Investor driven co's.

[Boy_Scout11]

Allow me to point out how the smartest business minds of today work, at least from my perspective. I can see the {shall we say, bottom line tendencies, vs business in a moral and ethical manner.}

I can see the bad, because I can see all the possibilities of bad in myself, as I can see all the good potential in myself. Psychology demands that ones actions follow ones words, wheather they choose good or bad, but in far too many cases, many, many, people say one thing and do another, which not only leads those people to mental, physical and emotional dichotomies, but those they teach, their children and the children of those they teach, just to be able to deal with all the schools, business, friends and governmental actions. We all know what to say, for the most part, but we see that is hardly the case.

Here is the senario for the field we are speaking of at present, below.

Lets say, I am the ceo of the Yellow Pages, and revenues are flat, while the investors are screaming for more, more, more. If the CEO is unable to formulate a plan and make more profits for those investors, he knows he/she will lose their job, to someone else that can show results in the bottom line.

Hence, the CEO calls for meeting after meeting, brainstorming, to find ways to bring in more profits, so she/he, can keep their job and make those huge bonuses. That is the reality of todays investor driven markets, which only hurt us all.

Now, the YP are in every market in every state in the union and they have all this equiptment for printing, which probably sits un-used for at least a portion of the time, if not all the time, except for when the books are printed, according to the specific requirements or, they have other contracts they fulfill for government or other agencies. NOTICE, the Talking Phone Book came out before the YP, but only about 2 weeks prior. For this to happen, the YP may have been actually losing work to other printing agencies for some years now, as printers are getting ever cheeper and competition in that field becoming ever more fierce. They may have machinery just sitting by, but neither is that, any proof. I am merely pointing out the investor driven mind, of today.

IMPORTANT NOTICE!
Since I do not know, I can only offer how investor driven co’s, think and why and not that the YP is doing this.

Ok, back to it. Lets say in one of those meetings at their headquarters, someone sees the potential of the YP dominating all the markets, decides to bring competition to the market, via an offshoot of their own parent co., and the new book was called the TPB. Then say, the YP allowed the TPD to use their machinery, so that the costs for both co’s, actually decreased and revenues, thru their own competition, now gets their books into the largest of markets, because those markets will bear the extra strain and instead of making profits from just the YP, they now have most business people understanding that there is a good chance that most will advertize in both books. LOL, that, would be capitalisim at its best, but ethics and morals, at their worst. Even if the so called competition, lowers its rates on both books, they have still raised their profits, thru the roof.

[John_Mace]

You made some errorneous assumptions.

1. A competitor cannot always enter a market and charge the same price as the incumbent. Someone has to kickstart ads in TPB so it can gain some market share.

2. If TPB offers cheaper rates, which it almost certainly has to do, some companies might choose to place ads only in TPB, not in YP.

3. Companies do not have any unlimitted advertising budget and won’t miraculously double their ads just because there is another ad channel. Some (probably most) will forego the new publication altogether.

There are porbably quite a few other false assumptions you are making as well.

However, since you think this a great idea, why don’t you put it into practice yourself and report back to us when your make your first million.

[Boy_Scout11]

[quote]

@John Mace

You made some errorneous assumptions.

We can always examine what you claim and see if what you claim is true, or wheather you do not comprehend all that you have read.

1. A competitor cannot always enter a market and charge the same price as the incumbent. Someone has to kickstart ads in TPB so it can gain some market share.

If you can, please show with my wording in my origional post, where I said anything against what you state. You have implied that I said otherwise.

2. If TPB offers cheaper rates, which it almost certainly has to do, some companies might choose to place ads only in TPB, not in YP.

I did not argue otherwise on this point, so why do you insinuate that I do?

. Companies do not have any unlimitted advertising budget and won’t miraculously double their ads just because there is another ad channel. Some (probably most) will forego the new publication altogether.

I am a businessman and if you read my origional piece carefully, you should understand what all business people will understand, considering the fact, that they are in 9 major markets already and adding more. Considering this information and that now businessmen/women will now have to advertize in both books to get the same amount of coverage as they had with just the yp operating by itself.

[quote]
re porbably quite a few other false assumptions you are making as well.[/uote]

I made not one false assumrtion, you are the one that has made each of these false assumptions. Why don’t you go twist someone elses words and meanings.

