tagged w/ Alister & Paine
-
Alister & Paine Poised for Continued Rapid Growth
Digital magazine publisher, Alister & Paine, INC. announced today the results of a recent audit revealing 400% return on investment (ROI) over the first six months of operation, with a monthly recurring return of 1,125 percent.
Under the leadership of Brian Aitken, the company is poised to continue its growth into the New Year as publisher of THE digital magazine for 21st century executives.
“While many new companies struggle in this tough economy and have a difficult time realizing profits even within a few years, Alister & Paine is quite the opposite,” said Brian Aitken, CEO of Alister & Paine. “This recent audit shows strong growth for us and proves Alister & Paine as a credible partner for our clients.”Alister & Paine Poised for Continued Rapid Growth
Digital magazine publisher,... more
-
-
Six months ago Brian Aitken, a 26-year-old entrepreneur, launched Alister & Paine Magazine: a digital magazine for 21st century executives. The company, which specializes in providing a web-optimized distribution channel for B2B and high end consumer goods, realized a 400% return on total investments after its first six months of operations.
A recent audit reveals that the company has been experiencing, and is projected to continue, a monthly recurring return of 1,125%.
"The key to any successful business is sticking to the plan, keeping the costs low and providing value to your clients. Alister & Paine does exactly that by providing high-quality editorials to a very hard-to-reach demographic. It doesn't hurt to have fun and love what you're doing...then the 90-hour weeks don't feel so bad," said Brian D. Aitken, Founder and CEO of Alister & Paine Magazine.Six months ago Brian Aitken, a 26-year-old entrepreneur, launched Alister & Paine... more
-
-
The Obama administration and the Democrats in Congress have made “reform” of the U.S. health insurance system one of their top priorities. The stated goals of this reform are covering the uninsured and slowing the growth of health care costs.
Critics of ObamaCare focus on the negatives it might generate, especially higher taxes and rationing. Many also question whether it will in fact bend the healthcare cost curve. These concerns are well taken, but they are just the tip of the iceberg. The ideal “reform” is not creation of a new government health insurance program but elimination of existing programs. Here’s why.
The standard argument for subsidizing health insurance holds that applicants for insurance know whether they are healthy or unhealthy, but insurers cannot tell which applicants are which. Under this “asymmetry of information,” insurers must offer the same premium to everyone, but then only the unhealthy want to purchase insurance. This “adverse selection” of applicants means private insurance might not arise or might only serve a portion of the market.The Obama administration and the Democrats in Congress have made “reform”... more
-
-
Thomas Pink of London was recently named the official luxury clothier to Alister & Paine Magazine, the American based digital magazine for 21st century executives.
Pink was set up in 1984 by three Irish brothers – James, Peter and John Mullen. Their idea was to reinvent the traditional Jermyn Street shirt, taking it to a wider, aspirational audience. The brand name Thomas Pink came from an 18th century London tailor known for making sought-after red hunting jackets. If you were lucky enough to own one, you were said to be ‘in the pink’.
Both Thomas Pink and Alister & Paine cater to a clientele that are critical of craftsmanship and enduring style. Just like Pink prides itself on immaculately tailored shirts Alister & Paine dignifies internet-journalism with its selection of high caliber interviewees and unique editorials. Alister & Paine Magazine was launched in 2009 by Publisher & Entrepreneur Brian Aitken. The Magazine, which is completely digital, brings business and lifestyle topics to the doorstep of some of America’s most influential executives.
“Thomas Pink products embody our philosophy of merging quality and sophistication in everything we do so it was only natural that we name them the official luxury clothier of Alister & Paine Magazine for 2009” said Brian D. Aitken, CEO of Alister & Paine, INC.Thomas Pink of London was recently named the official luxury clothier to Alister &... more
-
-
Every time a pant cuff gets worn, a shirt sleeve becomes pilled, a button pops off and you can’t fix it (if you’re that helpless of a bachelor), you trek out to the tailor and go through the tedious process of having a new suit made. Sure, it’s worth it for the attention to detail a master tailor delivers as opposed to those ill fitting polyester garments a place like Men’s Warehouse would put you in, but still.
