“First nation” is a modern way of saying deprecated term “Indians” referring to indigenous people of Americans in Canada. For this group of people, a statute called the Indian Act was created aiming to assimilate them at first, though some of its provisions seek to protect the right of the native. That’s probably why the native don’t want to let go protections like tax exemptions while admitting its paternalism.

The Indian Act in 1876 empowered the government to keep tabs on everything about the aboriginal: their “status, land, resources, wills, education, band administration” and so forth. Unexpectedly, some issues occurred during the implementation of the first nation protection, when the government’s project conflict with first nation’s interest.  For example, the BC Hydro’s $8-billion Site C hydroelectric mega project is intended to explore enery resources like wind, solar and geothermal power. However, it might harm the local’s interest by interfering in their outdoor activities like fishing, hunting or holding ceremonies. (Background: The Indian Act)

According to the Canada’s highest court, the Crown can ratify encroaching Aboriginal title lands only if there is a substantial goal. The bottom line is that no matter how profitable it might be, the project should never sacrifice Aboriginal’s interest for broader interest.

Nonetheless, while considering the PESTLE, including political, economic, social and technological, legal and environmental factors, the lifelong benefit behind the temporary loss should not be neglected. Specifically In this case, it involves almost every factor in PESTLE, mainly about political, social, and environmental elements. Although Hydro’s Site C hydroelectric project does require some political adjustment, and does need to consider the need of first nation, and does have potential to harms the ecosystem, people may need to make some concession for bigger profit. After all, these projects are thought up to provide better facility for their daily life. Therefore, moderate compromise is necessary so that numerous great resources can be made full use of and first nation’s quality of life can be improved in the long run. 

References:

Isabelle Montpetit (May 30, 2011) Background: The Indian Act[online]. Available from: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/background-the-indian-act-1.1056988 [Accessed 06 October 2014]

Peter O’Neil (September 18, 2014) First Nation chiefs to stage Site C showdown  [online]. Available from: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/First+Nation+chiefs+stage+Site+showdown/10215965/story.html#ixzz3FRVccimF[Accessed 06 October 2014]

This September, Sony unveiled its fancy SONY Xperia Z3. Sony has long followed the Focus Strategy according to Porter’s Generic Strategies (which aims at product uniqueness and has narrow market segment), and now when competing with other giant companies in electronic industry, Sony sticks to its strategy.

One common complaint of IPhone is its battery capacity. But here in Sony, Apple’s weakness is perfectly solved. “As with the Z1, Sony’s focus is on extended battery life. Without battery saving features the Z3 lasted two and a half days of use” (Sony Xperia Z3 compact review: best small Android phone and iPhone 6 competitor) ” As it is praised in the Guardian, the Sony Xperia Z3 is “the company’s smaller flagship smartphone with a powerful process and camera, but battery life to last over two days of heavy usage.”(Sony Xperia Z3 compact review: best small Android phone and iPhone 6 competitor)

By emphasizing its point of differences, Sony successfully intrigues the public by its 20.7-megapixel high-resolution camera, waterproof design and ability to remote PlayStation 4 games. Nonetheless, its point of parity with iPhone 6 is also to its advantage. Both being high-end electronic products, SONY Xperia Z3 costs around ¥760, which is nearly ¥100 lower than iPhone 6.

As for Size, with its 4.6 inch screen and a 720p resolution, Sony Z3 is highly lauded as being “that were a good balance between being pocketable and powerful. ” (Sony Xperia Z3 Compact Review: Android’s Alternative To The iPhone 6 ) The guardian also verdicts the Sony Z3 as “the best small Android smartphone available”, while iPhone has an amazingly large group of Apple fans that prop up its sales

So who sales better? The answer is we will see. But no matter who is the best, customers are always the winners! Because we get better products at a more fair price as a result of this competition!

References:

Evan Spence (September 27, 2014) Sony Xperia Z3 Compact Review: Android’s Alternative To The iPhone 6 [online]. Available from:http://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2014/09/27/xperia-z3-compact-android-replacement-iphone-6/  [Accessed 05 October 2014]

News (October 1, 2014)Sony Xperia Z3 and Z3 Compact: Australian price, details and hands-on [online]. Available from: http://www.news.com.au/technology/gadgets/sony-xperia-z3-and-z3-compact-australian-price-details-and-handson/story-fn6vihic-1227076087476 [Accessed 05 October 2014]

Samuel Gibbs (October 3, 2014) Sony Xperia Z3 compact review: best small Android phone and iPhone 6 competitor [online]. Available from: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/03/sony-xperia-z3-compact-review-best-small-android-phone-and-iphone-6-competitor [Accessed 05 October 2014]

Youtube Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHPWFw9NSiE

This October, Walmart launched its Pickup Grocery service which is a “free service, allows customers to place their orders online any time from two hours to three weeks in advance.” (Walmart’s Drive-Through Grocery Concept Is A Head Scratcher)

As it was commented on Forbes, this service may attract some commuters who have a car and happen to pass through the store, but this service won’t work for those average homemakers and shoppers.  They may enjoy the shopping experience and may live too close to the shop to drive a car. Besides, daily food like meats and vegetables are perishable, and most people will prefer pick up their own on the site.

