Government & Private Equity

You know that one. He’s the one in the office who puts out all the great ideas then steps out of the way while you do the work, but comes back just in time to tell you how you did it all wrong. His interest gravitates only to Power and Recognition. He isn’t interested in doing the work, actually participating in the project, or actively becoming involved in the accomplishment. He only wants the glory of suggestion and the recognition of completion.

Tags: business, concerns, ethics, issues, workplace

The completion of the Human Genome Project was greeted with much enthusiasm and many hopes for a bright future pregnant with new possibilities. Currently incurable diseases would be detected early enough and would be prevented before they developed. Damaged organs would be replaced with brand new cloned organs perfectly compatible with our bodies as these organs would be specially grown out of our own stem cells. Our children would be healthier and would live longer. The possibilities that were in the horizon seemed endless. Some even believed that one day we would even defeat death and would perhaps beat God in his own game.

Over the past forty years, genes have gradually gained a new value as the raw resources or the building blocks of an already happening biotech revolution that has been penetrating virtually every industry in the world markets. Those who have been involved in the race of deciphering the genetic code of life forms on this planet have also been part of a more vicious race of acquiring patents and intellectual property rights.

Although the ethical challenges posed by the biotech revolution are still being debated, patents on biotechnological inventions on living matter, such as genetically modified seeds, micro-organisms, genes, tissues, cell lines and many other components of life are now a reality. This double-edged sword has created a dilemma. On one hand, it is imperative to form a healthy balance between the interests of the inventor and the society via a social contract, such as a patent, which should also encourage scientific progress and a safe platform for the continuation of future inventions. On the other hand, such patents closely related to life and healthcare, under the strict control of a small group of corporate entities, worry many people, who clearly understand that in the near future one will have to pay royalties or will have no access to certain healthcare services.

In many hospitals today, patients, who need to have certain tests done to see if they have a specific gene or a genetic disposition for certain diseases, have to pay a royalty fee to the patent-holding company for that specific gene being scanned. For many, having to pay a “fee” to have a “gene scan” of “their own genes” is unacceptable. Although the medical technology will soon have the capacity to screen thousands of genes and genetic predispositions in the near future, offering a vast selection of new cures and solutions to various diseases, there is also no doubt that some will use patents to literally extort money from those of us in need of a cure.

If you are diagnosed with a rare cancer and need to be treated with a special type of protein that facilitates the growth of a certain anticancer agent, do not be surprised if you find out that you have to pay a chunky royalty to a company that you have never heard of. You no longer have any rights over your genes or your “own body tissues” as “somebody else” has already claimed the intellectual rights to “your” body parts “without” your consent or knowledge.

In the future, we all will have to pay our dues to a syndicate of biotech elites to have access to our own genetic heritage. Life has finally become a commodity that is tradable, inheritable and also extremely profitable.

Currently residing in Vancouver, CANADA.

Article Source

Corporate Espionage is so great in America that competitors will go to lengths to find out what your company has that makes it so much better than everyone else’s. Often they will even go so far as to set up a dummy corporation or LLC and actually go thru the sales process to buy a franchise, sometimes even go thru the purchase process, just to get all the information they need to compete with you, using your proprietary methods.

This is why I came up with a clause in our franchise agreements which helped us in knowing who we are dealing with up front and what their interests really are. Below is one of the clauses we use;

7.16 Other Parties

If Franchisee is a partnership, joint venture, association, corporation, limited liability company or other legal entity, then all persons who have any beneficial interest in the Franchisee must execute this Franchise Agreement where indicated below and be bound jointly and severally by all the terms and provision hereof, and each such execution shall be a condition precedent to the grant by Franchisee of the Franchised Business.

- – - – - – - – - – -

This made it very tough for a competitor to risk giving themselves away or opening them up for unfair business practice criminal investigations or civil lawsuits from us. It is unfortunate that the weaker, underwelming competitors have to cheat and lie just to keep up, but they are sub human and simply unworthy of mention on the evolutionary food chain. I use to feel sorry for them, but then that 15-second period ended, now we play tough, check six and steamroller these losers. Consider this in 2006.

“Lance Winslow” – Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; WorldThinkTank. Lance is an online writer in retirement.

