Promised to be a new source of clean, renewable and cost-effective electricity, Site C is an enormous project built to sustain the BC population for the next decade. It involves the construction of a third dam and a hydroelectric generating station that will support 450.000 homes per year. This long term project, however raised a lot of controversy regarding its impact on the community and ecosystem surrounding the site.

The construction of the dam will result in the flooding of 83 kilometres of the Peace River Valley, demolishing farming area and wildlife habitat. The $8 billion project pose a huge threat not only to the ecosystem but also the lives of First Nations that use the area to fish, hunt, and practice ceremonial services. This means, project site C generate a conflicting externalities to the community around the area. To be more exact, the development of project Site C will abolish activities such as farming, fishing, and hunting in the area. This externality should be considered crucial to the life of the First Nations as it affect their food source, directly impacting their day to day lives. Acknowledging that the project is built to create sustainability, I strongly believe it is more than possible for more sustainability problems to emerge from the building of this dam.

In addition, Site C project not only affect the materialistic side of First Nations lives but also the culture and practices that is furthermore threatened by the flooding of this area. The site is seen as a respected place, a home that is used for ceremonial practices which in my opinion should be reserved and protected for the sake of the future generation of the First Nations.

On the bigger scale, it is understandable that the increase in population and demand for energy creates pressure for the government to expand more energy source. Overall, I believe that BC’s government should put more effort in finding another solution to solve the problem of energy scarcity as the Site C project can not only generate great positive long term impact, but also negative.

References:

https://www.sitecproject.com/sites/default/files/info-sheet-need-and-alternatives-june-2014.pdf 

 https://www.bchydro.com/energy-in-bc/projects/site_c.html

http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/Opinion+need+Site/10188814/story.html

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/Site+threat+billion+ecological+values/10075979/story.html

Said to be launched in 2015, the apple iwatch has already raised various comments from different stakeholders.

The apple iwatch is not just a timepiece but also a small computer that enable its users to send messages, use simplified apps, connect to Siri and access the internet . This product development is not a surprising move from Apple, considering the increase in popularity of wearable gadgets in the market. The iwatch will be launched with various stylish designs to cater different segments of the market, which I think a huge turn from Apple’s previous product decisions. I believe Apple’s stylish, unique and limited number of design play a huge role in the success of Apple’s products. The availability of several designs can potentially ruin the unique selling point that Apple posses.

On the other hand, it seems that Apple has adopted a new approach in building a differentiated product than before, taking account the recent launch of iphone 6. No matter what Apple decided, its decisions are very powerful considering it has all the ace in the bag.

A highly known luxury fashion label, Michael Kors, is going downhill according to the recent report regarding its share prices. With inventory increasing, Michael Kors shares have decline 25% in the past six months.

High sales volume is a green light for a business, but maybe not in this case. The recent phenomenon experienced by Michael Kors is caused by too many people wearing the brand itself, making the brand less cool for the public eye, therefore decreasing demand. Its suspected that the decline in the business is caused by its use of several brands I several price points to reach different level of the market segments that in this scenario, completely backfires.

With many people wearing the brand, it’s losing its unique selling point as a product in the market. However, this is not the case of Louis Vuitton and Prada which rise a new speculation about the cause of this decline. In my opinion the price put plays a crucial role in the fall in the performance or Michael Kors as a luxury brand. Careless marketing decision lower the brand image, which is everything in the luxury bag industry.

In the end the collapse of brand image can be avoided by maintaining the appropriate value propositions to be in the luxury brand industry. New marketing decision is needed to stop Michael Kors from going to square one.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/3-reasons-michael-kors-could-162301709.html