Author: Grace Ng

On the surface, TOMS unique ‘one – for – one’ business model concept may seem well intended. However, having said that; doubts have arisen as to whether the shoes being donated to the needy was actually a true act of CSR on behalf of the firm, or whether it was merely an ingenious marketing ploy to enable the firm to gain firm traction in the industry by differentiating its product and promoting its brand image by means of tying in the strong positive associations with ‘good deeds’ that allude to the actual brand name. Some might even argue that the one – for – one campaign serves as nothing more than a medium for which TOMS can rationalize it’s high prices for it’s footwear.

Either way, I believe that the ‘one – for – one’ business model, in essence, was based on good intentions. That being said, I support the ‘one-for-one’ business model the firm has decided to employ.

 

Regardless of whether the firm is utilizing it’s business model as a marketing strategy or stepping stone to gain a larger customer base, I feel that it does forego quite a substantial amount of would-be-potential-revenue by opting to donate it to the poor, inconvenienced and needy.

 

While it is true that local businesses within the region (that TOMS is donating to) will invariably be impacted negatively, I feel that if the region is impoverished to the point where individuals can barely afford shoes, that receiving them for free would help ease the burden of daily expenses that come with their already-difficult-lives. In conclusion, the lives that TOMs has helped by instigating this ongoing act of kindness will help a significant amount of people.

Bib:

http://www.toms.ca/?cid=ps_cabrand&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=%2Btoms%20%2Bone%20%2Bone&utm_campaign=CA+Brand+-+BMM&utm_content=sqC4RZnPV_dc|pcrid|44861320309|pkw|%2Btoms%20%2Bone%20%2Bone|pmt|b|

Pic Bib:

http://farahdeenafisal.blogspot.ca/2014/01/shoes-you-i-like.html

https://fromhightopstocrocs.wordpress.com/tag/one-for-one/

https://sites.psu.edu/atrimbleenglish15/2013/09/15/toms-one-for-one-rhetorical-analysis-outline/

On one of my habitual news-feed-skimming sessions, I encountered a rather interesting article by Forbes . As an international student, even I was no stranger to the notorious ‘black Friday’ sales.

Curiously, as most shops braced themselves for the horde of customers to come, REI is doing just the opposite!

 

Foregoing the chance to reap substantial profits, REI has opted to close the doors of it’s 143 outlets and encourage it’s customers and employees to “life outdoors is a life well lived”

 

I believe that in opting to close it’s doors on one of the busiest days of the year may prove to work toward REI’s advantage as not only does REI’s employees feel valued, but so too do it’s customers (whom would naturally associate the brand to be righteous and not money-hungry). In the long run, this might even strengthen the bond between customers and the brand, as well as decrease employee turnover and higher levels of motivation (improving the internal structure of the business).

I agree with the overall opinion of the article that more firms should adopt such practices as it leads to a happier, more motivated workforce!

Pic Bib:

http://gearjunkie.com/rei-skip-black-friday-ben-steele-interview

http://www.forbes.com/sites/onmarketing/2015/11/16/banning-black-friday-reis-decision-to-opt-out-and-why-others-may-want-to-follow/

Being an avid Nike and Adidas fan for some years now, Sharon Hsu’s blog post naturally captured my intrigue.

 

While I do agree that Nike had acquired some bad publicity in regards to it’s poorly regulated production processes (that brought to light it’s poor business ethical behavior) in the manufacturing process of it’s commodities, I feel that Nike can only be held partially responsible for it’s actions. This ‘bad reputation’ Nike has accumulated by sourcing for cheaper labor (I strongly believe) is; or was at some point; secretly practiced amongst many other big firms in many different industries. Neither Nike, nor any other large corporation was the first (and only) to commit such a ‘horrible’ act against ethical business practices.

Having said that, I encourage you to think (and have an open mind) about it this way: by sourcing for labor from impoverished areas, they indirectly instigate growth in the economy as they stimulate job opportunities for the vulnerable. Children and adults, whom would otherwise be left with little to no alternatives other then to turn to the sex trade, selling their bodies for money, can now enjoy sustainable jobs.

Do not be mistaken though; our general views do not differ. I did not support Nike’s actions then, and am happy as a consumer to note that Nike is trying to make an amends in the eyes of the public in regards to correcting it’s business ethical behavior and tailoring it’s manufacturing process (even if its just a little change) to improve itself as a reputable corporation.

 

Picture bib:

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/99571841737365646/

http://sacredcowchips.net/page/2/

 

Coming to Canada and being exposed to the local favorites (brands) the city has to offer was both a delight as well as an eye opening experience for me. Drawing from my first Blog post (2^nd last Blog post), I was very taken in by the local iconic brands unique to the region. Roots, Tim Hortons, Hunter Boots – and yes – the ever-popular Lululemon!

