Swedish furniture giant IKEA, has decided that IKEA Canada will purchase a 20 turbine wind farm site in Alberta. The far should be completed by late 2014, and will cost roughly $90-million dollars. The buy is part of IKEA’s goal to become completely energetically self sufficient by a target date of 2020. The southern Alberta wind farm will be the second largest in IKEA’s arsenal, after one of the many in Europe. 

From an outsider perspective I believe it’s a fantastic idea; not many companies can say they’re not worried about the cost of energy going up, but now IKEA can. Being completely self-sufficient is an advantage is a sense that the company runs itself. From a consumer’s view it also gives IKEA a “greener” view. Using wind turbines is more environmentally responsible than other sources of energy, and it portrays a very unique and fresh view of the company. I don’t see much of a down sound, the company is it’s own boss in a sense when it comes to energy supply. IKEA is a perfect example of a sustainable company, and if it keeps making decisions like these will be successful for a long time.

H.J Heinz Company has recently decided to to shut down three factories, cutting roughly 1350 jobs. One of the plants shutting down is in Leamington, Ontario a factory that has been running for over 100 years. The factory shut down will take away 740 jobs from the small southern Ontario town. The decision comes from Heinz’s new owners Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (Warren Buffet) and global investment fun 3G Capital, which bought Heinz for $28 billion June. 

The factory shut down really is the classic, long time blue collar “I heard they’re shutting the mill down”. It’ll probably come as much of a blow to the historical-emotional side of it’s workers as well as the fact that they’ll be out of work. However two other plants in St. Mary’s, Ontario and Toronto will benefit by adding 470 jobs to their workforce.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/heinz-to-close-ontario-plant-cut-800-jobs/article15442338/

Recently the social media giant Facebook put forth a $3 billion dollar offer to purchase Snapchat. Snapchat is a picture messaging platform where users send pictures and then after a few seconds they disappear. Despite the fact that Snapchat has only been around for roughly 2 years it has grown to about 9 million users sending over 350 million Snaps daily. The choice to decline the offer comes from founder Evan Spiegel. According to a source with knowledge of the matter, the company is currently being sought after by multiple investors, including a $4 billion dollar investment proposal from China’s Tencent Holdings.

Facebook’s eagerness to absorb Snapchat stems from the fact that there is a decline in Facebook popularity. Facebook recently acquired photo media platform Instagram for $1 billion dollars, and looks to continue in the social media battle.

With it’s recent IPO Twitter becomes more and more threatening; added to that is the fact that Facebook isn’t alone in it’s ambitions to expand. Twitter recently bought Vine, a short-video social media app.

In order to maintain company growth and profitability I agree with Facebook’s attack on purchasing Snapchat, Instagram and whichever social media platforms are on the rise. Apps are simply “trending” in nature and a fad only lasts for so long. It’s smart to try and create a monopoly, or at least aim for oligopoly. I see Facebook vs Twitter as a parallel to Coke vs Pepsi. May the best team win.

I completely agree with Natalie Hayworth’s statement, saying that it is a bold and risky move to hold out and decline Facebook’s offer. If Snapchat loses market power to the next trendy app then a mistake would have been made, but on the contrary if Snapchat remains a dominant social media app it’s payoff’s will be huge.

https://blogs.ubc.ca/nataliehayworth/2013/11/17/winner-or-loser/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/13/facebook-snapchat-3-billion_n_4268859.html

An $11 billion dollar merger between American Airlines and US Airways has finally cleared the runway and is underway. The combination of the two airline giants will create a company that services 140 million passengers flights all across the world. Roughly 90,000 employees and about 951 planes will be the result of the combination of the two companies that will continue to be called American Airlines, yet under control of US Airways’ CEO Doug Parker.

In order to prevent monopolistic dominance for the consumer, the Justice Department has stated that the agency will force the new super giant to give up multiple gates at LaGuardia (NYC), LAX (L.A.) and Reagan National Airport (Washington, D.C.). The gates will be auctioned off to competitors with lower cost budgets, thus ultimately serving in the favour of consumers. After the government confirmed backing the deal, share prices of AMR, American Airlines parent comany, rose roughly 26%

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-airline-merger-20131113,0,1206080.story#axzz2kVCRdGz8

Yellow Media, best known for it’s Yellow Pages phone books is in the process of cutting roughly 300 jobs by early 2014. The cut-backs stem from the company’s desire to turn more digital. Company CFO Ginelle Maille says the Montreal based company is “changing the dynamics of [their workforce in order to] accelerate digital media growth”. According to the company 43% of revenues come from the digital frontier.

In addition to the cut-backs, Yellow Media will be ushering in 45 year old CEO Julien Billot on January 1st to replace long time CEO Marc Tellier. Billot will be leaving his Head of Media Division position at Solocal Group. After months of searching, Yellow Media believes that Billot will be able to lead the company into the digital media age after his experience with Solocal (formerly known as PagesJuane Group) a company with similar services.

http://www.thestar.com/business/economy/2013/11/12/yellow_media_cutting_300_jobs_by_early_2014_in_shift_to_digital_from_print.html

http://business.financialpost.com/2013/10/21/yellow-media-ceo-julien-billot/?__lsa=c33b-bc58

After a recent sale of 45% percent stake of Vodaphone to Verizon Wireless for $130 billion dollars, Vodaphone is being hunted for another deal, but this time by AT&T. AT&T is considering a takeover bid of the British telecommunications company in attempt to capitalize on the growth in Europe. An analyst from Berenberg, Paul Marsch estimates that AT&T would have to pay roughly £80 billion pounds ($127 billion US dollars) for Vodaphone. AT&T is reportedly exploring other targets as wll, such as UK telecommunications company EE. EE operates under EE, Orange and T-Mobile brands and is the largest mobile-network operator in the UK. Be that as it may, AT&T’s chief executive Randall Stephenson believes that Vodaphone is the company that will provide instant impact in the market that the company is looking for.