Nonetheless, every cloud has a silver lining. Walmart is racking its brain to create new things to enlarge its consumer segment, while keeping its main strategy as providing low cost and a broad range of goods, called leadership strategy based on Porter’s generic strategies. Doubtlessly, this innovation provides great service for potential consumer groups, including business commuters who own a car. Besides, as Carol Spieckerman, CEO of new market builders, said: “Shopping eats up time and can be a major inconvenience for parents with small children and the elderly and infirm.”  Therefore, for these people, the drive-through service can be a pain-reliever.(Walmart’s Drive-Through Grocery Concept Is A Head Scratcher)

On the other hand, for others who love online shopping, this  service can be a gain creator. They can compare and contrast a variety of good while sitting comfortably at home instead of rushing in the market. By this way, Walmart intrigues its consumer to its digital platform and familiarize them with how this works.  The company can therefore “gather more information on its customers’ searching and shopping habits as they place orders online.”(Walmart’s Drive-Through Grocery Concept Is A Head Scratcher)

Consumers normally buy products to get the job done, and the company’s job is to find out this ”job to be done”. In this case, Walmart successfully provide considerate services for busy business people, for parents with small children and the elderly and infirm. This innovation add a large part in its value proposition canvas by enlarging its products & services and its customer segment, and thereby will increase its sale volume. More importantly,  another “ulterior motive” behind this maybe a shift to online shopping. The next possible move of Walmart maybe to provide door-to-door service globally (in fact, it has now, but only free in Canada), and there is high chance that it can be to be the first biggest supermarket that provide online goods delivery worldwide, just like Amazon do in goods. (Walmart’s Drive-Through Grocery Concept Is A Head Scratcher)

References:

Geroge Anderson (October02,2014) Walmart’s Drive-Through Grocery Concept Is A Head Scratcher [online]. Available from: http://www.forbes.com/sites/retailwire/2014/10/02/walmarts-drive-through-grocery-concept-is-a-head-scratcher/   [Accessed 05 October 2014]

From Yahoo’s acquisition of MessageMe to Facebook’s merge with What’s App, merge and acquisition between companies happened all the time. Currently in food industry, Burger King bought Tim Hortons at $12.5-billion which aroused controversy. Some pessimists have posed their concerns about “change in ownership will somehow make Tim Hortons alter Timmy’s experience” and therefore lead to reduction in sales volume.(Burger King will turn Tim Hortons into ‘iconic global brand,’ Miles Nadal says)

However, Tim Hortons CEO Marc Caira have told CBC that they are not intended to “have the two chains sell each others products”, and there will be no interaction between the two restaurants. Other than that, the analysis of Miles Nadal, a famous advertiser in Canada, may reassure them even more. He claimed that “the deal is a complementary one with benefits for both sides.” Burger King will promote Tim Hortons brand to the world by co-branded restaurants, while Burger King can boost the variety of its fare and therefore increase its competency with the help of Tim Hortons. (Burger King will turn Tim Hortons into ‘iconic global brand,’ Miles Nadal says).

Furthermore, statistic supports for the advantage of combination are also convincing. Released as part of “disclosure obligations for the debt financing”, same-store sales for the nine-week period went far beyond analysts’ expectations, which were up 3.6% in Canada and 7% in the U.S. (Tim Hortons’ U.S. sales could outstrip early estimates)

In a nutshell, Tim Horton’s merging with Burger king is a win-win solution for both companies. This wise move will double their consumer group, and enhance their popularity. Anyway, it is time for Tim Horton’s to go global, and for Burger King to provide something other than just burger. The success of this acquisition is highly expected, and we may probably see McDonald, KFC, and Burger King&Tim Hortons keep abreast of each other in the near future.

References:

Hollie Shaw (September 15, 2014)Tim Hortons’ U.S. sales could outstrip early estimates [online]. Available from: http://business.financialpost.com/2014/09/15/tim-hortons-u-s-sales-could-outstrip-early-estimates/?__federated=1 [Accessed 04 October 2014]

Kristine Owram (August 30, 2014)Burger King will turn Tim Hortons into ‘iconic global brand,’ Miles Nadal says [online]. Available from:http://business.financialpost.com/2014/08/30/burger-king-will-turn-tim-hortons-into-iconic-global-brand-miles-nadal-says/ [Accessed 04 October 2014]

Pete Evans (August 26, 2014)Tim Hortons, Burger King agree to merger deal [online]. Available from: http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/tim-hortons-burger-king-agree-to-merger-deal-1.2746948 [Accessed 04 October 2014]