Academic Authorings

Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis

2011-05-29T16:09:00.000-07:00

Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)

2011-05-29T16:08:00.000-07:00

While specific figures regarding these synergies have not been made public, benchmarking PepsiCo’s success with the acquisition of its bottling partners is not difficult. As the bottling business is naturally less profitable than that of selling syrups, it is natural to expect PepsiCo’s gross margin percentage to head lower post-merger. This reality is taken into account with a reminder that the macroeconomic trend in North America is decreasing carbonated beverage consumption per capita. Further, PepsiCo issued millions of new shares of common stock when it acquired its two largest bottling partners. Despite these factors, which have all negatively impacted the company’s earnings per share (EPS), PepsiCo’s third-quarter 2010 EPS came to $1.19, up 10 cents from the prior year quarter, which was also prior to the M&A activity.[ Alazraki, Melly. "PepsiCo Earnings, Revenue Rise on Bottlers Acquisition." DailyFinance. 7 Oct. 2010. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/10/07/pepsico-earnings-revenue-rise-on-bottlers-acquisition/ .] This suggests that at least some synergies were recognized right away from the first-quarter 2010 mergers, and it’s those cost reductions which fought the negative headwinds facing PepsiCo. The result is significantly higher EPS. Without specific synergy figures from the company, a bit of deduction suggests that PepsiCo’s CEO Nooyi is telling the truth, and that significant cost savings from the merger are unfolding. This relationship translates to Coca-Cola’s acquisition of CCE, as the transactions almost mirror one another. The likelihood of Coca-Cola realizing significant cost savings, and therefore bottom-line growth, from its acquisition of CCE’s North American operations is a virtual certainty.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success

2011-05-29T16:06:00.000-07:00

Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success

The Coca-Cola/CCE acquisition came to agreement roughly a year ago, with closure of the deal about two quarters ago. The company has not let on yet about synergies realized from the transaction. Therefore, an analysis of the results from PepsiCo’s M&A deal with Pepsi Bottling Group (PBG) and PepsiAmericas (PAS) may be a solid indicator of what Coca-Cola should expect. PepsiCo’s deal occurred roughly a year earlier, with agreement coming on August 4, 2009, and closure on February 26, 2010 after shareholders of both PBG and PAS completed shareholder elections of the form of consideration most desired.[ "PepsiCo Announces Final Results of Elections Regarding Merger Consideration for Bottler Acquisitions." PepsiCo. 2 Mar. 2010. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.pepsico.com/PressRelease/PepsiCo-Announces-Final-Results-of-Elections-Regarding-Merger-Consideration-for-03022010.html .] As it turned out, all PBG and PAS shareholders who elected to receive cash in lieu of any consideration of PepsiCo stock had their desire met. The rest of PBG and PAS shareholders received roughly 50% of the value of their shares in cash and the other 50% in shares of PepsiCo stock.

According to a publication called “Daily Finance,” an interpretation of PepsiCo’s third-quarter 2010 financial results reads as follows: “The American beverage business saw volume, net revenue and operating profit results driven by the favorable impact of the bottling acquisitions, synergies and improving sequential organic volume trends across the product portfolio in North America.”[ Alazraki, Melly. "PepsiCo Earnings, Revenue Rise on Bottlers Acquisition." DailyFinance. 7 Oct. 2010. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/10/07/pepsico-earnings-revenue-rise-on-bottlers-acquisition/ .] This assessment was made more firm when Indra Nooyi, PepsiCo CEO, said during the company’s first-quarter 2011 earnings call, “We hit the first anniversary of the bottler acquisitions in the first-quarter, and the synergies are ahead of original estimates. We have made the operational organization changes necessary to realize the cost synergies, and we're beginning to realize the revenue synergies now.”[ "PepsiCo's CEO Discusses Q1 2011 Results - Earnings Call Transcript." Seeking Alpha. 28 Apr. 2011. Web. 01 May 2011. http://seekingalpha.com/article/266334-pepsico-s-ceo-discusses-q1-2011-results-earnings-call-transcript .] From these short-term assessments, it appears that Coca-Cola should expect exceptional cost synergies to emerge, especially around or after the one-year anniversary of the deal completion.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction

2011-05-29T16:05:00.000-07:00

Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction

From a regulatory perspective, this M&A deal almost exactly mirrors the 2009 transaction whereby PepsiCo acquired its two largest bottling partners. In that deal, both Pepsi Bottling Group and PepsiAmericas had existing bottling and distribution agreements with the Dr. Pepper Snapple Group for certain beverage products. Coincidentally, the same agreement exists between Dr. Pepper and CCE in which the latter bottles and distributes the former’s products throughout various North American geographic segments. In an identical decision, the Federal Trade Commission has decreed that the Coke/CCE deal may only come to fruition if the former sets up an information “firewall” that would prevent certain Coca-Cola employees from gaining access to competitive information that Dr. Pepper has shared with CCE under its existing bottling agreement.[ "FTC Puts Conditions on Coca-Cola's $12.3 Billion Acquisition of Its Largest North American Bottler." Federal Trade Commission. 27 Sept. 2010. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2010/09/coke.shtm .] This position by the FTC is intended to prevent the release of Dr. Pepper’s proprietary business information and therefore eliminate potential conflicts of interest inherent to the business landscape.

In one final regulatory move, the Canadian Competition Bureau approved this acquisition in the fall of 2010.[ "Coca-Cola - Press Center - Press Kits - Regulatory Clearance For CCE Acquisition." Coca-Cola: The Coca-Cola Company. 27 Sept. 2010. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/dynamic/press_center/2010/09/the-coca-cola-company-obtains-regulatory-clearance-for-acquisition-of-cces-north-american-business.html .] As CCE engages in limited bottling and distribution activities in Canada, this approval was necessary before a complete acquisition could be made by Coca-Cola. Separately, the final seal of approval on the deal comes from current CCE shareholders, whose investment position is likely to alter significantly if the acquisition goes through as planned. The new CCE they will be shareholders of will focus almost exclusively on bottling and distribution of Coca-Cola products in Europe. This focus will be enhanced by CCE’s counter-acquisition of Coke’s Swedish and Norwegian bottling operations, and the later option of purchasing Coke’s German bottling operations at fair value, a major discount from what an outside party would have to pay. Regarding approval of the entire deal, CCE shareholders were scheduled to have a vote on the morning of October 1st, 2010. According to a CCE announcement, enough shareholders approved the acquisition, and execution of the deal is to begin immediately.[ Geller, Martinne, and Brad Dorfman. "Coke Enterprises' Shareholders Approve Coke Deal." Reuters.com. 01 Oct. 2010. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/10/01/us-cocacolaenterprises-idUSTRE6903E720101001 .]

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players

2011-05-29T16:04:00.000-07:00

Major Legal and Financial Players in the M&A Deal

Exhibit 8[ "The Coca-Cola Company and Coca-Cola Enterprises Strategically Advance and Strengthen Their Partnership." Business Wire. 25 Feb. 2010. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/permalink/?ndmViewId=news_view .] presents a schedule of firms that were involved in the Coca-Cola/CCE acquisition transaction. Interested parties include law firms, investment banking firms, a consulting firm, and several other players including the Federal Trade Commission and the shareholders of the acquired company, CCE. Coca-Cola has used law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom for M&A legal services several times in the past, including Coke’s 2007 acquisition of Energy Brands, the owner of Glaceau, the maker of VitaminWater.[ "Skadden Represents Coca-Cola in Its Acquisition of Glaceau." Skadden. May 2007. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.skadden.com/Index.cfm?contentID=42 .] Other Coke acquisitions Skadden advised on include the company’s initial equity stake in Honest Tea, and the company’s busted $2.4 billion bid for Chinese juice maker Huiyuan Juice Group, Ltd.[ Lee, Lisa, and Amy Wu. "Skadden Breaks out the Bubbly." The Deal LLC. 12 Sept. 2008. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.thedeal.com/magazine/ID/019462/dealmakers/deal-diary.php .]

Also of note in this deal was CCE’s employment of law firm McKenna Long & Aldridge and consultant Greenhill & Company to interact directly with the company’s Special Committee to the Board of Directors regarding the deal. By involving separate firms to deal with a special committee, CCE was able to avoid most conflicts of interest with senior company management that could have arisen. This practice is commendable and indicative of due diligence on the part of both beverage companies.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)

2011-05-29T16:02:00.001-07:00

For Coca-Cola, gaining the type of cash flow and synergies that CCE North America brings came at a cheap price. To pay fair value for such a large business, with assets of $12.3 billion, is a phenomenal deal for Coke. Within Coca-Cola, a major reorganization has begun that will combine the acquired assets from CCE with other company segments to create a new, overarching business segment known as Coca-Cola Refreshments (CCR). This unit will be lead by the former President of the North American business unit with CCE, Steve Cahillane.[ "The Coca-Cola Company Finalizes Transaction with Coca-Cola Enterprises." Reuters.com. 3 Oct. 2010. Web. 4 May 2011. http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/10/03/idUS44374+03-Oct-2010+BW20101003 .] Accordingly, his expertise with the business should prove invaluable to Coca-Cola in bringing the unit in-house. The new CCR unit at Coca-Cola will be a combination of: “(1) CCE North America; (2) CCNA (Coca-Cola North America) Foodservice; (3) the Minute Maid and Odwalla juice businesses, (4) CCNA Supply Chain Operations, and (5) the Company-owned bottling operations in Philadelphia.”[ Ibid. ]

Whether the Coca-Cola/CCE deal will ultimately prove a fruitful endeavor for Coke is no question. By cutting out a layer of management and eliminating the entire CCE shareholder base from equity interest in the North American segment, Coca-Cola will undoubtedly realize massive synergies. Being such a recent deal, it is difficult to determine the types of synergies that Coke is seeing so far. As it turns out, Coca-Cola’s 2011 first quarter earnings report was released on April 26th, 2011, and indicates positive results for the acquisition so far. The company’s net revenue jumped 40%[ "2011 First Quarter Results." Coca-Cola: The Coca-Cola Company. 26 Apr. 2011. Web. 04 May 2011. http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/dynamic/press_center/2011/04/2011-first-quarter-financial-results.html .] from the comparable period last year, giving clear indication as to the magnitude of this acquisition. The company says in its report, “Coca-Cola Refreshments (CCR) integration efforts are on plan, with expected 2011 net cost synergies of $140 to $150 million.”[ Ibid. ] Of the estimated $350 million in total synergies over four years, this is clearly a solid start to the first year of combined operations. The long-term success of the deal is a matter for further discussion, and is given consideration later on in this paper.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure

2011-05-29T16:02:00.000-07:00

Coca-Cola’s Acquisition of CCE’s North American Operations

Deal Structure

The structure of the Coca-Cola/CCE deal follows in Exhibit 7. Coca-Cola will be relinquishing its 34% equity stake in CCE, valued at $3.4 billion approximately. Coca-Cola, in a position against the industry trend, owns a few bottling operations overseas. The company will offer the Norwegian and Swedish operations over to CCE, and an option for CCE to acquire an 83% stake in the major German bottling unit for fair value in 18-36 months post-deal closure. In exchange, CCE will be giving Coca-Cola all of its North American bottling operations, valued at roughly $3.4 billion, as well as $822 million in cash. There were no competing bids in this transaction, as no outside parties were aware the deal was in progress. Given the industry trend toward bottler consolidation, analysts surely might have expected this acquisition, though no other bidders were involved in the deal-making process.

