Finding or creating a sustainable company in today’s ecofriendly demand is more than half the battle when it comes to starting a successful company. Now doing this without creating harm to the environment is even harder. This is what Farris Farrag is now doing with an “aquaponic” system in Egypt.

Using a completely recyclable system involving fish and water he has found a way to grow agriculture in a desert without sacrificing taste or profits. The next step of his organization will be to start using salt water from the sea. By doing this he is producing agriculture where it was normally not possible, the possibilities for his young and futuristic farms are endless. Bringing fresh produce to the middle east and a long list of other water starved countries. By creating an ecofriendly and sustainable production of a necessity, produce, the business possibilities are endless as well. This breakthrough could lead to many profitable partnerships while helping world hunger. In conclusion, Farrag started his company with the goal of a doing a social service for people and the countries that are in need and this is why his enterprise will be profitable in both the short and long term.

http://business.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/22/ex-banker-starts-agricultural-revolution/

A professional athlete once said “I am not a role model” although it seems that in today’s society much has changed for these high profile human beings. Referring to Ali Jatoi’s blog post about athletes endorsing an unhealthy lifestyle, junk food. The list goes on and on of different sports and both genders of celebrities putting their name behind products that are directly contributing to the growing obesity problem in our society. Most companies really do not care if they are using athletes to make their unhealthy/harmful product more popular, they only care about increasing awareness and using the celebrities fan base to do so.

The athlete who said the quote I mentioned earlier was Charles Barkley in a Nike Commercial. He was implying that athletes should not be role models just because they are dominant in their sport. In hindsight, kids want to be them in the future. From young kids to adolescents whether they play a sport or not they do look up to them. So when Lebron James or Michael Jordan or any other high profile athlete or celebrity endorses a unhealthy lifestyle, their only is one conclusion and that is that not by choice they are role models.

https://blogs.ubc.ca/alijatoi/2013/10/07/why-are-so-many-athletes-promoting-junk-food/

In response to Christie Lowe’s post on Marc Jacobs leaving Louis Vuitton, I would say it is a very optimistic point of view the company is taking. Saying good bye to one of your strongest and most recognizable world class designers cannot be replaced by a lump sum of money from a stock payoff. It almost feels like Jacobs had a very successful 16 year run with the luxurious brand and is now leaving the company simply because he can. Having the help of Louis Vuitton to establish his name in the fashion world now he can return to New York and start to build his own fashion icon. He was definitely one of the top designers and helped make Louis Vuitton what it is today, a snob brand too expensive for most of us anyways, but none the less a fashion icon. After seeing the success other high profile brands went through when taking their companies public such as “Prada” and “Michael Kors” it looks that Jacobs has really made the best decision for where he is right now and for how he wants his brand to grow in the future.

https://blogs.ubc.ca/christielowe/2013/10/08/marc-jacobs-is-saying-au-revior-to-louis-vuitton/

Keeping up with the changes in today’s technology while trying to keep people happy and maximize profits; all three are what BMW hopes to do with changing to using carbon fiber instead of steel for producing their futuristic electric car, the i3. With emission regulations getting stricter, BMW hopes to take an early step to avoid being heavy fuel consumption vehicles in a market with increasing demand for fuel efficiency. The only way to do so is to make the cars lighter.

I personally think that BMW is taking the right step in doing so, although when I read that other cars such as Formula one racing and Bugatti have used carbon fiber I really do wonder about how much this new car will cost. They are not expecting a short term pay out from this change in production, BMW might not see profits from this decision for quite some time. They are trying to be one step ahead of the other race rockets that rely on the upper class to buy their “gas gusslers” even with exceeding oil prices. If BMW can attain their long term goal of using carbon fiber in production which is hopefully going to decrease the price per kilogram of their new input then yes they eventually will see large profits in creating a sustainable, light enough, fuel efficient car for the future.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-14/bmw-makes-lone-shift-to-carbon-fiber-to-gain-auto-edge.html

I guess money always is and always will be the real issue. This seems to be the case in on-going legal issues between Apple’s IPhone and Samsung’s various smartphones.  Apple is suing Samsung for infracting on their patents of the IPhone released in 2007. It is not a question of whether they are guilty but now a matter of how much did Apple suffer financially from the infraction. Yes, this is a matter of ethics in the business community because Samsung has already done something wrong. The more interesting side of things is what they will be penalized.

