Halloween is the last big thing before the Holidays, weather it is Hannukah, Christmas, New Years or a weird combination of both (a.k.a Christmukah for those The O.C fans) there is something inspiring about the end of the year, a feeling of restored hope, of family, of serendipity.  Christmas is a time where retail prosper and for that to occur the businesses vastly invest on advertising. There are plenty of Santa Clauses, Snowmen, and mittens flowing around but contrary to that trend John Lewis has thrived with the ads that tell a story and that make an emotional connection between the consumer and the Holiday.

One criticism made by BBC was that “the ad appears to miss out one vital component – the products they are trying to sell.”  I believe that is precisely why they are so successful.  Instead of trying to sell a product, they sell an experience, the beauty of giving someone much more than a manufactured good but the happiness that comes with Christmas.  The same happens with Starbucks they successfully convince people to pay $4,50 for something they know costs around 9 cents.  Creating the chills is their point of difference.

John Lewis Christmas Ad

What makes a consumer choose a certain airline over another? What is the difference between Air Canada, United, Delta, American Airlines, Lufthansa and so many others? I would say of course the route, the time and the price. If all of those variable were to however be put as ceteris paribus those companies would have nothing but a reputation.

If that was true and I was faced with the choice of airlines, I know which one I would definitely not choose, Air Canada. Not because of their airplanes or their staff, but simply because I have personally been a victim of their overbooking policy and it is frustrating and inconsiderate.

The problem with unsatisfied consumers is not only that they are the ones buying from the company but also that the company is failing to deliver the one thing they are suppose to, the one thing the costumers pay for: a seat at the plane.  The act of overbooking is selling something that is not there, is selling more then what you have. It is like selling all of the existing apples AND the promise/probability that one of the people that previously bought the apple will no longer want it anymore all of that with no assertion whatsoever to anyone that they for sure have the apples. Booking an Air Canada flight feels more and more like gambling.

Response to Tamar Batrawi’s Blog: https://blogs.ubc.ca/tamarbatrawi/2013/11/16/air-canada-why-dont-you-just-do-your-job/

I, as a stereotypical Brazilian am madly in love with soccer. I am madly in love with the emotions it brings, with the patriotism it arouses, with the passion that unites every single citizen independent of their social class or religion to watch a match. I am madly in love with the magic provided by the reflection of the colors of the flag on the jersey of the soccer players. I am in love with soccer.

I, like millions of Brazilians am rooting for Brazil to deliver an extraordinary World Cup, and as a fan it was always a dream to host the event.   But as a citizen I cannot help but question if this is the right time for Brazil to host it. As a government that suffers with astronomical rates of corruption Brazil now suffers with the evidence of overpricing in its constructions, a waste of public money, which will be missed up front by the departments that care about public health, education, transport, safety, accessibility and whatnot. The world Cup is an opportunity for great improvements not only in the area of sports, but on transportation, security and local business, it is an event that can boost a country’s economic growth and prosperity.  Unfortunately, if Brazil does not change the mentality, if it does not change the procedures, our citizens will have nothing as a legacy but a useless stadium.

What makes an invention great? What shifts products from being something consumers wish to something they absolutely cant’s live without? Phones can’t unlock with fingerprints.  Cars can’t work without gas.  There is no way humans can have artificial pancreas. Except now all of those things are possible.  They are now concrete products because someone somewhere felt the gap in the industry for that product. That is how innovations work, that is how small ideas turn into worldwide businesses.  The two founders of Google redefined what search means, Wikipedia redefined how to collectively create and distribute information, Starbucks redefined the culture and approach surrounding coffee, all of those were once startups.

Entrepreneurship is about placing yourself in the future and finding what is missing and from that sufficing the market. Right now social media and technology are growing ever so fast, but years from now will that market be saturated? Or is it ever expanding?  The ability to forecast the trends and to act on ideas is what separates a random suggestion from a true potential initiative.  At the end of the day the point is to locate the itch and find a method to scratch it.

Last week one of the co-founders of Lululemon blamed the consumers for the problems it has been having lately with see through leggings. Correction, Chip Wilson did not blame all of the consumers, but a specific type of them, the ones that are not suppose to be wearing their leggings, the ones that are just not fit enough. “Quite frankly, some women’s bodies just don’t work for [the pants] … It’s really about the rubbing through the thighs, how much pressure is there over a period of time.”

Mr.Wilson if the strict immorality of your comment did not persuade you to take it back, let us see if these facts will:

1. The plus-size market generates $19.4 billion in women’s-clothing sales. (That is money that could be going to Lululemon if it sold plus-size)

2. That’s 18% of the women’s total clothing market.

3. H&M, Forever 21, Donna Karan and Tommy Hilfiger offer plus sizes (Not fancy enough for your 100 dollar leggings? Is Oscar de la Renta and Anne Klein fancy enough? Because they offer plus size!

4. Lululemon’s biggest competitor, Athleta, creates larger sizes for its brand for a comparable $90 (competitor’s advantage, they can sell to a broader demographic that your “skinny is cool” motto doesn’t allow your company to sell for.)

“Namaste,” is a traditional Sanskrit greeting that is supposed to mean a mutual acknowledgment of a person’s inner beauty, is craved in some of the company’s products and website nevertheless, this philosophy seems to dramatically clash with the idea of excluding those who don’t have enough of a thigh gap.

Plus-sized customers are expected to spend about $332 million on athletic wear this years and not a single penny of that will be going to Lululemon if they don’t make a drastic change. That is what I like to call a Plus-Size mistake.

“Corporate initiative to assess and take responsibility for the company’s effects on the environment and impact on social welfare. The term generally applies to company efforts that go beyond what may be required by regulators or environmental protection groups.” – Investopedia

Tom’s Shoes has been a notable example of Corporate Social Responsibility been put into practice.  It has for long advertised and executed its one for one campaign which gives a pair of shoes to every pair purchased.

Tsuyoshi’s blog argues in his blog that the CSR of Tom’s are not legitimate and defeats its purpose since the shoes are manufactured using cheap labor and are extremely overpriced, he judges the One for One campaign to be nothing but an marketing stunt. Conversely I perceived the situation differently. TOMS Shoes was founded together with the social mission of matching every pair of shoes purchased with a pair of new shoes for a child in need. In TOMS’s case, the social mission is the same as the company mission.  Their initiatives go beyond giving out shoes, with every eyewear product they help to improve sight on someone that needs it.  Differently from a company that implements the initiative with the purpose of expanding sales, Tom’s launched its business with CSR as its core and main objective, being sustainable and socially responsible are traits the company cherishes as a significant part of their brand value.

To learn more about Tom’s Corporate Responsibility visit:

http://www.toms.ca/corporate-responsibility/

To read Tsuyoshi Murakami’s Blog refer to this link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/yoshimurakami/2013/09/12/corporate-social-responsibility-of-toms-superficial/