Analysis of Pepsi Co in India

Analysis of Pepsi Co in India PepsiCo is the largest snack and non alcoholic beverage manufacturing company in the world. Its product range includes grain based snacks, carbonated and non- carbonated beverages and foods. It operates through four operating segments: Frito-Lay North America (FLNA), PepsiCo Beverages North America (PBNA), PepsiCo International (PI) and Quaker Foods North America (QFNA).It sells its products in 200 countries with major operations in the US, Canada, Mexico and the UK. It distributes its branded products through multi channels such as direct stores, broker warehouses, food service centers and vending machines. PepsiCo in India PepsiCo entered India in 1988 and concentrated on three focus areas soft drink, snack foods and food processing. PepsiCo got permit to import cola conecnterate and to sell soft drink under Pepsi label in Indian market and in return to export juice concenterate from Punjab. Main objective put forward was To promote the development and export of Indian made and agro based products and to foster the introduction and development of PepsiCo products in India. Pepsico entered in India in the form of joint venture with PAIC holding 36.11%, voltas 24%, PepsiCo holding 36.89%. ISSUES: PepsiCo was coupled with the punjab card. They made certain commitments to Indian cental government.PepsiCo specifically supported national priorities in area like export and agriculture. Some of the commitments are as follows: 1) the project will create employment for 50000 peope nationally, including 25000 jobs in Punjab alone. 2) 74% of total investment will be in food and agro processing. 25% will be in manufacturing of soft drinks. 3) PepsiCo will bring advanced technology in food processing and provide thrust by marketing Indian products abroad and giving them global market. 4) 50% of total production will be exported. 5) an agro research center will be established by PepsiCo with ICAR and PAU. 6) no foreign brand name will e used for domestic sales. 7)export import ratio will be 5:1. FAILED COMMITMENTS: Within few years pepsi was recorded as one of non compliance companies that did not fulfill the commitments it made to Indian government. The company nowhere met its obligations. On September 4,1991 george fernandes said that Pepsi co has failed to meet its commitments and the company became a challenge to the government. The failed commitments are as follows: 1)EMPLOYMENT COMMITMENT: Employment generated by PepsiCo 1990-91 1991-92 direct indirect direct Food processing 169 9903 170 Administration 117 432 179 Bottling 497 15115 560 Total 783 25450 909 Source: data taken from balance sheets of pepsi foods ltd. Pepsico by 1996 increased the employment figure to 2400 which was just 3% of the commitment made. Branch name commitment Pepsi committed not to use its brand name pepsi in india. During first year pepsi used Indian brand name Lehar pepsi bt with the introduction of new policy in 1991 pepsi immediately changed its drink name from lehar pepsi to pepsi. Export commitment: Pepsi commited that 50% total product will be exported but instead of exporting its own products it exported basmati rice, tea, leather products Agro research center: No agro research center was established. PepsiCo, Inc., SWOT Analysis Strengths Weaknesses Strong Growth Prospects Efficient Use of Resources Expanding Operating Margin Declining Market Share in Sector Overdependence on Few Customers Geographical Concentration Opportunities Threats Huge Potential in the Emerging Markets Increasing Bottled Water Market Growing Organic Foods Market Highly Competitive Market Private Label Brands Gaining Momentum Global Economic Conditions PepsiCo, Inc. PepsiCo, Inc.- Financial and Strategic Analysis Review Reference Code: GDCPG35119FSA Page 2 PepsiCo, Inc. SWOT Analysis SWOT Analysis Overview PepsiCo, Inc. (PepsiCo) is one of the leading snack and beverage companies in the world. Dominant market position and diversified brand portfolio are its strengths. Further, the rising demand for bottled water and strategic acquisitions could ensure a strong future. However, poor profitability and overdependence on a few customers are areas of concern to the company. Highly competitive market and growing demand for private label products coupled with global economic slowdown could also impede the companys growth. PepsiCo, Inc. Strengths Strength Strong Growth Prospects The company was trading at a price/earnings (P/E) ratio of 16.16 at the end of fiscal year 2009. This was above the SP 500 companies average* of 9.2. A higher than SP 500 companies average P/E may indicate that the company may have high growth prospects which is reflected in its stocks premium pricing. Investors may be expecting higher earnings growth in the future compared to other companies in the SP 500 index. Strength Efficient Use of Resources The companys return on