Article Source

Tags: ethical, problems, dilemma, concerns, organizations

Multi-Level Marketing (MLM) is a system of marketing that has been around for some time. Also known as Network Marketing, it is a method of distributing products that involves little or no mass advertising. Instead, marketing of the product is spread by word of mouth of its users.

Of course, word-of-mouth marketing is around even longer than MLMs, so what makes it different? Unlike traditional word-of-mouth marketing, the users who spread the word for the company, and gets others to buy the products, gets a commission for doing so. The person who spreads the word is called the Sponsor or Upline, while the person whom he sponsors is called his Downline.

To make the deal even sweeter, the company gives the Sponsor a commission for products the Downline of his Downline buys! Many companies allow each Sponsor a network up to 6 levels deep. Hence the name for this style of marketing – Multi-Level Marketing or Network Marketing.

Legal Concerns

Legally speaking, MLMs have been legal in Singapore since June 2000, when the government finally recognised it as a method of product distribution, rather than a Pyramid Scheme. The U.S. government (the land where MLMs first originated with a company called Amway) has slapped a whole list of conditions on an MLM system to set it apart from Pyramid Schemes.

Ethical Concerns

To me, many MLMs toe a very thin line to Pyramid Schemes. The problem does not lie with the marketing system (which actually represents a very cheap method of product distribution for the parent company). Rather, it lies with the people who promote the products. In some cases, the way the system is run by the company also makes it a form of legalised Pyramid Scheme (if there is such a thing).

Why do I say that the problem lies with the people who promote the products? The problem is with the fact that it is promoted as a means to get rich. Its promoters want the downlines at all costs – it means more money for them. In order to get the downlines, they push the ‘business model’ and use hype and emotional draws to appeal to those who are looking for more income.

More often than not, the products are very expensive and marketable only to certain segments of the population (e.g. health products). In addition, many who are drawn to such MLMs are actually not prepared for the kind of sacrifices and time required for the business to work. It can take as long as 1-2 years, and thousands of dollars in expenditure before a profit can be turned in. These are the ‘hidden’ stuff that many promoters did not mention, in their push for more people in their downline (and hence greater wealth for them).

Another practice many companies have (that makes for high dropout rates) is that of a ‘maintenance’. Each month, their distributors must buy a certain amount of their product to keep their downlines. With increasing expenditure and of both money and time (especially time) and sometimes alienation from friends and family (due to overzealous promoting of the products to get a downline), the distributor gives up – and all their work goes down the drain.

The final point that personally bugs me is the fact that the promoters always harp on the fact that MLM is a sure-win business model. They insist that everybody can succeed in having the MLM as a business, to attain financial freedom.

Let me put it across very plainly. Is it possible for everybody to earn money from MLM? In order for a person to earn money from MLM, you need a critical mass of downlines (as little as 256 persons or as many as 1024, if not more). Mathematically, it is a folly to assume that there is no bottom of such a pyramid network. For those near the bottom, where are their critical masses coming from?

Ultimately, there must be somebody who is taking money from outside of the MLM structure, and pumping it into the network of sponsors above. Now, I have no problem with that. There might be those who buys the products without taking it as a business (also known in network marketing circles as ‘consumers’). I was one of them (my money comes from outside of the MLM structure). However, to push MLM as a business where everybody can make money is simply unethical.

Conclusion

I personally do not have an anti-MLM pose (I used to be a consumer, but not an active MLM business leader). To me, it represents a distribution system that takes away the wealth from the big boys (the advertisers, the warehousing systems, the transport systems, etc) and put it in the consumers themselves. For those who went in early and helped the company market their products, their income will increase.

For those who come in later, however, it is a different story. My desire, for those who read this article, is to warn against the hype and emotional traps that comes from a desire to get rich quick. I also hope (against hope, perhaps) that those promoters who have been pushing that mathematically-impossible model will at least tell the truth to their potential downlines.

I welcome all feedback on this article. Till then, may you find health and wealth in your endeavours.

Michael Chan used to be a teacher, before he left to run a managed fund. When his business failed, he returned to teaching, and is currently a Department Head at the Shanghai Singapore International School.

He constantly applies his business acumen to his job, to add value to his employer. His thoughts on K-12 education and on financial education can be found in his blog at here.

Article Source

Tags: ethical, concerns, issues, training, questions