Wouldn’t it be nice if you could step in a 3-D laser body scanner Jetson-style, have beams of light measure each curve and angle of your body and BAM!—a suit that fits you to perfection is delivered to your doorstep?
Alton Lane has arrived.Every time a pant cuff gets worn, a shirt sleeve becomes pilled, a button pops off and... more
-
-
Listen up. Ernst & Young named this man Entrepreneur of the Year in 2008. This year his company was listed as Number One for Consumer Electronics by Inc. Magazine (Ranked #14 in the Inc. 500 overall). Did I mention his company has seen over 6,251% growth over the past three years?
Snowboarder, entrepreneur, Deadhead.
We caught up with Rick Alden between impromptu business meetings and guest speaking at Weber State University to talk about how he figured out how to make serious money doing exactly what he loves.Listen up. Ernst & Young named this man Entrepreneur of the Year in 2008. This... more
-
-
In my last article I discussed ten growth factors for small and medium businesses (SMBs) during the recession, and as promised, this article discusses money allocation tips during the recession, i.e., where to cut back and where to allocate funds for best results. It will probably help if you read the last article before you read this one.
Get the best finance VP (CFO) your money can buy. Many finance VPs are glorified accountants, but you can’t afford this when times are hard. Your finance VP is a key executive and a huge factor in the health of your business, and needs to be strategic, creative, and an expert in cash flow management. Penny pinching isn’t necessarily a success factor during tough times. Your finance VP needs to know when to strategically invest in your business, when to shut the purse, and how to allocate your funds for best results.
Shed low performing business & product lines. Perform detailed analysis on your business lines and product lines, and either sell or shut down the ones with low ROI. You have better things to do with your money. This doesn’t apply to new operations that require more time to show returns.
Evaluate marketing and advertising costs. Marketing and advertising are major cost centers, so take a step back and reconsider the ROI on each aspect of your marketing efforts including print, email campaigns, trade shows, online programs, advertising (both online and traditional). Move funds into higher ROI activities and eliminate or reduce your lower ROI activities. Definitely look into social media. It’s here to stay, and as I mentioned in my last article, it will turn your marketing department upside down.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE: http://www.alisterpaine.com/findingmoney.htmlIn my last article I discussed ten growth factors for small and medium businesses... more
-
-
George W. Bush’s and Barack Obama’s “stimulus” programs will permanently transform the American economy. The market-based system that has produced unprecedented prosperity relies on profit and loss, which rewards individuals and firms that add value to the economy and penalizes those that detract value. The various stimulus programs undermine that system.
My discussion will focus on four distinct components of the 2008-09 stimulus: Federal Reserve policy, the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), the Obama stimulus spending package, and the bailouts of automobile and financial firms. Because there is a temptation to stereotype political parties, labeling the Democrats the party of big government and the Republicans the party of limited government and fiscal conservatism, it is worth emphasizing that these policies were bipartisan. The Federal Reserve policies came during the Bush administration and under Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, a Bush appointee. TARP was implemented by Bush and his Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, and the bailouts of automobile and financial firms were initiated in the Bush administration.
My message is one of hope and change. The change is the four stimulus programs. The hope is this: I hope I am wrong about the permanent negative effects these programs will have on America.
Federal Reserve Policy
Two fundamental elements of Federal Reserve policy changed in 2008:The Fed began making loans to nonbank financial institutions and buying financial assets other than securities issued by the U.S. Treasury.
The Fed was established in 1913 primarily to lend money to member banks based on their assets that could be used to pay off the loans. Until 2008 the only firms the Fed would lend to were member commercial banks. Then the Fed began making loans to nonbank financial institutions. It did so to provide those firms with liquidity, but in doing so it broke with precedent in two ways. First, it made loans to firms that were not members of the Federal Reserve System, and second, it made loans based on questionable assets, running the risk that the borrowers might not be able to repay the loans.