You are obviously no business person.

[furt]

@Boy Scout11

I am a businessman …

What industry?

I made not one false assumrtion, you are the one that has made each of these false assumptions. Why don’t you go twist someone elses words and meanings.

Calm down; there’s no need to be hostile. You posted in debate forum; if you want everyone to tell you you’re right, you’re in the wrong place.
I don’t understand why this is unethical or immoral. In several major American cities (Philadelphia for one) there are two or more newspapers owned by the same company but which compete for advertising revenue. Some companies will advertise in both, some in only one, some in neither. Similarly, radio conglomerates like Clear Channel will often own four or five or more stations in the same market. Bad for those who want media diversity, but not unethical per se.

[Boy_Scout11]

@furt

What industry?

I don’t choose to say anything about that, at this time.

I don’t understand why this is unethical or immoral. In several major American cities (Philadelphia for one) there are two or more newspapers owned by the same company but which compete for advertising revenue. Some companies will advertise in both, some in only one, some in neither. Similarly, radio conglomerates like Clear Channel will often own four or five or more stations in the same market. Bad for those who want media diversity, but not unethical per se.

Our nations small businesses are under attack and have been for a long time now. Ethics and morals, or the lack thereof, is why this nation is in so much trouble now and IF, that co. were doing this, they would be adding a much heavier burden on small business people at a time when things are very bad. I know the numbers in sectors say we are doing well, but the job numbers and many of the small and independent business people I am talking to, are having alot of difficulties. The investor driven co’s. of today are for the most part, if not all, very large corporations, or family oriented. Their bottom line is the dollar and if corporate execs don’t do as they want, that person is out and so on, until someone is willing to do whatever, even at the cost to morals and ethics.

Furthermore, the only thing taxable, is sweat equity. The entire rest of society preys on sweat equity and this nations working class is at the end of its rope. Did you happen to see that when oil prices were at their highest point, that most retail operations began to hurt? That is how close this nations working class is to bankruptcy. For those that have government jobs, or large corporations that can downsize in case of such times will make it thru, but many, many small businesses will not.

At this point in time, way too much can collapse all at once and the above is only part of the reason. Taxes are so, that large corporations keep buying up many other medium and small businesses, so they can keep from paying that money to the tax man. Then, they have so many write-offs, that they have 10 times the advantage, thru buying power, write-offs and deductions, that small businesses come and go, as the wind. Government protects and discriminates on the part of big business so often, that we don’t know where big business and the government end.

The small businessmen of today, cannot sustain this constant payout. I did not say the TP was doing that, but if they were, it would be just another un-needed bill, for those who suck the life from the hard working man/woman and we are fast becoming a third world nation, with a few large businesses and the government taking it all, in the many ways.

Just look at the oil industry and the tricks they play with shortages and price fixing, right out in the open. They have become as flagrant as a spoiled child and our own government couldn’t give a darn. These are just a few things.

[Kent_Clark]

If I read your post correctly, your suggesting that a business with unused capacity use some of that capacity to produce an additional product, in effect, putting it in competition with itself.

This happens all the time in the U.S. General Motors produces cars under different names with trivial (sometimes virtually no) differences except for being sold by different dealers. Proctor and Gamble makes many different brands that compete for sales at retail stores. Many companies manufacture generic versions of their own products and either sell them to “private labels” or sell them at retail. Even Corel, which produces Word Perfect software, sometimes continues to sell older versions of its software at a lower price, after it comes out with an upgrade.

Some U.S. airlines have even started their own competing companies to fly selected routes at lower prices (United Airlines and “Ted,” for example.)

Companies have to differentiate the higher-priced products by either product features or customer service enhancements, just as any competitor would. In your example, there would have to be some advantage for customers to continue advertising in YP, or else they would all switch to the lower-cost alternative.

Is this practice different where you are? Why do you think it is unethical and immoral?

[furt]

All of which is irrelevant to both your OP and my question. Why is it unethical or immoral for a business to offer two similar (or even identical) products? Or are you just saying it is undesirable?

Furthermore, the only thing taxable, is sweat equity.

