I suppose signing the dotted line with your clients is one, but most of your business activities probably function as some kind of support for what you do or as an avenue to develop more opportunities to sign those dotted lines, right? Think of a GSA MAS Contract as the ultimate tool in marketing to and reaching the federal marketplace. Marketing in itself is an expense—it doesn’t generate income. But it does create opportunities for income, which is why smart, focused, specific marketing is always worth it: it more than pays for itself over time through the business opportunities it generates. A GSA MAS Contract, while not strictly a marketing venture—you’ve got to do your own government marketing and client development—opens a door to a whole world of business that you do not and cannot access without it.
In contrast, more information about transactions between firms and the U.S. federal government is publicly available because of that country’s Freedom of Information Act. Even the administration of the law may vary. For example, in the United States the plaintiff and the defendant in a lawsuit generally pay their cases in order to avoid expensive litigation. In the United Kingdom, rite losers in trials pay the legal expenses of both parties. Thus the British have less incentive to file frivolous lawsuits.
If it were not for the protection of patents, big companies, with their robust capacity, would surpass the small business entrepreneurs in speed and cost of production and thereafter suppress them completely. However, the excludability that patents impose on non owners of the inventions does not see capacity. This helps small business entrepreneurs to practice their own inventions while big companies remain hands-tied. ii) Revenue from licenses, sale or infringement. Licensing ones technology to others is another good way of making money.
Their main market of action is obviously the US one but they currently drive their strategy worldwide as it represents a huge reserve of profits. What kind of competition? Both Pepsi and Coke understood that it was better off not to erode their gross profit by playing on prices, even if the customers have showed price sensitiveness in the past history. They have no incentives to fight on prices as long as • there are not many other sellers in the market • prices can be adjusted quickly • there is a history of cooperative pricing (except punctually) Preservation of overall industry profits by Entry Enter the soft drink market is quite risky given the high dominant position of Pepsi and Coke. Hence, there is no real threat to see a new comer eroding the whole market profits by heating up internal rivalry.
Second, most of the time, for a promising industry, there is no need for any government assistance to the initial firms. It would be much better if these firms could borrow from private lenders to cover their initial losses and repay these loans from future profits. If there are defects in the lending markets, then the government could extend loans. If the industry will create external benefits, such as training workers or new technologies, then the best government policy acts directly on the source of the external benefits (for instance, subsidies to training, or subsidies to research and development). Third, the argument could be misused because there are too many uncertainties, as indeed the industry could grow up, or not.
b. Two key advantages of the corporate form over other forms of business organization are unlimited liability and limited life. c. A corporation is a legal entity that is generally created by a state; its life and existence is separate from the lives of its individual owners and managers. d. Limited liability of its stockholders is an advantage of the corporate form of organization, but corporations have more trouble raising money in financial markets because of the complexity of this form of organization. e. Although its stockholders are insulated by limited legal liability, the corporation's legal status does not protect the firm's managers in the same way; i.e., bondholders can sue its managers if the firm defaults on its debt, even if the default is the result of poor economic conditions.
It didn’t help that a lot of their online competitors copied BN’s method of buying gemstones from their suppliers for specific purchases. New Entrants: This is a weak force. When looking at the high costs to enter, as well the significant brand loyalties that already exist, the competition for new entrants keeps most new entrants from being successful. Buyers: This is only a moderate force, since jewelry tends to be custom, and therefore, people expect to pay higher prices than they might for other things. Most jewelry stores’ prices aren’t greatly different from others’ and buyers have very little influence on prices due to the high cost of raw materials to make the products.
customer satisfaction, improved on-time rating, lower fees, standardized pricing and, most importantly, safety. Chris Edwards states, “Any service that can be supported by consumer fees can be privatized. A big advantage of privatized airports, air traffic control, highways, and other activities is that private companies can freely tap debt and equity markets for capital expansion to meet rising demand. By contrast, modernization of government infrastructure is subject to the politics and uncertainties of government budgeting processes. As a consequence, government infrastructure is often old, congested, and poorly maintained” (Edwards, 2009).
I think the most common form of fallacy I have encountered in my experience is the Appeal to Authority. This is likely due to the limitations of human knowledge; it is much easier (and often necessary) to defer to expert opinions on matters we know little about. For instance, Congressional debate on certain legislative issues is often delegated to committees and subcommittees, which in turn bring in outside experts on complicated questions. The advice of these experts often becomes foundational to the lawmaking process, and, in general, this doesn’t cause too many problems. On technical grounds, however, arguing from “Dr.
The most common word used in the transaction of merging or acquiring companies is ‘synergy’. This explains how two companies combine their core business activities so as to increase an overall performance and at the same time reducing their transaction costs. The main reason as to why companies merge or are taken over is mostly based on financial purposes. Often, firms are unable to perform to a required or to their desiring