The second major change was that the Fed bought financial assets not issued by the Treasuryóso-called toxic assets held by private banks and other firms. The true value of the assets was questionable, so the Fed risked losses. The Fed can afford to take those losses, however. The biggest problem with this change in policy is that by buying some assets rather than others, the Fed was supporting some firms over others.
TO READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE CLICK HERE: http://www.alisterpaine.com/transformamerica.html
What do you think about all this "stimulus"?George W. Bush’s and Barack Obama’s “stimulus” programs will... more
-
-
Times continue to be difficult for businesses about a year into this recession. So many small and medium businesses I’ve recently spoken with are either going under or selling out, I’m beginning to take it personally (yeah, it’s all about me!). During good times, anyone can drift along, and during tough times, the weaklings fall off the grid, but during particularly hard times like right now, only the best survive. Being average no longer cuts it.
Reality check: by definition, half of all companies are below average. Where does your company fall on the spectrum?
Best business practices that make stellar companies need to be front and center in hard times as there’s no time to snooze. You and your employees have to work harder and much smarter in order to succeed. Here’s a list of factors that will propel growth during the good times, but must be seriously considered during tough times.
Embrace change. I know it’s cliché, but you don’t have a choice. The road ahead of you has turned and you’ve either come to a screeching halt or headed for the cliff. The only way to survive is to turn with the road. Change can be scary and unsettling for some, but get used to it. A windy road awaits all of us.
Define your target market with laser accuracy. Many of you have drifted along and survived on low hanging fruit, but this is no time to be fuzzy about your target market. Take a giant step back and define your market strategy. Where is your best bang for the buck? Are you headed for where the market is going? Without this, you’re shooting blind hoping to hit the target.
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE HERE: http://www.alisterpaine.com/recessiongrowth.htmlTimes continue to be difficult for businesses about a year into this recession. So... more
-
-
Want to save the economy?
It’s not easy, but it starts with entrepreneurs and executives like me and you. The biggest problem is, as much as we think the government helps small businesses and start-ups, the government actually harm entrepreneurs’ long-term objectives. Ever wonder why, with all the money provided through loans and grants, most startups fail within their first 5 years?
Lots of these failed startups can be attributed to inexperienced entrepreneurs entering into an already competitive marketplace. Some of these entrepreneurs lack management skills, others didn’t take the time to formulate a thorough business plan, analyze the market and competition, or bring enough capital to the table. Many entrepreneurs actually bring too much “capital” to the table; but they do so in the form of loans which they ultimately cannot pay back (this is where I reiterate the importance of a thorough business plan). Outside lack of planning the single biggest threat to a small businesses success is the government.
I know, I know. Grants, government-backed loans, the Small Business Administration--all of these things are meant to help entrepreneurs; not bankrupt them. But what about government subsidies and bailouts to failing companies? These policies hurt entrepreneurs more than the government programs in place to help them.
Government subsidies are killing America. Subsidies, by definition, support a failing business with tax payer money. This immediately removes any incentive of the failing business to rethink their strategy or develop new revenue streams. Think about it: if the government paid you to fail, would you change your business strategy? Of course not.
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE HERE: http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/2009/0812.html
Alister & Paine, INC. specializes in digital media auditing, buying and B2B Marketing.
Alister & Paine is a digital magazine covering business, lifestyle and human interest topics.Want to save the economy?
It’s not easy, but it starts with entrepreneurs... more
-
-
Violence among Mexico’s drug cartels and government has spilled over the U.S. border and beyond. The New York Times reports, “In the past few years, the cartels and other drug trafficking organizations have extended their reach across the United States and into Canada. Law enforcement authorities say they believe traffickers distributing the cartels’ marijuana, cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and other drugs are responsible for a rash of shootings in Vancouver, British Columbia, kidnappings in Phoenix, brutal assaults in Birmingham, Ala., and much more. United States law enforcement officials have identified 230 cities . . . where Mexican cartels and their affiliates ‘maintain drug distribution networks or supply drugs to distributors,’ as a Justice Department report put it in December.”
