https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xN8skvVbDg&feature=youtu.be

At this year’s Superbowl, fast food chain Carl’s Jr made jaws drop with their ad featuring Charlotte McKinney. The ad depicts the model almost naked with the implied message that she is all natural, just like their 100% natural, antibiotic, and hormone free burgers. She is surrounded by men in a local farmer’s market staring at her and all of her assets (particularly the burger). The first reason this advertisement seems shocking is that there is an obvious taboo of there being a woman without a shirt, representing the general gender inequality, and further implying that it is more shocking to have a slim woman mostly naked. The next message is the fact that she is holding a burger. Women are often portrayed as gentle and eat salads to stay in shape. There is an abundance of media (including entire magazines) targeted towards women’s diets and fitness, discouraging women specifically from eating fast food. This makes it shocking to see a supermodel eating such foods. It is also controversial due to obesity of the United States, which can be seen as an epidemic: portraying role models eating unhealthily is always a questionable move for media. The next issue is the looks from the surrounding men. The fact that they look absolutely stunned by the mostly naked McKinney and the burger says how inappropriate it is to show skin while eating a burger. The looks they give her are stares that would be given to a murderer or a giant, not a woman. America thrives on entertainment and fast food, and this ad gives the best of both worlds, and further encourages stereotypes.

With my new version of this advertisement, I attempted to address issues with fat shaming, the acceptance of killing animals for meat but controversy of a gun, and a public reaction to obesity. There has been media controversy surrounding plus sized women showing off their bodies in public. For example, Meghan Trainor has been in the news for “skinny shaming” without recognizing the fact that often smaller sized women are healthier. There is also media against eating disorders, but being “fat” has become more and more acceptable in a society where fast food is so popular. It is almost not shocking to see an obese woman in a bikini—the looks on the mens faces are still judging her just as they did in the original. A person holding a gun can be compared to a good-looking woman holding a burger. In many countries with conscription, people wouldn’t look twice at someone walking down the street with a gun. For many people, the issue in this image is that skinny or fat, the woman was not escorted by a male or covered head to toe, which could result in a death penalty. In some cultures, even eating meat is so unacceptable. There is almost no difference in holding a gun to kill a person and a burger while killed an animal for some advocates of vegan and vegetarian lifestyles. This advertisement says that in American culture being obese is ok, women are stared at and judged no matter what, and the target market may be smaller than Carl’s Jr had anticipated.

Based on the article from The Globe and Mail:

Microsoft Unveils first Lumia smartphone without Nokia name

Although Microsoft purchased Nokia in May, they have unveiled a new smartphone under their own name. Although Microsoft only holds 2.8% of the market share of smartphones, they are ready to hit the mass market with this highly strategic new product. They are giving the “affordable” Blackberry Passport a run for their money with this new $137 product. This is a real differentiation strategy compared to all other smartphones. The surprising part about this reveal was the fact that the phone will not have Nokia’s name on it, but it is likely a good move for Microsoft.

Nokia’s marketing has always been focused around being strong, low cost, and simple but to keep their market share, Microsoft is looking to market in a high quality but low cost market segment. As the first major company to release a real low cost smartphone, they are better off doing it under their own name. Even with Nokia stocks up and Microsoft stocks down, the company is more likely to be taken seriously for quality as Microsoft. With a redefined strategy, Microsoft actually has a shot at increasing its market share of smartphones.

Based on the external blog written by Alex McEachern, lessons of customer loyalty are drawn out by the common household cartoon, The Simpsons:

https://www.sweettoothrewards.com/blog/10-simpson-loyalty-lessons/

The importance of customer loyalty was discussed in-depth through the example of Zappos, the shoe seller that offers a new type of customer experience. The Kwik-E-Mart demonstrates the importance of customer loyalty by Apu’s famous line “Thank you, come again” the same way that Zappos upgrades its customers to VIP for free. Zappos’ main marketing strategy is through word-of-mouth, and in Season 3 Episode 3 Homer revives Ned’s bankrupt business through word-of-mouth. That is the difference between Zappos and a traditional shoe store–it is worth talking about. If a business is effective but not worth talking about (there are no points of difference), it will be limited.

The image above shows one of the most fundamental lessons that we learned from Zappos: give employees what motivates them. Although most Zappos employees would likely choose twenty dollars over a peanut, many of them gave up higher paying jobs to work in a fun and rewarding environment. That is all from the organizational culture that Zappos offers.

