by hundreds of first nations. But social community and taxpayers are willing to know clearly about the allocation of this amount of money. And it is generally agreed that  this amount of money should be spent on making benefits for society as a whole.

In my opinion, each of those first nation organizations, has the responsibility to disclose tax revenue given that tax payers have the right to know how their tax contributed to economic development specifically.

Therefore, I doubt about the statement at the end of this passage which suggests that only those “Indian bands” must submit forms while those for nations with comprehensive self-government agreements or treaties it is optional. Because the amount of tax charged and remuneration leaders receive should in proportion to the responsibilities they have and the exact benefit they bring to the whole society. Seeking for transparency act for tax stream can be seen as a force power for leaders to make a better use of $900,0000. And $800,000 bonus related to economic development for leaders of first nation organization would be more likely to make sense for public.

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Harper+government+outraged+that+chief+tiny+Coquitlam+first+nation+received+900K+latest/10080633/story.html

According to this passage, what the Second Cup company experiencing is a huge lost of $26.2-million in general. I think the most responsible reason is a tough rivalry with several considerable threats.

Second Cup does have a strong position in coffee shop market, because it has 349 locations across Canada after all. But it is difficult for Second Cup to do a revival given that other rivals such as Starbucks and Tim Hortons taking up a leading position in this market.

Beside of strong supplier power, what else possibly cause Second Cup a huge lost and dropping price per share, is customers’ inclination of other coffee shops. As people have increasing demand for “fast casual” chains, like what Panera Bread and Chipotle do, providing higher quality quick-service food options.

In that case, I think differentiate strategy would be efficient for Second Cup to provide new  drinks and snacks which are not available in other coffee shops. Since Tim Hortons focuses on fast order strategy, McDonalds’  runs for 24 hours, the Second cup would be better off choosing another differentiated characteristics to attract customers and expand their business scale.

http://business.financialpost.com/2014/11/03/second-cup-outlines-3-year-turnaround-plan-amid-26-2m-loss/

Black Markets always exist under the normal economy, making a potential harm to free market. So I agree on this comment that black markets of a certain scale would badly mess the normal economy and even more noticeable consequences.

Depending on what exactly is dealing in black market, different consequences would occur to society. For example, if drugs are dealing widely in the black market, huge profit would be received by the drug dealer but it would cause violence and chaos among the whole society. Therefore trading in the black market definitely work against business ethic, which even reach beyond the boundary of legal issue.

But I think there is still a considerable problem even if the black market can be completely shut down by official power. Even U.S. and European police are now tracing and targeting the black market trading, demand for products in black-market would still exist. The police representing legal power have right and responsibility to stop this black market trading behaviour in order to prevent black market trading and protect the normal economic environment, however, they are unable to prevent the demand and willingness to sell in black market.

If tradingchannels are shut down by official power, people in this profit-motivated underground market would possibly seek for other extreme ways to make the deals, which would be very dangerous and unpredictable consequence.

Black Markets and Websites: An Abyss of Crime?

About the question “If the United Nations was fully funded why would we need the Arc or social enterprises”, I agree with this statement that we should first identify the definition of responsibilities they take separately before we discuss whether we still need social enterprises given that we already have United Nations funded.

As an intergovernmental organization, United Nations aim to promote international co-operation, which is of a large scale. While social enterprises aim to apply commercial strategies to maximize social utilities,earning profits for society development instead of for certain individual shareholders.

However, in case of how to manage social resources to maximize development or benefits for society, I think it is better off when they work with each other.

Take UNDP(United Nations Development Programme) as an example, it generate  large international purchasers, local producers and others to strengthen each commodity’s value chain. Additionally, it hosts the secretariat of the Business Call to Action (BCtA), in which way to encourage more social enterprises to develop innovative business models therefore combine profitability with development impact.

So in my point of view, it has another reason other than the difference of scale in charge of United Nations and social enterprises. It is noticeable the role that United nations is playing is a manager or coordinator for those social enterprises to operate more efficiently, and it also provide international platform for social enterprises. They are actually working mutually with motivation effect.

http://blogs.ubc.ca/johnathanlam/2014/11/09/why-we-need-both-the-united-nations-and-social-enterprises/