The deal is largely thought to be at fair value. Exhibit 7 shows the equal valuations of CCE’s North American operations and Coke’s equity stake in the company, at $3.4 billion. Coca-Cola has also indicated the swap of $822 million for Coke’s Norway and Sweden bottling operations to be an equivalent component. The basis for this fair value swap lies in the relationship between the companies that has precipitated over the many years of both companies’ history. CCE realizes that virtually all of its success has been at the hand of Coca-Cola. Coke has helped the company merge with smaller bottling partners, and has continued to maintain franchising agreements with CCE that shareholders perceive as being very fair. As such, CCE would not have allowed a competitive bidding process to emerge for its North American unit. At the same time, a practical look at the deal points out that Coca-Cola could in the future refuse to renew the franchising contract with CCE. Should that happen, Coca-Cola would surely endure a massive blow to revenue, but with almost 200[ "About Us: Our Heritage: CCE Timeline: The Evolution of Coca-Cola Bottling and CCE." Coca-Cola Enterprises. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.cokecce.com/pages/allContent.asp?page_id=88 .] other independent bottling partners in the US alone, it’s likely the company could make up production elsewhere given time. CCE on the other hand, with no franchising contract with Coca-Cola, would face a complete shutdown and possible bankruptcy. Coca-Cola’s franchising model holds all the leverage, meaning that CCE really didn’t have much choice in this matter. Coke decided it was time to streamline operations by acquiring the bottler’s operations in the US and Canada, and CCE, wanting to maintain goodwill with the company, agreed to become entirely Europe-focused with the addition of two small bottling units in Norway and Sweden.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity

2011-05-29T15:56:00.002-07:00

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)

2011-05-29T15:56:00.000-07:00

Exhibit 4: Quick View of Two PepsiCo M&A Deals

Undoubtedly the most pertinent transaction of PepsiCo’s M&A activity is the company’s merger with its two largest bottling partners in late 2009, early 2010. PepsiCo’s consideration for both companies was targeted for 50% cash and 50% PepsiCo common stock. Expected pre-tax synergies of $300 million were expected to be realized by 2012.[ "PepsiCo Reaches Merger Agreements with Pepsi Bottling Group and PepsiAmericas." PepsiCo. 4 Aug. 2009. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.pepsico.com/PressRelease/PepsiCo-Reaches-Merger-Agreements-with-Pepsi-Bottling-Group-and-PepsiAmericas08042009.html .] Total PepsiCo consideration for both companies was valued at $7.8 billion. PepsiCo CEO Nooyi, in selling the proposed acquisition to stakeholders, summarized the industry condition well:

“While the existing model has served the system very well, it is clear that the changing dynamics of the North American liquid refreshment beverage business demand that we create a more flexible, efficient and competitive system that can drive growth across the full range of PepsiCo beverage brands. Our shared culture, strong operational leadership and ability to successfully integrate operations - in this case operations we know very well - should allow us to bring the businesses together quickly and seamlessly.”[ Ibid.]

The selling point of this deal to regulators was the apparent quick, seamless integration of the businesses resulting from PepsiCo’s industry expertise. The estimated synergies are expected to help keep costs low to consumers. To shareholders, the company claims this M&A deal will accelerate company growth going forward. What this deal gets reduced to is the simple realization that with no more licensing with bottling partners, there will be no more reduced royalties coming in. The realized synergies will simply boost cash flow by cutting out a middleman. This extra cash flow will let PepsiCo invest in other companies and products, and effectively accelerate the growth of the firm. Exhibit 5 presents a summary of the two bottling companies.[ Ibid. ] Specific benefits PepsiCo says the merger of a bottling company and its bottling partners creates include:

“Consolidation of 80 percent of the North American beverage volume will speed the decision-making process and eliminate friction points
Offering more compelling bundles across food and beverage and providing enhanced customer service nationally, taking the "Power of One" to the next level
Consolidation of manufacturing networks will provide cost benefits and also optimize our investments in growth and innovation
Greater flexibility in deploying multiple go-to-market systems to tailor distribution by channel
Elimination of redundant costs to leverage scale efficiencies”[ Ibid.]

The 80% figure is specific to PepsiCo’s bottlers, but not far off from Coke’s 90%-plus figure. When PepsiCo acquires these companies, the same way Coke purchases CCE as will later become apparent, the financial consideration is entirely cash and stock. As such, no financing contingencies exist that might prevent the deal from coming to fruition. On the contrary, the deal will require regulatory approval as well as a signoff by both bottling companies’ shareholders.

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulators came back to Pepsi with conditions identical to what Coca-Cola ultimately agreed to abide by in its acquisition of CCE. PBG and PAS both bottling products for Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, a smaller competitor to both Coke and PepsiCo. The FTC complaint reads: “The FTC’s proposed consent order is designed to remedy these potential problems by requiring PepsiCo to set up a “firewall” so that the sensitive information cannot be accessed by anyone at PepsiCo who may be in an position to use the information against Dr Pepper Snapple.”[ "FTC Puts Conditions on PepsiCo's $7.8 Billion Acquisition of Two Largest Bottlers and Distributors." Federal Trade Commission. 26 Feb. 2010. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2010/02/pepsi.shtm .] Compliant with these terms, PepsiCo closed its acquisitions in February 2010.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)

2011-05-29T15:55:00.000-07:00

PepsiCo Chairman and CEO Indra Nooyi accurately recaps the changing industry dynamics which have resulted in the two major beverage company business model trends previously identified:

“Our operating environment has changed dramatically in the last decade. Retailers have continued to consolidate. New companies have emerged. And non-carbonated drinks, which have different economics and different distribution systems than carbonated soft drinks, have become a much bigger factor in the industry and in our own portfolio.”[ Platt, Gordon. "Pepsi Puts Some Fizz Back in M&A Market." Global Finance Magazine. June 2009. Web. 1 May 2011. http://www.gfmag.com/archives/100-june-2009/1833-regulars-finance-mergers-a-acquisitions.html#axzz1Kqmf5N9W .]

Exhibit 3 highlights significant M&A activity for PepsiCo between 1998 and 2010. The major industry trends, brand acquisition and vertical integration, are immediately apparent in this list. PepsiCo bought the Tropicana and Gatorade[ Chazan, Guy. "Pepsi to Buy Wimm-Bill-Dann of Russia for $5.8 Billion." The Wall Street Journal. 3 Dec. 2010. Web. 01 May 2011. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703377504575650252777195806.html .] brands to enhance the company’s variety of beverage offerings. On the other hand, PepsiCo’s acquisitions of Pepsi Bottling Group (PBG) and PepsiAmericas (PAS) were pursued strictly with operational efficiency in mind.

For many smaller players in the beverage industry, M&A means acquiring other small companies and achieving both gains in market share and streamlined operations. At the world’s largest beverage companies like Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, M&A activities tend to focus on one goal or the other. For example, PBG and PAS are in the business of bottling and distributing beverages only, with no actual brand ownership to their names. Conversely, PepsiCo’s acquisition of South Beach Beverage Company was designed to offer customers all across the country a healthy alternative-type beverage under the umbrella of Pepsi’s already highly efficient system of franchising with bottlers. In this way, the largest beverage companies of today are pursuing very focused M&A deals with narrow goals in mind.

Exhibit 4 presents abridged details of two PepsiCo M&A deals featured in Exhibit 3, Wimm-Bill-Dann (2010)[ Ibid. ] and Quaker Oats (2001).[ "Pepsi Buys Quaker in $13.4B Stock Deal." ABC News. 4 Dec. 2001. Web. 01 May 2011. http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=88989 .] Of these acquisitions, Tom Pirko, CEO of beverage company consulting firm Bevmark, says “Pepsico is building a formidable package of leading brands.”[ Ibid. ] These are just a few of PepsiCo’s many M&A deals over the last decade, but they highlight the company’s participation in the beverage industry’s overall trends.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)

2011-05-29T15:54:00.000-07:00

After PepsiCo acquired its two largest bottling and distribution partners in late 2009 and early 2010, Coca-Cola seized an opportunity with Coca-Cola Enterprises (CCE). CCE, as one of Coke’s largest and oldest bottling partners worldwide maintained substantial capital-intensive operations in the North American market. The landscape of the beverage industry has changed in recent years to reflect updated consumer preferences and the reality that most markets worldwide are saturated with a variety of beverage companies. This verity has resulted in lucrative financial opportunities to be found in the acquisition of bottling partners. This second major trend of the industry is the one Coca-Cola embraced in 2010 with its acquisition of substantially all of CCE’s home-market activities. The way Coke has addressed these industry trends has proven the company a formidable global foe that is becoming increasingly better poised for future profitability and market dominance.

An M&A deal worth noting, but that did not come to fruition, was Coca-Cola’s failed 2009 bid to takeover Chinese juice maker Huiyuan. Huiyuan, one of China’s largest juice makers and sellers in the country’s fastest growing beverage segment, had agreed to sell itself to Coca-Cola for approximately $2.4 billion.[ Buckley, Chris. "China Says Rejection of Coke-Huiyuan Deal No Blow to Open Trade."Reuters.com. 19 Mar. 2009. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/03/19/us-cocacola-huiyuan-china-idUSTRE52I27120090319 .] The deal was agreed upon after months of due diligence, market research, and negotiations between the companies. Ultimately, however, it was struck down by Chinese regulators who claimed the deal would have given Coke a virtual monopoly on the beverage industry in China. There is wide speculation that other political forces were to blame for the deal turning sour, and that market dynamics were only lightly considered.

The significance of this failed transaction is that Coca-Cola followed its “buy the brand” strategy in line with the major industry trend of simply acquiring solid brands that have already been established, rather than build out a new product line. The company followed every step appropriately, and reached a deal to access a large portion of the Chinese beverage market. The deciding factor in this case became a nationalistic government flexing its political muscle, and the deal failed at little or no fault of Coca-Cola’s. While the beverage industry’s dominant trends are generally positive steps for beverage makers to improve bottom-line and top-line growth, there is a pitfall in the strategy in that deals do not always close. Political forces present a major risk to multinational food and beverage companies like Coca-Cola and PepsiCo going forward as a result.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)

2011-05-29T15:53:00.000-07:00

Other major considerations are less strategic and more practical in nature. First, Coke must identify the short-term integration issues the company might face in an acquisition scenario. Generally Coke has left businesses alone to function as if the takeover didn’t occur, and simply institutes usage of the company’s vast global supply chain to distribute the new products. On this note, national culture is also important to consider, given the variety of products that beverage companies make and the diversity of international customs and cultures. As Coca-Cola enhances a newly purchased brand with its distribution network, the issue of culture clash becomes a long-term consideration. For example, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo do not own any alcoholic beverage brands, generally ensuring that all their beverage products will be consumable in markets across the world, regardless of expected demand for those goods. Finally, company culture at an acquisition target is worth observing. In the case of Honest Tea, Coca-Cola appreciate that part of the brand’s equity was derived from the founder’s commitment to sourcing from approved locations that met certain sustainability and ethical standards. Accordingly, Honest Tea continues to thrive under the umbrella of Coke ownership because the company’s founder was allowed to continue running it, and ensuring that commitment to excellence does not waver. Of all the considerations Coca-Cola makes when assessing takeover targets, perhaps mass product appeal is the most important.

The decade 2000 to 2010 featured mostly non-carbonated drink company acquisitions by Coca-Cola. In 2001 the company recognized the upside of the healthy juice drink market in the North American region, and bought up Odwalla accordingly.[ "The Coca-Cola Company." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Coca-Cola_Company .] Later on in 2007, Coke acquired both Energy Brands (owner of Glaceau, maker of VitaminWater) and Fuze Beverage in the same year. Both companies make what are known in the industry as “enhanced water drinks.” Fuze sells a fruity-flavored water while Energy Brands’s division making VitaminWater features flavored water products that have vitamins added. Both companies were marketing their products as healthy alternatives to sugary cola drinks, and when their sales began to explode, Coke decided the brands were must-haves. In a similar fashion, the company made a partial equity investment in Honest Tea in 2007 and later acquired the rest of the company in early 2011. What Coca-Cola gained in all three of these brand acquisitions was unparalleled access to the fast-growing health drinks segment of the consumer beverage market.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis

2011-05-29T15:52:00.001-07:00

Coca-Cola M&A Portfolio Analysis

The array of M&A activity presented in Exhibit 2 below showcases the company’s answer to the constantly changing beverage landscape. With some deals aimed at expanding market share and others designed to create operational synergies, the company has embraced a model of expansion that is well suited to today’s largely saturated global beverage markets. Coca-Cola’s equity takeover of both Inca Kola in Peru and Thums Up in India resulted from the company’s desire to expand revenue figures in those countries. Each of these brands was home to its country and held the majority of market share as such. Coca-Cola’s answer to slow growth of its signature brands in these emerging markets led it to the decision to acquire each brand in the mid-1990s. These investments represent the first major beverage industry trend, growing market share and brand recognition worldwide, through the acquisition of successful brands. The company’s 1995 acquisition of the Barq’s root beer brand is another example of this. What all three of these transactions have in common, however, is they’re soda brands. The late 1990s still featured growing soft drink consumption in the North American market. As the decade turned, so did consumer preferences in the United States.

