Looking towards the growing potential that Snapchat has, it is undoubted that Evan Spiegel the CEO, decided not to sell it with any amount of money offered. Based on what Adrian Wibowo wrote on his blog, his statement seemed to be agree with Spiegel, who decided not to accept any offer from buyers, even Google that value Snapchat for $4 billion.

I also personally agree with the way Spiegel and Adrian think. Being an entrepreneur needs to have the ability to take risk. Even though Google offers such a huge amount, Spiegel seems did not affected because he believes in himself that Snapchat will grow bigger that what people think it would be. Meet the CEO (Video) This is also the reason why Google and Facebook have the interest to buy Snapchat.

Being an entrepreneur also need to have the ability to responsible for what they are doing. Hence, Spiegel has decided to go with rejecting all offers and need to develop Snapchat individually without any further help. With his hard working, the reasons behind this will be slowly invisible and give advantages for himself as a one solid company.

Most Facebook users now are using Instagram as well. We noticed that every time people posted something on Instagram, there is a post on Facebook “(user’s name) just posted a photo on Instagram” with a picture with it, or “(user’s name) likes (user’s name)’s photo on Instagram”. This eventually the reason why Facebook bought Instagram’s share for $1bn. Instead of adding extra value, Facebook tries to keep users’ interest in using them.

This cooperation is basically benefiting both sides. Instagram could raise their number of users and Facebook will not loose their users’ interest. This joint cooperation will also establish an extent value propositions that can satisfy users even more, which leads to increase in customers’ loyalty.

These value propositions are specifically targeting on performance of both sites, accessibility and convenience or usability. The two of them work supportively, where both of them are connected, so when a Facebook user wants to go directly to an Instagram profile user, they can just click on the availability of Instagram link on their timeline (when someone posted something on Instagram and they connect the account with Facebook), which also offer convenience.

Source: http://www.aljazeera.com/business/2012/04/201249183331607267.html

Social medias are one of the key success of a business. Through them, a lot of companies take the chances to put their products (goods and services) to be well-known by people. The most wanted social media for this kind of advertisement is no other than Facebook. With its share price that most of the time increasing and billions of people use Facebook, companies believed that Facebook will increase their sales and revenue streams.

However, on the other side of Facebook, Widya Purnawan’s blog stated how twitter affects and increases Apple’s market capitalization, which I disagree with it although it happened already. Twitter can be said that its interest is less than Facebook. Its users are also not as many as Facebook has. This eventually suggested that it’s better to work together with Facebook rather than Twitter, although Twitter also have the potential to grow.

With a condition where Twitter unveiling its IPO, this might be the reason why Carl C. Icahn forced Twitter to make a big payouts to investors and therefore, Twitter guaranteed of boosting up Apple’s market capitalization.

At the mean time, Twitter may help to increase Apple’s advertising process. However, it is a lot beneficial if Apple cooperates with a social media that interacts with more people rather than promise of getting “upgraded”.

Who does not know Apple? A company that stands out with its production of more than one type or product, which can be called as product mix. It offers laptop (macbook), iMac, iPhone, iPod, iPad, and now it came back with an innovated idea of iPad, which is iPad mini with retina display.

Apple seems operating and developing through Business Technology Management (BTM) to produce iPad mini with retina display. Seeking towards customers’ needs of “more modern and sophisticated” technology, they managed to establish a decision of applying the new concept that they had before with MacbookPro. Although how the new iPad works is still the same (including the software), the new specifications create a new point of view such as thinner, lighter, sharper, and faster processor. By that, it increases customers’ interest on purchasing, as well as fulfilling their demands on having something different and new. Apple introduces iPad mini with retina display (video)

According to many reviews, this product also simply out with convenience where purchasers are able to get it at London Drugs and Future Shop, provided with choices of provider. They also offer shipping service, which ease customers to get one.

Source: http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2013/11/12/ipad-mini-with-retina-display-available-today/

Everyone knows that Samsung and Apple are bounded in a conflict of patent case. A year ago, California jury decided that Samsung needed to pay over $1 billion in damages. However, the statement was renewed the price tag and leave about $450 million of the original award, but still remained in doubt. Another situation, the jury is still in a situation on whether Samsung has to pay for Apple’s lost profits too or they need to pay royalties for every single device that has been sold, carrying the features covered by the patents. Jury’s document on Samsung and Apple (DOC)

Although problems within companies have not been solved yet, they are still competing in the market. Samsung may be said “copying” Apple’s idea, but in fact, a lot of customers preferred to buy Samsung instead of Apple after and before knowing that Samsung “stole” Apple’s ideas. This refers that customers’ preferences are not depending on situation of the company, but into how the company advertises its products and offer different features with the same or more advantages and lower prices. Hence, this case eventually sees the customers’ loyalty towards a firm. When customers obtained what they deserved after being ‘loyal’, they will set their preference.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/12/technology/jury-to-decide-how-much-more-samsung-must-pay-apple-in-patent-case.html?src=recg