http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2012/10/12/f-ewallets-mobile-payments.html

Almost everyone has a phone these days, in fact roughly 80% of the worlds population as access to one today. Smartphones make up about 1.08 billion of the 5 billion mobile phones floating around today, with 81% of these users claim to use their phones throughout the day. Smartphones represent more than a phone; they hold maps, emails, banking information and other applications outside of a phone. The thing that smartphones arent though is a wallet, but that may soon change. Fusing smartphone technology and payment technology is the next step in the mobile market. Recently, Starbucks released a mobile app that allows clients to pay for their orders through their phone and it exploded.

Now companies like Walmart, Bestbuy and Target are utilizing the same technology and reaping great rewards. By allowing clients to “swipe” with their mobile phones instead of their credit cards companies are able to save money from creditors who often charge swipe fees upwards of 2%. As of now the only thing holding back the mobile payment game is the amount of firms that would be involved in the deal, and who gets the cuts. Phone companies, cell carriers, banks, creditors all want a piece of the pie but cant decide how to cut it, so until then phones are going to have to wait for a bit before they can enter the world of wallets.

Yahoo, Facebook! A new search engine involving the two internet giants may be in the works. There has never been a better advertising method than search engines. When a user searches something through a search engine advertisers pay big bucks to show up in the search results, giving Google the 40 billion in annual revenues they enjoy today. Currently, Facebook boasts an incredible 1 billion active monthly users and Yahoo claims 80 million. The two giants possess a huge global distribution. Facebook has a massive range of unique consumer data due to its nature as a social network. It knows the ins and outs of customer tastes allowing for more effective targeting from ad agencies. By allowing Yahoo to tag along with Facebook’s famous brand, top programmers can be attracted and tune Facebook into a top tier search engine. As of now money is slipping through Facebook’s fingers as valuable advertising dollars are lost. Current Facebook users do not want to be looking at ads when they are browsing the site and communicating with their friends. Instead, if Facebook can develop a search engine with Yahoo that wont be flashing ads in consumers faces they can cash in on the huge population of users on the site. If Facebook added a search feature somehow billions could be added to the bottom line every year, no questions asked. Facebook stocks, although taking a bit of a dip lately, might be looking up in the near future. Yahoo!

http://www.businessinsider.com/yahoo-facebook-search-engine-2012-11

We are living in a period of unprecedented interconnectedness. Humans have never been so easily able to share information, revolutionizing the way we live. Upon reading Jaskaren Athwals blog post about the European debt crisis, I took a step back and analyzed the bridge that connects humans worldwide – Globalization.

Globalization is a blessing and a curse. On one hand it brings people the world over closer than ever, in a way that is easier than ever. A person can speak face to face with a family member across the world with a click of a button over the internet. Goods from China can be bought and sold in Canada at the snap of a finger. The interconnectedness brings the economies of the world together like they have never been before, opening up new dimensions for trade. This connectivity however means that if something is going on in one market, all the other markets will feel the ripples as well. When the US housing market crashed in 2007, it marked the worst recession since World War 2. The American market is the strongest in the world and when it dipped under, the other markets worldwide followed suit. The effects were felt around the globe. I was in Spain and Portugal over the summer and it was clear to see what kind of toll the recession had taken on Europe. Riots were taking place in the streets over unemployment rates infront of my hotel in downtown Barcelona, with general strikes breaking out nation wide. With international markets being so closely connected through globalization, the effects of failure are felt worldwide. The American market is making turnarounds today but the European crisis will likely last until beyond 2014, proving that while globalization may be a beneficial force its negative effects can be devastating on the global scale.

A major blow has been dealt in the world of snack foods. Hostess, the makers of twinkies and other various treats has declared they will be going out of business. A recent strike has economically crippled Hostess, so much so that even if the workers conducting the strikes had a change of heart it is still “too late” to recover. Hostess has been plagued with economic crisises since 2004 when it first filed for bankruptcy, but this latest development will prove to be its last. Roughly 18,500 workers will lose their jobs as a result, adding to current unemployment line facing the states today. Leading up to the closing Hostess was in bad shape. After attempting to pass a new contract that would slash workers salaries and retirements benefits resulted in a strike from the unions of bakers, confectionaries and tobacco and grain millers that make up 30% of the companies work force. Production for Hostess products ground to a halt, and sales accordingly plummeted as clients will not stock the products if supplies are not adequate. Hostess, who nets $2.5 billion in sales a year, is hoping to sell of its 30 signature lines in order to retain some sort of cash. Twinkies will forever live on in the hearts of people worldwide for their hilariously unhealthy reputation and their delicious taste.

Upon reading Hilary Rejto’s post regarding misleading advertising, I began to think about what effects advertising really has on consumer behaviour. Advertising is everywhere, constantly bombarding the senses. Radio, TV, internet, even cellphone games are packed with it. Although often overlooked, it is nearly impossible to leave the house without being struck by a heavy barrage of advertising. Consumer behaviour is shaped through the use of advertising. Ads target consumers in hopes to change how they think. Companies associate desirable features with their product, and the consumer begins to do the same. 

Ads attempt to position the brand in question into a desirable spot in the consumers mind, like the beer ad above. The beer is positioned with a beautiful girl on a beautiful beach in some beautiful tropical destination, and the consumer is lead to believe that all that can be theirs if they support the brand. According to research done by Mark Changizi of the Rensselaer Polytechnical Institute, exposure to advertising appeals to a subconscious section of the brain. When someone sees a movie with a “cool” guy riding around with a pair of fresh Nikes on, the consumer subconsciously makes note of it. They see that whoever the guy in the Nikes is, whatever he is doing is paying off and he is successful. Its the sense of something greater, like success, that ads feeds consumers in order to obtain their business. Ads will tell a consumer what is cool and what isnt cool, and the consumer changes their behaviour accordingly. They dont have a choice because a subconscious part of their mind has been attuned to the brands wishes. Consumers like to believe they make their own choices but those choices have a heavy weighting placed on them through advertising and its mental effects.