In identifying a potential acquisition target, Coca-Cola considers a variety of factors. The first and foremost considerations are the strength of a company’s brand and financial situation. In order to even be considered for takeover, a beverage company must fill a market void that Coca-Cola has for some reason been unable to master as of yet. Both Coke and PepsiCo have in recent years been acquiring juice makers in foreign countries. As the middle class in foreign countries swells and consumers look for alternatives to sugary soft drinks, the juice market worldwide is going to continue to boom. In Russia and China, neither company has been able to establish a juice brand with any real success. This explains the move to acquire these companies in those markets.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)

2011-05-29T15:51:00.001-07:00

During several points over the company’s century-plus long history, the need has arisen to reorganize the system of franchisees. Essentially, as international demand for Coke products grew, so did the number of bottling partners Coke did business with. Most recently, the company encouraged bottlers to combine during the 1980s, and Coca-Cola successfully narrowed its network of roughly 400 independent partners down to just 180 franchise ownerships.[ Ibid.] This is how the company has managed overhead expenses in the past, and ended up with massive worldwide bottling partners as a result. Take CCE, for example, which in 2006 distributed approximately 2 billion cases of product to retail locations in a half-dozen countries, including 46 US states.[ Ibid. ] The franchise model has been Coke’s lifeline for more than a century as it has allowed expansion of many products into emerging markets without serious capital commitment.

While bottling partner consolidation will continue to happen on its own, the prospect of reducing overhead via this tactic faces limited prospect at this time. Coca-Cola and PepsiCo both have realized that the inability to make bottling partners more efficient can be overcome by acquiring those partners. By acquiring bottling partners, the world’s largest beverage companies can eliminate a layer of management and an entire set of profit-hungry shareholders at the same time. In this way, Coca-Cola hopes to maintain its status as the largest beverage company in the world by consumption.
Figure 3[ Ibid.]

Figure 3 illustrates the market penetration that CCE has accomplished. Coca-Cola’s acquisition of CCE’s North American operations will result in the transfer of all the market share seen below. On the contrary, the new CCE, which will be focused solely on distribution in Europe, will gain operations in Norway, Sweden, and eventually Germany (under an option exercisable 18-36 months post-acquisition), as an updated market map on the new CCE website reveals (Figure 4).

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives

2011-05-29T15:50:00.001-07:00

Strategic Objectives of Coca-Cola’s M&A Activity

The basis for these overwhelming beverage industry trends lies in the desire for top-line and bottom-line growth. Aimed at meeting this goal, Coca-Cola has developed what it calls a “2020 Vision.” The premise of this vision is to bring together beverage companies and partners in a way that will behave as “an aligned system.”[ "The Coca-Cola Company Provides Roadmap for Achieving 2020 Vision at Analyst and Investor Event." Coca-Cola: The Coca-Cola Company. 16 Nov. 2009. Web. 04 May 2011. http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/presscenter/nr_20091116_2020_vision.html .] This is most easily understood as vertical integration. Referring back to Figure 1, major companies in the beverage industry fit a standard model for getting products to market. In order to “align” the members of this supply chain, Coca-Cola is acquiring both brands and bottling partners. Typically both the bottling and distribution functions are performed jointly at a franchise partner’s facility. By controlling more functions up and down the company’s business model, Coke will be able to cut costs and reduce the amount of profit lost to intermediaries.

Figure 2 illustrates the role that Coca-Cola Enterprises (CCE) plays in the business model that Coca-Cola uses in getting products to market. Coca-Cola itself is responsible for producing the syrups for its branded sodas. By producing the concentrates in-house, Coke is able to safeguard the secrecy of the recipes it uses. Those syrup concentrates are forwarded to CCE, which uses capital intensive factories to combine the syrups with carbonated and non-carbonated water, depending on the beverage. The finalized drinks get filled into bottles and then bulk packaged for transport to retail outlets where consumers obtain the drinks. CCE’s responsibility is to mix, bottle, and deliver the beverages to the end consumer. The far right portion of the graphic recognizes the various methods by which consumers obtain the beverage. Vending machines, grocery stores, gas stations, and restaurants are just a few of the many places that Coca-Cola beverages are available on a worldwide basis.

Figure 2[ "Our Business at a Glance." Coca-Cola Enterprises. 2007. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.cokecce.com/brochures/cce_2005/02_atglance.html .]

Traditionally, Coca-Cola has always taken care of the ingredient sourcing and syrup manufacturing processes. This has let the company outsource the capital intensive portion of operations to franchisees. These bottling companies earn a significant portion of the markup that gets added as the product travels from concentrate to the dinner table. Coca-Cola Classic began as a fountain beverage in 1886, and wasn’t first bottled until 1894.[ "About Us: Our Heritage: CCE Timeline: The Evolution of Coca-Cola Bottling and CCE." Coca-Cola Enterprises. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.cokecce.com/pages/allContent.asp?page_id=88 .] It was in 1899 that two entrepreneurs, Benjamin Thomas and Joseph Whitehead, presented the Coca-Cola leadership with a plan to sell the beverage in bottles all across the country. Seeing limited prospect of successfully selling the product outside of Georgia and neighboring states, Coca-Cola granted the men exclusive rights to sell the bottled beverage across the US for just one dollar.[ Ibid.] From this arrangement, the network of bottling franchisees that Coca-Cola relies on today was born.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)

2011-05-29T15:49:00.000-07:00

Large beverage companies generally use their economies of scale to maintain market share and compete against encroaching micro-brands. When a small beverage company finds a niche market, as VitaminWater and Honest Tea did, the general trend is for one of the larger beverage companies to acquire them. Where there is competition in carbonated soft drinks, the major brands use their brand equity to keep most consumers loyal. When competition arrives in the form of small health drink companies, the story is different. Aside from packaging trends, demand trends are making healthier drink alternatives the increasingly popular choice for consumers. Accordingly, the major companies see it more cost effective to simply acquire the competition.[ "Mergers and Acquisitions Heat Up in Food and Beverage Industry." Logistics Consultants, Supply Chain Systems, Warehouse and Distribution Consulting. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.tompkinsinc.com/industries/mergers-acquisitions/mergers-acquisitions-food-beverage.asp .] The majors also use M&A deals to enter emerging markets, as Coca-Cola did when it made an equity investment in Inca Kola in Peru.

With business model trend (1), above, the goal of acquiring brands is largely strategic. The odds of introducing a product in an emerging niche market and having it succeed are too slim and financially risky. Therefore, behemoth beverage companies like Coca-Cola and PepsiCo will routinely survey the market for other companies who have already accomplished the unlikely feat of succeeding in a niche market. Then, the larger company acquires the smaller one and all those great products belong to the major company. In this way, companies like Coke enhance their strategic goals of tapping all possible beverage markets while avoiding the massive financial risks. When the majors acquire smaller brands, there’s a chance that some followers of the brand will be alienated and cease to be customers. But when a Coke or PepsiCo-type company takes over a brand, that brand has access to the best distribution and marketing networks in the world. The exposure those brands gain automatically boosts their sales volume across target markets.

In pursuing the largely financial objectives of streamlining operations to improve efficiency, major beverage companies have begun integrating vertically. This takes place as bottling and distribution partners down the supply chain are acquired, as described in business model trend (2), above. Historically, the major beverage makers have left bottling and distribution responsibilities to partner companies. In Coca-Cola’s case, one such partner is Coca-Cola Enterprises (CCE). This type of bottling outsourcing simplifies operations and frees up vital funding for use on other projects, including international expansion, R&D, and brand diversification. Now that the global market for beverages has reached maturity, the places where major beverage companies can look for financial streamlining or simplification have narrowed significantly. With fewer untapped international markets, the major beverage companies are running into the issue of sustaining profit growth. Cash flows, therefore, are relatively healthy these days. Accordingly, the M&A activities of the major beverage companies tend to happen entirely in cash and stock. Coca-Cola rarely, if ever, uses financing sources directly to close on M&A deals. Naturally, the exact timing of cash flows may require these companies to tap revolving credit facilities. Generally though, the relatively small size of acquisitions lends to their closure in cash. The obvious benefit of this is that financing contingencies don’t hold back deals from finalizing.

As the adage goes, where revenue can’t be increased, costs must be decreased. The desire to enhance profitability has been a key driver of business model trend (2), above, in recent years. Last year, PepsiCo acquired its two largest bottling partners, Pepsi Bottling Group (PBG) and PepsiAmericas (PAS). Likewise, Coca-Cola has taken the initiative to acquire some of its bottling partners. In particular, Coca-Cola on February 25, 2010 reached an agreement with Coca-Cola Enterprises (CCE) to acquire the North American operations of that company. The extent of CCE’s operations in the North American market is substantial and is explained later on. CCE will continue to exist in much smaller form exclusively in Europe. This industry trend of bottom-line growth through vertical integration, specifically the Coca-Cola/CCE acquisition, will be the focus of ensuing discussion.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry

2011-05-29T15:48:00.000-07:00

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends

2011-05-29T15:47:00.000-07:00

Demand and Economic Trends

The industry-wide trends at the forefront of major beverage companies’ minds include the following:

Carbonated soft drink consumption per capita is falling worldwide.
Industry revenue is predicted to fall 2% per year over the next five years.[ Kaczanowska, Agata. Carbonated Soft Drink Production in the US. Rep. no. 31211a. IBISWorld Industry Report, 2011. Print.]

Consumers are increasingly sensitive to price as a result of the prolonged economic recovery worldwide.

Health-conscious consumers are demanding a rapidly evolving new segment of beverages.

Competition in the industry is high, as the market is saturated with beverage companies.

In addition to the trends identified above, the level of research and development activity in the beverage industry has shrunk in recent years. In keeping with new brand acquisition rather than organic brand creation, Coca-Cola has largely limited its R&D activities to packaging. For example, the company in 2009 began mandating its bottling partners use a new “Plantbottle,” an updated plastic bottle made from less PET resin (petroleum-based) than before and up to 30% plant-based material.[ "Coca-Cola New Plant Bottle." The EnviroMedia Greenwashing Index. 6 Apr. 2010. Web. 30 Apr. 2011. http://www.greenwashingindex.com/ad_single.php?id=7083 .] This development has maintained Coke’s public image as an environmentally conscious company, and the R&D has contributed to the firm’s bottom line as it has licensed the technology to Heinz for use in its ketchup bottles.

Further eco-friendly trends abound, particularly in the production process. At PepsiCo, the maker of Gatorade (resulting from the acquisition of Quaker Oats in 2001, the owner of Gatorade at that time), the sterilization process for new Gatorade bottles has been changed from rinsing in hot water to blowing ionized air. This saves hundreds of thousands of gallons of water per year. The company began saving 12% right away on each production plant’s water bills. Power savings from not heating all that water have pushed down plant utility costs by over 30% total.[ Hall, Eudell. "Pepsi Conserves Water with Gatorade." American Public Media. 19 Nov. 2008. Web. 1 May 2011. http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/11/19/pepsi/ .] PepsiCo also announced a partnership with Waste Management to support placing PET recycling kiosks in public venues to get overall beverage container recycling up in the United States.[ "PepsiCo, Coca-Cola Roll Out Recycling Initiatives." Environmental Leader. 3 June 2010. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.environmentalleader.com/2010/06/03/pepsico-coca-cola-roll-out-recycling-initiatives/ .] Coca-Cola has adopted a similar undertaking, and with initiatives like this, both companies intend to save money and become more sustainable simultaneously.

