There are perhaps only three topics of conversation that the typical Canadian will avoid at all costs: politics, religion, and anything that would damage the sanctity of our national treasure, the game of hockey. Throughout his recent post, “Advertisements to be Place on NHL Jerseys”, fellow blogger Justine Bearss explains that the National Hockey League is considering commercializing the jerseys of each franchise, and further, he outlines his support for such a proposal. Bearss cites the increased revenue that would result, a figure estimated to be north of $120 million. The projected surplus funds would presumably be used to expand the NHL’s reach by targeting underdeveloped markets, and by extension, grow the game of hockey as whole. In addition, potential sponsors would gain access to a broad and expanding consumer base, and as Bearss points out, “each brand will become more well known, and possibly increase consumer incentive to purchase their products.” Even commissioner Adam Silver of the National Basketball Association called jersey sponsorship throughout North America “inevitable within the next five years.” Implementation of jersey sponsorships within the next few years is seemingly all but a certainty, and there appears to be very little reasoning that would say it shouldn’t be.

While a $120 million increase in revenue is a seductive prospect, the NHL risks alienating a large portion of its consumer base, particularly if it is the first major league in North America (apologies to Major League Soccer) to actually implement the proposal. As a hockey fan myself, I was initially shocked and disappointed to hear that the NHL was even considering such an idea, and if the collective reaction on twitter was any indication, many other fans feel the same way. While the idea of logos on a jersey may seem innocent enough, I imagine it will be disconcerting for many to see a brand other than that of the team prominently displayed on every player’s chest. I remember looking with disdain at the commercialized European league jerseys (pictured right), each spotted with an unsightly assortment of logos. Even if the other major North American sports leagues do decide to move forward with jersey sponsorships, I feel that the NHL should resist the temptation, a decision which would actually help the league differentiate itself, as the last remaining league to retain its integrity. While it may mean sacrificing profits in the short run, after two lockouts within the last ten years, Commissioner Gary Bettman and the NHL cannot afford to risk the one sponsorship that does matter, the support of the fans.

Bearss, Justine. “Advertisements to Be Placed on NHL Jerseys.” Justine Bearss COMM101 Blog. N.p., 9 Nov. 2014. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. <http://blogs.ubc.ca/justinebearss/>.

Westhead, Rick. “Westhead: NHL Says No to Jersey Ads – and $120M Windfall.” TSN. N.p., 17 Sept. 2014. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. <http://www.tsn.ca/westhead-nhl-says-no-to-jersey-ads-and-120m-windfall-1.85030>.

“Ads On NHL Jerseys ‘Coming,’ League Exec Says.” The Huffington Post. N.p., 6 Nov. 2014. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. <http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/11/06/ads-nhl-jerseys_n_6116996.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-business>.

Tarver, Brett. “Are Ads on NHL Hockey Jerseys Inevitable?” CTVNews. N.p., 8 Nov. 2014. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. <http://www.ctvnews.ca/sports/are-ads-on-nhl-hockey-jerseys-inevitable-1.2093179>.

Validated by the success of Martin Scorsese’s recent release, The Wolf of Wall Street, the public’s perception of the financial industry has perhaps never been more negative.  With documentaries such as Charles Ferguson’s Inside Job exposing the inherent flaws in a system that rewarded, rather than punished, the shamelessly immoral, and illicit, behaviour that directly led to the collapse of the financial industry, the general public no longer trust the financial institution. Rather than fines and sanctions, the large Wall Street firms responsible for the recession received bailouts desperate to restore order to the crumbling economy. However, in his recent post, SEC Commissioners Kara Stein, Luis Aguilar Hit Bank of America Where it Hurts, in a Revenue Stream, established blogger Yves Smith illustrates how the SEC, long considered a pushover by the industry, is beginning to exert its regulatory might.

SEC Commissioner Kara Stein (pictured right) is moving to “stymie giving Bank of America [a waiver] for its $16.7 billion settlement for selling toxic mortgages,” and instead “bar the Bank of America from fundraising for private concerns.” The proposed regulation would actually hit the bank where it hurts, as the ban would put a significant “dent in their [senior management’s] bonuses.” While traditional bank settlements rarely affect senior managers, or even yield rewards, in the case of JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon. By moving away from the agency’s typical “lax enforcement and other types of overly-financial-firm-friendly conduct” Kara Stein has certainly garnered Wall Street’s attention, something the SEC hasn’t had in quite some time.

