One of the more exciting marketing strategies of the last ten years has been the growth in the use of coupons. The idea is simple. A central marketing agency promotes the named businesses by offering discount vouchers. Go to this restaurant, eat a magnificent meal, and enjoy a discount of 50%. This is a great promotion for the restaurant and the statistics show the majority of people who come to try out the meals return and pay the full price later on. Now let the pharmaceutical industry play with this idea. Suppose the drug manufacturers were to offer coupons to their loyal customers, how would the marketing plan work? Well, for a moment, consider the problem of the generic market. When the patent runs out on a brand, others may copy the chemistry and sell a generic version of the drug for a significantly lower price. From the customer’s point of view, this is wonderful news. The same drug is available. It has been approved by the FDA as an exact match for the original branded drug. And it comes at a heavily discounted price. Not surprisingly, this knocks a big hole in the profits of the branded manufacturer, so this manufacturer will search for a way to keep the generic manufacturer out of the market.
|
||||||
|
As you are almost certainly aware, a number of GOP-controlled states have been introducing pro-life bills to deter women from going through abortions. As federal law stands, states cannot simply ban abortions. That would require the repeal of Roe v Wade, a decision of the Supreme Court in 1973. So ingenious law-makers have been coming up with ever more barriers to put in the path of women who want to terminate a pregnancy. The latest proposals require an ultrasound test. In the early stages of pregnancy, this can be external. But, as the pregnancy advances, the probe must be inserted into the vagina to take precise readings. Thus, not only are the law-makers requiring doctors to carry out a procedure that’s medically unnecessary, but they are also insisting the procedure be the most invasive possible. Not only women but a significant number of men think this is an abuse of law-making powers. In Pennsylvania, State Senator Larry Farnese is proposing a bill to change the procedure men will have to go through to get a prescription for one of the erectile dysfunction drugs. The first step will be a full cardiac stress test to ensure you are fit enough to attempt sexual activity. This will be followed by a physical examination to see whether there are any signs of prostate cancer. The man will also have to produce an affidavit from his partner confirming the reality of sexual difficulties and, if there are no obvious physical causes, psychological counseling will be required. A judge was once asked for a definition of obscenity. His reply was that he would know it when he saw it. So, to the courts, it’s acceptable to leave a concept undefined so long as anyone would know what it means. When we come to fraud, it’s a similar problem. There are so many different ways in which someone dishonest can separate a willing victim from his or her money. It can be the most simple of lies or a complicated web of deceit that lures even the most wary of people into handing over cash. For that reason, we are left with a list of components. There must be a deception of some kind. This deception must be made dishonestly, and it must cause financial loss to the person deceived. After that, it’s down to common sense. So here’s the question for you. Let’s say you ask advice from someone who seems to be an independent professional and then act on that advice by buying a product. Later you discover the professional received a substantial part of the price as a commission and that there were other, better products you could have bought at lower prices. You have suffered a loss by relying on the advice. Had you known the professional was being paid to sell that product, you would probably not have relied on the advice. Before the recession, there was a constant stream of people wanting business premises, so being a commercial landlord made good economic sense. As evidence of this, look at the popularity of the Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs). Across the US, there are a number of significant players that own office blocks, regional malls, shopping centers, healthcare centers, and residential accommodation. Despite the recession, these investment vehicles have continued to bring in steady dividends. This level of performance has not been matched by the owners of individual properties on Main Street or for private letting as residential accommodation. Large numbers of properties on Main Street are shuttered and there’s no sign of any real demand to maintain rental income. Unless demand picks up, rents will continue to fall. With mortgages now more difficult to obtain, there’s better performance in the residential market as people need rented accommodation, but care must be taken when buying property. A significant number of homes are going through the foreclosure process and, if you have the capital, can be bought relatively cheaply in auction. So long as you have professional surveys to ensure the properties are physically sound, these acquisitions represent a good long-term investment, i.e. at some point, the property market will recover and values will rise. But if you bought at the top of the boom, you may be struggling to cover the financing costs out of revenue. The ability to buy big ticket items even if you don’t have the cash available is an idea that everyone has now got used to. This may involve a loan or some other credit arrangement, or you can rent. We have moved from a society in which people used to save until they could afford to buy, to one where you can satisfy your wishes instantly with a good credit score and proof of your identity. When it comes to vehicles, it’s either been a case of talking nicely to neighbors to borrow their car in an emergency or go to a rental agency. Now we have moved beyond the carpooling arrangements into car-sharing. This is both good news and bad. At a community level, there are an increasing number of self-help groups who are making their vehicles available to each other. At the top end of the market, established renters like Hertz are making vehicles available on demand. New organizations like Zipcar also leave vehicles in designated places and anyone with a card can get in and drive them away. The established renters are simply using the existing fleet in a more flexible way to generate money. Satisfactory insurance cover is already in place. But problems have been emerging in the less formal market. What happens to your own insurance cover if you place your own vehicle into a pool that anyone can drive? The answer is simple. If you do this on a regular basis and you are paid, this is a commercial use. As a private owner, this invalidates your policy. |
|
|||||
