Social media heavily affects the decisions of people. From one restaurant review to the number of likes on its Facebook page, it can either pull or push customers away. As mentioned in the article, companies nowadays have taken advantage of the ability to improve their online reputation through fake reviews. They will often give positive feedback on their company or even pay others for false testimonials. This ties in with what we learned in COMM 101 about business ethics. I believe such false reviews are extremely unethical as it deceives the customers. As a user of Yelp, I heavily rely on customer reviews and ratings for unfamiliar restaurants. However, if the owners give incorrect and higher reviews than they deserve, it misleads the customers. There are even internet marketing and online reputation management companies that boost a business’ online image with “fake testimonials on a variety of popular review websites for a price”. These companies run their own businesses unethically by providing positive reviews while making revenue. This is a highly improper way for business to gain a better brand image as it is completely false. In my opinion, businesses, even though they are desperate for profit maximization, should not buy fake support, reviews, or likes, and risk their ability to run a long-term business.

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/fake-online-reviews-4-ways-companies-can-deceive-you-1.2825080

While on LinkedIn, I came across a blog posted by Sam Lu on the concept of entertainment for smartphones and tablets. Nowadays, millions of forms of entertainment are made available on the App Store or Play Store with no need to pay a single cent. Every week there are always new games and new apps waiting to be downloaded by such lucky consumers. I have to agree with Sam Lu’s view on the new and greater consumer-focused market in the world. Through smartphones, consumers have it lucky these days by being provided free games at click of a button. In comparison to the pre-smartphone era, every game cost several bucks but now, the entertainment industry can effectively target consumers’ demands online and more conveniently.

“Competition in mobile entertainment is squarely focused on what the consumers enjoy”. This is utterly true since there are literally millions of games ready to be downloaded and not every game can do well. I remember when the game Flappy Bird was extremely popular for its unique but simple approach to entertainment. However, the game was suddenly removed from the App Store and not so long after, numerous games very similar and if not, exactly the same were designed and put on the market. It is very clear that the mobile entertainment industry quickly took advantage of what the consumers enjoy and made it accessible to them in the fastest way possible.

The mobile entertainment industry has taken over the market so quickly with the same number of hours and costs put into production, but making it much more convenient and cheaper for consumers. With the increasing number of smartphones and tablets being purchased today, it shows that the market will continue to evolve and deliver what consumers want, and at the same time, satisfy consumers in the same way as other megahit and high-priced products, if not more.

Sources: http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20141109074329-8501469-freemium-isn-t-free-but-it-s-not-the-canadian-devil?trk=tod-posts-post1-ptlt

The importance of social media has drastically increased in this time period. The relevance of its products such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube has developed immensely that people today live in the social media era. Such an increase in the usage of websites has created a new and significant way of marketing, bringing forth a large target audience of numerous social media users.

As stated in the article, people are interested in topics recommended by familiar users and not brands promoting themselves. This leads into the power of “beauty gurus” on YouTube mentioned in Stella Cho’s blog post. These girls who make weekly videos on makeup tutorials, product reviews or product recommendations greatly influence the consumers’ choices. Through their hundreds of thousands of views from their videos, they are able to promote such brands and products with a greater influence on the consumers’ decisions than some official advertisements. As an active user of social media myself, I can relate to the audience. Also being an enthusiastic viewer of fashion vlogs myself, I have to say these girls’ comments and reviews on products have affected my purchases as well. I would most often rely on their opinions, heavily depending on their knowledge of the quality and price of several products because in the end, would you rather believe a regular person like yourself or an official advertisement? Realizing the heavy impact of social media like these YouTube videos, companies have begun to partner with many of these sites and open up a new customer segment. With the social media industry growing, companies can find a new means of marketing and gaining revenue.

Sources:

Stella Cho’s Blog Post: https://blogs.ubc.ca/stellacho/2014/10/05/marketing-in-a-digital-age/

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/marketing/twitter-conversation-more-important-than-blatant-advertising/article20898781/

Google, one of the youngest firms among the leaders, has become one of the world’s leading companies recognized for its innovation and creativity. After only 16 years in business, Google has become the largest brand name. Why is that? Google hires and manages the relationships of their employees in a way that maximizes productivity in the workplace. The human resources department called “People Operations” at Google, effectively manages the lifecycle of an employee’s relationship with the firm from hiring to the employee leaving.