equity (ROE) was 35.4% for fiscal year 2009. This was above the SP 500 companies average* of 12.9%. A higher than SP 500 companies average* ROE may indicate that the company is efficiently using the shareholders money and that it is generating high returns for its shareholders compared to other companies in the SP 500 index. Strength Expanding Operating Margin The companys operating margin was 18.61% for the fiscal year 2009. This was above the SP 500 companies average* of 14.7%. A higher than SP 500 companies average* operating margin may indicate efficient cost management or a strong pricing strategy by the company. The companys operating profit was USD 8,044.00 million during the fiscal year 2009, an increase of 15.59% over 2008 while the net profit was USD 5,946.00 million, an increase of 15.64% over 2008. The operating margin has increased 252 basis points (bps) over 2008, which may indicate managements high focus on improving profitability. Strength Strong RD Activities PepsiCo has a strong RD arm that focuses on various activities, which could help the company in cost reduction and process improvement, quality assurance, process control, and system development. The company also places emphasis on developing new manufacturing methods, improving on the existing manufacturing processes, new product developing and improving the existing products. For the fiscal year 2008, the company spent USD 388 million on its RD initiatives, against USD 364 million in 2007. Thus, such a strong focus on RD activities provides the company with an edge over its competitors in generating higher operational performances. New product and technology innovations also strengthen the companys innovating capabilities and provide a source of future revenues for the company. Strength Diversified Brand Portfolio PepsiCo boasts of a broad brand portfolio in the beverages and snacks categories, which helps it cater to the diverse needs of its customer base. The top 18 brands of the company generate USD 1 billion or more each in annual retail sales. Some of the major brands offered by the company include Pepsi, Mountain Dew, Diet Pepsi, Gatorade, Tropicana Pure Premium, Aquafina water, Sierra Mist, Mug, Tropicana juice drinks, Propel, SoBe, Slice, Dole, Tropicana Twister and Tropicana Seasons Best. This diversified brand portfolio of the company provides it with the economic stability and an edge in attracting and retaining a diverse customer base. It also helps the company to mitigate the risks associated with overdependence on a particular brand or product category. Strength Dominant Market Position PepsiCo enjoys a leading market position that helps it attract and serve a diverse customer base. The company is one of the leading snack and beverage companies in the world. It is engaged in manufacturing, marketing and sale of a variety of salty, convenient, sweet and grain-based snacks, carbonated and non-carbonated beverages and foods. The company sells its products in more than 200 countries. It is the market leader in the US savory snacks market with a market share of about 39%. It is also the leader in the US liquid refreshment beverage category with a market share of 25%. Furthermore, the company occupied 52nd position in the Fortune 500 rankings in 2009. The Frito-Lay brand is the worlds leading manufacturer of snacks. This dominant market position helps the company diversify its risks associated with the cyclical nature of most of these markets and puts the company at an advantage over its rivals while expanding its product lines. PepsiCo, Inc. PepsiCo, Inc.- Financial and Strategic Analysis Review Reference Code: GDCPG35119FSA Page 3 PepsiCo, Inc. Weaknesses Weakness Declining Market Share in Sector The companys compound annual growth rate (CAGR) for revenue was 7.34% during 2005-2009. This was below the SP 500 companies average* of 11.1%. Further, the company reported revenue of USD 43,232.00 million during the fiscal year ended December 2009, a decrease of 0.04% from 2008. A lower than SP 500 companies average* revenue CAGR may indicate that the company has underperformed the average SP 500 companies growth and lost market share over the last four years. The companys underperformance could be attributed to a weak competitive position or inferior products and services offering or lack of innovative products and services. Weakness Overdependence on Few Customers Overdependence on a few customers has been a major area of concern to the company. A significant portion of the companys revenues are generated from few customers. For instance, in 2008, sales to Wal-Mart and Sams West, Inc. represented 12% of the companys net revenue. The top five retail customers represented about 32% of its 2008 North American net revenue, of which Wal-Mart (including Sams) accounted for about 18%. The loss of one or more of the top customers in any of these segments could have a material