Please explain this. Is money is no longer taxable? If they’re taxing sweat, I’m screwed, 'cause I’m in Florida.

[John_Mace]

[QUOTE=Boy Scout11]

We can always examine what you claim and see if what you claim is true, or wheather you do not comprehend all that you have read.

Yes, your rambling OP was very difficult to follow. Perhaps I could have understood it better if it had been better composed.

I made not one false assumrtion, you are the one that has made each of these false assumptions. Why don’t you go twist someone elses words and meanings.

Then why don’t you define “through the roof” for us wrt to profits. It’s entirely unclear that the new product will sustain a price large enough to raise any profits at all.

You are obviously no business person.

Entirely wrong, as I have been for many years. But I guess you’re just a genius who has discovered an entirely new way of making a killing in business. Like I said originally… report back to us when you use your strategy to make your first million.

[Boy_Scout11]

@kunilou

If I read your post correctly, your suggesting that a business with unused capacity use some of that capacity to produce an additional product, in effect, putting it in competition with itself.

Yes, that is what I am saying.

This happens all the time in the U.S. General Motors produces cars under different names with trivial (sometimes virtually no) differences except for being sold by different dealers. Proctor and Gamble makes many different brands that compete for sales at retail stores. Many companies manufacture generic versions of their own products and either sell them to “private labels” or sell them at retail. Even Corel, which produces Word Perfect software, sometimes continues to sell older versions of its software at a lower price, after it comes out with an upgrade.

As far as goods are concerned, the customer does not have to buy two of the same product, to get the same service, one vehicle should deliver. One phone book is enough, just as one vehicle is enough. By comparison, two cars would be needed to do the job one car used to do, just as now, it takes advertizing in two books, to get the same advertizing power as one used to deliver.

Some U.S. airlines have even started their own competing companies to fly selected routes at lower prices (United Airlines and “Ted,” for example.)

To be analogous, to two phone books being needed to cover the same area, at twice the price, a flyer would have to pay double the price for the same amount of miles flown.

Companies have to differentiate the higher-priced products by either product features or customer service enhancements, just as any competitor would. In your example, there would have to be some advantage for customers to continue advertising in YP, or else they would all switch to the lower-cost alternative.

From the way I wrote my piece, I had hoped people would understand that what I posed, was hypothetical to start with. Then, I had hoped they would see, that if the YP was the parent co., and TPB was a subsidiary, using the YP’S MACHINERY to print all the subsidaries books, that parent co., would actually be making the actual profits skyrocket, because even if the TPB CHARGED JUST 3/4THS THE PRICE OF THE YP, most business people will see, that to get the same coverage, in other words reach the same amount of customers, they will have to advertize in both phone books, because it is likely, that many will use the TPB, because it is just one book, while the YP is two seperate books. At least that is what the research presented by the TPB claims and as they are now in at least 9 markets and growing, many people will become loyal followers of the TPB, at least until they raise their rates, to meet that of the YP and, both co’s., belonging to one parent co., making both books on the same machinery, means huge savings for them both, as well as huge profits.

Remember, this is a hypothetical situation, but it is a representation of investor driven thinking in the marketplace and by no means, does it not mean that this very senario is not happening.

[DMC]

A couple of points. First off, I have phone service through the regional Bell, as does almost everyone I know except for a couple of folks who have gone the “I have my cell, so screw land lines” route. This means that I get a free copy of their yellow pages with no effort on my part.

Now, I also get some third party yellow page books. I might throw them away, I might use them to line my bird cage, I might make confetti out of them, or IF they are somehow better than my Bell provided Yellow Pages, then I might use it and get rid my my Yellow Pages.

Summary: If the local Yellow Pages are better, advertisers gain nothing from me by advertising in the third party (same party in your hypothetical) phone book, no matter how cheap it might be. If the Yellow Pages are worse, the advertisers gain nothing from me by advertising in them. Either way, advertisers are not in any way guaranteed to have skyrocketing profits only by advertiser in both places.

If I were your hypothetical CEO, I would get together with all other Bells, sell off all of our equipment that is sitting around most of the year, and farm the project out, having each Bell stagger when they put out new books, so the printer would have business the entire year, thus reducing costs. If a printer that can handle this does not exist, one would magically appear VERY quickly. I’ve seen plenty of printers who have a single customer, and do not even attempt to acquire more customers.

