Last week, one of our classes was focused on entrepreneurs and startup companies.  Interestingly enough, just yesterday I read an article that connected with these concepts.  The article was about Shnarped Hockey, an app created by a recent graduate from UBC.  Shnarped Hockey, “connects professional hockey players and fans . . . the core feature, ‘the pound’, allows fans to send players a virtual fist-bump in real time after a game well-played” (“Ubc grad scores,” 2013).  Through this app, you can also watch game highlights and read related articles.  The founders of the app even appeared on an episode of Dragon’s Den!  “Together with his co-founder, Kyle Hagel, Sproat went on the show asking the investors for $100,000 for ten per cent equity in their company.  They walked away with $250,000” (“Ubc grad scores,” 2013).  Cole Nakatani, one of our guest speakers, spoke to us, and an interesting thing he said was that not a lot of the successful entrepreneurs grow up knowing that they are going to start a successful company.  He said there is many different career paths an entrepreneur can take, and this article provides a great example of an unlikely path, as both Hagel and Sproat played hockey for the minor league teams of NHL franchises, and have now successfully created a startup.  Hearing and reading about Sauder grads like Dustin Sproat, Cole Nakatani and Brian Wong has taught me that becoming a successful entrepreneur is indeed possible.

Ubc grad scores big on cbc’s dragon’s den. (2013, October 31). Retrieved from http://news.ubc.ca/2013/10/31/ubc-mba-grad-scores-big-on-cbcs-dragons-den/

Image: (2013). Shnarped Hockey [Web Graphic]. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/shnarped

I was reading Jiya Dassan’s Blog, and one of her posts caught my attention.  I found her blog post on Gillette creating a cheaper razor for men in India interesting because it perfectly demonstrates something that our instructors and teaching assistant have been preaching the entire semester, which is that all of the building blocks of the business model canvas are tied together, and if you change one of them, then other blocks are going to be altered as well.  This post demonstrates this because it shows how changing the customer segment aspect of the business model canvas from Canadian and American men to men in India has resulted in a change of a lot of the other building blocks as well.  For example, Gillette had to change its value proposition because; “men in India usually shave less often, have thicker hair, and are more price sensitive than Americans”.  The change in the value proposition also lead to a change in the cost structure segment, as cheaper razors for consumers means Gillette must lower their costs as well, so their margins don’t take a huge hit.  I personally believe that if a company changes one aspect of the business model canvas, but does not alter the other connected blocks, then the company will not be successful in achieving their goals.

Gillette Fusion ProGlide Challenge [Web Photo]. Retrieved from http://moodbuddy.finesoft.com.sg/events/view/18

I recently read one of Amy Lio’s blog posts, and I found the story she chose to discuss very interesting.  I found it very interesting because it connects with one of the course concepts we recently learned about, which is People, Culture & Teams.  In that class, Danielle Van Jaarsveld talked to us, and something she said that really caught my attention was that, “it is not about keeping employees happy, it is about keeping them motivated”.  I agree with this statement; however, I also believe that the motivation must be done in a certain way; a way that improves the human resource management of a company, which is, according to Danielle, “the lifecycle of an employees relationship with a firm from hiring to the employee leaving”.  According to Amy’s blog, Aritzia motivates its employees by making it known to them that they are, “expected to sell at least $500 worth of merchandise every hour in order to keep their jobs and perhaps be promoted”.  I find that while this strategy may motivate employees, it is very detrimental to the relationship between Aritzia and its employees.  I think that Aritzia should instead find strategies that do not include threatening to fire its employees if they do not meet a certain sales mark, because with this current model their employees are motivated for all the wrong reasons.

Bellamy-Willms, M. (Producer). 7 Things We Can Learn From Aritzia’s CEO [Web Graphic]. Retrieved from http://shoppertunity.com/suburbia_shopper/7-things-we-can-learn-from-aritzias-ceo/

          A few weeks ago in class, we talked about Financial Markets, specifically about technology companies and their I.P.O’s.  The company we discussed the most was Facebook, and the mistake they made by overpricing their I.P.O, and many people wondered if Twitter would do the same.  It turns out that Twitter learned from Facebook’s mistake, as their I.P.O was not overpriced.  Twitter’s I.P.O was set at $26 a share, and on November 7^th 2013, when Twitter hit the stock exchange, shares were being traded at $45.10.  However, I read a very interesting blog post by Vauhini Vara on The New Yorker, who provides a completely different perspective on the situation.  Vara says, “Twitter made a different error by underpricing its I.P.O.  Twitter’s mistake, actually, might have been worse”.   This blog post was very interesting and useful to me because originally, after constantly reading and hearing about the mistake Facebook made, I only looked at I.P.O pricing from one point of view, and that was that overpricing an I.P.O is a mistake.  However, after reading what Vara had to say, I have come to the realization that underpricing an I.P.O is a mistake as well.  This is because Twitter only got $26 a share, which generated them $1.82 billion.  However, the fact that at opening, shares were being traded at $45.10 and then closed at $44.90 on its first day of trading shows that there was much more money out there for the taking.

