Long Wei Lau

According to the blog post titled “Brain drain…a problem or a natural process” by Asfvin Pugunisparam, I am actually not shocked the reverse of brain drains in India. And the explanation answers his first question of “is brain drain a natural process that occurs in each country?”

I believe that everyone is self-interested and everyone has infinite of greed in them but it can be greed towards fame/ reputation or any personal incentive, not necessarily monetary incentive. The huge population migration to other countries which are in better state than their own country is a normal phenomenon. It is even more obvious if the country is in trials and tribulations because people always think that they deserve better and more especially elites and professionals. The low level of patriotism as the world becomes more globalized is also one of the reasons as people believe that they are not bound to a country and they do not have the social responsibility to shoulder the burden of their country. In addition, one’s greed can never be satisfied, people will just want more and more and realize that their country is not able to satisfy their personal desire thus making them moving to more developed country for a better future. But, I believe brain drain this is a huge problem to those countries although it is inevitable most of the time.

The article reveals the need of something simpler in term of features of a phone. In the article, the writer writes a letter to BBC News to request for a phone that is very simple, operates like a hand torch, with large keypad, small and narrow screen to display number dialed with an “on” and “off” button.

( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20295118 )

Often when business tends to find ways to edge against or differentiate themselves against the other competitors, they tend to go away from the core need and usage for the existence of the product. Phone, is one of the example. Alexander Graham Bell invented phone to communicate and contact other people from distant. Cell phone/ Hand phone was innovated to provide more convenience for people so that phone can be mobile and people can move with phone. But, as phone turns smaller and advanced, smart phone is created. It is not a wrong move to invent smart phone which brings so many things, applications and services into one small device. But, as we fancy the ability and advancement of our phones, we tend to forget the main reason of a phone, to contact and message people. Therefore, the need of elders to get a simple phone that satisfies the function of communicating and connecting people is forgotten. Thus, the elder’s market which is a huge market remains untouched or without a leading brand in the market. As the huge firms, such as Apple and Samsung stop producing simple phone, will there be any firm or new competitor who can satisfy the market and bring back the trend of simply phone? Will there be any firm try to produce a “differentiated”- simple phone that is targeting this narrow segment of market? Or will the smart phone trend just continue to grow in the same direction, the SMART direction which may be confusing for some people?

Window Live Messenger was first released to the market on July 22, 1999. From past decade, the competition has been very high between Yahoo! Messenger and Window Live Messenger although there were some brief glorious moments for other online instant messenger such as ICQ. In 2011 October, Microsoft, the owner of Window Live Messenger acquired Skype as Skype showed sign of increasing growth with huge potential to gain more market share.

The article begins by mentioning the flop of Window Live Messenger in the past few years. The article also states that Skype meanwhile has a surging number of new users compared to Window Live Messenger. Thus, Microsoft chooses to shut down Window Live Messenger and give the option for users to change their account into Skype account.

(https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20222998)

In my opinion, the whole market feature has changed. Decade ago, people can only use Yahoo Messenger or Window Live Messenger to contact and communicate with friends and beloved. But, now with the creation of social media such as Twitter and Facebook, people no longer need to rely only on online instant messenger. Therefore, it would be better for Microsoft to cut off Window Live Messenger as it provides the same service as Skype while Skype has the differentiated service such as calling to phone which Window Live Messenger does not have. In addition, it would be wasting resources to operate two same services or department which may cannibalize each other as they are having same targeted market segment.

The article discussed the latest report of Dell that showed revenues decreased by 5.3 percent and net income fell by 31 percent. Due to the huge letdown in their financial report, the shares of Dell were trading 2.2 percent lower at $9.35 in New York today.

( http://nicosiamoneynews.com/2012/11/15/mobile-devices-spur-dell-contraction/ )

The recent report that I read in another article showing that a rising competitor, Lenovo, a Chinese company has been gaining more market share in the past few years and is just second to Hewlett-Packard. Dell is differentiated with its virtual integration that enables them to cut down their cost and gain the highest profit from each computer sold while satisfying the preference of different customer. But, recently Lenovo has created a higher level of cutting cost with its imitation of Dell’s vertical integration adding the advantage of cheap labor and supply of hardware, it enables them to have advantage in term of price. This benefit has given them the fame of PC firm with lowest or more affordable price in the industry.

At the same time, the trend of tablet has been grabbing the market of laptop and tablet is becoming a convenient and competitive substitute to laptop. The main advantage of laptop is being highly mobile while providing the same service. With the recent rippling huge tides of new tablets from several multinational computer hardware and electronics companies, a certain amount of market share of computer or laptop is moving to tablets instead. Dell has been reaping the profit for its usage of virtual integration for quite some years, but with so many new elements making the rivalry and competition more intense, should Dell search for ways to complement its current business model to compete against Lenovo? Another matter is, with so many computers, electronics, technology and software giants such as Microsoft, Google, HP, Amazon, Sony, Samsung and Asus tapping into the market of tablet, should Dell enter the market as well? Or should they focus on research and development to bring more innovative product that can edge against other firms?