With Verizon and AT&T both looking for European expansion, the two biggest US mobile-network companies may possibly end up battling on the other side of the globe as well. Vodaphone in my opinion has monopolistic power in the situation; Verizon has already made its move and with AT&T being so hungry for expansion, they will be willing to pay with inelastic desperation.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/telecoms/10419960/Vodafone-shares-rise-on-ATandT-takeover-talk.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/telecoms/10281668/Vodafone-seals-biggest-deal-in-a-decade-with-130bn-Verizon-sale.html

Recent analysis on the heavily anticipated Twitter IPO has shown that the social media company could be valued at as much as $20-billion dollars (U.S.) after trading starts. The company plans to raise over $1-billion dollars (U.S.) from a share sale. Everyday half-a-billion tweets are sent by Twitters 218 million users; a 44% increase from 151 million in 2012.

Twitter is trying to avoid suffering a same sort of disappointing fate that Facebook experienced during their IPO in May 2012. Twitter’s main source of revenue is in advertising and as far as R&D goes, Twitter doesn’t really do a lot of updating. Twitter is a unique “say what you’re doing” type of social media site, and that sort of leaves them with the simplicity of not having to constantly re-invent the wheel. In 2012 Twitter’s revenue had increased nearly 200% percent to $316.9 million dollars (U.S.)

The question that remains on most Twitter users minds is, “When is this fad going to burn out?”. Facebook certainly hasn’t yet and if Twitter can keep the fire burning then this IPO will prove to be a huge success.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/03/twitter-ipo-share-sale

Under two weeks ago Blackberry received some good news from Toronto based financial holdings company, Fairfax Financial Holdings Ltd. Fairfax is planing to offer Blackberry $4.7-billion dollars (U.S.) for the company, which equates to roughly a $9-a-share-bid. The bid was made at the time when the company’s share value was $9.08; on Friday (Oct. 4th) however the stock fell to $7.69 per share. This new share figure is only 10 cents  higher than the $7.59 per share figure that Veritas Inc. has calculated for Blackberry’s liquidation value. Veritas’ analyst Neeraj Monga said that Fairfax leader Prem Watsa would despite the fall in stock price likely be against lowering it’s $9 per share bid, and “would be extremely against withdrawing an offer entirely.”

It will be interesting to see what happens if Fairfax does absorb Blackberry, how will they use the company to benefit, will they revive the free-falling telecommunications company or use it’s resources to help grow themselves bigger and better.

In response to Fraser Denton’s article on Blackberry being behind the times, I completely agree. Blackberry being one of the leading smartphone makers for so long should have caught onto the fact that touch screens were the next big thing. Fraser’s insight and recommendations are on point.

https://blogs.ubc.ca/fraserdenton/2013/10/06/the-squished-berry/

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/fairfax-strikes-47-billion-deal-to-buy-blackberry/article14470689/

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/blackberry-falls-near-liquidation-value-says-report/article14715711/

Canadian cell phone company, Blackberry has recently cut 4500 jobs in an attempt to jolt the company out of decline. Essentially Blackberry has accepted a $900 million dollar loss in the means of unsold phones and unused parts. Blackberry is basically providing the textbook example for a “sunk cost”. The companies downfall comes from the increased competition in the smartphone market and Blackberry’s inability to retain their professional/business consumer market. Blackberry’s stock dropped roughly 16% on the day after announcing their loss, which contributes to the company’s ugly 41.48% loss in the last 6 months alone.

I find it quite interesting how a company that was once regarded as the trailblazer in smartphone technology can now hardly stay afloat in comparison to the competition. It’s understandable that once something is made, soon enough there will be another company with a bigger better version, but it seems like Blackberry simply disregarded the idea of technological advances until the “woulda, coulda, should’ve” release of the Z10 and Q 10. It will be interesting to see if Blackberry can heal their injury, or if it will prove to be a career ender in a once upon a time Hall of Famer.

James Cowan pokes fun at the organizational and marketing skills in his blog post for MacLeans magazine. In my opinion as well, it is slightly astonishing how the once most powerful smartphone company can rapidly spiral to the bottom.

http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/10/10/we-respected-blackberry-but-we-never-loved-it/

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/trading-in-blackberry-halted/article14440386/

Image Source:http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=BBRY

Telecommunication company AT&T is under a lot of scrutiny after posting a commemorative tweet about 9/11. Many users found the tweet to be a disgrace to the tragedy and a poor excuse for product placement. More upsetting to some is the weak apology that they offered after.

Personally it seems pretty obvious not to use a national tragedy as an opportunity to display a new phone. It makes you question whether or not it was a impromptu decision or just simply a poorly executed marketing strategy. The most interesting thing about the issue is how casual the apology was. Like us Sauder students have recently learned, handling an issue with the utmost sincerity is pretty crucial to having a successful recovery.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/atandt-removes-apologizes-for-911-tribute-tweet/2013/09/11/6d8f8806-1b06-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html