Vara, V. (2013, November 09). Who gained from twitter’s underpriced i.p.o.? . Retrieved from http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/currency/2013/11/who-gained-from-twitters-underpriced-ipo.html

Popper, B. (2013, November 07). Twitter’s stock closes at $44.90 a share, up 73 percent on its first day. Retrieved from http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/7/5076484/twitter-ipo-twtr-public-offering-stock

Wall Street Graphics. (Designer). (2013, November 04). Twitter bumps its IPO price to $23-$25 per share [Web Graphic]. Retrieved from http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57610649-93/twitter-bumps-its-ipo-price-to-$23-$25-per-share/

One of the companies we have continuously talked about in class is Netflix.  We have read and analyzed their SWOT’s during different stages in their development, examined the growth of their stock, and discussed internal and external events that have had major impacts on its success.  We have also talked about how the emergence of Netflix and the online streaming industry has essentially killed the video rental industry.  As it turns out, Blockbuster, the company that used to be so successful is finally giving up, as the few still existing stores in the United States are shutting down, while Netflix continues to grow.  One of the main reasons why I think Netflix has become so successful, and will continue to be successful in the future is because of its management information systems.  As discussed in class, management information systems help companies make decisions.  One aspect of this is customer relationship management.  Netflix uses management information systems to make their platform more personalized for their users.  Netflix uses management information systems to capture data about their users (based on what they have previously watched) and then uses this data to recommend shows and movies they think their users will be interested in.  This makes their users feel more welcomed on the platform, which in turn prevents them from using different alternatives like Amazon Instant Video or Hulu.

Last us blockbuster video rental stores to close. (2013, November 06). Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24844350

Kirschenbaum, D. (Designer). (21, March 2013). How to Watch USA Netflix Streaming in Asia [Web Photo]. Retrieved from http://www.flashrouters.com/blog/2013/03/21/watch-netflix-in-asia/

    Last class, we talked about two concepts: creating shared value, and sustainability.  According to the Harvard Business Review, shared value is, “policies and operating practices that enhance the competitiveness of a company while simultaneously advancing the economic and social conditions in the communities in which it operates”.  On the other hand, one can look at sustainability as the triple bottom line, and the framework of trying to find balance between social, environmental and economic benefit.  While these topics mostly pertain to companies and corporations, I personally think that they can be applied to countries as well.  According to the U.S Energy Information Administration, China imports more oil than any other country in the world, and “Its [China] coal consumption – about four billion tons – is so vast that it is burning nearly as much coal as the rest of the world”.  Combining this with the fact that, “the new frontiers [of oil] are in deep ocean water and in developing countries, where political instability and conflict are often the rule” makes China’s current way of actions simply not sustainable (Reguly, 2013).  China has realized this, and is trying to become more sustainable and create more shared value by investing $1.28 trillion in a five-year plan that will have a beneficial impact socially, as the plan aims to reduce the amount of smog in the air, which in turn leads to better air quality, higher life expectancy and healthier people, environmentally as it aims to reduce fossil fuel emissions, and economically as the plan also aims to increase China’s GDP.

Reguly, E. (2013, October 25). China’s troubled shift to a green economy. Retrieved from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/chinas-troubled-shift-to-a-green-economy/article15095368/

Tian, W. (2012, November 13). $1.28 trillion to be invested in green economy. Retrieved from http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2012cpc/2012-11/13/content_15924634.htm

Creating shared value. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.waterhealth.com/sites/default/files/Harvard_Buiness_Review_Shared_Value.pdf

(2013, July 1). NWO and European Partners Announce Research Programme with NFSC on Green Economy and Population Change [Web Graphic]. Retrieved from http://news.nost.org.cn/2013/07/nwo-and-european-partners-announce-research-programme-with-nfsc-on-green-economy-and-population-change/

      A few days ago, Instagram announced that they were going to start having advertisements on their platform.  A lot of users are complaining because they think their photo streams are going to be filled with those flashy annoying banner advertisements.  However, this is not the case with Instagram.  Instagram has found a way to implement advertisements into their users photo streams without destructing their users experience.  They do this by using the data they have on their users, which is they know who their users follow.  For example, Tom Ford, the famous fashion designer, has sixty-four thousand followers on Instagram.  Now let’s say someone follows Louis Vuitton, Gucci and other high-end fashion accounts, but not Tom Ford.  Instagram knows that this user has an interest in high-end fashion, so an advertisement they might see is a filtered Tom Ford Instagram picture, which is something they are interested in.  I personally believe that Instagram’s decision to start having advertisements isn’t a big deal at all.  I think that Instagram has found a way to make advertising on their platform non-obtrusive, useful and welcoming to the user, while maintaining their current value proposition, which is why I think Instagram will succeed in their reformation, and why Facebook will finally begin to see a return on their $1 billion investment.

