One of the latest articles from the New York Times overviews a number of interesting stories about entrepreneurs and the decisions they have to make. The article reviews ten different entrepreneurs and refers to their decision making process of whether to sell the company they have created or not. The number of interesting examples conclude that there is never a right answer. Dan Porter, the creator of the popular app Draw Something explains that there are many personal decisions involved and sometimes the decision to sell or not to sell your business is not even based on the money received by the deal. In conclusion, the message conveyed by the entrepreneurs is that if it seems hard to start up a business, it is even harder to decide if and when to sell it on; handing over your creation, or hold on and continue fighting for it.

The following article reviews Sony’s new smart-watch and points out its major advantages and disadvantages. The new product released by Sony is aimed at competing in the new and very recent market for smart-watches, created as part of the major technological innovations in the previous years. The smart-watch incorporates the old fashion features of a watch and new integrations with smartphones, such as answering calls and replying to text messages. The new product released by Sony has little if no points of difference. According to the article it does not perform significantly better than its competitors, and has no new and innovative features other smart-watches don’t offer. However, as Sony is a large and experienced company their costs of producing this product are much lower than other firms, thus still allowing them to be competitive, not on innovation, but on price. Sony’s economies of scale allows it to sell the product 33% cheaper than their main competitor Samsung, thus compete on the market in spite of the fact that they entered relatively late. As of this moment, it seems as firms will start competing on prices in the market for smart-watches, until one of the competitors will manage to incorporate a new breakthrough in this market.

The article “HP CEO Apotheker fired, replaced by Meg Whitman” discusses the latest changes in HP’s management. HP has a significantly “tall Pyramid” style of management, it is structured into many different levels in between its base level and the top management. This business structure is proved to cause difficulties when aiming at strong communication between the different aspects of a firm and stimulating creativity. The recent rapid changes in HP’s management board caused many difficulties to the company in all of its aspects. Leo Apotheker was forced out of the organization and Meg Whitman, replacing him, decided to reverse all of the major steps he has decided to take. The lacking of good Performance Management and the absence of a strong culture and team connections within HP has affected the firm negatively. The new CEO Meg Whitman promised to restore HP’s strong culture and success from years ago, but it is known that changing a firm’s culture within a rapid changing environment such as technology, is a difficult task that takes a long term effort and investment.

Reply to N. Taylor Thompson blog post on the Harvard business review:

Your post reviews a very interesting case in which a company supposedly attempted to make its products more effect and accurate to its consumers thus making it more fair – you pay for what you use but on the other hand consumers interpreted it differently.

I understand your argument that the company could have predicted the way it escalated, however I disagree that it is that clear and easy to predict. As you yourself mentioned costumers attempted to punish Netflix for unbundling their services, while they did not thoroughly examine their new business model. Netflix is  good example that shows that not only companies and firms have to constantly plan and think; consumers (or at least rational consumers) should execute research and planning in their consuming decisions as well.

Replay to Edward Sim’s blog post:

Thank you for the brief overview of this important scenario. It seems as the US government will bring a major crisis upon itself if it does not act soon to restart the government’s schedule. In spite of the fact that economics crisis does not seem as close, history shows us how these appear when they are least expected. I personally believe US government should change its policies when theses things occur, as implemented in many other countries worldwide, for instance: instant break up of the government and immediate restructuring.

Reply to Jiya Dassan’s blog post:

It seems as Gillette has conducted thorough and accurate research and thus successfully managed to dramatically increase their market share due to their operations in India. It seems as they managed to identify their opportunities in a specific market and create a product that will better fit those consumers.

The following article discusses the problems Hawaii’s genetically modified crops. After the pineapple and sugar agricultural industries in Hawaii collapsed due to foreign cheaper imports producers and the government were looking for a new product to grow on Hawaii’s lands. The solution that came up was genetically modified corn, however this crop causes major unease to the residents living in Hawaii. Looking at the producers SWOT analysis, they did not see the threat of foreign imports on time. One of the major weaknesses of growing corn is that people living by the fields are suffering from major pollution and pesticides. This poses as a correct threat to the producers as individuals’ are acting against them however the Hawaii based producers supply most of the corn to the US, one of their stronger advantages. At the moment the Hawaiian producers should look for opportunities to produce in a cleaner manner and to avoid hurting local residents: since these companies have strong influence and power over the economy a possible solution to the problem could be purchasing land further away from residents or seeking cleaner pesticides thus prevent hurting the environment for instance.

The “Rising Star” is Keshet’s brand new format with astonishing ratings reaching 49 percent on primetime television. The article overviews Keshet’s brand new concept and businesses model: the television screen and smartphones brought together. The new show is a live singing competition in which the audience themselves vote and decide whether the contestant continues to the next level or not: using their smartphones in real time. Keshet has been working on their “off screen” platform intensively lately as consumers shift away from the television screen for the mobility of the smartphones. As Keshet was aware of the growing threat it worked to provide a platform that allows consumers to watch all of their content on whichever device they are using. In spite of the fact that they tackled the smartphones’ curse on time Keshet was looking on ways to make the audience more involved and perhaps pull them back to the television screen. The attempt to combine these two markets resulted in this new form of market: live integrated television; at the moment one of the most successful television formats in the history of Israeli television.

The following article discusses Blackberry’s current situation. At the moment Blackberry owns around %15 of the total office market in Canada. As it lays off many workers as part of its attempts to reduce costs Blackberry is left with enormous amounts of unused office space. Blackberry is attempting to sell and rent some of their office space however demand for this size office space nowadays is very low. Blackberry should attempt to use its existing operations, manufacturing and development facilities in order to make profit. Blackberry has the resources to invest in new and upcoming startup companies or support new high tech companies by renting them space or resources for instance. In spite of the fact that Blackberry is struggling on the market these days it still hold onto 1.6 million square feet of office space, which if used in the right way and led to the right direction, could provide Blackberry with a large income from existing assets.

The following article discusses the current situation of Canada’s wireless market. The three largest Canadian operators are blamed for forming a loose oligopoly in which they match prices and eliminate consumer choice. Canada’s government is attempting at the moment to bring in foreign cellular companies such as Verizon (U.S.) in order to destroy the oligopoly, drop the prices and create a more fair market for consumers. If Verizon enters Canada they will use the already established Canadian network. The three largest Canadian operators are arguing that this act will cause many Canadian workers to lose their jobs and that Verizon in Canada will be administered by Americans thus supposedly not providing any of the management positions to Canadians. Canada is in an ethical struggle: the oligopoly must be destroyed for the good of the consumers but the entrance of a foreign large-scale company to Canada might have some negative effects as well.