Does anyone still think the “war on drugs” is a good idea?
That may strike some people as an odd question under the circumstances, so let’s take it from another direction. Have you seen the news stories about the violence on the border being perpetrated by the Mexican whiskey and cigarette cartels?
No? That’s probably because there was no such violence and are no such cartels.
So why are there violent cartels in marijuana, cocaine, and heroin but not in whiskey and cigarettes?
All together now: prohibition.
“Our” Fault?
Of course the politicians blame everything and everyone but themselves for this spreading violence. “Our insatiable demand for illegal drugs fuels the drug trade,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said. “Our demand”? Including hers? “Our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police officers, soldiers and civilians.” Her answer, in addition to sending the Mexican government taxpayer money, is to go after consumers of drugs and manufacturers and dealers of guns she doesn’t like.
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE HERE: http://www.alisterpaine.com/drugwar.htmlViolence among Mexico’s drug cartels and government has spilled over the U.S.... more
-
-
In the psychiatrically correct view, mental illnesses are “just like bodily illnesses”; in fact, they are authoritatively declared to be “brain diseases.” The truth is that they are not. In medicine, there are diseases and, sometimes, treatments for them. In psychiatry, there are no diseases, nevertheless there are always treatments, that is procedures declared to be “therapies” for what, in fact, are diagnoses. The disanalogy between bodily disease and mental disease generates many confusions, perhaps most importantly the false belief that antipsychotic drugs function analogously to antibiotic and antihypertensive drugs.
There are objective criteria to determine whether a person has or does not have, say, a case of acute gonorrhea. This makes it reasonable to ask whether an antibiotic drug, say penicillin, is effective against gonorrhea. However, it is not reasonable to ask whether an antipsychotic drug, say Zyprexa, is effective against schizophrenia, because there are no objective criteria to determine whether a person has or does not have this alleged disorder. This is why it is futile to debate whether one or another psychotropic drug "works." All we can know is whether a particular mental patient likes or does not like to take a particular psychotropic drug; whether a particular family member likes or do not like his "loved one" to receive a particular psychotropic drug; and so forth.
READ THE REST OF THE ESSAY HERE: http://www.alisterpaine.com/treatments.htmlIn the psychiatrically correct view, mental illnesses are “just like bodily... more
-
-
There is an age-old adage that states reputation is everything, and with regard to business, it couldn’t be closer to the truth. Some experts even believe that reputation is a company’s bottom line. Martha Stewart knows it. ValueJet, at least by name, no longer exists because of it. But the Corporate Gods seem to make at least one major exception: for the notorious irresponsible bend-for-nobody Exxon.
Oil is inherently dirty business, of which Exxon is unquestionably the very unpopular King.
It is hard to forget the images of sea birds and otters fatally drenched in oil after the 1989 Exxon Valdez tragedy - a spill that is considered the most devastating human-caused environmental disaster ever to occur at sea. And while researchers once estimated that decimated bird populations would take 20 to 70 years to recover, it’s not likely that Exxon’s reputation ever will. In a recent survey of 26,000 consumers, Exxon’s reputation was ranked third to last, and participants mentioned the Valdez spill as their reason for ranking the King of Energy so poorly.
Although Valdez is a significant factor in Exxon’s unpopularity, it’s far from the only blemish on its corporate responsibility grade report. Betterworldhandbook.com ranks Exxon at the bottom of its “Social Responsibility Rankings for Gas Stations” (awarding the company the only grade F), citing numerous black marks on its record, including Money Magazine’s 10 worst list (x4) and Money Magazine’s Top 100 Corporate Criminals. Moreover, Exxon is drawing increased criticism for its stance on global warming, unwillingness to pursue alternative energies, and its support of drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Could things be worse? If reputation really is a company’s bottom line, one would think that Exxon must be in pretty bad shape. And one couldn’t be more wrong. (Even Greenpeace knows Exxon is a machine).