adverse effect on the results of these segments. Due to overdependence on a few customers, the company may not be able to find suitable alternatives to sell its products in time if any of these customers is unable to buy the products on terms favorable to the company. Weakness Geographical Concentration PepsiCos overdependence on the US market for its revenues exposes the company to various risks associated with geographical concentration. Though PepsiCo has operations in various geographic regions, a majority of its revenues still comes from the US. During the fiscal year 2008, the company generated 52% of its total revenue from the US region. Further, during the fiscal year 2009, PepsiCo generated over 71% of its revenues from North America. This dependence on the US could impact its operational and financial performance in the event of any economic, political or climatic change. It also could restrict its market share and growth opportunities. PepsiCo, Inc. Opportunities Opportunity Huge Potential in the Emerging Markets The company could benefit from the growing markets in the Asia Pacific region. According to the World Bank, the GDP growth rate of high income countries came down from 2.6% in 2007 to 0.4% in 2008. The economies of these countries are expected to have contracted by 3.3% in 2009. Despite the global economic slowdown, the emerging and developing economies recorded a GDP growth rate of 8.1%, 5.6% and 1.2% during 2007, 2008 and 2009, respectively. Growth in the East Asia and Pacific region (especially China) as well as in South Asia (especially India) has been resilient. This was mainly due to the massive fiscal stimulus package in China and Indias skillful macroeconomic management. Chinas GDP grew at 9% in 2008 and 8.4% in 2009, while Indias grew at 6.1% and 6% respectively, during the period. The growing economy in these countries has generated new employment opportunities for the residents and has provided a boost to their earnings. Rise in disposable income has changed their buying behavior. Now more and more people are buying luxury and lifestyle goods unlike in the past when they used to confine their spending to basic necessities. Customers in the emerging countries are becoming more brand conscious and prefer to buy branded goods. With competition at its peak and markets getting saturated, the company can look out for new growth avenues in these regions. Opportunity Increasing Bottled Water Market The strong growth in the bottled water market is emerging as a major boon for the company. The global bottled water industry has been witnessing strong growth over the past few years, especially in the US. Bottled water is sold mostly in the industrialized countries where it costs between USD 500 and USD 1,000 per cubic meter, compared to USD 0.50 for municipal water in states such as California, US. With the strong profitability offered by the segment, many players have started foraying into the bottled water business. The demand for bottled water has also been on the rise in emerging countries. PepsiCos established presence in the bottled water segment, along with its strong brand image puts the company at a competitive edge over its rivals in attracting and retaining a loyal customer base. The strong distribution network also helps the company to cater to a geographically diverse customer base. Opportunity Growing Organic Foods Market The company has a significant opportunity to grow as the demand for organic food is set to rise by an average of 18% in the US by 2010, according to the Organic Trade Association (OTA). Rising Health consciousness in the US has made the organic foods segment one of the fastest growing segments in the food retailing industry. Though, the organic food segment represented a mere 2.8% of the US food and beverage market, the organic food market in the region generated USD 21.2 billion in 2007. According to a recent report from the OTA, the global demand for organic products has been growing at USD 5 billion a year. PepsiCo offers its all natural and organic product line under the Tropicana and Quaker brands in the US. The company can thus capitalize on its distribution network and organic food offerings to increase its market share and revenues. PepsiCo, Inc. PepsiCo, Inc.