Having discovered the brand in late September, I was intrigued by how popular their wares were! People striding up and down the university walkways with their Lululemon hoods drawn close to their brow, bombarded by kisses from the afternoon rain.

 

Yoga pants are very popular here too, aye?

 

This got me thinking, with Lululem’s success and popularity amongst such a large customer base, why then did it still have such high inventory stocks left idol???

 

Some might justify the firm’s overproduction of their commodities to be intentional. This would allow the firm to engage in intentional ‘clearance’, and ‘warehouse’ sale events that would inevitably attract more customers with lowered prices. Other’s believe it’s negelegence and inefficiency on the part of the firm that allowed an overproduction (and otherwise known as misallocation of resources – dragging down net profits) to occur.

 

I side with Ritual’s ‘s point of view wherein her blog addresses the issue of Lululemon’s  misallocation of resources into the over production of its commodities. I believe the access inventory stock works as a double edged sword, Though some customers stand to gain from the promotion of sale items, the business and it’s are stakeholders ultimately threading a very fine line between making a profit or losing significant revenue. This risk would deter most potential stakeholders from investing in the future.

 

Bibliography:

Ritual’s Blog Post:

LULULEMON: YOGA,PEACE,LOVE, HIGH INVENTORY?

Jonathan Ratner. “Lululemon Athletica Inc Has More Inventory Problems.”Financial Post Lululemon Athletica Inc Has More Inventoryproblems Comments. N.p., 23 Mar. 2015. Web. 04 Oct. 2015

 

Picture bib:

http://www.luluaddict.com/2014/12/new-resolution-hobo-bag-stress-less.html

Innovation is the lifeblood of progress! As a community we often seek to better our lives by making them easier and thus more efficient. Innovations and breakthroughs through research and technology have played a vital role in influencing the lives we lead today.

 

However; having said that; the question ‘what is the cost of innovation?’ comes to mind.

 

What is our opportunity cost as we constantly pursue the future?

Those the introduction of innovation disrupt or upset the consumer structures of related goods and how they are consumed?

The introduction of certain types of innovation may lead to a structural reform in the way by which consumers choose to consume a product. Therefore the cost of innovation can sometimes lead certain industries to become at a disadvantage, effectively uprooting them and leaving them obsolete.

 

The introduction of mass online storing facilities such as sound cloud, drop box and even desktop file storage space, accompanied by the transition of film cameras to digital ones, has had an adverse effect on the photo album industry.

 

PT Tommy (Indonesia) is a photo album-manufacturing firm.

Capturing market dominance in Jakarta, the monopoly failed to assess why it’s competitors were leaving the industry before it was too late..

It now operates in a sunset trade, wherein the industry is shrinking.

It is ironic how originally photo albums and cameras were both complimentary goods to one another; but with the introduction of an innovative new idea; turned tables and became foils to one another. The innovation of both the transition of film to digital cameras, accompanied by the revolution of online storage facilities brought a prospering industry to it’s knees. Photo albums became obsolete as consumers adopted the more efficient and cost saving online storage to store their photographs. Such is an important lesson, to both appreciate and be weary of innovation and all it’s splendor as well as it’s consequences.

This is a common example of disruptive innovation at it’s finest.

 

pic bib:

• http://www.tmialbum1.com/

Whether it’s been a bad day stressing over your midterms or having a spectacular time at last night’s concert, sharing it has become a social norm amongst the digital generation. Humans are social creatures and thrive on interaction and sharing. Tweeting has been going strong amongst individuals of all shapes and sizes from the tweens the crowd around the corridor of their schools to iconic celebrities and idols backstage before a show, even large conglomerates have twitter accounts!

But how did the creators; Evan Williams and Biz Stone; dream up such a unique social platform?

That’s easy! They didn’t!

Initially starting up as a platform to create, browse and share podcasts, they were swiftly kicked out of the industry when Apple decided to compete against them for market dominance. Not losing heart, Twitter began it’s transition with the aid of crucial market research on the dissatisfactions customers had with the existing social media platform, in turn coming up with a much simpler model by which thoughts and feelings could be shared, expressed and laced together in continuum. They identified that people are both curious and eager to share and learn, and as such found their niche, propelling them forward and pivoting their business to success.

I believe that identifying and differentiating their product to cater specifically to a need (for simplicity) other social media platforms had failed to previously address could have only been accomplished with both reliable and specific market research on Twitter’s part. Without closely examining and honing into customer dissatisfaction in specific areas, they would not have been able to find and breach their way into this untapped market.At a glance – quick and precise – one get connected to what is happening in his/her immediate friend circle. This is great!