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE HERE: http://www.alisterpaine.com/exxon.htmlThere is an age-old adage that states reputation is everything, and with regard to... more
-
-
Can you see the light? Buffet can.
Although measures of investor confidence are up from their December 2008 low, the dizzy American market still teeters on fear. And it’s no wonder. With a full basket of financial woes and dominoes still toppling around the world, the economic prophets declare the Great Recession will persist through the rest of 2009.
That’s something to think about.
But while craven investors hide in the hills, keeping their money in cash equivalent safe havens and awaiting good news, the oh-so debonair valiant-investor is charging back in, knowing that if one waits for the robins the spring will be over.
Consider oracle-investor Warren Buffet’s tremendous success, a mastery of the counter correlation between fear and greed. Sitting atop his billions, Buffet passionately cajoles, “Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful.”
In short, now is the time to conquer fear, and overcome the ugly temptation to let risk aversion profit a zero. Fortune favors the bold after all, like Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller, who capitalized on the panic of 1873, bought at fire-sale prices and built an empire.
That’s hot.
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE HERE: http://www.alisterpaine.com/valiantinvestor.htmlCan you see the light? Buffet can.
Although measures of investor confidence are up... more
-
-
Alister & Paine Launches New Column
HIGH FALLS, N.Y. – (August 3, 2009) – Since our inception we've been responding to our readers requests to cover different topics... including the "real" effect of increased government regulations on American businesses (coming soon) and the best place to go heli-boarding this winter (also, coming soon). One request we had over and over was to build a collection of human-interest essays.
Based on our readers feedback we've built the "Human Interest Column". We are proud to work with renown writers Thomas Szasz and Becky Akers to launch our first two Human Interest essays. These essays will be a special and irregular supplement to our regularly published Business and Elite Lifestyle Columns.
"Naturally, this took us as a bit of a surprise. It was never our intention, from the beginning, to offer these types of essays to our readers. That being said, we pride ourselves on our flexibility and a desire to give our readers what they want. The readers have spoken... and we've listened," said Brian D. Aitken, Executive Creative Director for Alister & Paine Magazine.
We hope you enjoy this new offering and, as always, don't hesitate to write us and let us know what you'd like to see next.
About Alister & Paine Magazine:
Alister & Paine was founded in early 2009 as a free weekly email magazine for American business executives. Editorial topics range from unbiased and timely business articles to luxury inspired lifestyle editorials. For additional information please visit www.alisterpaine.com.Alister & Paine Launches New Column
HIGH FALLS, N.Y. – (August 3, 2009)... more
-
-
In its zeal to protect us from Mexicans who want to pick our fruit and clean our homes, the federal government is walling off our southwestern border. Congress passed the “Secure Fence Act” [SFA] in 2006, authorizing barriers along some portions of the 1969-mile boundary; other stretches will contend with a “virtual” wall of motion-sensors and cameras. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was supposed to have built almost 700 miles of physical fence by the close of 2008 and the Bush Administration; we can assume it fell short since the Federal government is ever incompetent and since it’s tight-lipped about how many miles it has completed.
More people cross this international boundary each year than any other in the world – 250 million with government’s permission, a fraction of that without (estimates range from 400,000 to a million). Patches of the border, particularly urban ones, have been fenced and policed for decades. But this dotted line inconvenienced rather than stopped folks who neglected to secure a bureaucrat’s consent for their trip: travelers trying to exercise their inalienable right to free movement simply went around the barriers. The Feds never like being outfoxed, so they extended the fencing beyond populated areas. This drove migrants into increasingly remote and hostile terrain. There they not only had to survive encounters with America’s Border Patrol but also dehydration in the desert. No More Deaths, a group that=2 0caches food and water along routes migrants are likely to take, estimates that at least 238 travellers perished in Arizona alone in 2006, with more than 4000 “men, women, and children” overall “[losing] their lives in the deserts of the US-Mexico borderlands” from 1998 to the present.