- Financial and Strategic Analysis Review Reference Code: GDCPG35119FSA Page 4 Opportunity Strategic Acquisitions Strategic acquisitions offer a strong growth opportunity for the company, especially while foraying into new markets or launching new products or services. The company has grown over the years by acquiring or merging with some of the major brands like Frito Lays, Quaker Oats, Gamesa and Sabritas. Further, in October 2009, the companys Pepsi Bottling Ventures, LLC signed a Letter of Intent to acquire the assets of Pepsi Cola Bottling Company of Conway-Myrtle Beach, Inc., the Pepsi-Cola franchise bottler based in Conway, South Carolina. Earlier, in August 2009, PepsiCo Inc. entered into definitive merger agreements with its two largest bottlers, The Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc. (PBG) and PepsiAmericas, Inc. (PAS). Under the agreement, PepsiCo will acquire all of the outstanding shares of common stock of these two bottlers. Currently, the company owns 33% and 43% of the outstanding shares of PBG and PAS respectively. During the same period, the company also announced an agreement to acquire Brazils largest coconut water company, Amacoco Nordeste Ltda. and Amacoco Sudeste Ltda. (Amacoco). Earlier, in April 2008, PepsiCo acquired the UK based vitamin water brand, V Water. These mergers and acquisitions offer a steady revenue source, apart from geographical expansion for the company. PepsiCo, Inc. Threats Threat Highly Competitive Market Growing competition could impact the business operations of the company. The company faces stiff competition from the various companies that are in the business of beverages, snack and food products. Key competitors include General Mills, Inc., Groupe Danone, Hershey Foods Corporation, Nestle S.A., Coca-Cola Company, The Procter Gamble Company, The Kraft Foods, Inc., National Beverage Corp., Jones Soda Co. and Kellogg Company. Apart from the established players in the developed countries, the players from emerging countries too are competing hard to garner maximum market share in their respective regions. If the company fails to maintain product quality and consumer loyalty, this intense competition could reduce the sales volume of the company, thereby hampering its market position. Threat Private Label Brands Gaining Momentum The growing demand for private label products has been a major area of concern to the company. According to a report by the Confederation of the Food and Drink Industries of the EU (CIAA), there is a shift in the consumer spending towards private label products. Also, it is observed that the private label products have reached as high as 48% in traditional retailers and 94% in discounters. In the UK, almost all the top 30 retailers witnessed an increase in the private label share in 2008. Private labels may become even more popular due to the current economic slowdown. Apart from low prices, the increasing quality of private label products has been driving away the sales of branded products. Thus PepsiCo faces a major challenge from these private label manufacturers in sustaining its growth. Threat Global Economic Conditions The company faces a major challenge in sustaining its revenue growth due to the slowdown in the global economy, especially the US. The banks have tightened their credit lending process thereby affecting the consumers shopping ability. Even the market volatility concerns have made them shop only for basic and essential goods, thereby creating a major challenge to the goods manufacturers whose sales have been on the decline. According to The World Bank, overall global GDP contracted by 2.2% in 2009, with 1.2% growth rate in the developing economies well below the 5.6% growth rate in 2008. In 2009, the GDP growth in the US weakened to -2.4% while in the Eurozone, GDP contracted more sharply by 3.9% from 0.5% in 2008. Further, the global output is expected to expand by 2.7% in 2010, and 3.2% in 2011 still below the 5% generated in 2007. Thus, adverse economic conditions could adversely affect the demand for the companys products, which poses a major challenge to the company in sustaining its revenue growth. Growth strategies Transforming its beverage portfolio PepsiCo sought to transform its beverage portfolio by increasing the health and wellness quotient of its products through RD. It has strengthened. its carbonated soft drinks (CSDs) segment, comprised of Pepsi, Diet Pepsi and Mountain Dew. In 2007, it launched Diet Pepsi Max in the US. It is a zero calorie energy drink and targets young men. It also introduced the high caffeine Mountain Dew Game Fuel in 2008, aimed at video gamers. PepsiCo has also introduced new carbonated juice drinks such as Izze, which is free of caffeine, refined sugars and artificial ingredients and is naturally sweetened with fruit juice. Izze fruit juices primarily targets carbonates customers who want alternatives to artificially sweetened soft drinks. Growth through partnerships PepsiCo concentrates on partnerships and joint ventures to expand its operations. In 2007, it extended the scope of its partnerships with Starbucks and Unilever on RTD beverages, and is expanding into other categories through acquisitions. In January 2008, it announced plans to acquire Penelopa nuts and seeds in Bulgaria, and in 2006, it purchased Duyvis nuts business. Also In 2006, the company entered the salted snacks business in New Zealand with the acquisition of Bluebird Foods, and expanded its snacks business in Brazil with the purchase of Lucky snacks.