Similar to the online shoes and clothing company Zappos, Google maintains a positive organizational culture through its human resources management. Google’s HR policies enable Google to build a workforce that provides high quality service. The employees being most important, Google hires talented and innovative people who really want to work. This provides an opportunity for its employees to work on shared goals and impacts how people feel about the organization. As a result, employees are able to motivate each other in such a positive environment and increase productivity in the workforce. Google’s policy of not counting the number of sick days or hours at work also greatly affects the behaviour of its employees, as such flexible conditions encourage the measure of productivity by output from the workers.

I believe Google’s policies and practices benefit the company’s effectiveness and in turn, contribute to the success of the company.

Sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRsJbpppvEU

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2013/01/google_people_operations_the_secrets_of_the_world_s_most_scientific_human.single.html

In response to Nancy Lu’s post about Abercrombie’s exclusive marketing, I completely agree with her view on Abercrombie’s disrespectful marketing strategy. As a customer of Abercrombie myself, I enjoy shopping at its stores, however Jeffries’ tactic to limit Abercrombie’s customer segment by removing all XL and XXL is insulting to women and redefines what the company’s view of “beautiful” is. I believe this is highly rude to plus-sized women who are hopeful customers of Abercrombie & Fitch. However, this method of marketing does create some type of exclusiveness to those who are able to fit into Abercrombie’s clothes. I think Jeffries’ strategy to sustain a “cool” brand name is attainable, as customers today are all about “fitting in” and becoming a part of a trend. Abercrombie’s main target audience being teenagers, its strategy to create a brand name where only the good-looking and popular kids can wear is brilliant.

This unique method has definitely gained attention from people all around the world, however, I hope that Abercrombie could re-evaluate its marketing strategies and not risk its potential customers.

Sources:

Nancy Lu’s Blog Post: https://blogs.ubc.ca/nancylu/2014/10/05/abercrombies-exclusive-marketing/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/not-available-in-xl-abercrombie–fitch-ceo-mike-jeffries-accused-of-only-wanting-thin-and-beautiful-people-8608022.html

BC Hydro’s Site C hydroelectric megaproject is facing conflict with the First Nations due to ownership of land. As a result, the First Nations are urging the government to reevaluate this situation as starting the project will result in serious economic damages, and in particular, First Nations’ activities.

BC Hydro is proposing to perform an extremely costly project in the First Nations’ territory. BC Hydro is willing to undergo an $8 billion hydroelectric megaproject despite the damages that will occur to farmland and wildlife habitat. I believe this highly costly activity is not the most effective way to create energy for the community. The project will cost Canadian tax payers to pay parts of the $8 billion. Tax collected by the government will be used toward this incredibly costly project, and as a Canadian resident myself, I find it inappropriate for such actions to be used toward flooding valleys, destroying wildlife, and limiting First Nations’ future land activities.

Furthermore, though the region’s growing population is steadily becoming more in need of “relatively clean hydroelectric,” I believe the risks of nature are much more serious. The disruption of natural habitats should not be tolerated, and the First Nations’ rights to their land should not be neglected. For those members of the First Nations tribes who lived in these communities for generations and practiced their traditions as well as developed their culture, it is unfair for BC Hydro to develop a dam “flooding 83 kilometres of the Peace River Valley”. Such environmental issues should definitely not be overlooked and safety regulations should be taken into consideration.

Sources: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/First+Nation+chiefs+stage+Site+showdown/10215965/story.html

http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Premier+urges+cooperation+more+litigation+government+natives+reach+fork+road/10194776/story.html

Blackberry has made a comeback in the market recently by releasing its new smartphone, the “Passport”. With its new sleek design and appearance, Blackberry is targeting consumers again in hopes of regaining market share. The new “keyboard smartphone with a 4.5-inch screen” is once again competing with rivals Apple and Samsung.

Blackberry is desperately trying to regain attention through its release of the new smartphone, meanwhile its rivals Apple and Samsung have steadily been doing well. It is for certain that these companies are Blackberry’s biggest rivals in the market. The Passport is available for $699 without a contract, while Apple’s iPhone 6 is being sold for $749, and Samsung’s Galaxy S5 $700. With Blackberry’s new release, it is evident that the company is not focusing on gaining customers through price, but through a different focus strategy. Blackberry’s CEO John Chen has released his plan in “shifting [Blackberry’s] focus away from consumer devices towards software and enterprise clients”. Blackberry’s comeback with a narrower market segment is hoping to achieve greater sales and near-term profitability, while the company’s business model shifts with new hardware.