Walling off Rights
You might think that would be tragedy enough for anyone. But as former President George Bush said when he signed the SFA, “We have a responsibility to enforce our laws. We have a responsibility to secure our borders. We take this responsibility seriously” – apparently, far more seriously than we do corpses or Constitutional limits on government. And so the Act “authorize[d] the construction of hundreds of miles of additional fencing along our southern border… more vehicle barriers, checkpoints and lighting to help prevent people from entering our country illegally. The bill authorize[d] the Department of Homeland Security to increase the use of advanced technology, like cameras and satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles to reinforce our infrastructure at the border.”
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE HERE: http://www.alisterpaine.com/wall.htmlIn its zeal to protect us from Mexicans who want to pick our fruit and clean our... more
-
-
Later this year Copenhagen will host the final meeting on international climate policy at the government level before declaring the Copenhagen Protocol—a follow up to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol which expires in 2012.
The summit will focus on what the “global community” can do to reduce carbon emissions—but the real agenda is to have the United States sign on, and ratify, the Protocol which they refused to do in 1997. The United States had determined that the proposed restrictions were too costly and therefore did not ratify the Protocol which they had been so active in formulating.
Policy makers, including President Bush, were fearful that many large industrial companies would face massive financial penalties and that the Protocol would cause an increase in taxes while limiting industrial growth. The cost of ratifying the Protocol was simply not worth the short term gains.
If the Copenhagen Protocol is just a new name on the same “cap and trade” product that resulted from the Kyoto Protocol then we’ll find many nations regulating a handful of industrialized nations (Kyoto was ratified by 141 nations but only limited emissions from 35 industrialized countries). Developing countries like China and India were excluded from the stringent regulations proposed by Kyoto to give them “time to catch up” with the rest of the industrialized world.
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE HERE: http://www.alisterpaine.com/copenhagen.htmlLater this year Copenhagen will host the final meeting on international climate policy... more
-
-
We’ve heard your feedback and, not surprisingly, the overwhelming majority of our readers who responded to the June 22nd article “The Green Road to Copenhagen” were opposed to the Copenhagen Protocol and the pending “Cap & Trade” Bill. Many of you were opposed to increased regulations and tax liabilities during this fragile economic period. Many of you were also opposed to the idea that America would somehow allow for other countries to dictate our domestic policies. Sadly, if there’s anything we’ve learned from the passing of the “Spending Bill” it’s that the American Government cares little, if at all, about the interests and opinions of the masses of which it represents.
That being said, perhaps it’s time we take a long hard look at our portfolios and consider making strategic moves if this pending legislation, which President Obama is strongly advocating, should pass.
So, which companies are poised to capitalize from the Cap & Trade Bill and the Copenhagen Protocol? For starters, carbon-compliance and monitoring companies like the United Kingdoms’ Hedra PLC and EmissionsLogic.
Before being acquired by Mouchel in 2008, Hedra PLC was the UK’s leading independent consultancy specializing in Utilities and public sector markets. Should the “Cap & Trade” Bill pass companies like Hedra will work with businesses so they understand their obligations under this new set of laws.
More laws = more lawyers.
EmissionsLogic is the one-stop-shop for environmental compliance solutions. They provide everything from monitoring solutions, regulatory compliance oversight, evaluation of energy reduction and abatement projects to allowance and carbon-credit trading. They also assist companies with reporting and third-party auditing. Think of them as the Pricewaterhouse Coopers of energy compliance.
Energy compliance companies aren’t the only businesses poised to capitalize from this energy and policy revolution. Companies like Clipper Windpower, who manufacture and maintain the massive windmills seen in “eco-friendly” commercials, stand to make a pretty penny as our nation’s energy dependency is transferred to renewable resources like wind and solar.
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE HERE: http://www.alisterpaine.com/capitalize.htmlWe’ve heard your feedback and, not surprisingly, the overwhelming majority of... more
-
-
With every economic downturn, there’s a flurry of mergers and acquisitions as a result of lowered market value, lower-tiered companies threatened to fall off the grid, and companies with a cash hoard searching for bargains.