As for the ingredients which go into Coca-Cola products, the company mainly relies on the suppliers of those products to bring forth new inventions. Recently, artificial sweetener companies have been developing a mass-marketable form of stevia, a natural plant-based sweetener. These companies have convinced some of the world’s largest beverage makers to begin reformulating their drinks to include this new product. This shift has accompanied the general consumer trend away from consuming sugary drinks. In the case of both Coca-Cola’s cola and non-carbonated product portfolios, the company’s continued sales success is partly the result of sustained high levels of marketing.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends

2011-05-29T15:46:00.000-07:00

Product Trends

With regard to product trends in the beverage industry, several issues have come to companies’ attention:

Raw materials costs are rapidly on the rise.

Products must modify quickly to keep up with transforming consumer preferences.

New taxes are being levied on sugary soft drinks, a key staple of major beverage companies’ portfolios.

As the diversity of consumer demands for beverages worldwide grows, so does the number of product lines that Coca-Cola serves. Enhancements to new and existing products will focus on the above issues, while also addressing the trend of sustainability. A product’s “carbon footprint” will begin to matter more, and one industry follower believes “packaging will have ‘green packaging ratings’ that consumers will include as a factor in drink purchase decisions.”[ "Beverage Industry Trends." Chem.Info. Chem.Insider Daily, 8 Mar. 2010. Web. 30 Apr. 2011. http://www.chem.info/Articles/2010/03/Plant-Operations-Beverage-Industry-Trends/ .] Trends in packaging include using less bulk packaging while finding ways to make current products more resistant to breakage.[ Ibid.] Drink containers will continue to become more reusable, and a variety of new product sizes is likely to appear as convenience becomes a more important factor for certain beverage segments. For example, Coca-Cola’s Powerade brand is likely to be sold in ever-increasing sized bottles as athletes and other high per capita sports beverage consumers look for ways to obtain greater value from the product. Very mobile, on-the-go consumers, alternatively, will be looking for small-sized beverages that offer maximum portability.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction

2011-05-29T15:43:00.001-07:00

Introduction

With the beverage industry changing shape rapidly, major beverage companies are finding new ways to stay profitable. Companies like Coca-Cola and PepsiCo continue to grow their business by expanding the portfolio of drink brands they sell, and by acquiring their franchise bottling partners in order to realize operational synergies. The overarching objective of this paper is to analyze M&A activity in the beverage industry in order to provide a framework for which to understand Coca-Cola’s acquisition of CCE’s North American operations. Further, details of the deal, its major players, and the likelihood of the deal’s future success will all be addressed.

To begin, an analysis of product and consumer trends in the beverage industry is appropriate. Coca-Cola sells 1.7 billion[ "The Coca-Cola System." Coca-Cola: The Coca-Cola Company. Web. 04 May 2011. http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/citizenship/the_coca-cola_system.html .] beverage servings per day to consumers, making it the largest beverage company in the world. Deals like the one with CCE illustrate the scale with which Coca-Cola operates. Next, a view of the shifting business model of beverage companies will lay the groundwork for understanding the significance of the Coca-Cola/CCE deal. Looking at other industry M&A activity will give context to the deal. Finally, looking at the deal itself will reveal how this $12.3 billion acquisition is a landmark in the industry and a model for corporate growth. Exhibit 1 begins with a SWOT analysis of Coca-Cola.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary

2011-05-29T15:43:00.000-07:00

Executive Summary

The beverage industry is a wide-open field with hundreds of companies and many thousands of diverse products. Consumer preferences are shifting away from sugary sodas and toward more healthy juice and tea drinks. The major players in the beverage industry worldwide, namely Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, are adapting their business models to meet this shift. Part of this adaptation involves increased M&A activity of specific types. To be successful in the beverage industry, a company must keep costs down while ensuring that revenue continues to grow.

Two ways to keep the bottom-line healthy in these times of economic uncertainty and budding inflation are aggressively pursuing horizontal and vertical integration. This approach has spawned two business model trends amongst beverage companies. Rather than developing their own new brands, the majors are waiting to see which products small competitors are able to successfully bring to market, and then buying up those brands. This strategy is perceived to be more cost effective, and as brands are acquired, the industry experiences horizontal integration. By buying new brands in emerging markets, companies expand their revenue base substantially. Vertical integration takes place in the form of bottling partner acquisitions. PepsiCo sparked a wave of bottling and distribution partner integration in 2009 with its acquisitions of Pepsi Bottling Group and PepsiAmericas.

Historically, beverage makers kept their syrup and concentrate-making activities in-house, and franchised out the bottling and distribution operations. Coca-Cola has slowly begun to buy up bottling plants around the world in recent years, and organized them internally under the Bottling Investments Group. But the company’s 2010 deal to acquire the North American operations of Coca-Cola Enterprises, one of Coke’s largest bottling partners worldwide, is on a scale the beverage industry has never before seen. This report establishes the context for analyzing the Coca-Cola/CCE deal in depth by detailing the beverage industry and its various types of M&A activity.

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

2011-05-29T15:41:00.000-07:00

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary 3

Introduction to the Beverage Industry
Introduction 4
Product Trends 6
Demand and Economic Trends 6
Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry 8

Industry M&A Analysis
Strategic Objectives of Coca-Cola’s M&A Activity 11
Coca-Cola M&A Portfolio Analysis 15
PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) 18
Other Beverage Industry M&A Analysis 22

Analysis of the Coca-Cola/CCE M&A Deal
Coca-Cola’s Acquisition of CCE’s North American Operations 23
Major Legal and Financial Players in the M&A Deal 26
Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction 27
Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success 28
Conclusion 29
References 30

More posts from a paper on Coca-Cola M&A Activity (including merger with CCE):

Coca-Cola M&A Activity, CCE Acquisition: Executive Summary
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Introduction
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Product Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Demand and Economic Trends
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Business Model Trends in the Beverage Industry
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Beverage Industry Business Model Trends (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Strategic Objectives (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Company Portfolio Analysis (3)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: PepsiCo M&A Portfolio Analysis (Largest Competitor) (2)
Coca-Cola M&A Activity: Other Beverage Industry M&A Activity
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Deal Structure (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Major Legal and Financial Players
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Regulatory and Shareholder Approval of the Transaction
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Implementation Analysis: Likelihood of Acquisition Success (2)
Coca-Cola Acquisition of CCE North America: Conclusion to M&A Deal Analysis
Coca-Cola CCE Merger: Table of Contents and Works Cited List

References

"2011 First Quarter Results." Coca-Cola: The Coca-Cola Company. 26 Apr. 2011. Web. 04 May 2011. http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/dynamic/press_center/2011/04/2011-first-quarter-financial-results.html .

"About Us: Our Heritage: CCE Timeline: The Evolution of Coca-Cola Bottling and CCE." Coca-Cola Enterprises. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.cokecce.com/pages/allContent.asp?page_id=88 .

Alazraki, Melly. "PepsiCo Earnings, Revenue Rise on Bottlers Acquisition." DailyFinance. 7 Oct. 2010. Web. 01 May 2011.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/10/07/pepsico-earnings-revenue-rise-on-bottlers-acquisition/ .

"Beverage Industry Trends." Chem.Info. Chem.Insider Daily, 8 Mar. 2010. Web. 30 Apr. 2011. http://www.chem.info/Articles/2010/03/Plant-Operations-Beverage-Industry-Trends/ .

Buckley, Chris. "China Says Rejection of Coke-Huiyuan Deal No Blow to Open Trade." Reuters.com. 19 Mar. 2009. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/03/19/us-cocacola-huiyuan-china-idUSTRE52I27120090319 .

Chazan, Guy. "Pepsi to Buy Wimm-Bill-Dann of Russia for $5.8 Billion." The Wall Street Journal. 3 Dec. 2010. Web. 01 May 2011. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703377504575650252777195806.html .

"Coca-Cola - Press Center - Press Kits - Regulatory Clearance For CCE Acquisition." Coca-Cola: The Coca-Cola Company. 27 Sept. 2010. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/dynamic/press_center/2010/09/the-coca-cola-company-obtains-regulatory-clearance-for-acquisition-of-cces-north-american-business.html .

"Coca-Cola New Plant Bottle." The EnviroMedia Greenwashing Index. 6 Apr. 2010. Web. 30 Apr. 2011. http://www.greenwashingindex.com/ad_single.php?id=7083 .

"FTC Puts Conditions on Coca-Cola's $12.3 Billion Acquisition of Its Largest North American Bottler." Federal Trade Commission. 27 Sept. 2010. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2010/09/coke.shtm .

"FTC Puts Conditions on PepsiCo's $7.8 Billion Acquisition of Two Largest Bottlers and Distributors." Federal Trade Commission. 26 Feb. 2010. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2010/02/pepsi.shtm .

Geller, Martinne, and Brad Dorfman. "Coke Enterprises' Shareholders Approve Coke Deal." Reuters.com. 01 Oct. 2010. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/10/01/us-cocacolaenterprises-idUSTRE6903E720101001 .

Hall, Eudell. "Pepsi Conserves Water with Gatorade." American Public Media. 19 Nov. 2008. Web. 1 May 2011. http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/11/19/pepsi/ .

Kaczanowska, Agata. Carbonated Soft Drink Production in the US. Rep. no. 31211a. IBISWorld Industry Report, 2011. Print.

Lee, Lisa, and Amy Wu. "Skadden Breaks out the Bubbly." The Deal LLC. 12 Sept. 2008. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.thedeal.com/magazine/ID/019462/dealmakers/deal-diary.php .

"Mergers and Acquisitions Heat Up in Food and Beverage Industry." Logistics Consultants, Supply Chain Systems, Warehouse and Distribution Consulting. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.tompkinsinc.com/industries/mergers-acquisitions/mergers-acquisitions-food-beverage.asp .

"Our Business at a Glance." Coca-Cola Enterprises. 2007. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.cokecce.com/brochures/cce_2005/02_atglance.html .

"Our Territories: Overview." Coca-Cola Enterprises. 2010. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.cokecce.com/pages/_content.asp?page_id=95 .

"Pepsi Buys Quaker in $13.4B Stock Deal." ABC News. 4 Dec. 2001. Web. 01 May 2011. http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=88989 .

"PepsiCo Announces Final Results of Elections Regarding Merger Consideration for Bottler Acquisitions." PepsiCo. 2 Mar. 2010. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.pepsico.com/PressRelease/PepsiCo-Announces-Final-Results-of-Elections-Regarding-Merger-Consideration-for-03022010.html .

"PepsiCo, Coca-Cola Roll Out Recycling Initiatives." Environmental Leader. 3 June 2010. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.environmentalleader.com/2010/06/03/pepsico-coca-cola-roll-out-recycling-initiatives/ .

"PepsiCo's CEO Discusses Q1 2011 Results - Earnings Call Transcript." Seeking Alpha. 28 Apr. 2011. Web. 01 May 2011. http://seekingalpha.com/article/266334-pepsico-s-ceo-discusses-q1-2011-results-earnings-call-transcript .

"PepsiCo Reaches Merger Agreements with Pepsi Bottling Group and PepsiAmericas." PepsiCo. 4 Aug. 2009. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.pepsico.com/PressRelease/PepsiCo-Reaches-Merger-Agreements-with-Pepsi-Bottling-Group-and-PepsiAmericas08042009.html .