Oh, I am a business person, and you’ll find a large number of us on this board. I’d guess we’re swamped with business people here.

[Chairman_Pow]

@Boy Scout11

As far as goods are concerned, the customer does not have to buy two of the same product, to get the same service, one vehicle should deliver. One phone book is enough, just as one vehicle is enough. By comparison, two cars would be needed to do the job one car used to do, just as now, it takes advertizing in two books, to get the same advertizing power as one used to deliver.

You completely lost me. What you appear to be saying is, “if company X is at full capacity and cannot expand into other markets and has reached full saturation of those markets, they should create a lower-priced version of their product and market that.”

If that’s the case, they will cannibalize their own sales. I fail to see the logic in this.

To be analogous, to two phone books being needed to cover the same area, at twice the price, a flyer would have to pay double the price for the same amount of miles flown.

Perhaps I missed it, but you also imply that the circulation of the original publicaiton will need to be cut down in order to provide a market for thier newer product.

Brilliant.

I’m 99% positive that YP is outsourced to RR Donnelly, the largest printer in North America. I find it hard to imagine that this isn’t immensly cheaper than maintaining equipment that sits unused for 50 weeks of the year and the distribution network and ancillary functions. I know this doesn’t hinder your hypothetical example, but if there is nothing else to do to cut costs, I’d hire me a new CEO.

At least that is what the research presented by the TPB claims and as they are now in at least 9 markets and growing, many people will become loyal followers of the TPB, at least until they raise their rates, to meet that of the YP and, both co’s., belonging to one parent co., making both books on the same machinery, means huge savings for them both, as well as huge profits.

Is this hypothetical market research? I have a hypothetical boatload of investors who can’t follow this run on sentence.

Remember, this is a hypothetical situation, but it is a representation of investor driven thinking in the marketplace and by no means, does it not mean that this very senario is not happening.

I’m surprised that no one’s gone to this (and as a lesson in how these boards sometime operate, I’ll be the bad guy): please cite a case. If you would like to disuss a real case of this instead of adding information unknown to the other posters to clarify a point (indeed, make it up), it would allow for some greater debate.

[Boy_Scout11]

[QUOTE=DMC]
A couple of points. First off, I have phone service through the regional Bell, as does almost everyone I know except for a couple of folks who have gone the “I have my cell, so screw land lines” route. This means that I get a free copy of their yellow pages with no effort on my part.

Now, I also get some third party yellow page books. I might throw them away, I might use them to line my bird cage, I might make confetti out of them, or IF they are somehow better than my Bell provided Yellow Pages, then I might use it and get rid my my Yellow Pages.

Summary: If the local Yellow Pages are better, advertisers gain nothing from me by advertising in the third party (same party in your hypothetical) phone book, no matter how cheap it might be. If the Yellow Pages are worse, the advertisers gain nothing from me by advertising in them. Either way, advertisers are not in any way guaranteed to have skyrocketing profits only by advertiser in both places.

If you have two books in your area, can you describe the differences to us?

If I were your hypothetical CEO, I would get together with all other Bells, sell off all of our equipment that is sitting around most of the year, and farm the project out, having each Bell stagger when they put out new books, so the printer would have business the entire year, thus reducing costs. If a printer that can handle this does not exist, one would magically appear VERY quickly. I’ve seen plenty of printers who have a single customer, and do not even attempt to acquire more customers.

No, you wouldn’t, because those books are very specific and they own all that machinery at present and it has been paid for, years ago. Since I have been speaking about investor driven thinking and ethics and morals as well, you have just pointed out one portion of all that I present. If you wish to answer, answer to the entire post, thank you.

[Kent_Clark]

@Boy Scout11

As far as goods are concerned, the customer does not have to buy two of the same product, to get the same service, one vehicle should deliver. One phone book is enough, just as one vehicle is enough. By comparison, two cars would be needed to do the job one car used to do, just as now, it takes advertizing in two books, to get the same advertizing power as one used to deliver.