This years presidential campaign was filled to the brim with controversy. In the recent elections the rise of super PACs (Super Political Action Committees) have been driving the elections, pouring huge sums of money in, in favor of their supported politician. Generally the politician with the most amount of money backing their campaign cleans up, but this race was different. This year Karl Rove, through the use of his groups blew through over a billion dollars, and gained little to no returns on the money invested. Almost all of the politicians sponsored by Rove’s super PACs lost their races.

Huge sums of money were directed towards funding vicious attack ads on democratic runners, proving to be of little to no use. Super pacs mask the voices of the people who happen to be voting, and serve to some extent, indoctrinate citizens. They strip the power out the people voice, and replace it with a fabricated voice supplied by the highest bidder. For that reason, the 2012 election was an extremely important one in Americas history, proving that while money may buy all the advertising and brainwash campaigns a party needs, the peoples will is ultimately what counts.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2012/10/05/bc-wine-expansion.html

BC wine producers are taking advantage of cheaper land costs in non traditional areas, moving out of high cost areas such as the Okanagan, Lower Fraser Valley, and Vancouver Island. By moving to different areas, wine makers are able to cut costs by as much to $3-$4 a bottle. These cheap prices allow the wineries to target even larger markets without such deep pockets. The cheaper markets make up the majority of the consumers in the market and thus, by decreasing the prices to such incredibly low levels the spotlight that the BC wine industry spreads is expanded further. The new trend of buying into non traditional areas is showing to help grow BC wine makers influence with the number of vineyards rising 21.7% since 2008 and hectares devoted to wine production raising 8.7% since 2009. This huge expansion in the BC wine industry is reassuring in the current state of the economy, where most industries are taking heavy losses. The constant expansion of the industry also alludes to the increased demand for Canadian grown and crafted wines, with American wineries taking heavy hits. I fully expect to see this demand grow as the American slowly shrinks giving our comrades here in BC a larger share of the market to peddle their wares. Right now though, its nice to kick back and enjoy a glass of home grown wine, knowing that there is only better things to come for the industry.

http://www.bnn.ca/News/2012/10/2/RIMs-future-not-as-dire-as-portrayed-Marketing-head.aspx

There is no doubt that Blackberry (RIM) has been going through a rough patch (pun intended) following the release of the iPhone and other smart phones, but RIM is not as bad off as it appears to be. RIM has posted a 39% decrease in brand value since last year and reported a $235 million net loss while currently holding less than 5% market share. Despite these statistics RIM recently released that instead of a declining subscriber base, their subscriber numbers have grown by as much as 2 million. The media makes RIM out to be dead in the water but although RIM may be limping its not dead yet. With a subscriber base of 61 million world wide with dominating markets in South America, Indonesia and South Africa. With the release of BB10, RIM’s new operating system, combined with the market shares that it holds in countries around the world may show a new business model targeting the smaller and less wealthy markets. If RIM wants to remain in the competitive North American markets, they will need to develop a new touch screen system. In order to remain relevant RIM needs to recognize that the day of the keyboard has passed, pick up the pieces and move on to touchscreen technology or something beyond. If RIM can have a streak of creativity to combine with the new operating system they may see success in the future. All in all, RIM may have had a streak of bad weather lately but things look as if they may begin to ripen up soon enough for the Canadian company.

Every year Apple, one of the most cutting edge tech companies on the planet, comes out with shiny new products that captivates consumers worldwide. But at what cost do these products come at behind the pricetag? Many of the Chinese workers in the plants that build apples gadgets work under questionable conditions. Many of them are forced to work long hours, and many are found to be working 60 hour weeks with some clocking in over 100 hours of O/T a month. Failure is treated with punishments, with humiliation common. Sleeping 20 to a 3 bedroom flat in Foxxconn’s dormitories, the company who produces Apples luxury electronics is common as well. Suicide rates are higher than the national norm throughout the production factories. Environmental standards are abused. While Apple may produce some beautiful products, the ugliness is hidden on the inside where it cant be seen. Still despite the utilization of cheap Chinese labour Apple is still selling its products to consumers at high prices, pushing the limits to see how far consumers will go for the newest shiniest Apple product. Not a good look on one of the wealthiest and most powerful corporations on the planet. 

LeBrons $300 shoes leave sneakerheads worldwide shaking their heads about the ridiculous sticker price. Bad move on Nikes part for expanding into an untapped, highly elite and ambitious high end basketball market? There will always be buyers willing to spend the money for the best equipment for their sport, and Nike is testing the boundaries with the newest addition to their basketball line. Nike soccer cleats can cost easily upwards of $300 and these cleats happen to be some of the best selling cleats in the market. Nike hockey gear easily costs above $300, and just like soccer these dominate the industry. Although there is a higher degree of technology and materials included in producing hockey skates, that doesn’t stop Nike from producing some of the most expensive skates available for consumers. Whatever the sport, Nike is producing top of the line, expensive equipment that is accepted by consumers everywhere. People will always pay to have the shiniest newest flashiest gear if they believe it will get them the leg up on what opponent they face. Basketball shoes are generally much cheaper than other sports gear but hey, nothing ventured nothing gained. Good step Nike, even though the shoes taking that step cost $300.

Lebron James approves this message.