Evaluation of Dworkins and Habermass Approach to Civil Disobedience E

Evaluation of Dworkin's and Habermas's Approach to Civil Disobedience The following essay will attempt to evaluate the approach taken by Dworkin and Habermas on their views of civil disobedience. The two main pieces of literature referred to will be Dworkin?s paper on 'Civil Disobedience and Nuclear Protest?' and Habermas's paper on 'Civil Disobedience: Litmus Test for the Democratic Constitutional State.' An outline of both Dworkin's and Habermas's approach will be given , further discussion will then focus on a reflective evaluation of these approaches. Firstly though, it is worth commenting on civil disobedience in a more general context. Most would agree that civil disobedience is a 'vital and protected form of political communication in modern constitutional democracies' and further the 'civil disobedience has a legitimate if informal place in the political culture of the community.' Civil disobedience can basically be broken down into two methods, either intentionally violating the law and thus incurring arrest (persuasive), or using the power of the masses to make prosecution too costly to pursue (non persuasive). Dworkin takes a categorical approach to civil disobedience, by breaking it down into a number of different types then applying certain conditions to each type to assess wether the disobedience should be allowed or not. He states that there are three different types of disobedience based on the motivations behind the action. These are integrity based, justice based and policy based civil disobedience. Briefly, integrity based disobedience is motivated when the law requires people to do something that goes against their personal integrity and is usually a matter of urgency. Dworkin gives an example of this as the Northern American citizen who covertly harbours and shelters slaves from the Southern citizens in violation of the Fugitive Slave Act.# The second type of disobedience, justice based, is motivated by a peoples desire to oppose unjust policy in the hopes of reversing the policy, for example the civilian protest about the war in Iraq recently. Thirdly, policy based disobedience is somewhat different to the first two in that it is usually activated by minority groups who think a policy is dangerously unwise. As Dworkin puts it ?they think they know what is in the majority?s own interests.? Given these three types of disobedie... ...rity is not necessarily a clear majority and also that majority decisions are quite often made under the pressures of time and lack of resources. Both Dworkin and Habermas have the same general views on civil disobedience (they both believe it is an essential form of political communication in a democratic state) but when they begin to examine the issues more closely, the differences in justification begin to become apparent between the two writers as outlined above. Bibliography. 1. Articles/Books/Reports Ronald Dworkin, ?Civil Disobedience and Nuclear Protest? in A Matter of Principle (1985) 104-16. JÃ ¼rgen Habermas, ?Civil Disobedience: Litmus Test for the Democratic Constitutional State? (1985) 30 Berkeley Journal of Sociology 95-116. 2. Other Sources Andrew Calabrese, Virtual non-violence? Civil disobedience and political violence in the information age (2004) 6 Emerald Info 326 available at http://spot.colorado.edu/~calabres/Calabrese%20(civl%20dis).pdf William Smith, Democracy, Deliberation and Disobedience (Paper presented at the UK Association for Legal and Social Philosophy Annual Conference, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, April 2003).

