Month: September 2011

The Canadian coffee giant Tim Hortons has recently changed their cup sizes in their Ontario locations. Small-size cups are eliminated and extra-large (24oz) is now being added to the list and so far the prices have not gone up.

This is amazing for coffee lovers (such as myself) and even though it is not certain whether or not Tim Horton’s will implement this new system to all locations across the country, there are several reasons why they possibly will.

The first is Tim Horton’s recent entry to the United States. Since their entry, the company has established countless locations and have had decent success there. (Not as well as Starbucks and Dunkin’ Donuts, etc. but pretty good for a new foreign coffee company) And as we all know, Americans love to get their money’s worth. By disregarding the old cup sizes, customers can now get more with what they paid, and for many, that definitely accounts for a good start to their day.

Another reason is Starbuck’s introduction of “Trenta” (31oz) earlier this year. Tim Horton’s might see this as a potential threat and therefore has chosen this strategy to keep at par with their biggest competitor.

The full article is here: http://www.businessreviewcanada.ca/business_leaders/tim-hortons-to-test-new-coffee-cup-sizes

Many of us remember the disastrous BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico last April. That incident not only left environmental contamination and a poor reputation for BP but also raised awareness for the corporate responsibilities to clean up their own messes.

Companies such as Imperial Oil Ltd, ConocoPhillips, Chevron Corp. and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, who hope to drill in the Arctic have assured they would operate safely and take entire responsibility throughout their project.

Michael Peacock, the exploration manager of Imperial, stated that: “… If we can afford to drill in this environment, then we should have the financial strength to fund any cleanup.” Most readers would be happy to see such large corporations make such commitments in protecting the local environment and demonstrating such business ethics. But upon further examination, it is clear that the companies have no intention in putting money aside to pay for possible spill-related costs. Peacock states that “Financial guarantees…. create little benefit for the public while adding to the cost of the operation.”

In my opinion, there are two parts to business ethics. The first is the ability to promise to do wrong by none (openly stating their beliefs and morals). The second is the ability to carry out their promises. The public is more likely to be convinced if companies such as those of Mr. Peacock’s are more willing to act upon their “beliefs” rather than shielding themselves from the situation.

Globe and Mail: Oil drillers willing to accept liability for accidents in Arctic

Hi everyone! 🙂