Category: Comm101

Recently, Amazon launched a Kindle Fire, an e-book reader much cheaper but contains less functionality than I-Pad. Kindle Fire is a device allows people to read books, play simple games and play music. It does not have as much functionality as I-Pad but still is a good substitute product. According to critics from the link that I shared below, they put it in a different market as I-Pad.
However, I have a different opinion. Not supporting any gaming or utility functionality does not exclude one from the market that I-Pad is in. Critics even contradict themselves by saying that Kindle Fire has a potential to be like Nintendo Wii, which had soft start in the beginning but later on became one of the leaders in the gaming market, implying that Kindle Fire is in a same market as I-Pad. Two products have same point of parities, which are tablet, MP3 player and e-book functionality. Both Amazon and Apple have their own app stores where customers can purchase music and e-books. Point of difference for Kindle Fire is that it is cheaper. In next couple of months, unless Apple does something, Kindle Fire will gain significant market share.

I think it is not necessary for a company to follow business ethics. The primary goal of a company is to maximize its profit in any method and if it can make profit, even if that method is morally wrong, it should take that chance of earning a lot of profit. However, the reason why my answer was not necessary rather than ‘no’ is because it depends on how a business wants to be remembered.

If a business wants to make money quickly, its only focus should be making money in a short term. However, if a company wants to be more than just a fad and stay for a long period of time, it should not only care about earning profit but also social impact of its each step. In order for companies to make customers loyal to them for a long period of time, coming up with only creative and innovative product is not enough. Customers might like a company’s product for a short period of time but what makes them keep coming to its store its brand value and reputation. In order for a company to achieve that point, product should not be its only concern.

Recently, Google announced that it acquired Motorola, once one of leaders in mobile phone market, for $12.5 billion dollars. This acquisition will give not only Motorola more opportunity but also for consumers. In the article I found, the author expresses his concern about how this whole shifting will be limit consumers choices as Google will care less about other Android phone making companies and only focus on Motorola.

However, I strongly disagree with it, in fact I believe that it will be exactly opposite will happen in a few years. Companies, such as Samsung, HTC and other companies, who relied on Google’s operating system (OS), will now have to come up with their own OS as Google is entering hardware market also. Now that Google is making both software and hardware, it changed from co-operator to competitor. In order for them to gain advantage over Google, Competitors cannot rely on Google’s OS. This will make more options to consumers. If we look at the smartphones coming out these days, it is only design that is different. If companies start to use their unique OS, end-users will have more option to choose from.

Here is a current market share for smart phones.

Hyundai is a Korean car company who has recently gain significant share in global car industry. Before Hyundai expanded its market to global level, it produced one of the luxurious cars in Korea and were famous for quality of its products. However, as the company started to get globally recognized, it started to care less about safety of Korean consumers. For the same type of car, Hyundai

The main problem with Hyundai is that it is discriminating consumers. The company’s representative explained that the reason it differentiated its cars was because of the difference in government regulation. If it was aware of the fact that putting another airbag gives safer environment for passengers, regardless of what the country’s regulation is, air bag should have installed. Its whole action raises ethical problem since this shows that Hyundai really did not think about consumer’s safety but only focused on maximizing their profit.would put airbags on the side for exporting cars but not on the domestic ones. You could question why is extra-air bag such a big deal? According to researches done by Korean car experts, having an airbag on the side decreases the chance of dying from car accident by 37%.