You’d only be lying to yourself if you said you could care less about that one kid who tweets endlessly about life.

 

 

Picture bib:

1)”Full HD Pictures.” 3D Twitter Wallpapers. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Oct. 2015.

2)”SCOTUSblog Brings the Gavel Down on Trolls – American Journalism Review.” American Journalism Review. N.p., 01 July 2014. Web. 15 Oct. 2015.

Have you ever wondered why we like the things we do? Or perhaps why we’re drawn to certain ideas, themes and even people? These queer patterns in our behavior could better be explained by a company by the name of ‘Archetypes’. Or rather… could have been.

The company was one of the largest start up businesses in New York, securing $19 million in funding over two years, the company’s concept centered around helping people “discover” and better understand themselves by classifying them into different archetypes. It also provided a platform for like-minded users to connect, interact and unite. Despite it’s unique concept and trendy inlay, The Company found itself bankrupt by 2013. The huge Sunk cost the company incurred deterred stakeholders from shelling out anymore money as the prospects for reaping benefits looked grim. After having failed to raise $20 million , the company declared it’s bankruptcy.

 

In light of discovering the tragic end to this company, I realized something that had never previously occurred to me before.. Though much thought and effort had gone into the production and making of this company’s foundation; successfully making in popular – with over 100,000 sign ups; the company had lost sight of it’s main goal, and that was to generate revenue. Failing to rebound from the hefty sunk cost proved too much for the company to stay a float.

bib:

1. “NYC Startup Archetypes Goes Bankrupt.” Pando. N.p., 04 Nov. 2013. Web. 10 Oct. 2015.
2. “Archetypes, the Biggest NYC Startup You’ve Never Heard Of, Completely Unravels.” Pando. N.p., 03 Oct. 2013. Web. 10 Oct. 2015.
3. “About Us – Archetypes.” Archetypes. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2015

video taken from

http://www.archetypes.com/about-us/

Music is the essence of inner expression; it soothes the mind and soul. Pop artists greatly influence today’s generation, sifting and tweaking culture, practices and perceptions on a global scale. As such, music has become an integral part of our lives for many of us.

Spotify has successfully changed the way in which consumers engage in listening to music, by offering the relatively new service of live streaming. Because it was one of the first to claim and provide this form of service, it effectively embeds it’s brand image in the minds of its consumers for that said category. On that note, Spotify enjoys the recognition and top tier spot on the ‘ladder’ above it’s contenders (as consumers have already related it’s brand image to ‘streaming services’) Customer perceptions are hard to change once formed, making it difficult for rival contenders to overthrow the current dominant brand.

Apple recognizes that the market is slowly shifting from commercial in app purchases to music streaming and as such is quick to attempt penetrating this new market with it’s own ‘Apple Music’, where in it becomes a contender to Spotify. However with that being said, because Spotify is the first recognized brand to have provided this service, customers are more likely to associate the service with them, and thus in order for apple to gain some sort of footing in the market, it has to coin effective points of differentiation, in addition to it’s points of parities.

Both Apple and Spotify charge a monthly fee of $9.99, providing similar services. However, unlike spotify apple’s ‘Apple music’ does not require another seperate app download for apple users as updating the music app within the device automatically upgrades it to include the ‘Apple music’. It also provides free radio (Beats 1) where Spotify does not. Another recognized difference users have identified is that music by artist tailor swift is only present on Apple Music, and not on spotify

 

Being new to Spotify myself (despite it launching in 2008), I admit to also being amongst the majority of individuals that recognize Spotify as the first music streaming provider. This mindset is what companies trying to penetrate and gain market dominance over competitors need to take into account when marketing their new product. Being careful to abide by points of parity while at the same time having strong points of differentiation.

❉ ✱ ✲ ✴ ✵ ✶ ✷ ✸ ❇ ✹ ✺ ✻ ✼ ❈ ✮✦ ✧ ❂ ❉ ✱ ✲ ✴ ✵ ✶ ✷ ✸ ❇ ✹ ✺ ✻ ✼ ❈

Bib:

1.”What Is Apple Music and How Does It Work?” HowTo Geek RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Oct. 2015.

2.”Why I Ditched Apple Music for Spotify – CNET.” CNET. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Oct. 2015.

3.”Apple Music vs Spotify: What’s the Difference? – CNET.” CNET. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Oct. 2015.

Images taken from:

1. “Apple Music vs Spotify.” Nerdy Talk RSS2. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Oct. 2015.