Debtor Appeal of Boston Essay

1. Case name and citation: In re Boston shipyard Corp. , Debtor Appeal of Boston Shipyard Corp. , No. 89-1144 United States court of Appeals, first Circuit. 886 F. 2d 451 Heard June 7, 1989. Decided September 1989 Before CAMPBELL, Chief Judge Reinhardt and Toruella circuit Judges. Its alleged that the ruling in this case was not fair by the fact that the district court that confirmed the bankruptcy of Boston Shipyard Corporation, BSC in favor of the appellee , the US Military Sealift Command, MSC. 2. Key Facts: BSC entered into agreement with MSC to revamp and repair the USNS Mississinewa (a water vessel) at a final pay of $ 4,997,925. Having been not fully aware, it turned out that the contract required much more in expenses than it was originally estimated. On realizing change in the contract specifications; it filed a change authorization order so that the work could be done with the permission of their client MSC. The orders however accumulated at the MSC’s table such that their delayed resolution resulted to a wide financial implication towards BSC. Till August 1985, BSC’s financial condition had worsened a situation that required the contract partner, MSC to make payments. Failure of MSC to pay BSC led to termination of the contract. The pulling out of the contract by BSC Company was based on the fact that the latter company had been declared bankrupt. It’s reported that on October 17th due to failure of MSC to compensate BSC, and was terminated by the government (West’s Federal Reporter, 1990). 3. Legal issues presented before Court: Among the legal issues presented before the court were several factors. That one, BSC as a company pulled out of a contract it had entered into with the US Military Sealift Command, â€Å"MSC†. The second issue was the fact that the latter, (MSC) had declined to make payments to the contractual partner, (Boston Shipyard Corporation, BSC), to cater for the extra expenses that were not budgeted for by the company. The US Military Sealift Command, MSC was â€Å"supposed† to cater for these cost overruns in order for BSC to provide its services. 4. Holding of the court: The US government, on February 25th 1986, through the US Bankruptcy Court, filed a proof of claim of $ 9. 2 million in Reprocurement costs. On the other hand, BSC, objecting to the Proof of Claim, filed a counter Proof of Claim, which was meant to convert the terminated contract into one that could benefit the government. Six months down the line, the bankruptcy court on making first hearing, it passed a judgement that favoured the government on the basis that BSC had without excuse withdrawn from the contract. This was further accepted to at the district court, a decision that BSC appeals to. 5. Reasoning (rationale): That a cardinal change is created or comes to exist in a contract when the contractor finds that he or she is required to execute tasks that are materially different from those that were originally bargained for at the start. Such changes are not subject to rectification, and so the judging on this, the government was in breach (West’s Federal Reporter, 1990). Basing on the fact that this contract was a â€Å"call and inspect† type, which implied that the vessels had to be opened first and scrutinized before establishing the whole cost to be involved in the contract. BSC may not be justified to abandon or pull out of the contract basing on the change orders written to MSC. Delay in the kick off of a contract is expected in any contractual agreement (Magoba Construction Company vs. United States). Talking of the incapability of BSC to deliver its services due to financial incapacity, one may argue that a contractor’s default may be pardoned if the causes seem to be beyond his control (ruling of Southeastern Airways Corporation vs. United States). However, it’s generally understood that as a contractor who makes and accepts bids from the government or any other individual, he should be having enough funds to support the contract. This is subject to change. Justification of the contractors default may be carried out only if the experienced financial problems were caused by factors beyond the company’s control or by the company itself (ruling of the case of National Eastern Corporation vs. United States). BSC also argues that the government’s delay to pay it some amount of money resulted to it being unable to respond to a contract worth $ 6. 5 million. This is not true. Evidence has, right from the beginning that BSC had a thin financial base before the contract was initiated (West’s Federal Reporter, 1990) At the same time, no blame was to be put on MSC for having caused any delay or disruption. Hence, conclusively, BSC’s financial incapacitation deterred the take-off of the contract. A different decision on this would make government contracts quite unworkable, and hence contractors would demand refund, and or financial consideration for any cost overruns. References: West’s Federal Reporter (1990): Cases argued and determined in the United States courts of appeals and Temporary Emergency Court of Appeals, University of California, p. 452