The article “Burger King to open in South Africa” reports the plan of Burger King to expand their franchise in South Africa. Burger King would be up against the most successful fast food chain in South Africa, Mc Donald who has 165 outlets in the country and opened its first outlet in 1995.

( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18466764 )

In my opinion, in terms of marketing, Mc Donald has the total edge against Burger King as they have been in the market for quite a long time. In the mind of consumers in South Africa, Mc Donald would be the first choice when it comes to fast food and burger as they have the first-mover advantage. In generic strategies, Burger King has not so much of differentiated product compared with Mc Donald which will make them second to Mc Donald in the market of South Africa. Thus, it will be a question whether it is a good investment of Grand Parade Investment to hold the exclusive agreement of franchising from Burger King.

As a third world and developing country, the news can make a lot of significant changes to the population in South Africa. By opening outlets in the country, it will significantly add to the employment rate and helping to make the life of people in South Africa. Thus, this move from Burger King can be regarded as socially beneficial.

In the blog post of Steve Dotto, he tries to defend that smart meter is bringing more benefit than the risk that it bears. Smart meter has caused a lot of controversial in BC with the fear of invasion in privacy and harm on health of consumers.

( http://www.techvibes.com/blog/the-lowdown-on-bc-hydros-highly-controversial-smart-meters-2011-11-30 )

In my opinion, it is inevitable for the information technology to keep on evolving, including how the way electrical meter is measured. The concern of privacy is correct as almost every security system in the world is can be hacked including the information gathered by BC Hydro. The information can be used to commit crime or any other illegal usage. But, consumers must acknowledge that their privacy is invaded all the time even without smart meter if you read my first post. Google, Facebook and etc (social media and search engine) use the information that you key inside and sell it to the third party.

In addition, for health issue, there is a concern that the radiation from smart meters when transmitting information to BC Hydro will harm the body. But, even without the existence of smart meter, people are always exposed to radiation such as mobile phone and the connection of internet.

So, does smart meter really makes so much of difference in people’s lives?

In the article “Huawei and ZTE pose security threat, warns US panel”, the two firms have been stopped by US government from merging and acquiring any telecommunication of any US company. Thus, causing a dispute between the Chinese companies and US government. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19867399)

The House Intelligence Committee of US reported in an unclassified report that the two Chinese companies have strong links with China’s government and military. With that US government strongly believed that it will cause threat to national security of US. The report also alleges that the companies are corrupted with bribery, discriminatory behavior and copyright infringement. But, the Huawei and ZTE claim that they meet all standards set by US and posed no threat.

Though it appears to be a harsh action by the US government, but it seems logical for them to take the move as the founder of Huawei is a former member of the People’s Liberation Army. While ZTE faced accusations that their equipment contains codes to relay sensitive information back to China.

Still, there has been no clear evidence by US that espionage is the true reason behind the acquisition. And, this is the first time US government blocks a foreign investment since 22 years ago. This may violent what seems to be a market economy image that US has. But, as Huawei and ZTE grows to be the one of the largest global players, is it possible that the true fear is that US is afraid of the dominance of these companies of the industry in US and eclipsing others? Or they are fearful of both possibilities and hence come to this decision as a precaution.

This article is concerned about the labeling of genetically modified ingredients. As the health awareness is increasing, people in California are attempting to change the labeling laws on genetically modified foods via legislation (voting through ballot paper). (http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-19828142)  The labeling laws at the current do not require the food industry to label on raw or processed food offered for sales to consumers.

From the stand of consumers, it is totally their rights to know what are they consuming. But, for the view of suppliers especially those who have genetically modified ingredients in their food products, the statute would have incur additional cost to them to regulate the labeling of genetically modified foods. By regulating the label it would mean changing the label of for products supplied to other parts of United States as it will be troublesome and expensive to have separate packaging. (http://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2012/general/pdf/37-title-summ-analysis.pdf)

Meanwhile, saying that it would have incurred around 1 million annually as one of their reasons. It actually does not make sense as they are willing to pay 40 million mainly on TV advertisements in an attempt to convince people not to vote against them.

From the point of consumers’ rightist, it appropriate to make such a call and it is the first step to make a revolution for labeling law as consumers need to know what they are eating. Although, it may not be fair in GM’s view as the current labeling law does not include antibiotics, pesticides or hormones to be labeled on package too. But, I believe it is just the matter of time given that the health awareness is escalating everywhere.