With this in mind, it occurred to me that approaching M&A deals mirrors dating in many ways. Here are a dozen parallels I thought about.
1- Be wary of virgins. Most of you are probably too old to remember, but let me remind you: house of pain. If at least one of the participants has never been through an M&A deal, there’s great potential for misunderstandings and misfires. If you’re dealing with an M&A “virgin”, take your time, take the lead in communicating the plans, and watch every step of the deal. If you’re the “virgin”, educate yourself and surround yourself by trusted advisors who will guide you on what to expect.
2- Make sure you share core values. If you were raised in a hippie family and your date is from an ultra-conservative family, it makes for a good Hollywood flick, but you know in real life you have lots of work ahead of you. Make sure to evaluate the company’s corporate culture, fiscal management policies, long term strategies, and other core values that need to fit your company’s value system for a healthy deal.
3- Heed the early warning signs. Remember that guy who checked out every woman who walked through the restaurant on your second date? Sure he was cute, but you knew better. I once witnessed a deal where the acquiring company had hit a wall with lack of growth and few new products in the pipeline. The SVP of sales and marketing had quit over the weekend never to return, the CEO was under intense pressure from the board to increase top line results, and the company was on an acquisition spree. Some of the targeted companies had noticed the warning signs but went ahead with the deals anyway. Needless to say, some of those deals went south in no time. Has the company you’re considering recently lost key employees, major customers or partners? Are they playing their cards too close to their chest? Are they having trouble refreshing their product line? Have they seriously reduced their marketing and advertising activities? May be time to step back and reevaluate the situation.
READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE HERE: http://www.alisterpaine.com/mergers.htmlWith every economic downturn, there’s a flurry of mergers and acquisitions as a... more
-
-
Back in the early 90s, I knew someone who worked at a new coffee shop in Santa Monica, and couldn’t get over the fact that people lined up at the door at the crack of dawn before the coffee shop opened. That’s the first time I heard of the Starbuck brand, and in retrospect, I should have sold the house and bought the stock at IPO price back then, and then I would have been a gizzillionaire or something…
OK, I’m having an A.D.D. moment. Back to the topic of brands.
In what turned out to be one of the most successful American brand stories, Starbucks expanded its operations from a small specialty coffee chain in Seattle to an international conglomerate with one of the best known brands around the world. Who thought about coffee brands before Starbucks? It was either Nescafe or 7-11 back then.
By 2008, Starbucks boasted 15,750 locations internationally feeding a typical problem with successful brands – overexposure causing ubiquity and un-exclusivity. I know, most companies wish they had this problem. A problem it is, nonetheless. In a matter of a decade, the company went from Starbucks the darling of chic barista coffee houses, to Starfux the corporate powerhouse encroaching neighborhoods. No more lining up at the storefront at the crack of dawn.
But that was so 2008.
Starting today, Starbucks is testing a new idea by converting a few of its Seattle locations into a completely new storefront: (drum rolls!) selling beer, wine, and specialty foods in addition to its current line of coffees and pastries, and (double drum rolls!) debranding the stores both from the Starbucks name and the all familiar Starbucks look. The storefronts will be named after the cross section of the streets closest to it, like “25th and Sepulveda” – I just made up that name (and no, I don’t live there).
Starbucks has recently experienced great difficulty increasing sales. The specialty coffee story has had a great run but competition has become all too stiff (McCafes anyone?). So with this, the company switches from a “coffee house” story to a “neighborhood hangout” story with food and alcohol, live music, and comfortable rustic environs. If this idea proves profitable, Starbucks will be able to convert a large subset of its current 15,000+ locations from “coffee house only” stores to “coffee house and bar and café” stores, thereby expanding into new highly profitable markets in one swift swipe.
Continue reading the article here: http://www.alisterpaine.com/starbucks.htmlBack in the early 90s, I knew someone who worked at a new coffee shop in Santa Monica,... more
-