Platt, Gordon. "Pepsi Puts Some Fizz Back in M&A Market." Global Finance Magazine. June 2009. Web. 1 May 2011. http://www.gfmag.com/archives/100-june-2009/1833-regulars-finance-mergers-a-acquisitions.html#axzz1Kqmf5N9W .

"Skadden Represents Coca-Cola in Its Acquisition of Glaceau." Skadden. May 2007. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.skadden.com/Index.cfm?contentID=42 .

"The Coca-Cola Company." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Coca-Cola_Company .

"The Coca-Cola Company and Coca-Cola Enterprises Strategically Advance and Strengthen Their Partnership." Business Wire. 25 Feb. 2010. Web. 29 Apr. 2011. http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/permalink/?ndmViewId=news_view .

"The Coca-Cola Company Finalizes Transaction with Coca-Cola Enterprises." Reuters.com. 3 Oct. 2010. Web. 4 May 2011. http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/10/03/idUS44374+03-Oct-2010+BW20101003 .

"The Coca-Cola Company Provides Roadmap for Achieving 2020 Vision at Analyst and Investor Event." Coca-Cola: The Coca-Cola Company. 16 Nov. 2009. Web. 04 May 2011. http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/presscenter/nr_20091116_2020_vision.html

Coppers and Rose, Lakes Brothers Case Study; Ethical Decision-Making Framework

2011-04-28T21:58:00.000-07:00

4. Identify the possible alternative solutions.

As a group we arrived at three alternative solutions that are in accordance with the rules and regulations established by Coppers and the United States labor law. Both alternatives maintain that in no circumstance should an employee be permitted to report a lesser number of working hours to his or her client than are actually worked. As previously discussed, while in the short-run this method of managing employees can lead to increased profits, in the long-run it can be detrimental to all of the individuals and institutions involved. The first alternative follows: Coppers can inform its client, Lakes Brothers, that it needs to renegotiate the fee to be charged for services if Coppers is to perform a complete and accurate audit.

This alternative relieves pressure on Coppers’ employees but threatens the firm’s contract with Lakes Brothers. The second alternative is: Coppers can reprimand Robert Cooley, the supervisor on the audit, and drop Lakes Brothers as a client. This approach would address the supervisor’s actions defiant of company policy, and rid the firm of an historically difficult client. Finally, a third option holds that Coppers could make a firm-wide announcement reminding its staff to report all hours worked or face consequences, and simply have faith that its audit managers adjust their staff and client schedules accordingly to come into compliance with firm policy.

5. Determine how the individuals or groups are affected by the alternative solutions.

The first alternative, contract renegotiation with the firm’s client, is a risky move for the company. In a difficult economic climate, accounting firms tend to value every client’s business. With Lakes Brothers, however, Coppers needs to consider the legal and reputational ramifications that engaging in business with this company could have. If Coppers takes the path of discussing an increase in compensation for its accountants based on the amount of work required to perform a complete audit, the client could decide to walk away from the engagement. Coppers would lose its client, though the firm’s staff would be relieved of a difficult job. Alternatively, Coppers could successfully earn higher compensation and therefore pay its workers accordingly. This situation is unlikely but would result in a win-win.

The second alternative, reprimanding Cooley and dropping Lakes Brothers as a client, would generally be a negative outcome for the firm. It would lose its client and alienate one of its high performing staff members. The staff member could decide to blame Barbara Montgomery for the outcome of this situation and Barbara’s career within the firm could be threatened. The third alternative features a firm-wide reminder of hours-reporting policies. This type of announcement would not specifically address the difficulty of working the Lakes Brothers audit engagement, though it would bring to Coppers’ employees’ attention the necessity of abiding by company and legal policy. While not assuring any action will be taken, such an announcement could influence the future behaviors of Coppers staff, and result in more positive long-term benefits for the firm.

6. Decide on the appropriate action.

Ideally, Coppers does not want to lose a client, estrange any of its valuable personnel, or leave the issue facing the Lakes Brothers engagement team unaddressed. The approach we recommend to this situation is a combination of the three alternatives presented. First, a firm-wide announcement reminding staff of the firm’s policies is always a good action to take. Second, the company should address the issue of contract pricing with Lakes Brothers to stress the importance of being fairly compensated for a complete audit. Regardless of whether Coppers loses this audit client, the firm needs to keep this case in mind when making future audit contracts with prospective clients. Further, the firm should take steps to ensure its employees aren’t exploited by supervisors with lofty goals. These steps will ensure that first-year staff members such as Barbara are not forced to work excessively without proper compensation. In this way, the firm’s policies as well as national labor laws will be enforced and followed.

References
Melloy, John. "U.S. Cost of Living Hits Record, Passes Pre-crisis High." USATODAY.com. 20 Mar. 2011. Web. 12 Apr. 2011. http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2011-03-18-cost-of-living-hits-record.htm.
Cathey Jack M, Clark Myrtle W & Richard G. Schroeder (2011). Financial Accounting Theory and Analysis: Text and Cases. 10th Edition, NJL John Wiley and Sons Publications, pg 584.
"Wage and Hour Division (WHD) - Off-the-Clock References." The U.S. Department of Labor. Web. 12 Apr. 2011. http://www.dol.gov/whd/offtheclock/index.htm.
Whitney, Kathy. "Good Night’s Sleep Crucial to Health, Productivity." Vanderbilt University Medical Center. 12 Oct. 2007. Web. 12 Apr. 2011. http://www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/reporter/index.html?ID=5879.

Keyboard Codes for French Accent Marks/Characters

2011-04-28T21:38:00.001-07:00

Random French Sentences 15

2011-04-28T21:37:00.001-07:00

Pierre est difficile.
Pierre is difficult.

Ils se réunissent le demanche au stade.
They meet on Sundays at the stadium.

Cette voiture-ci roule plus vite.
This car goes faster than the other one.

Un appartement à louer.
An apartment for lease.

Parle!
Speak!

Je l'ai ouverte.
I've opened it.

Avant le départ du train.
Before the train leaves.

Un bon repas.
A good meal.

Many more posts with random French sentences:
Random French Sentences 1
Random French Sentences 2
Random French Sentences 3
Random French Sentences 4
Random French Sentences 5
Random French Sentences 6
Random French Sentences 7
Random French Sentences 8
Random French Sentences 9
Random French Sentences 10
Random French Sentences 11
Random French Sentences 12
Random French Sentences 13
Random French Sentences 14
Random French Sentences 15
Keyboard Codes for French Accent Marks/Characters

Random French Sentences 14

2011-04-28T21:36:00.007-07:00

Random French Sentences 13

2011-04-28T21:36:00.005-07:00

Random French Sentences 12

2011-04-28T21:36:00.003-07:00

Random French Sentences 11

2011-04-28T21:36:00.001-07:00

Random French Sentences 10

2011-04-28T21:35:00.005-07:00

Random French Sentences 9

2011-04-28T21:35:00.003-07:00

Random French Sentences 8

2011-04-28T21:35:00.001-07:00

Random French Sentences 7

2011-04-28T21:34:00.005-07:00

Random French Sentences 6

2011-04-28T21:34:00.003-07:00

Random French Sentences 5

2011-04-28T21:34:00.001-07:00

Random French Sentences 4

2011-04-28T21:33:00.005-07:00

J'etais le seul à ne jamais boire d'alcool.
Of the group, I was the only one who never drank alcohol.

Elle parle français puisque sa mère est Français.
Because her mother is French, she speaks French.

Cela doit être vrai.
It must be true then.

Jean était retournée à la banque.
Jean went and returned to the bank.

Vous et moi sommes toujours d'accord.
We always agree.

Many more posts with random French sentences:
Random French Sentences 1
Random French Sentences 2
Random French Sentences 3
Random French Sentences 4
Random French Sentences 5
Random French Sentences 6
Random French Sentences 7
Random French Sentences 8
Random French Sentences 9
Random French Sentences 10
Random French Sentences 11
Random French Sentences 12
Random French Sentences 13
Random French Sentences 14
Random French Sentences 15
Keyboard Codes for French Accent Marks/Characters

Random French Sentences 3

2011-04-28T21:33:00.003-07:00

Random French Sentences 2

2011-04-28T21:33:00.001-07:00

Random French Sentences 1

2011-04-28T21:32:00.001-07:00

Executive Summary: Tata Motors' Expansion into the US and other Foreign Markets

2011-04-18T02:26:00.001-07:00

The task of expanding an Indian brand of automobile little-known to the US market into the same market requires corporate diligence and heavy capital investment. The research that follows analyzes all aspects of the introduction of Tata’s smallest and cheapest car, the Nano, to the US auto market. The financial analysis contained in Exhibits 1 through 7 details the rationale behind Tata establishing itself in the US market with a network for 40 car dealerships. Additionally, all Nano vehicles will be sourced directly from the current Nano plant in Gujarat State, India. Importing all cars in the first several years will delay the prospect of building an expensive auto manufacturing plant in North America.

A detailed supply chain regarding moving completed Nano cars from the factory in India to dealerships across the US is also included. This process will involve using rail, truck, and shipping partners to transport the vehicles half-way around the world. This type of supply chain is lengthy and includes many risks. The largest transportation-related risk concerns adverse whether events that may affect shipping. The greatest strategic risk for Tata Motors is that US consumers will not be as enthralled with the foreign brand as expected. Rising materials costs and potential labor unrest also pose threats to Tata’s global success. Regardless, Tata must make a concerted effort to establish its long-term brand presence in the US using the steps listed above. The unique nature of its vehicles helps make Tata poised to succeed early on in the US.

Other posts on Tata Motors related to US expansion:

Executive Summary: Tata Motors' Expansion into the US and other Foreign Markets
Tata Motors Recent Financial Performance and Customers
Method and Rationale for Tata Motors' Expansion into the US
Demand Forecast for the Tata Nano in the US
Tata Motors Expansion into the US: Retail Pricing Forecast
Tata Motors Expansion into the US, Build Dealerships vs. Dealer Network
Tata Motors Expansion into the US, Import vs. Auto Mfg Plant
Works Cited for Tata Motors Expansion into US

*Image obtained from "PajamaDeen."

Religion's Influence in the Development of Europe Between 700 and 1700 AD

2011-04-17T07:27:00.000-07:00

Religion undoubtedly played an immense role in the development of Europe between 700 and 1700 AD. Following the fall of the Roman Empire in the west, the Frankish dynasty of the Merovingians converted to Christianity, and began to conquer other surrounding tribes. As Frankish influence in Europe continued to expand, everything fell apart at once with the death of the leader Charlemagne. With this, the entire Roman Empire fell apart, and the Church took up the responsibilities of the government. With Christianity ruling over Europe, nobody could question the Church’s motives without being accused of heresy. This led to the development of some controversial feelings in Europe, and the killing of numbers of innocent individuals.
Turkish Muslims began to dominate in the Middle East, conquering all of India, and then spreading towards Europe. During the 1000s, the Islamic Saljuq Turks began to attack and conquer parts of the Byzantine Empire. With this, the major powers of Europe, as urged by Pope Urban II, began the Crusades, to regain the Holy Land of Palestine from the Muslims. As in this case, religion led to many Crusades, or Holy Wars, involving the slaughtering of countless numbers of people.
The Renaissance (meaning “rebirth”) was a philosophical and artistic movement that occurred in Italy from about 1300 to 1600. With it, the Renaissance brought humanists, famous writers, and probably most commonly thought of, famous painters, as well as new painting techniques. In northern Italy, the Renaissance brought improvements in literature, and the widespread act of printing. To touch briefly upon the Schism of 1378, the Roman Catholic Church split following the French King’s declaration of his disapproval for the Italian Pope. This led the next 68 years to be full of fighting and controversy, with two popes attempting to claim power over the Catholic Church at one time.
Humanists proclaimed that the Roman Catholic Church had “lost sight of the spiritual mission proclaimed by Jesus.” They decided to split with the Church in western Europe, creating several new churches, thus completing the Reformation. Martin Luther then challenged the Church’s sale of indulgences. He then put many of his ideas into print, and spread them around Europe. Luther parted from the Church and all his followers became partakers in Lutheranism. This began the first protestant church, with Luther at its head. A Protestant Reformation raged in England, and King Henry VIII broke England off from the Roman Catholic Church around 1530. Parliament then made numerous laws, created the Church of England, or Anglican Church, with Henry VIII as its head. In the 1530s, a Counter-Reformation took place, with many European Catholics taking an active stand against Protestantism. Much conflict erupted from this. The Spanish Inquisition later occurred in Spain, with the Church attempting to root out all those not loyal to it, by killing countless numbers of Jews and Protestants. In summary, religion in Europe developed it to what it is today, with unimaginable numbers of people being killed in the process. Religion obviously had a detrimental affect on the development of Europe.