While in most cases I would consider myself a champion of free markets and deregulatory principles, in this particular case I must agree with Yves Smith, and by extension Kara Stein; the time has come to hold the banks accountable, and if that means regulation that actually impacts individuals within a firm, so be it. The SEC and other regulatory agencies watched as the financial industry constructed a proverbial house of greed, and were then left powerless to prevent its collapse. For far too long, a skewed incentives system has permitted the banks to get away with defrauding the American public, and that illicit behaviour will only continue unless we allow regulatory bodies to implement significant penalties. Through the efforts of Kara Stein and Luis Aguilar, the SEC has taken the first step on the road to change.

Smith, Yves. “SEC Commissioners Kara Stein, Luis Aguilar Hit Bank of America Where It Hurts, in a Revenue Stream | Naked Capitalism.” Naked Capitalism. N.p., 10 Nov. 2014. Web. 10 Nov. 2014. <http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/11/sec-commissioners-kara-stein-luis-aguilar-hit-bank-america-hurts-revenue-stream.html>.

Fundamental economic theory dictates that the processes the yield creativity, and further, innovation, are driven solely by the pursuit of profits. However, practical experience fails to corroborate that basic human assumption. Indeed, as Martin and Osberg perceptively note, “the truth is that entrepreneurs are rarely motivated by the prospect of financial gain… Instead, both the entrepreneur and the social entrepreneur are strongly motivated by the opportunity they identify.” The entrepreneur identifies what Martin and Osberg refer to as a “suboptimal equilibrium,” or more simply, a problem that society is working around, rather than eliminating. Then, the entrepreneur strives to institute a dynamic solution to the problem, and through the innovative solution, benefit society as a whole. The potential financial compensation for proposing said solution is usually a secondary objective.

How does this aspect of entrepreneurship, central as it may be, relate to the United Nations? “Promoting social progress, better living standards and human rights,” is not the sole objective of the U.N. Indeed, its primary function is to ensure international cooperation and peace. Even in its role as an agent of social change, it traditionally operates within the social paradigm, however unjust rather than revolutionizing it. Even if it was “fully funded,” the United Nations would continue to implement Band-Aid solutions, working around an unsatisfactory equilibrium, breaking out of it. The U.N. solution may alleviate societal pains in the short-term, but what about the future? Further, within the current system, recipients of aid aren’t permitted to champion their own social change.

In the long term, the social entrepreneur is a far more effective instrument of change than the United Nations. Rooted in local culture, with an intimate knowledge of key issues, t
he social entrepreneur utilizes creativity and innovation to “forg[e] a new, stable equilibrium,” that ensures an improvement in quality of life. Rather than continuing to throw funds at a problem until it disappears for a short time, a social entrepreneur will identify the key issue and propose a solution. Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus (pictured right) perhaps best exemplifies the social entrepreneur. The impoverished in his community weren’t debilitated by a lack of effort or desire, they simply lacked a minuscule amount, an amount so small the western world might take it for granted, of financial capital to provide for themselves. Yunus simply provided the opportunity for small, unsecured loans, through said loans, enabled his community to take control of their lives. The Arc Initiative has seen similar results; by facilitating business solutions, it takes existing ideas, gives them economic viability, and allows them, and their owners, to flourish.

Martin, Roger L., and Sally Osberg. “Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition (SSIR).” Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2014. <http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/social_entrepreneurship_the_case_for_definition/>.

“UN at a Glance.” UN News Center. UN, n.d. Web. 07 Nov. 2014. <http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/index.shtml>.

Kroekker, Jeff. “Can Fair Trade Boutique Expand without Alienating Customers?” The Globe and Mail. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2014. <http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/small-business/sb-growth/day-to-day/can-fair-trade-boutique-expand-without-alienating-customers/article4405520/>

Throughout Mrs. MacLean’s grade 10 Social Studies class, the discussion on sustainability in business revolved around several core issues; the most notable of said issues being the Keystone XL pipeline project. That was three long years ago. A vine was a source of grapes, the word “Gangnam” was known only in Korea, and a portion of the world maintained the belief that the world would be ending in December. Yet talks concerning the Keystone XL pipeline project remain at a standstill, with three years yielding little to no progress. It’s funny to consider how much and how little has changed.