The Historical Period of One Day in the Life of Iv Essays

The Historical Period of One Day in the Life of Iv Essays The Historical Period of One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich: Living Eight Years in a Day One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich is a story of a man, Ivan Denisovich, during only one day of his sentence in a labor camp in Russia. The novel recounts in a fictional story, the experiences of Solzhenitsyn himself, and of his observations during his "stay" as a foundryworker and bricklayer, just as Shukov was in Solzhenitsyn's novel (One Day... 204). Sent to the Special Camps of Stalin in 1950, he experienced the life of a camp laborer as a political prisoner (Solzhenitsyn 1). Later exiled for life, he began work on the book secretly and recalled the memories with which he constructed the story, yet historical account, of life in a soviet labor camp. Within the text of One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, one finds constant references to the actual dress, code of conduct, and language of the prisoners. For example, Shukov, the main character, is a member of gang 104, number S-854 (One Day... 4,6). During their imprisonment, the laborers were assigned numbers of identification: Not only was this an attempt to keep a foothold on some type of organization of the prisoners, but it was also a device of the government to psychologically destroy the individuality of each prisoner, making him a number, burning his name with the clothes that he'd worn on the train ride to the camp (Ratushinskaya ch.4). This practice was much like and even patterned after the practices of the Nazis in their camps in which they imprisoned and humiliated the Jews. Similarly, the crimes for which soviet prisoners were charged ranged from general criminal offenses to ludicrous breaches of petty laws and incriminating political whispersanything that may remotely threaten the safety of Stalin's position in power. Historical documentation of these offenses finds not only Solzhenitsyn himself imprisoned for his "anti-Stalinism" remarks embedded within a discreet letter to a friend (Solzhenitsyn 1), but also the imprisonment of other authors as well. For example, Pasternak and Akhmatova were silenced by Stalin's iron fist for their anti-Stalinist poetry, though brilliant and exquisite (Yarmolinsky 191). Furthermore, attesting to the historical accuracy of the novel, this imprisonment of poets is found in Irina Ratushiskaya's documentation of her own imprisonment as an young, up-and-coming shining star in Russian literature, only to have her efforts quaffed, burned, and she herself, subjected to live as a zek, or prisoner, in the camp (Ratushinskaya c h. 3, 5, 10). Zek-life, as it was called by Ratushinskaya in her book Grey is the Color of Hope, was much like that of the prisoners in One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich; Irina, imprisoned nearly 45 years after the time period in which One Day... was set. The vulgar language and unabashed forwardness of both wardens and prisoners exhibits the baseness of the camps(One Day... xiix). Solzhenitsyn described the zeks as being supplied with a minimal amount of clothing and barely minimal amount of food, subjected to strip searches in the middle of winter, and expected to work everyday, maintaining their health (One Day... 37) "Each prisoner was allowed one shirt and one vest. Everything else had to come off.." was the mandate for clothing (One Day... 37). Later is said about Shukov and of the lack of food, "The amount of oats Shukov fed to the horses when he was a boy, and he never thought he'd long for a handful himself one day!"Subjected to the extreme cold of the region, the dampness of the bui ldings, the lack of food, prisoners suffered emotionally, physically, and spiritually. 'One of the main elements of persecution was based on differences in beliefs: A Baptist, evenanyone whose beliefs may conflict with the efforts of The Party (One Day... 38)stood his ground beneath the persecution of Stalin. This example was one, even though a fictional one, of many. Documented in Ratushinskaya's book is the plight of the "nuns" who, in their refusal to leave their traditional faith to join the reconstructed Russian Orthodox Church (Ratushinskaya 53). Similarly, have other orientations been persecuted as well, including sexual orientation. The noted author and Russian Literary great Pushkin was himself a

Essay on Doms Stuff