Analyzing the Terms of the Treaty of Versailles

2011-04-17T07:22:00.000-07:00

The Treaty of Versailles was undoubtedly unfair to Germany. Terms of it included: Germany had to admit that it alone was guilty of starting the war, and must pay an undetermined amount of money for reparations, it must give up a good deal of land, Poland was to be restored as an independent nation, it had to abolish conscription and could not maintain an army of more than 100,000 men, it was not allowed to manufacture heavy artillery, tanks, planes, or poison gas, it could have no submarines, and very few ships, and the port of Danzig became a free city. The Allied Powers felt that these terms were justified, in order to prevent the start of another war. Because these terms were so harsh, however, gave the German people even more reason to want revenge. The League of Nations was to watch over Germany, being sure that it didn’t violate any terms of the treaty. In WWII, when Germany began to rearm and make aggressions in Europe, the League did nothing to stop Hitler. With this, he felt he could do as he pleased, later leading to the start of WWII. This is how the Treaty of Versailles backfired when it came to the start of WWII.
European countries allowed Hitler to make his minor aggressions in the late 1930s, because they, for one, didn’t think that much would come of it, and secondly, if they were to take a stand, then another war might erupt between Germany and the rest of Europe. When a war finally did break out, and Germany conquered France, forcing the Pétain government to sign an armistice in the same railroad car as the Treaty of Versailles in the end of WWI. The harshness of the Treaty caused Hitler to want much revenge, taking too great an offensive in some places, and too little of one in others, and thus costing him the war. In WWII, Hitler’s failed offensive in Russia cost him millions of troops, essentially costing him the war. This is contrary to WWI, where a stalemate developed, and the two sides signed a treaty to stop fighting. Germany then sent home all its troops. With this, the Allies forced upon the Germans the Treaty of Versailles. WWII was lost fighting, and WWI was lost for a lack of troops to fight. The way Europe developed after the world wars was palpably affected by the Treaty of Versailles.

Historical Review: 20th Century Yugoslavia, Continued Again

2011-04-17T07:19:00.000-07:00

A mélange of different ethnic groups existed in Yugoslavia, with citizens who were Serbs, to Croats, Slovenians, Macedonians, and Albanians. The one common attribute that these ethnic groups shared was the language they spoke. The Serbs in Yugoslavia attempted to become the more dominant ethnic group, but this in turn encouraged Croatian and Slovenian nationalism. As a result, in 1991, Croatia and Slovenia declared their independence from Yugoslavia; the result of this, war between Serbia and Croatia. This war waged only very briefly, for the US and UN stepped in, with UN peacekeepers monitoring the cease-fire in Yugoslavia. Notice that only Croatia was involved in the war- that’s right, Slovenia had evaded fighting. In the end though, independence had been gained by both countries, which showed that such a feat could in fact be accomplished. This led Bosnia to also declare their independence, which happened in 1992. Bosnia, in an attempt to purify their country, and with the aid of the Yugoslavian government, initiated a process of ethnic cleansing, involving the ruthless torturing and murdering of Muslims in Bosnia. The United Nations decided to put into effect an arms embargo on Bosnia, in an attempt to stop the fighting. This prevented the Muslims, in control of the Bosnian government at the time, from getting hold of a means of protection against rebellious Serbs in the country. Continued Serbian aggression on Bosnia brought about air strikes on Serbian targets by NATO, in 1995. The two sides (Bosnian Serbs, and the Muslim-led Bosnian government) agreed to participate in peace talks hosted by the US, taking place in Dayton, Ohio. A settlement was reached, and the peace treaty was titled the Dayton Accord. The further presence of foreign troops, many of which were American, was needed for a while after, in order to maintain the peace.
Through the many events in the countries of Serbia and Yugoslavia during the 20th century, a history has unfolded that can be viewed as unique, and distinctive. Through Yugoslavia’s involvement in both world wars, the country can be clearly seen as an ally to the United States, and even as an aide to the American dream. Yugoslavia’s government is currently a republic, although even as a communist government under the control of Marshall Tito, it was in opposition to the Axis powers in World War II, and Russia’s “Iron-Curtain” sweeping across Europe later in the century. According to the historical review provided of the kingdom of what was once Serbia, later Yugoslavia, and currently Serbia Montenegro, it can be seen that this country has been undoubtedly beneficial to not only European, but world history, and the conditions in which America is present today. What if the 800,000 members of the National Liberation Front in World War II had aligned themselves with, rather than against Nazi Germany, giving Germany a boost militarily, and hence causing them to have won World War II? Where would we be today?

Historical Review: 20th Century Yugoslavia, Continued

2011-04-17T07:17:00.000-07:00

Yugoslavia maintained peace for a reasonable period of time, until World War II erupted. In early 1941, the German leader Adolf Hitler turned his focus to the Balkans. He attempted to persuade the Yugoslavian government to allow German troops to pass through their country towards Greece. In a derisory two weeks, the Yugoslav army had been flattened by the Germans. Despite this embarrassing loss, the Yugoslavians pursued an effective campaign of guerrilla warfare throughout the duration of the war. In 1944, large numbers of resistance fighters were called up to aid in the battle against German troops. On July 22, 1941, King Peter II in London called for such an uprising of the Yugoslavian people. In response to this declaration, General Draga Mihajlovitch, who at the time was a Serbian appointed as minister of war, organized the first battalions of troops in what became known as the Chetnik movement. The type of warfare incorporated most in Chetnik fighting was guerrilla warfare. This method of fighting proved to be extremely effective during the war, so much so, that the Germans attempted to retaliate by massacring the Serbian village of Kragujevac in October of 1941; 7,000 civilians were shot to death. Another resistance movement was formed in April of 1941 by the Secretary General; at the time, this was Josip Broz- nicknamed “Tito”. This communist inspired movement became known as the National Liberation Front, and it called for its national uprising on July 12, 1941. By the end of the war, this group had over 800,000 members. Direct confrontation between NLF forces and German troops rarely occurred, for most attacks by the NLF were in the form of sabotage, primarily of travel routes, and enemy convoys and communications.

Post World War II conditions in Yugoslavia proved to be much more suitable than those that were in place during the war. These somewhat seemingly decent conditions, however, were hampered by the fact that the Yugoslavian government had become communist directly following World War II. In September 1947, the Soviet government established the Communist Information Bureau, known as Cominform. This organization’s purpose was, basically, to oppose Marshall Plan aid. All that came about of this though, was tension between the communist and noncommunist political parties of Europe. In the spring of 1948, an agreement arose between Stalin and the leader of Yugoslavia, Marshall Tito. Tito proclaimed that although he was a dedicated communist, his country was going to follow an independent route. The reaction from this resulted in the expulsion of Yugoslavia from Cominform. This expulsion led to the growth of Yugoslavia’s independence from the Soviet Union.

Other posts on imperialism and/or Yugoslavia:

What is Imperialism
The Effects of Imperialism on Foreign Lands
British Imperialism: South Africa
Imperialism Simulation
Historical Review: 20th Century Yugoslavia
Historical Review: 20th Century Yugoslavia, Continued

Historical Review: 20th Century Yugoslavia

2011-04-17T07:14:00.000-07:00

The history of Yugoslavia is extensive and eventful. Numerous events throughout the history of the country have caused it to develop into its current condition. Despite the fact that Yugoslavia as a nation no longer exists, but rather Serbia and Montenegro claims to be its successor, the focus of the following historical review shall be none other than the major significant events of the country’s existence during the 20th century. Pre-World War I however, Yugoslavia existed with the title of Serbia.

Serbia existed as a nation during the 20th century, but only through the early years of it. The revolts that broke out in numerous Turkish provinces in the Balkans in 1875 led to a war between Russia and the Ottoman Empire. Upon being defeated, the Turks were forced to sign the Treaty of San Stefano. This treaty, signed in 1878, allowed Romania, Montenegro, and Serbia their independence. Over the next three decades, however, acts of aggression by the Ottoman Empire, including the alteration of national boundaries, resulted in the formation of the Balkan League, consisting of Bulgaria, Greece, Montenegro, and Serbia. The League went to war with, and defeated the Ottoman Empire in 1912. This would seem to be a good thing, except for the fact that the Balkan League couldn’t agree on the distribution of the captured Turkish territories. This led to yet another war, although this time the war was with Serbia, Greece, Montenegro, Romania, and the remaining parts of the Ottoman Empire, siding against Bulgaria. Bulgaria suffered a quick defeat, and as a result, Serbia was able to come out of the wars with a seaport along the Adriatic Sea.

Imperialism, militarism, alliances, and nationalism were the four main causes of World War I. The nationalism aspect played an extremely large role, in that Russia agreed to back Serbia, and Germany the same with Austria-Hungary. June 28, 1914, the Serbian terrorist, Gavrilo Princip, assassinated Archduke Francis Ferdinand, future emperor of Austria-Hungary, and his wife. The result of this was declaration of war of Austria-Hungary on Serbia exactly one month later. Thus, World War I was initiated, and Serbia was held responsible as a whole for the actions of the one Serbian terrorist who began it all. Upon decimation of the Central Powers in 1918, Serbia and the Allies were victorious with copious gains. After the war, Serbia and Montenegro, the former Habsburg provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and a section of the Adriatic coast (including the seaport they had received in 1912) decided unanimously to form the new nation of Yugoslavia. This marked the end of Serbia, and the birth of a new kingdom, with more foreseeable potential than could ever have been imagined.

Other posts on imperialism:

Historical Review: 20th Century Yugoslavia, Continued
What is Imperialism
The Effects of Imperialism on Foreign Lands
British Imperialism: South Africa
Imperialism Simulation
Historical Review: 20th Century Yugoslavia

British Imperialism: South Africa

2011-04-17T07:12:00.002-07:00

European occupation of South Africa began with the Dutch in 1652, why they founded Cape Town as a place for ships to refuel on their way to the East Indies. This Dutch colony grew very large over time (about the next 150 years), and eventually in the early 1800s, the British captured it. Now that the British controlled this colony in South Africa, many people left it, mass migrating to the north primarily. These Boers, as they were known to be, formed three new territories: the Orange Free State, Natal, and the Transvaal. As this occurred, the Boers came into communication with the native empire already located in the region: the Zulu. In 1879, the Boers teamed up with the British to defeat the Zulu, and destroy their empire, taking over control of all of their lands. Because soon thereafter, diamonds and gold were found in the region, Germany declared a protectorate over the region in the mid 1880s, in hopes of finding opulent mineral reserves. The history of this country, South Africa, was undoubtedly altered by British Imperialism.

The British, when they first began to colonize South Africa, did not impose cultural restraints to a maximum. The British practiced indirect rule over South Africa, primarily because they didn’t have enough manpower to put their own leaders into every country that they colonized. This left local South African rulers with some authority over their lands. The British also decided to allow the Boer populace to continue speaking their native language, Afrikaans, in hopes of ensuring Boer support of the peace. Another matter, though, left the natives upset about their position in society. The only individuals permitted to take part in the voting of government officials and such, were: “males who had lived in the South African Republic for at least seven years” (http://www .workmall.com/wfb2001/south_africa/south_africa_history_british_imperialism_and_the_afrikaners.html). The cultural effects of Imperialism on South Africa, overall, were minimized, with the exception of the law on voting.

