Commercialization of Christmas is brought up every year around this time: is the “true meaning of Christmas” getting lost in the materialism?
Megan, a freelance writer, discussed one dimension of this issue in her blog Writing Out Loud . Her post “Cutting costs: the Christmas edition,” quite self-explanatory in its title, reminds us of the financial reality and consequence of Christmas commericalism, and her way of dealing with it.
Even though some costumers feel like Christmas is just another excuse for stores to advertise, most stores, somehow, marketed the themes of “a traditional Christmas” and “the season of giving.” While everything from clothes to electronics to gift wrappers seem to go on sale during Christmas, those products are linked to the theme of “giving” because they are meant to be presents.
Megan’s blog post offers a rational approach: treat this discontent toward Christmas shopping like it really is: money trouble. Most people would probably have a happier holiday if they are not drowning in credit card bills. No one was forced to buy those expensive, impersonal, mass-produced products (and then gift them to oneself). Consumers have the choice to economize and make Christmas a personal experience, like Megan is planning.
Oscar Lai’s blog entry “Steve Jobs’ Rotten Apple” noted how Steve Jobs’ unfavourable personal characteristics, namely the lack of philantropy, might have leaked into Apple’s culture and attributed to its lack of explicit social responsiblity agenda. To answer the question in Oscar’s blog: no, I don’t think Apple cares. Apple successfully positioned itself as an innovative, technological company and this is what it delivers.
However, in Austin Smith’s entry “Bombardier Bombarded By Thieves,” he arguess that Bombardier has to take action against the damage stolen cables has on its company. I agree with Austin on his view; the stolen cables affected the safety and performance of Bombardier’s rails, and safety is one of the qualities Bombardier, a builder for transportation devices, positioned itself to have.
Factors other than its product/service may affect a company’s performance if these factors are relevant to how the company positions itself. Bombardier needs to prevent against thefts that aren’t the company’s responsibility, but are ruining its positioned image as a reliable manufacturer. Meanwhile, Tech giant Apple’s lack of CSR is no secret and it is still doing well because it isn’t how Apple positioned itself; it can do without the competitive advantage from CSR.
Yellow Pages has more than one hundred years of history. However, this inches-thick compilation of adverts and business directory is becoming obsolete with the the internet and search engines.
The Globe and Mail’s November Issue of Report on Business notes that Canadian publisher Yellow Pages Group’s parent company Yellow Media is facing numerous financial woes.
Strength:
Yellow is a recognizable brand name: long history, high costumers volume
strong financial performance: operate at 50% margin, annual revnue of about $1.6 billion for the past few years (1)
Weakness:
poor reputation among costumers, especially its web service (2)
failure to integrate technology efficiently: the brand is still associated with a book; its products aren’t very successful on the web
the company is heavily in debt (3)
Opportunities:
Unfulfilled consumer need: improve/expand web services. YM is still ahead of many print-based businesses in shifting their revenue-generating sector to the web(4)
Threats:
search engines and the internet both attribute the consumer’s shift away from the firm’s traditional product
decreasing investor confidence in the company (5)
Yellow Media is doing well in what it is doing, but unless it updates itself and integerate the role of the internet into its products and competitive advantage, it will fall behind.
References:
(1) Krashinsky, Susan. “Every book has an ending.” The Globe and Mail Report on Business. 28。4 （2011): 35-41. Print.
(2) Ibid.
(3) Ibid.
(4) Ibid.
Comments Off on Yellow Media – Brief SWOT Analysis
The National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy released a report on water use, which states that Canada’s natural resources sectors use about four litres of water for every litre used in all sectors combined. One of the Table’s recommendations was using “economic incentives” to promote wiser water use. (1)
CBC News Blog posed the question to its reader. The more popular comments on the blog had similar overall ideas: increase water fees for oilsands but not for the agricultural sector. (2)
The little sympathy for the oil sands, compared to the agricultural sector, shows the effect a corporate sustainability advantage, or rather, lack thereof. While both industry use water heavily, agricultural water use is considered a necessity and therefore acceptable. Meanwhile, the oil sands
not only strike the public as a purely for-profit industrial venture, but it’s link to oil and carbon emissions makes the public view it in a negative light when it comes to environmental issues.
The oilsands are trying to remedy this PR situation. Suncor, for example, is advertising its soil reclamation project in the tar sands (see
their Youtube video). However, it seems this sustainability has yet to see much result.
Benetton released similar photoshopped images of Obama, Merkel, Chavez, Sarkozy, Netayahu, and many others.
In this ad campaign, “Unhate”, Benetton claims that it hopes to improve people’s tolerance and lessen their fears in the unfamiliar. (1) Benetton is not a social enterprise, but this campaign, with a premise on tolerance, seems like it is part of a corporate social responsibility agenda.
This campaign is striking me as a cheap ploy to generate publicity.
Benetton’s images are disrespectful to the subjects of the pictures. It already withdrew the above image of the Pope upon the Vatican’s request. (2) While Benetton chose the images that drew fierce reactions, the “intended” message is lost to most people amid the political turmoil. People’s reactions ranged from bemusement to confusion to outright disgust – toward those politicians kissing, not the issue of tolerance.
However, this ad campaign succeeded in putting Benetton’s name across every news media once again. Even so, those images added no value to the Benetton’s primary commodity: clothing.
This ad campaign – all the negativities it associated with the issue of tolerance – left me a very poor impression of Benetton. I don’t think I’m
shopping there anytime soon.
It’s not too long ago that we learned about Michael Dell’s success by applying the direct business model to selling computers. Dell’s direct business model, among other traits, characterizes it as an entrepreneurial company.
image source: www.dell.ca
Dell qualifies as an entrepreneurial company in the speed and amount of wealth creation, as well as the risk of this venture. Dell generated wealth at an amazing pace; it grew to $12 billion in just 13 years (1), far outstripping a typical small business. Technological products depreciate quickly. Selling computers can be a risky as it is profitable.
However, the most recognized characteristic of an entrepreneurship, as emphasized in Schumpeter’s definition, is innovation (2). According to Michael Dell himself, the key to his company’s success was its direct business model (3) — new method production and operation management. Its allowance for customization also opened up the market to consumers who were not satisfied existing products. Dell also took advantage of the new ways to reach its consumers, such as launching Dell.com back when the internet was young. Like its new business model, adapting to this new technology made Dell a technological giant.
References:
(1) “The power
of virtual integration: an interview with Dell computer’s Michael Dell.” Harvard Business Review. March/April
1998, Vol.76 Issue 2, p.72.
(3) “The power
of virtual integration: an interview with Dell computer’s Michael Dell.” Harvard Business Review. March/April
1998, Vol.76 Issue 2, p.72.
small number of companies develop operating systems (Nokia, RIM, Google, Apple) but more companies develop hardware
Smartphones, are highly perishable products that depreciates quickly in the market. Producers need to sell quickly, which intensifies rivalry.
The industry is still growing.
Threats of Substitutes is high
While brands differentiate between different Smartphones to an extent, Smartphones in the same price range have mostly the same functions.
Buyer Power is medium to weak
Weak: buyers are not concentrated and can not influence the price.
Medium: Buyers can purchase from a rival, but a rival will not necessarily present the buyer with better incentives or prices.
Weak: Some producers’ influences extend to their distribution channels. An example is Apple’s stores.
Supplier Power
(omitted due to word count limitations)
Threats of New Entrants is low
Diffcult to enter: Smartphone production involves many patents and proprietary knowledge. Even established companies are embroiled in legal battles over patent issues.
Difficult to enter: New entrants lack popoular brands, which are important to sales.
