A Costly Switch

A long standing alliance between Japan Airlines and The Boeing Company faltered when the airline invested in 31 Airbus A350’s, over Boeing’s upcoming 777X planes. After technical frustrations with the Boeing 787 Dreamliner and delayed release dates for the new 777X, Japan Airlines opted out for the A350’s. As a bonus, the company anticipated lower costs with Airbus’s discounts and a quicker delivery date. However, JAL’s decision is accompanied by high switching costs which may detract from the overall benefit of the switch.

Along with purchasing a new fleet, Japan Airlines will require a significant and ongoing investment in maintenance and training.1 The company will be obligated to hire Airbus pilots, mechanics, and train air flight personnel to handle operational changes. Procedures as simple as folding in supercomputers, a feature on the A350’s, will require training of current, and new staff. Although seemingly insignificant, the company could save money on the additional costs associated with switching suppliers. In addition to expensive mechanical changes, JAL also sacrificed any loyalty packages or discounts they acquired with The Boeing Company throughout the years.

Although Airbus is an appealing alternative supplier for the recently problematic Boeing planes, the associated switching costs appear more expensive than any savings the A350’s will provide.

1: Stock, Kyle. “How Japan Airlines Flexed Its Negotiating Muscles.”BloomberBusinessweek. N.p., 07 Oct. 2013. Web. 07 Oct. 2013

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-07/how-japan-air-lines-flexed-its-negotiating-muscles#r=read

Additional Citations

Clark, Nicola, and Hisako Ueno. “Japan Airlines Deal With Airbus Is Blow In Boeing Stronghold.” The New York Times. N.p., 07 Oct. 2013. Web. 07 Oct. 2013.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/08/business/international/jal-orders-9-5-billion-worth-of-airbus-jets.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0&ref=business

 

Figure 1: Web. 07 Oct.2013.

 

Twitter: Profit or Purpose?

Analysis of Twitter’s latest Offering Document reveals their large numbers of devoted users are not raising relative profit. Compared to other social media channels such as Facebook and LinkedIn, Twitter collects less average revenue per user, and as a result, less overall total revenue. Twitter’s inefficiency is associated with their limited use of advertising. While the company’s international recognition should translate to higher revenue, will Twitter lose its original purpose if advertisers influence modification of classic features, and designs?

 Similarly to Twitter, Facebook was formerly concerned over lack of advertising; which led advertisers to insert unsubscribed adverts throughout every user’s newsfeed.  However, users complained as they considered these commercials spam. If Twitter follows a similar path, users will feel robbed of their customized news feed where they choose

who to read about and follow. The twitter feed being the sites main function, users will then have less incentive to visit the site as something they felt was personal is bombarded with unwanted ads.

As a limited social media outlet, Twitter attempting to increase average revenue per person with advertisements will leave current users frustrated. The company will lose devoted users and the unique purpose of sharing one’s ideas and thoughts.

Koh, Yoree, and Suzanne Vranica. “Twitter Advertisers Say Service Needs More Users.” The Wall Street Journal. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Sept. 2013. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303492504579115753167390832.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection

 

Louis, Tristan. “Is Twitter The New LinkedIn Or The New Facebook?” Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 05. Oct. 2013. Web. 1. Oct. 2013.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tristanlouis/2013/10/05/is-twitter-the-new-linkedin-or-the-new-facebook/

Figure 1 : http://theinspirationroom.com/daily/design/2012/6/new_twitter_logo.jpg Web. 1. Oct. 2013.