The Imperialist effects of Great Britain on South Africa don’t end with their history and culture, but follow through to their economy. A British man named Cecil Rhodes relocated himself to South Africa in 1870. He moved to the diamond fields of the Orange Free State, controlled and operated by the Boers. Soon after moving, Rhodes became interested in the business and economics of the region, becoming engrossed in the production of diamonds. By about 2 decades later, Rhodes almost entirely controlled this industry, exhibiting similar characteristics to a monopoly. In 1899, war broke out between the British and the Boers, with the British eventually prevailing some three or so years later. With this victory, the British transformed the, what was once a Dutch colony, into a mining settlement. Later, in 1910, a constitution united the four regional colonies (Cape Colony, the Orange Free State, the Transvaal, and Natal), into the Union of South Africa. This was significant in history because it caused the economies of all four colonies to combine, creating a single, central economy with an emphasis on mining. This mining characteristic of South Africa brought much wealth to its imposers, the British, and later on in history, despite the fact that in 1908, the British only retained control over Natal. British control over South Africa began in 1878, and ended primarily in 1908, when all they retained control of was Natal.

Other posts on imperialism:

What is Imperialism
The Effects of Imperialism on Foreign Lands
British Imperialism: South Africa
Imperialism Simulation
Historical Review: 20th Century Yugoslavia

The Effects of Imperialism on Foreign Lands

2011-04-17T07:12:00.001-07:00

Imperialism is: the ambition of a powerful nation to dominate the political, economic, and cultural affairs of another nation or region. The Age of Imperialism occurred between 1830 and 1917. During this time frame, numerous European nations experienced an increased desire for self-sufficiency. The industrialized nations of the time wished not to be dependent on other countries for raw materials. Thus, the leaders of these nations were forced to find alternative means of getting the materials that they needed. This alternative means just so happened to be the colonization of overseas nations, primarily in Asia, Africa, and South America. With this colonization, major European powers were able to get the materials that they needed without being dependent on their neighbor, and increase the sizes of their armies and navies. A major European power colonizing and annexing another overseas nation meant that that nation would then become industrialized. The price to pay for this, though, was a European monopoly on all the goods sold in those countries. Thus, local industries in overseas nations suffered significantly, and were in most cases unable to continue operation. Along with industrialization, came numerous missionaries of Christianity, and with them, knowledge of medicine, sanitation, and hygiene. Europeans felt that those less fortunate than themselves deserved to be subject to Western civilization. There were countless pros and cons to European Imperialism, but for the most part, Imperialism was beneficial to those that it influenced.

Other posts on imperialism:

What is Imperialism
The Effects of Imperialism on Foreign Lands
British Imperialism: South Africa
Imperialism Simulation
Historical Review: 20th Century Yugoslavia

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Conclusion

2011-04-17T06:45:00.001-07:00

Conclusion

Of anything, what had the greatest impact on the development of nuclear weapons, was fear of being annihilated, a threat that faced every nation. Paranoia kept every nation on edge, and fearful: “Number of false alarms of nuclear missile attacks generated by the US early warning system between 1977 and 1984: 20,784” (Harper’s Magazine, “Nuclear Energy”, http://www.harpers.org/Nuclear.html). The fear of extermination caused many nations to pursue the development of nuclear weapons. This was because nuclear weapons were known to be deadly, and by having them, a country could easily protect itself from others. The threat of your neighbor having more nuclear weapons than you caused the development and production of nuclear weapons to occur at an augmented rate. The fear of annihilation came from the development of nuclear weapons, and the stockpiles of them that rival nations had built up. Such an immense fear caused dozens of nations, primarily the US and USSR, to form agreements in the form of treaties, limiting nuclear capabilities. Limiting nuclear capabilities was done by limiting: nuclear weapons stockpiles and the capabilities of those weapons, nuclear weapon use in specific regions of the world, and, nuclear weapon use in certain geographical locations. Countless treaties after treaties were signed, eventually causing the general fear of extinction by nuclear weapons to subside within the world. If you were Reagan, would you have accepted Gorbachev’s proposal to eliminate all nuclear weapons by the year 2000?

Other posts on nuclear arms:

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Introduction
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1940s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1950s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1960s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1970s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1980s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Conclusion

WORKS CITED
Andrews, Elaine K. Civil Defense in the Nuclear Age. Franklin Watts: New York. 1985.
Brennan, Donald G. Arms Control, Disarmament, and National Security. George Braziller: New York. 1961.
Garwin, Richard L. “Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century: Prospects and Policy.” 23 Oct. 1999 – 25 Oct. 1999. 29 Mar. 2004 http://www.fas.org/rlg/102599nw21.htm.
Mendelsohn, Jack, and Grahame, David. Arms Control Chronology. The Center for Defense Information: Washington D.C. 2002.
“Nuclear Energy.” Harper’s Magazine. 29 March 2004. 2 April 2004 http://www.harpers.org/Nuclear.html.
“Nuclear Weapon.” Wikipedia. Nov. 2000 – 29 Mar. 2004. 29 Mar. 2004 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon.

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1980s

2011-04-17T06:45:00.000-07:00

1980s

One detail that must be realized is that: “Any country, certainly a major power, acting as a unit, is physically free at any time to terminate a rule restricting its conduct, no matter how clearly it was written or how many times it was signed” (Brennan, 57). This fact limits the amount of safety a nation can feel, regardless of how many treaties and agreements have been signed. With this in mind, it is plausible therefore, to come to the conclusion that: “Short of world government, there is no physical control in arms control” (Brennan, 57). The last atmospheric test to date, by any nation, was conducted by China on October 16, 1980. Just under four years later, China signed with the US, the PNCA. A year later, the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty is signed by 16 parties, banning production, acquisition, possession, testing, or control of, nuclear explosive devices. Almost six months later, in November 1985, Brazil and Argentina agree to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes only, by signing the JDNP.

Other posts on nuclear arms:

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Introduction
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1940s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1950s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1960s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1970s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1980s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Conclusion

In what is the best attempt yet at national security, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev proposed to US President Ronald Reagan, the elimination of all nuclear weapons by the year 2000. Reagan was disinclined to acquiesce with Gorbachev’s request, politely denying the proposal. The refusal came as a result of the US’s initiative to be the greatest nation in the world, and Reagan believed that in order to maintain this, a nuclear weapons stockpile, in the least, would be required. Donald Brennan comments that, “No arms-control plan will remain effective and dependable unless it continues to serve the national interests of each of the parties, as its leaders conceive those interests” (Brennan, 53). Eliminating all nuclear weapons was not in the best interest of the United States, thus Reagan was forced to reject Gorbachev’s proposal. It is thus reasonable to conclude that by not eliminating all nuclear weapons, Reagan is responsible for the US’s success: “The US has by far the greatest and most flexible military capability in the world, and its nuclear weapon technology is the most advanced” (http://www.fas.org/ rlg/102599nw21.htm).

In March 1986, Reagan proposed using Corrtex, which involves using a new hydrodynamic yield measurement method, to monitor the nuclear sites of countries signed onto the TTBT and PNET, hence ensuring cooperation with the treaties. From the early days of Dec. 1987, arose the signing of the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, between the US and USSR. This extremely important treaty eliminated “all ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges between 500 and 5500 km” (Mendelsohn, Grahame, 2). This greatly reduced the threat that each nation posed to the other. For added security, and to reduce the risk of a nuclear war, in May 1988, the US and USSR agreed to notify each other of all ICBM and SLBM launches at least 24 hours in advance. This concurrence became known as the Ballistic Missile Launch Notification Agreement. To conclude the decade, Russia conducted its last nuclear test to date, before entering into a unilateral moratorium involving several countries.

Other posts on nuclear arms:

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Introduction
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1940s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1950s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1960s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1970s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1980s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Conclusion

WORKS CITED
Andrews, Elaine K. Civil Defense in the Nuclear Age. Franklin Watts: New York. 1985.
Brennan, Donald G. Arms Control, Disarmament, and National Security. George Braziller: New York. 1961.
Garwin, Richard L. “Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century: Prospects and Policy.” 23 Oct. 1999 – 25 Oct. 1999. 29 Mar. 2004 http://www.fas.org/rlg/102599nw21.htm.
Mendelsohn, Jack, and Grahame, David. Arms Control Chronology. The Center for Defense Information: Washington D.C. 2002.
“Nuclear Energy.” Harper’s Magazine. 29 March 2004. 2 April 2004 http://www.harpers.org/Nuclear.html.
“Nuclear Weapon.” Wikipedia. Nov. 2000 – 29 Mar. 2004. 29 Mar. 2004 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon.

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1970s

2011-04-17T06:44:00.004-07:00

1970s

Disallowing weapons of mass destruction on the seabed and the ocean floor, beyond a 12-mile coastal zone, was the Seabed Arms Control Treaty, signed in February 1971. On May 26, 1972, the US and USSR sign the Antiballistic Missile Treaty (ABMT) limiting antiballistic missile defenses, in addition to the SALT I Interim Agreement, which established “an interim ceiling on strategic offensive nuclear weapons” (Mendelsohn, Grahame, 2). “The idea behind the limitation of ABMs was to reinforce the doctrine that defense against nuclear weapons was impossible” (Andrews, 49). These nations agreed to minimize their defenses and offenses, making each more vulnerable to an attack, and thus each less likely to attack. Because of fear, nations constantly sought ways to minimize their risk of being attacked. This led to the US-USSR agreement known as the PNWA, in which each “agreed to consult one another in [a] time of crisis in order to avoid nuclear conflict” (Mendelsohn, Grahame, 29). “Threat [and fear] has produced deterrent which has largely succeeded thus far in preventing large-scale war” (Brennan, 45). With this, it is evident that fear of a nuclear attack kept all nations frequently searching for solutions to their fears, mainly through treaties and agreements.

Other posts on nuclear arms:

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Introduction
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1940s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1950s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1960s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1970s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1980s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Conclusion

With interests in national security as well, India proceeded to conduct its first nuclear test in May 1974. A major factor in limiting the advancement in nuclear weapons technology came on July 3, 1974, when the US and USSR signed the Threshold Test Ban Treaty (TTBT), which banned underground tests of nuclear weapons with a yield higher than 150 kilotons. Later in 1976, both nations also signed the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty (PNET), where both factions agreed not to test any nuclear weapons above 150 kilotons, regardless of location. Neither the TTBT nor the PNET were ratified until Jun. 1, 1990, during the Presidencies of George Bush Sr. and Mikhail Gorbachev. One month following the signing of the TTBT, the Zangger Committee was formed of 15 nations. It established a set of guidelines which must be adhered to when exporting anything that could be considered beneficial to a nuclear weapons program. In the midst of signing this plethora of treaties, the US was secretly developing a neutron bomb, and in July 1977, the US came out and said that it had already tested the first neutron bomb ever made. This deadly new weapon, when detonated, left structures in tact, for the most part, while killing all biologically living organisms in its path. Two months following this announcement, the Soviet Union had invaded Afghanistan, and the CTBT talks were recessed, only never to be resumed. To finish off the decade, and provide both the US and USSR with more comfort, and SALT II is signed, limiting even further, nuclear weapons stockpiles.

Other posts on nuclear arms:

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Introduction
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1940s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1950s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1960s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1970s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1980s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Conclusion

WORKS CITED
Andrews, Elaine K. Civil Defense in the Nuclear Age. Franklin Watts: New York. 1985.
Brennan, Donald G. Arms Control, Disarmament, and National Security. George Braziller: New York. 1961.
Garwin, Richard L. “Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century: Prospects and Policy.” 23 Oct. 1999 – 25 Oct. 1999. 29 Mar. 2004 http://www.fas.org/rlg/102599nw21.htm.
Mendelsohn, Jack, and Grahame, David. Arms Control Chronology. The Center for Defense Information: Washington D.C. 2002.
“Nuclear Energy.” Harper’s Magazine. 29 March 2004. 2 April 2004 http://www.harpers.org/Nuclear.html.
“Nuclear Weapon.” Wikipedia. Nov. 2000 – 29 Mar. 2004. 29 Mar. 2004 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon.