 Being settled in court right now is if they should pay Apple royalties on all of their sales of the products that fall under infractions of the patents or if they should pay for the profits that would have gone to Apple if these new Samsung devices failed to exist. Apple is arguing for 379.8 million from both royalties and lost profits. In my mind I believe this is fair, to these gross companies that amount is not ridiculous but a large enough sum to mean something. I mean Samsung’s growth and exponential increase in the smartphone market only came after the copy of apples icon grid home screen and touch screen device.  All in all, one corporation is guilty and they will be covering the difference financially for their unethical behaviour.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/13/opening-statements-in-damages-phase-of-patent-trial/?ref=technology&_r=0

Entrepreneurs are often offered help once their company has exceeded the first and hardest stage of starting a company, so why won’t anyone help them in the first stage? This is why Adeo Ressi decided to start “The Founder Institute”, to help entrepreneurs who haven’t quite started a company but have an idea with the potential to become successful one day and produce jobs. He realized that 90 percent of start-up companies do not succeed not  from a lack of poor ideas but from the wrong people without the right trainning. Ressi picks his “students” by a personality test and if they pass then they will be taught the skills needed to start and maintain a successful enterprise. Messi makes his profits not only from charging a price range from zero to one thousand dollars American but also three and a half percent stake in the started companies of the entrepreneurs. He is generating revenue from helping others but he is hopefully starting companies which in the long run is producing jobs for our economy. The Founder Institute is a successful company because it is not just setting the main goal of maximizing profits but also doing a social service.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/14/business/smallbusiness/an-entrepreneur-who-manufactures-entrepreneurs.html?ref=smallbusiness&_r=0

It does seem crazy to say no to billions of dollars, but like everything in life there is more to decisions than what meets the eye. The owners of one of the largest growing social media apps today “Snapchat” are not making any revenue currently, yet they will not settle for billions. Seeing that the company started in 2011 and it has not even been around for 2 full years it really does seem ridiculous. But the two young Stanford fraternity brothers aren’t throwing in the towel any time soon. The two owners believe that the financial offers they have received up to date might be equal to what the company is worth currently but is not enough for the sky high potential this exponentially growing technology possess. Not only is the advertisement potential through the roof for Snapchat because it is a picture based application, but the growth in daily messages have increased from 60 million in Febuary to more recently upwards of 350 million. Snapchat is everything investors look for, except public. In conclusion, no one really knows what young and highly potential company will end up doing, the only thing that’s for sure is that eventually it will see profits.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/14/technology/rejecting-billions-snapchat-expects-a-better-offer.html?ref=business&_r=0

The Canadian auto industry is going to be facing some tough decisions in the ethical side of manufacturing their product. The age old battle of manufacturing on Canadian’s own land and helping our economy or taking the production line somewhere which is more costly efficient. Putting more pressure on the firms as well is Canadian auto analysis Joe MacCabe, he is predicting a 600,000 unit decrease in production by 2020. A simple solution to this predicament would be manufacturing “…south of the Ohio border”. It almost feels like a no brainer, making the same car for a cheaper amount. An even more drastic change would be producing in Mexico. But one thing is for sure, Canadian government does not want to lose these companies. They demonstrated this with a reasonable 71.6 million dollar investment in Ford’s operations in Oakville.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/canadian-auto-production-predicted-to-plunge-25-1.1928685

“Why fly when we could be taking a bullet train?” Is what individuals all over China are asking themselves every day. Nearly five years ago when China‘s high speed trains were debating launching their business they had to take into account trying to enter an already competitive travel market. Although, with over-population being an emerging problem in China it was a perfect opportunity for high speed trains to enter the market. The train companies are offering what the public wants; people are impatient and want to get from point A to point B quickly. No one wants to wait in a security line up at the airport, neither do they want to drive when traffic has been constantly increasing at 28 percent every year for the past few years. One of the reasons for Chinas economic growth is supposedly the link to enhanced traveling for business and domestic travellers. In conclusion, as mentioned in porters five forces; high speed trains were a threat of new entry to the travel market. They are most definitely a threat of substitution to domestic flights and motor vehicle transportation (now the leading method of transportation). With the vast and large population there is a very competitive market in China.

New bullet train undergoing test on December 24, 2009

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/24/business/global/high-speed-train-system-is-huge-success-for-china.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Maybe it could be from the dismal stock shares, maybe from the one billion dollar loss last quarter; maybe it is simply that the product in consumers minds just isn’t comparable to the competitors. Whatever the reason, last week Blackberry a product of RIM, made the first step in going private. The company in which they are currently in a diligence period with is FairFax Financial Holdings Limited. They have been offered nine dollars per share or 4.7 billion. Yes this is more value than blackberry has for their share right now but with how poorly the company has done and is projected to do, taking a step backwards could be the best decision for the struggling establishment. When I say struggling I mean eleven percent of the market share in November of 2011 and continuing to decrease even with the production of a new product line (Blackberry Z10). FairFax already owning ten percent of RIM’s Blackberry might have some inside knowledge on what could be done to better off the company. They could just be looking for 100 percent control of the company or going private and taking Blackberry off the market is all they are hopping to achieve. Either way they have put forward a fairly large financial offer on the table. The business minds over at FairFax definitely have something in plan for RIM involving either the technology or specific product of Blackberry.

http://www.businessinsider.com/blackberry-offer-to-go-private-2013-9