Sources: http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/blackberry-passport-priced-to-take-on-apple-samsung-1.2775003

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/blackberry-launches-passport-phone-blend-app-1.2775674

http://business.financialpost.com/2014/09/22/blackberry-ltd-charts-different-path-with-passport-as-apples-iphone-6-smashes-records/?__lsa=a221-7e06

http://store.apple.com/ca/buy-iphone/iphone6

http://www.bell.ca/Mobility/Products/Samsung-Galaxy-S5

Netflix’s decision to screen the upcoming sequel to Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon on its website has caused uneasiness among numerous cinemas. The ability for viewers to stream the movie on Netflix has led to the objection for top movie theatres’ to release the movie in theatres. As a result, the movie will be available for the audience to watch on any smartphone or computer, and be able to watch whenever, wherever.

Movie theatre chains are obviously furious about Netflix’s decision. Top cinemas such as Regal Cinemas and Cinemark in the U.S. and Cineplex Entertainment in Canada, have refused to play “any movie ‘day and date’ in [their] theatres with any other windows”, as this action could negatively affect their business. Due to the first movie, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, doing extremely well, movie theatres were probably looking forward to playing its sequel in theatres. However, they believe that by releasing the movie online and in theatres on the same day, fans will most likely watch the movie in the comfort of their own home. Consequently, those who enjoy the theatre experience are also being affected by such monopolistic behaviour.

I understand the movie theatres’ reason to be upset as they are reducing their chances to gain more profits and attention from the audience through their screenings, especially for such a highly-anticipated movie. However, I believe Netflix’s choice to stream the movie is a good way of creating value for customers. Those who are already loyal customers of Netflix are gaining satisfaction as they are able to view the movie without any additional costs, thus making it unnecessary for fans to buy movie tickets. In addition, for those who greatly want to watch the movie but do not have a Netflix account will be forced to create an account and pay the $8 fee. However, once they have registered, it is likely for customers to keep the monthly subscription if they enjoy the streaming service, and even if they do not, they will most likely keep the subscription in hopes of watching movies in the future. Therefore, Netflix is maximizing customers’ satisfaction in both ways, while increasing their own profits.

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/netflix-deal-to-screen-crouching-tiger-sequel-slammed-by-theatre-chains-1.2782265

Textbook prices have been increasing drastically enough for the average university student to be $25,000 in debt. Students are in need of purchasing overly expensive textbooks for several classes even after the high price of tuition, causing an extreme financial issue.

This increase in textbooks over time is affecting university students’ financial status incredibly as the average student is usually in debt from tuition fees. In my opinion, paying “as much as $1,000 per semester on books” (Enright, 2014) is highly absurd. It seems unethical for students to pay such high prices when the cost of textbooks has “increased more than four times the rate of inflation” (Enright, 2014). This makes me reflect upon the opportunity costs of being able to purchase other cheaper products. In addition to unethical issues, students are expected to purchase the latest edition in textbooks when in fact, there are only a few slight changes in these different versions. I believe this could be a factor in discouraging students from attending secondary educational institutions. These expensive textbooks can discourage students from purchasing their necessary textbooks which will therefore, affect their grades and cause them to do poorly in classes. Overall, overly-priced textbooks should be re-evaluated, taking into consideration university students’ financial concerns.

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/thesundayedition/essays/2014/09/21/textbook-prices-that-break-the-bank/

              McDonald’s Corp. has been heavily affected in sales due to a food-safety hazard of distributing meat in China. McDonald’s took meat out of restaurants during this hiatus, however, has seen a sales drop of 14.5 percent in the Asia-Pacific region as a result of buying meat from its meat supplier, Shanghai Husi Food Co.

              Businesses work to achieve their greatest profit. However, at times, the ethical components will be overlooked as a result of their desire to gain maximum profit. Through the unethical decisions by Shanghai Husi Food Co. of purposefully labelling the wrong expiration dates on their meat products, I was shocked and sickened by the OSI Group to choose a greater earning than responsibly supplying their products. OSI’s corrupt desire to risk the health of McDonald’s enormous amount of consumers in China is incredibly immoral and selfish. As a result, not only have they affected McDonald’s sales, but their own as well. Yum Brands Inc., whose brands include KFC and Pizza Hut, has also stopped using meat products from Shanghai Husi Food Co., and has “cut all ties with OSI in China, the U.S., and Australia.” I believe the Group should have refrained from their eagerness for increased profits and instead, have remained in their social responsibility of following ethical rules and gaining a steady income.

Sources:

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/mcdonalds-aug-sales-metric-hurt-china-scandal-25372461

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/mcdonald-s-kfc-apologize-in-chinese-expired-meat-scandal-1.2713508