. . .
From the way I wrote my piece, I had hoped people would understand that what I posed, was hypothetical to start with. Then, I had hoped they would see, that if the YP was the parent co., and TPB was a subsidiary, using the YP’S MACHINERY to print all the subsidaries books, that parent co., would actually be making the actual profits skyrocket, because even if the TPB CHARGED JUST 3/4THS THE PRICE OF THE YP, most business people will see, that to get the same coverage, in other words reach the same amount of customers, they will have to advertize in both phone books, because it is likely, that many will use the TPB, because it is just one book, while the YP is two seperate books.

I may choose to buy my mythical GM car because of it has a low price, fancy leather seats, or perhaps because I have a relationship with a dealer who sells it that I don’t have with another. It’s a question of which mythical car fits my needs more closely.

What I don’t understand in your hypothetical scenario, is whether you’re suggesting that the YP puts out a product that is exactly the same as the other product, with exactly the same features and benefits to the advertiser, only at a lower price.

If that’s the case, then no one will continue to buy the higher-priced product and the company’s business strategy will backfire.

Clearly, there must be some difference between the two products that you don’t recognize. Perhaps one is distributed at no charge to consumers, but businesses have to pay for their copies. Perhaps one guarantees more frequent editions. Perhaps they, in fact, are the same product but are marketed to different segments of the population, and I, as an advertiser, want the additional push to that segment.

Basic economics teaches us that if there is NO difference except price, customers will naturally gravitate to the lower-priced product. Your hypothetical company may be able to continue to sell competing products for a limited time, but sooner or later, its customers will no longer purchase both versions – just as Chrysler discontinued its Plymouth brand and GM discontinued Oldsmobile.

Once again I ask, why is this immoral or unethical?

[Boy_Scout11]

@Chairman Pow

You completely lost me. What you appear to be saying is, “if company X is at full capacity and cannot expand into other markets and has reached full saturation of those markets, they should create a lower-priced version of their product and market that.”

I have been showing how investor driven thinking today has been systematically destroying what would normally be moral and ethical co’s, for the sake of profits and the small businessmen/women are having to pay alot more than necessary, just so that co’s., can make more money for the investor and the working man has to pay more and more, in many such schemes. Just look at many of the headlines today. IE: MARKETS ARE UP, SALES ARE UP, AND WAGES ARE DOWN.

If that’s the case, they will cannibalize their own sales. I fail to see the logic in this.

You would have to read and comprehend fully, all the things I presented in my origional piece. There have been quite a few of you here in GREAT DEBATES, BUT, it seems most do not fully comprehend all they read, the very first time, or else, the people answering are only considering and answering to all that I have spoken about, PARTIALLY. This forum is supposed to be for GREAT DEBATES and I am looking for people with great comprehension and debating skills, so that I may learn as much as I can, but when I have to debate people that have twisted and turned my words, or made up stuff as two here have, I begin to thinK there are none here that can truly comprehend and debate, as GREAT DEBATES, SUGGEST.

I was challenged by a Doctor on this site about what I spoke of in dyslexia and after he tried to imply I was ignorant, by calling me,–Hoo Boy, I gave him so much to think about, he ran away and would not answer anymore, in two subjects. DYSLEXIA AND PSYCHIATRY.

No, I am not a genius, but common sense and the things I have written, should tell many of you that try to debate me, that you are not considering all the ramifications of what I present or your own words. NOW, I know this will make many of you mad as fire at me, but I am looking for GREAT DEBATES, not mediocre debates and surely not partial debates, but GREAT DEBATES.

Perhaps I missed it, but you also imply that the circulation of the original publicaiton will need to be cut down in order to provide a market for thier newer product.

Brilliant.

LOL. You did miss it.

I’m 99% positive that YP is outsourced to RR Donnelly, the largest printer in North America. I find it hard to imagine that this isn’t immensly cheaper than maintaining equipment that sits unused for 50 weeks of the year and the distribution network and ancillary functions. I know this doesn’t hinder your hypothetical example, but if there is nothing else to do to cut costs, I’d hire me a new CEO.

Now that is something I didn’t know, but can can you tell us all if Donnely has a parent co. and who that parent co. is?

I’m surprised that no one’s gone to this (and as a lesson in how these boards sometime operate, I’ll be the bad guy): please cite a case. If you would like to disuss a real case of this instead of adding information unknown to the other posters to clarify a point (indeed, make it up), it would allow for some greater debate.