Essay on Doms Stuff Essay on Doms Stuff Case 1-1 Google 1. How does the changing environment for business affect Google ability to communicate in this situation? a. The main environment problem I feel is that they are going to a country in which there is already search engine that many in China use. So they will have a tough competition right when they get there. Also the control that the government has on its people is a little different than here in the U.S; we can search what ever we want, but the people of China can not and will be shown others pictures instead of what they are looking for. They will have to really think about what they created the company for and make sure they do not become a money making machine without a heart. 2. Where is the company most vulnerable from a communication standpoint? a. They seem to have a weakness when is the most important for them to speak up for themselves. Especially when they where asked to meet about their status with their company and what they where doing in China they did not show up to the meeting. Also they might go against their slogan â€Å"Don’t be Evil† which will be hard for them to explain to the many users why they went against it. 3. What is the main problem for the Google Company that they have to deal with? a. I think the main problem that Google has to deal with is their initial slogan â€Å"Don’t be Evil† that they will ruin, if they where to become more corporate and not true to themselves and their goal. If they where to go and invest into the Chinese market with all the censorship the government puts on their

Case Study 1 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 3

Case Study 1 - Essay Example The National Cash Registered Country Club (NCRCC) started to benefit thousands of employees who became the core members leading to their development. The club later started offering some two golf courses. Award winning and the championship hosting on the PGA tour are some of the courses offered by the National Cash Register Country Club (NCRCC). The only limitation was that the club was not attracting some new members more especially the young families (Sanchez & Lazaro, 2010). The study is mainly focusing on membership study which is done as part of larger organization creativity to ensure adequate evaluation to different strategic directions that the club may wish to increase its membership. I feel to allow all group age to the club without eliminating some. As in this case, majority are always youths so they need to be given chance to participate in all events of the club. The NCRCC: Teeing Up a New Strategic Direction golf club situated in U.S is observed as the optional extra life styles. However, the McMahon Group came to specialize in the provision of research and strategic consulting to the golf club and providing full services to golf (Floyd &Hebert, 2010). Frank Vain, who was the president of McMahon Group, suggested that with the existence of NCR faced an added wrinkle since it was corporately held. The first impression of McMahon visit where they collected information’s on membership and operations together with the club specialists to discuss the trends of the industry with strategic planning committees (Petar, 2010). The board of National Cash Registered Country Club (NCRCC) hired president McMahon to help the employee with the direction and assistance of the NCRCC development board. Vain estimated historically that the NCRCC has about seven percent diffusion rate in the midst of the employees which was trending smaller which made some reinforcement to the NCRCC membership. However, the NCRCC needed to become

LETTER OF LEGAL ADVICE Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words - 1

LETTER OF LEGAL ADVICE - Essay Example In most cases, acceptance must be absolute and unconditional – all the terms of the offer should be accepted without setting any conditions or changing the terms of the offer. However, the person being given an offer may require that the terms of the contract be changed or the offeror fulfill some conditions before acceptance of the offer (Abdul, 2011). Acceptance completes the process of forming a contract and allows both parties to be bound by the contract. Once an acceptance has been made, none of the parties can withdraw from it without incurring a liability to the other party. In that case, acceptance comes has its own unique elements that makes it different from other elements of a contract. Acceptance in a contract takes different forms depending on the way they are communicated and the terms of agreement involved in the contract. When an offer is made, ways of communicating the acceptance and any terms involved are stated. In that case, acceptance in a contract can be in the form implications, set conditions or expressed acceptance. These forms of acceptance must always be very clear and should not be with any kind of ambiguity neither should it be unequivocal. As it is seen in the case of Malago Pty Ltd v AW Ellis Engineering Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 227, there was ambiguity in the expression on the area whose ownership was to be transferred; that is ‘Gross Marine berth income.’ This was then one of the issues that appellant of the case argued that it rendered the agreement void. The court of appeal however, resolved the issue based on the circumstances that led to the agreement after it after construition of that expression. Therefore, the company should ensure that acceptance is always clear without ambiguity. Conditional form of a contract is the type of acceptance made under conditions set to the offeror by the party to whom an offer has been made as terms that must be made for the other party to accept the offer (Michael et al,