These are only some parallels drawn between the Simpsons and Zappos, but all of these lessons are highly valuable for any business trying to retain customer loyalty as well as differentiate organizational culture.

“Thank you, come again”

In response to Neilinder Saini’s Blog “Ethical Market” which is based upon Gael O’Brien’s blog entitled “Business Ethics”.

https://connect.ubc.ca/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_55007_1%26url%3D 

In Neilinder’s blog, he takes the point of view that the way that companies advertise to children to affect their point of view on often unhealthy options is ethically questionable. I would argue that it is good to teach these children at a young age that there are unhealthy options out there, and avoiding them is nearly impossible but it is a question of ethics of society to choose to educate them about the positive options available. As Neilinder mentioned, these foods are cheap, convenient, and often have motivation for kids including toys. The only goal of these businesses is to maximize profits and minimize costs while keeping a positive stigma. It should be promoted that these foods are good in moderation and that responsibility should fall to education systems. The good marketing by these corporations should be matched by marketing by governments and others to encourage moderation and exercise. It would be unethical of any organization to put down any type of enterprise that these children are bound to encounter, but better yet to educate them about how to react when they do encounter them. From a young age children are exposed to sexual education yet it is much later that they are exposed to the importance of healthy eating and moderation.

The point of this post is to prove that it should not be in the interest of the company to pursue healthier eating campaigns, as it fundamentally goes against the principles of capitalism. It is the responsibility of independent organizations.

”If the United Nations was fully funded why would we need the Arc or social enterprise?”

The answer to this question is the same reason why governments would choose to fund large factories over small dog walking businesses: the scale of the benefit as they see it. Like governments, the UN will choose to fund things that benefit the most people from their perspective. Factories may employ hundreds or thousands of workers, but they will never teach people to be self sufficient and will limit their abilities to ever earn more than a minimum living wage.

Social enterprise and the Arc are ways to truly create shared value by creating clusters and promoting Mohandas Gandhi’s preachings of the value of self-sufficiency. Governments may see value in employing more people–which is a good first step, but these people will likely continue to live in poverty because they will never be enabled to benefit themselves.

Even if the United Nations were fully funded, their overall goals would not change. The United Nations being fully funded would more likely result in additional environmental and political summits than teaching self-sufficiency to people with an entrepreneurial eye but little education. There will always be space for initiatives such as the Arc, the Grameen Bank, and the world views of Gandhi because there is a constant need for innovation worldwide.

In response to Gideon Rapaport’s Blog “Microbrewing Industry” based on The Wall Street Journal’s article which can be found at: http://online.wsj.com/articles/how-a-brewing-hobby-became-a-business-1413751953?mod=trending_now_3

The focus of Gideon’s blog is on is how brewing at home produces a product which is superior to mass market brews which are found at bars around the world.

Even if the beer is better, there still needs to be a differentiation strategy behind the decision to start a brewing company and in this article there is none mentioned. The beer market is a mature industry with an abundance of competition so what might possess someone to abandon a stable job to pursue a hobby in a risky industry? To gain success in this industry, a target market and a specific differentiation strategy is necessary.

Jennifer Martin started her company, SIP Soda as an alternative to San Pellegrino. This is very similar to the situation of Scott Smith who gained success through his undirected beer company. The difference is that Martin saw a gap in industry for natural flavoured sodas to be served as an alternative to alcohol or classic soda. There is already a market for expensive beer and cheap beer and a taste difference is often not enough to win a market.

For a brand that does not want to be mass market, they must advertise very specifically to the narrow target market. As for cost, there is no cost strategy mentioned in the article, which should be something that Smith and the Wall Street Journal should use in terms of how to differentiate. This article makes starting a small business in a mature industry seem easy when truthfully there needs to be a motive behind the business.

Bibliography:

Hagerty, James. “Ho a Brewing Hobby Became a Business.” The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, 19 Oct. 2014. Web. 3 Nov. 2014. <http://online.wsj.com/articles/how-a-brewing-hobby-became-a-business-1413751953?mod=trending_now_3>.

Vennare, Joe. “Grab a Drink from These 9 Local Breweries and Distilleries on Fittsburgh.” Fittsburgh RSS. Web. 3 Nov. 2014. <https://getfitpgh.com/drink-local-pittsburgh/>.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/us-business/ford-scraps-proposed-2-billion-investment-in-windsor-ont-sources/article21285428/

Taxes and tariffs may be looked upon negatively, but with an increasingly globalized world, it will make more sense for Ford to build their new factory in Mexico than in Windsor, Ontario. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) allows free trade across the borders of Canada, the US, and Mexico, and in this case, will cost Ontario approximately 2,000 jobs. This story has been told countless times in various industries as production has shifted to Mexico.

