Month: October 2012

The Canadian entertainment industry faces a huge obstacle with trying to hold on to viewers. Chief executive officer of Quebecor Inc. has warned the industry that in order to stay relevant to viewers branching out to foreign platforms and across markets is needed.

The recent changes in the distribution of TV have been the main culprit to TV networks. Web-based providers are taking over the global scene of TV, with the release of TV-channels of Youtube more people are turning to these alternatives.

These changes are huge threats to the entertainment industry; threatening jobs and Canadian content in the media. It’s hard to capture people’s interest with content that does not appeal to viewers. Brand positioning for Canadian content needs to be reviewed if the industry is to remain relevant; if people are turning away from television programs it signifies something about the quality. Businesses need to be cautious with the huge transformations in technology, globalization is becoming more intrinsic into societies day-to-day business. Consumer behavior is at the helm of determining the future of Canadian TV networks. Why should anyone care about preserving Canadian TV? This is a necessary question to be answered.

http://business.financialpost.com/2012/10/08/canadian-tv-content-must-reach-beyond-borders-peladeau/

The Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation from northern Alberta has challenged Royal Dutch Shell over a constitutional infringement. The company has proposed the expansion of its already established Jackpine oil sands mine, the First Nations band has claimed that a violation has occurred because the band was not consulted before approval was giving to proceed. Consultation would be in the form of a federal/provincial panel consulting the community; however, with regards to ethics and good business, I believe that Shell had an obligation to consult the band head on, rather than rely on the federal/provincial panel. It only makes sense to consult stakeholders directly. When a business does this it demonstrates something more than just a business plan, it signifies trust, which is ultimately the largest component in making any business decision effective for future generations. This kind of a business deal would be affecting many people for many generations to come, consulting stakeholders head on is necessary to establish a good working relationship and to reduce further tension. In my opinion direct communication is needed to ensure the best possible outcomes.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/first-nations-band-files-treaty-rights-challenge-against-shell/article4580799/

The Alberta economy has long been ruled by the oil and gas sector, but those industries that are not centered on oil and gas are struggling. The focus on one sector has placed many challenges for other industries. Political concentration and big-spending on workers has made it difficult for other industries to act as alternative sources for jobs. People are leaving in the pursuit for better paying jobs. Many obstacles arise from this; companies are now being forced to distinguish themselves in terms of benefits with points of difference. The oil and gas sector offers well paying jobs because that’s where the money is at, but other industries now need to stay competitive. Government has a role to play in this situation. A reduction in taxes and priority for local companies needs to take precedence in order to ensure a competitive, diverse, and healthy economy. It’s essential to ensure a diverse economy, and this is where government coincides with business. The fuel for a strong economy comes from the innovation from businesses but government needs to act as a guide by making sure other industries are represented.

http://business.financialpost.com/2012/10/05/albertas-have-nots-struggle-to-grow-in-oil-sectors-shadow/

Welcome to UBC Blogs. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!

Enbridge’s Northern Gateway has without a doubt raised some discussion with regards to environmental stewardship. The proposed pipeline would ship Alberta crude through British Columbia to the coast where it would then be shipped off to China. The main concern here revolves around the question of “what if” something happens; such as an oil spill, “who then becomes responsible for clean up?”

The decision to make the project a limited partnership means that in the event of a catastrophic oil spill Enbridge Inc. would only have to worry about a portion of the costs for clean up. The cost for clean up would be divided between investors and the firm. Given this circumstance, stakeholders do not believe that proper funding would be readily available with this particular structure. Stakeholders who oppose the pipeline say that the risks outweigh the benefits. The questions that now remain are: Is Enbridge Inc. justified in their decision to opt-out of sole responsibility in the event of an oil spill? And should a business’ priority on making profit outweigh things such as environmental and social concerns?

http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Enbridge+feels+heat+from+lawyer+over+split+liability/7208623/story.html”>http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Enbridge+feels+heat+from+lawyer+over+split+liability/7208623/story.html