Brustein, J. (2013, October 03). Instagram will have ads. get over it. Retrieved from http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-03/instagram-will-have-ads-dot-get-over-it

Poulsen, L. (2013, September 09). Instagram announces ads and the public backlash begins. Retrieved from http://www.businessbee.com/resources/news/operations-buzz/instagram-announces-ads-public-backlash-begins/

Beasla, S. (Designer). (2013, July 19). [Web Photo]. Retrieved from http://blog.viralheat.com/2013/07/09/instagram-how-to-go-viral-with-your-filtered-photos/

 King, the biggest social gaming company in the world, is looking to go public in America, just like its competitor Zynga did two years ago.  Since going public, Zynga’s stock has gone from $11 to $3.74, and Zynga has fired hundreds of employees.  Zynga is in trouble, and I believe King is going to follow suit.  If you were to look at the revenue streams category on the business model canvas for King and Zynga, you would see the same model.  Both develop addicting iPhone, Android and Facebook games, and release them for free.  People then get addicted to their games and buy in app purchases.  Candy Crush generates $850,000 a day for King from people who pay $.099 to beat level 50.  While it appears successful, this model is not sustainable.  King and Zynga think they can succeed in the mobile gaming industry by releasing new games because this model works on platforms like the Xbox and PlayStation.  However, they fail to realize one key difference; on the Xbox and PlayStation, there are huge barriers to entry.  Their only competitors are massive game developers.  But in the mobile game industry, the barrier to entry is a computer.  It’s King and Zynga versus anyone with a MacBook.  King and Zynga are competing with thousands of developers, anyone of whom can create the next Candy Crush, and King all of a sudden loses a huge chunk of their revenue, and ends up just like Zynga.

De La Merced, M. (2013, September 29). British game maker behind candy crush seeking i.p.o. in u.s.. Retrieved from http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/09/29/british-game-maker-behind-candy-crush-seeking-i-p-o-in-u-s/

Zynga inc. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.google.ca/finance?cid=481720736332929

Gold, J. (2013, June 03). Zynga fires 18% of workforce, vows refocus on mobility. Retrieved from http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/060313-zynga-layoffs-270414.html

Kovach, S. (Producer). (2013, July 18). Here’s Proof That Candy Crush Influences Everything — Including Religion Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/candy-crush-igod-logo-2013-7

Blackberry is being sold for $4.7 billion; a huge disappointment for the company that used to be worth over $80 billion.  Everyone has the same question: what happened?  The answer isn’t simple.  There were many things that contributed to Blackberry’s decline.  One was the failure of the Blackberry Storm, the supposed to be answer to Apple’s iPhone.  The Storm, “ran on a single processor and was slow and buggy”, compared to the iPhone whose, “device used two processors” (Silcoff, Mcnish & Ladurantaye, 2013).   The Storm was such a letdown that Verizon actually used the budget they had set-aside for the Storm to market Androids instead.  Another reason was Blackberry’s out of date app system.  It was harder for developers to write code for apps (which consumers loved) on Blackberry’s, so developers made them for iPhones and Androids instead.  Even today Blackberry’s still don’t have Instagram!   Finally, when Blackberry launched their two newest products, they had an outside company engineer them.  The few people who still used Blackberry’s deemed, “the new system too different from the classic Blackberry experience” (Silcoff, Mcnish & Ladurantaye, 2013).  The Z10, Blackberry’s last chance of survival, also didn’t have a physical keyboard which was the one thing Blackberry had going for them.  All of a sudden, Blackberry’s decline isn’t a huge surprise…

Article: Silcoff, S., Mcnish, J., & Ladurantaye, S. (2013, September 27). Inside the fall of blackberry: How the smartphone inventor failed to adapt add to .. Retrieved from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/the-inside-story-of-why-blackberry-is-failing/article14563602/?page=8

Photo: (2010, June 17). APPLE THROWING THE BLACKBERRY INTO GARBAGE !! [Print Photo]. Retrieved from http://www.desura.com/members/f-tomcat-14/images/apple-throwing-the-blackberry-into-garbage

          Rupert Murdoch, the founder and CEO of News Corporation made me laugh when I read the comments he made about his corporation’s business ethics.  Murdoch said, “There can be no doubt about our commitment to ethics and integrity”; however, according to an article, Murdoch actually did many unethical things, including tapping phone calls and paying off government officials (Aaron, 2011).  After analyzing the article, there is no doubt in my mind that Murdoch did in fact do these things, and I believe that he did them in attempts to make more money.  In today’s world, the majority of people involved in business share that same goal of always striving to make more money.  Sometimes in order to do this, people (like Murdoch) act unethically.  Personally, I don’t think business should primarily be about trying to make money.  I recently read a book called The Ecology of Commerce and from this book I learned that business should instead mainly focus on trying to improve society.  I believe that being ethical in business isn’t only about following rules and regulations.  Being ethical in business means making decisions in attempts to improve our world, while thinking of money as just an added bonus.

Article: Aaron, C. (2011, August 11). Rupert murdoch’s greatest moments in ethics and integrity. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig-aaron/rupert-murdochs-greatest_b_924654.html

Photo: (2011, February 13). [Web Photo]. Retrieved from http://www.independentaustralia.net/Wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/murdoch-150×150.jpg