There were allegations that Ford didn’t even seriously consider the factory in Windsor and had already set out on the Mexico factory to invest $2 billion in building a new 1.5L engine. The company was seeking $700 million of government financial support, which was too high of a number for a potentially risky investment. Especially considering that Canada has a stable unemployment rate currently, the government seemed less likely to see the benefits.

In terms of risk and reward, Ontario’s government saw positive returns but they also took into account the risk coming from the automobile maker that has had vehicle recalls and other scandals recently. It is shocking that the business ethics here are not being questioned considering that Ford’s employees at the current plant in Windsor have won countless awards for the quality attaches to the product that they have produced in Canada for years.

As yet another factory is won by cheaper labour, these ethics should be questioned and the government should reconsider their involvement in this deal.

See article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2612668/Sales-slide-Starbucks-feels-tax-backlash-Coffee-chain-axes-six-shops-14m-drop-business-past-year.html

The coffee giant, Starbucks may be a hit at home in North America, but after some risky financial decisions, the transnational corporation has to deal with the consequences. By unlawfully funnelling money overseas, the financial accounting management of this coffee giant has had some explaining to do, including a £20 million payback to the British government. Starbucks has reported losses every year that it has been in the UK since 1998, however sales have continued to grow. In 2013 however, sales fell £14 million. Between picket lines outside of stores and David Cameron harshly telling Starbucks to “wake up and smell the coffee,” Starbucks has had a rough ride overseas.

Despite these huge losses, Starbucks has revealed their plans to open 100 new stores. After closing 6 stores that were major losses this year, the company is giving more tries in new locations. The same stigma will undoubtedly follow them to these stores. Starbucks was deemed “immoral” by British MPs, which will negatively impact the “socially conscious” brand name that Starbucks has tried to give itself. Considering their entire business model is based upon buying expensive coffee that improves the world, it is valid for these boycotts to have occurred. As Al Ries and Jack Trout put it in their book, Positioning, The Battle for Your Mind, it is key to get into the consumer’s mind, which Starbucks has done, but negatively. Changing their brand name to be associated positively in the UK will be a battle, but the trendy coffee company seems to have the confidence to try.

Campbell, Peter. “Sales slide as Starbucks feels tax backlash: Coffee chain axes six shops after £14m drop in business during the past year.” Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, 24 Apr. 2014. Web. 5 Oct. 2014. <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2612668/Sales-slide-Starbucks-feels-tax-backlash-Coffee-chain-axes-six-shops-14m-drop-business-past-year.html>.

While many people are concerned about which smartphone to purchase, First Nations of British Columbia are outraged that their right to live in their traditional ways has been overlooked. Although they may be seen as a Luddite community, it is part of their culture. No other group’s cultural rights are allowed to be infringed upon to this degree, so why so often are First Nations forgotten? It is a balancing game of self-interest and social interest. There will soon be a need for more energy sources, and the First Nations groups are cooperative with projects including solar, wind, and geothermal energy in the near future. It is in the self-interest of BC residents to want this dam, but it is not socially justifiable. Building this dam would have the same effect on First Nations as destroying every Church in West Vancouver would have on any practicing Christian. As this issue has climbed up the judicial ladder, it has to be deemed unjust. Even from an economic perspective, the compensation to First Nations peoples as well as the 30 people living on the land that would be required to even remotely justify this act would cost millions.

The management of this project is going to need to find a creative way to increase the energy production possibilities while decreasing the environmental impact if this project cannot go through. Site C would potentially be able to supply 465,000 homes with power for 100 years. The project could also potentially provide 30,000 jobs. Since BC Hydro is a crown corporation, they are again focusing on self-interest of the government, neglecting the minority.

O’Neil, Peter.  First Nations chiefs to stage Site C showdown.  Vancouver Sun.  September 18, 2014.  Newspaper Article. http://www.vancouversun.com/news/First+Nation+chiefs+stage+Site+showdown/10215965/story.html

Meissner, Dirk. “B.C. Hydro presses case for Site C dam megaproject.” Times Colonist. N.p., 28 Jan. 2013. Web. 5 Oct. 2014. <http://www.timescolonist.com/business/b-c-hydro-presses-case-for-site-c-dam-megaproject-1.58399>.