Fast forward to present day, and with the Republican Party having recently gained control of both houses, the issue may be taking its first steps towards resolution. As CBC News writer Daniel Schwartz notes, “Before the election, the Democrat-controlled Senate had declined to deal with Keystone XL legislation coming from the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.” However, with the Republicans gaining control of the senate, the project looks all but certain to move forward, it being given a high priority by GOP leadership. Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus stated “we will pass the Keystone pipeline, number two,” after passing a budget. Republican Senator John Hoeven echoed the sentiment, saying “Keystone will be one of the first things we pass.”

As the Republicans hasten to push legislation forward, several parties remain convinced that the costs to the environment outweigh the economic and social benefits. While TransCanada CEO Russ Girling maintains that the project has cross-partisan support, several key members of Obama’s political base are wary of the potential environmental damages. From the perspective of John Elkington’s “triple bottom line,” the pipeline’s economic impact is self-explanatory, the social impact pertains to the tens, if not hundreds of thousands of jobs created for a stagnant American workforce, and the environmental impact adheres mainly to the serious harmful effects of a potential spill. Does the potential negative impact outweigh the expected economic and societal benefits? The answer is a resounding no. As Republican Randy Weber stated, “It’s jobs, jobs, jobs.” As the North American economy continues to struggle, the influx of jobs and the overall boost to both the American and Canadian economies will be a driving factor in accelerating their recoveries. As long as TransCanada continues to adhere to environmental legislation, the project can move forward, at long last.

Schwartz, Daniel. “Keystone XL Pipeline Prospects Get Boost from U.S. Election Results.” CBCnews. CBC/Radio Canada, 06 Nov. 2014. Web. 05 Nov. 2014. <http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/keystone-xl-pipeline-prospects-get-boost-from-u-s-election-results-1.2825401>.

Cattaneo, Claudia. “The Return of Keystone XL: U.S. Mid-term Election Battle Rekindles Pipeline Debate.” Financial Post Business. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Nov. 2014. <http://business.financialpost.com/2014/10/14/the-return-of-keystone-xl-u-s-mid-term-election-battle-rekindles-debate-on-controversial-pipeline/?__lsa=9c17-8ed9>.

Cassata, Donna. “Republicans Counting on Swift Keystone XL Decision: ‘We Now Have the Votes'” CTVNews. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2014. <http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/republicans-counting-on-swift-keystone-xl-decision-we-now-have-the-votes-1.2089776>.

As the now infamous Donald Sterling saga reached its conclusion, the Los Angeles Clippers were finally able to turn the page, beginning a new chapter in their history with former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer’s purchase of the franchise. The price Ballmer paid is cited as $2 billion, “almost four times as much as the record set a few months earlier, when the Milwaukee Bucks went for $550 million.” The enormous price tag likely dissuaded most potential investors, but in his interview with Josh Lipton, Ballmer maintains the franchise’s potential profitability. “Can the Clippers make money?” Ballmer asked. “Yes. Can they make more money than any other team in the NBA? Yes.” While Mr. Ballmer is undoubtedly passionate about basketball, he is also confident that the investment was a sound business decision, asserting his expectation that “this will appreciate,” figuring “the Clippers investment will match or outperform a Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index fund.”

The question remains, was the $2 billion
acquisition of the Los Angeles Clippers simply a billionaire fanboy squandering his vast wealth, or does it represent a savvy business investment? At present, it would be difficult to disagree with the latter. After experiencing a seamless transition in leadership, the National Basketball Association seems poised to take advantage of the growth of basketball nationwide. “The NBA [recently] renewed its vows with ESPN and TNT for $24 billion over nine years. This TV deal will generate $2.7 billion per year, up from the current $930 million.” The Association will be sure to parallel the model of success used by the National Football League, whose league revenues are approaching $10 billion. As revenues reach record highs, the sports industry as whole is experiencing unprecedented growth. Steve Ballmer just doesn’t want to miss out.

Vance, Ashlee. “Steve Ballmer’s New Life With the Clippers.” Bloomberg Business Week. Bloomberg, 16 Oct. 2014. Web. 09 Nov. 2014. <http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-10-16/steve-ballmers-new-life-as-owner-of-nbas-most-expensive-team>.

Golden, Josh, and Jessica Lipton. “Ballmer: I’ll Own Clippers ‘as Long as I’m Alive'” CNBC. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2014. <http://www.cnbc.com/id/102031870>.