The unknowns in major corporations and their subsidiaries are so intertwined that it can never be found out. Private partnerships, shell co’s., as fronts and so on. My origional post called for much more than you chose to address and not ony do you show shortsightedness, you show little origionality in thinking.

The bad guy? LOL, I have been the bad guy on so many boards, it really doesn’t matter anymore.

Signed,

BLACK BART------SIMPSON. LOL

[DMC]

@Boy Scout11

If you have two books in your area, can you describe the differences to us?

Sure. The Yellow Pages are fine and the alternative has somewhat bigger ads, but a lot fewer listings. At least that’s how I remember it, as it was thrown away about a week after I got it.

No, you wouldn’t, because those books are very specific and they own all that machinery at present and it has been paid for, years ago.

Yes, I would, and I’m not sure if you’re qualified to tell me what I’d do in that situation. There are a lot more expenses than just equipment. You also never state in your hypothetical that the equipment was paid for years ago. Secondly, the books are hardy “specific” if you mean that they would require a retooling of equipment or a change in the process. The only thing I can see that is different between Southwestern Bell’s books and Bell South’s books, for example, are the content themselves, which are likely stored in a database somewhere. They use the same paper, are the same size, and likely use the same types of ink.

Since I have been speaking about investor driven thinking and ethics and morals as well, you have just pointed out one portion of all that I present. If you wish to answer, answer to the entire post, thank you.

To be honest, the only thing I got out of your OP was that you thought businesses with lulls could compete with themselves to fill those lulls. While that sounds logically sound on the surface, I simply pointed out that it was not a given that you’d be the next Bill Gates in your hypothetical. If there is more to your argument, I’d love for you to elaborate, but that’s what I got out of it.

On another note, I get the feeling that you might not be a native English speaker. I’m not a grammar/spelling Nazi by any stretch of the imagination, but I do get that impression from your post. If you are not a native speaker, you have a nice grasp of English, and it might explain some of the disconnect between what is in your head, and what made it to your post. I’ll be the first to admit that my skill level in the foreign languages I do know is not as good as your English.

[Boy_Scout11]

A GREAT DEBATE, is when anyone goes from one line to the next, speaking on every single detail, untill all has been addressed and IF, one cannot do that, they prove, that they are incapable of a GREAT DEBATE!!!

[TonyF]

Ok. We’d love to have a GREAT DEBATE as well. So what is your assertion, Boy Scout11?

Please, offer us something simple, like “I think that investor-driven companies are bad.”

Then, please give us some reasons, as to why you feel this way.

Next, if you would be so kind, assert your own ideas on how to make the situation better.

All you have done so far is to ruminate on a hypothetical situation.

[Boy_Scout11]

@TonyF

Ok. We’d love to have a GREAT DEBATE as well. So what is your assertion, Boy Scout11?

Please, offer us something simple, like “I think that investor-driven companies are bad.”

Then, please give us some reasons, as to why you feel this way.

Next, if you would be so kind, assert your own ideas on how to make the situation better.

All you have done so far is to ruminate on a hypothetical situation.

Tony, from my perspective, this government and big business are in bed with each other in thousands of ways unseen, just as many ways that are flagrant. If you contest this point, please let me know what you think, thanks.

[Boy_Scout11]

@TonyF

Ok. We’d love to have a GREAT DEBATE as well. So what is your assertion, Boy Scout11?

Please, offer us something simple, like “I think that investor-driven companies are bad.”

Then, please give us some reasons, as to why you feel this way.

Next, if you would be so kind, assert your own ideas on how to make the situation better.

All you have done so far is to ruminate on a hypothetical situation.

I would start off, by asking you, do you think government and big business are in bed together, in many unforseen and corrupt ways?

[drgnrdr07]

Boy Scout11. I would ask that you please cite some examples of REAL world corporations so we can all better understand your reasoning. It is very difficult to debate with you when people challenge your points and you don’t come back with real world information from various trusted sources. It would make your arguement much stronger if you would back it with something more than this is what I think might happen. Shows us examples of why we should believe you.

Why would a business advertise with two phonebooks that are essentially the same? They won’t reach any bigger market by doing that unless the two phonebooks are reaching different markets.