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1960s

2011-04-17T06:44:00.003-07:00

1960s

With a new decade, came a new nation to the nuclear club; France conducted its first nuclear test in Algeria, on Feb. 13, 1960, and its first Hydrogen Bomb test in 1968. A few months following the first French test, a US U-2 plane is shot down over the USSR. Because of this, Khrushchev canceled the scheduled Paris summit, and thus no additional progress was made in the CTBT negotiations, until they were reconvened in Geneva in 1961. There, the US proposed to the USSR, 20 on-site inspections per year of each other’s testing sites, to ensure no additional testing has been taking place; the USSR wants only 3, and an agreement cannot be reached. Shortly following this dispute, the US and UK propose a draft CTBT, limiting nuclear testing to underground, with explosions measuring sub 4.75 on the Richter scale. Again, the USSR rejects the proposal, and an accord is unable to be attained. The US-USSR moratorium reached in the late 1950s expires, and the USSR resumes testing; Tsar Bomba is detonated with a yield of roughly 50 megatons, the largest explosion of any kind ever in history.

Other posts on nuclear arms:

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Introduction
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1940s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1950s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1960s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1970s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1980s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Conclusion

In September of 1961, the US and UK urge the USSR to agree to a ban on atmospheric testing; yet again, the Soviet leader Khrushchev rejects the proposal, an action to which the US responds by resuming underground testing, and atmospheric testing about 7 months later. From July 15 to August 5, 1963, the original three nuclear nations met in Moscow, and signed the Limited Test Ban Treaty (LTBT), which outlawed nuclear testing in the atmosphere, outer space, and underwater. In the midst of all this, Elaine Andrews reminds that: “In spite of these efforts at control, however, the arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union went on at an alarming rate” (Andrews, Elaine K., Civil Defense in the Nuclear Age, 47). This is supported by the fact that: “The US in 1967 had a peak stockpile of some 33,000 nuclear warheads, and Russia in 1982 had some 45,000” (Garwin, Richard L., “Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century: Prospects and Policy”, http://www.fas.org/rlg/102599nw21.htm). October of 1964 introduced the Chinese to nuclear weapons, with their first test taking place on the 16th, and the adoption of a “no use nuclear weapons first” policy. The Chinese wasted no time in acquiring the materials and knowledge they needed to develop their nuclear arsenal, with the first Chinese thermonuclear test taking place on June 17, 1967. Earlier that year, the major nuclear powers gathered to sign the Outer Space Treaty, prohibiting weapons of mass destruction in outer space or on other celestial bodies.

In the early months of 1967, the Treaty of Tlatelolco was signed by every nation in Latin America and the Caribbean, which forbade the existence of nuclear weapons in Latin America; every nation ratified the treaty, excluding Cuba. 18 months later, 61 countries signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the goal of which was to halt all nuclear testing by any nation, for good. The 1960s brought much change concerning the diplomatic relations of nuclear weapons, and ended with NATO changing its nuclear defense policy to “flexible response”, meaning that NATO would only use nuclear weapons as a last resort of military action, and in doing so, would only use them in small amounts, increasing in size as needed. This shows that even NATO realized the extensively horrid capabilities that nuclear weapons possessed, and that eliminating them was for the good of mankind.

Other posts on nuclear arms:

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Introduction
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1940s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1950s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1960s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1970s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1980s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Conclusion

WORKS CITED
Andrews, Elaine K. Civil Defense in the Nuclear Age. Franklin Watts: New York. 1985.
Brennan, Donald G. Arms Control, Disarmament, and National Security. George Braziller: New York. 1961.
Garwin, Richard L. “Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century: Prospects and Policy.” 23 Oct. 1999 – 25 Oct. 1999. 29 Mar. 2004 http://www.fas.org/rlg/102599nw21.htm.
Mendelsohn, Jack, and Grahame, David. Arms Control Chronology. The Center for Defense Information: Washington D.C. 2002.
“Nuclear Energy.” Harper’s Magazine. 29 March 2004. 2 April 2004 http://www.harpers.org/Nuclear.html.
“Nuclear Weapon.” Wikipedia. Nov. 2000 – 29 Mar. 2004. 29 Mar. 2004 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon.

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1950s

2011-04-17T06:44:00.002-07:00

1950s

On January 31, 1950, President Truman directed the Atomic Energy Commission to “continue its work on all forms of atomic weapons, including the hydrogen, or super-bombs”, in order for the US to be able “to defend itself against any possible aggressor.” With this statement, it is evident that fear was already playing a role in the development of nuclear weapons. In mid 1952, the British conducted their first nuclear test near the Monte Bello Islands, off the coast of Australia, and their first thermonuclear test in early 1957. By mid-to-late 1952, the US had already developed a thermonuclear device, with which they had successful tests. Not far behind the US was the USSR, which tested its first thermonuclear device less than nine months after its rival, and detonated the world’s first air-dropped thermonuclear device in November of 1955. With so much testing of thermonuclear and nuclear devices taking place, the US proposed that its Atoms for Peace plan be ratified immediately, which called for the creation of an international atomic energy agency, which “would receive contributions from nations with nuclear material stockpiles, and utilize them for peaceful purposes” (Mendelsohn, Grahame, 61). The IAEA was eventually established in July of 1957. Donald Brennan asserts that: “The major point of controversy concerning our present and future strategic nuclear forces is whether the US should adopt a position of approximate equality with the USSR, or whether we should continue to maintain a considerable margin of superiority in such forces” (Brennan, Donald G., Arms Control, Disarmament, and National Security, 28).

By 1957, nuclear weapons were making a significant presence in the world, with NATO making them its chief means of defensive military action: “Nuclear weaponry has become a part of Western Culture; the decades post-WWII can be termed the atomic age” (Wikipedia, “Nuclear Weapon”, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon). The beginning of 1958 brought with it a petition to stop nuclear testing immediately by all nations, signed by 9,235 scientists. Such a strong argument prompted the beginning of the CTBT negotiations between the US, UK, and USSR. All parties agree to a moratorium, which is to last for 1 year, but most likely longer, should the participating parties choose to extend it. In the last month of 1959, 12 nations signed the Antarctic Treaty, banning the detonation of nuclear weapons on, and military use of, the continent. This created the first ever Nuclear-Weapons-Free-Zone.

Other posts on nuclear arms:

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Introduction
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1940s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1950s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1960s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1970s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1980s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Conclusion

WORKS CITED
Andrews, Elaine K. Civil Defense in the Nuclear Age. Franklin Watts: New York. 1985.
Brennan, Donald G. Arms Control, Disarmament, and National Security. George Braziller: New York. 1961.
Garwin, Richard L. “Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century: Prospects and Policy.” 23 Oct. 1999 – 25 Oct. 1999. 29 Mar. 2004 http://www.fas.org/rlg/102599nw21.htm.
Mendelsohn, Jack, and Grahame, David. Arms Control Chronology. The Center for Defense Information: Washington D.C. 2002.
“Nuclear Energy.” Harper’s Magazine. 29 March 2004. 2 April 2004 http://www.harpers.org/Nuclear.html.
“Nuclear Weapon.” Wikipedia. Nov. 2000 – 29 Mar. 2004. 29 Mar. 2004 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon.

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1940s

2011-04-17T06:44:00.001-07:00

1940s
Following the US’s detonation of the world’s first nuclear weapon, the USSR felt the need to compete, conducting its first nuclear test almost 4 years later. During the time between these tests, a man named Bernard M. Baruch proposed that all atomic energy be internationally controlled, and all atomic activities be licensed; the Baruch Plan was quickly dismissed by the USSR. The end of the 1940s brought with them the creation of COCOM, which was established by the noncommunist nations of the world, to prevent “the transfer of militarily useful technology to the communist world” (Mendelsohn, Grahame, 61).

Other posts on nuclear arms:

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Introduction
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1940s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1950s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1960s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1970s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1980s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Conclusion

WORKS CITED
Andrews, Elaine K. Civil Defense in the Nuclear Age. Franklin Watts: New York. 1985.
Brennan, Donald G. Arms Control, Disarmament, and National Security. George Braziller: New York. 1961.
Garwin, Richard L. “Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century: Prospects and Policy.” 23 Oct. 1999 – 25 Oct. 1999. 29 Mar. 2004 http://www.fas.org/rlg/102599nw21.htm.
Mendelsohn, Jack, and Grahame, David. Arms Control Chronology. The Center for Defense Information: Washington D.C. 2002.
“Nuclear Energy.” Harper’s Magazine. 29 March 2004. 2 April 2004 http://www.harpers.org/Nuclear.html.
“Nuclear Weapon.” Wikipedia. Nov. 2000 – 29 Mar. 2004. 29 Mar. 2004 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon.

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Introduction

2011-04-17T06:44:00.000-07:00

The Development and Diplomatic Relations of Nuclear Weapons from 1945 to 1990

Introduction

Throughout the history of the world, fear has brought great change to the many people it affects. One such instance of this is in the case of nuclear weapons, and their change throughout times past. The mid-1940s brought with them the discovery of one of the greatest, most powerful scientific units ever: nuclear energy. Nuclear energy can be used for many useful purposes, including the production of power, and the ability to make X-rays. The United States government saw nuclear energy, instead, as a way to intimidate rivals. From what was known at the time, nuclear radiation was an extremely hazardous, often lethal, material. Because of this, the military considered nuclear energy to be more of an aid as a weapon than anything else. With this, the Manhattan Project was initiated in late 1942, marking the beginning of nuclear weapons research in the world. Since that time, an uncountable number of nuclear tests have taken place by nations all across the globe, each with the same mentality: don’t be the last one without the weapon, or you’re done for. “July 16, 1945. The US conducts the world’s first nuclear weapons test code-named Trinity, at Alamogordo, NM” (Mendelsohn, Jack, and David Grahame, Arms Control Chronology, 5). It was impossible for any nation to ignore the threat which faced it, for fear of extermination kept the development of nuclear weapons at a steadily growing rate.

Other posts on nuclear arms:

Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Introduction
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1940s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1950s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1960s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1970s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: 1980s
Nuclear Weapons History and Proliferation: Conclusion

WORKS CITED
Andrews, Elaine K. Civil Defense in the Nuclear Age. Franklin Watts: New York. 1985.
Brennan, Donald G. Arms Control, Disarmament, and National Security. George Braziller: New York. 1961.
Garwin, Richard L. “Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century: Prospects and Policy.” 23 Oct. 1999 – 25 Oct. 1999. 29 Mar. 2004 http://www.fas.org/rlg/102599nw21.htm.
Mendelsohn, Jack, and Grahame, David. Arms Control Chronology. The Center for Defense Information: Washington D.C. 2002.
“Nuclear Energy.” Harper’s Magazine. 29 March 2004. 2 April 2004 http://www.harpers.org/Nuclear.html.
“Nuclear Weapon.” Wikipedia. Nov. 2000 – 29 Mar. 2004. 29 Mar. 2004 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon.

Aristocratic, Popular, Comic, and Supernatural Elements in A Midsummer Night's Dream; Shakespeare

2011-04-17T06:39:00.000-07:00

Aristocratic, Popular, Comic, and Supernatural Elements

The particular essay that is to be explored in the following was originally written in the late 19th century by a man named George Brandes. Bearing resemblance to the majority of his other distinguished works, “‘A Midsummer Night’s Dream’—Its Historical Circumstances—Its Aristocratic, Popular, Comic, and Supernatural Elements” was first published in Danish, and soon thereafter translated into various other languages for the rest of society to enjoy. As implied by the title, Brandes discussed various elements of “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” that are to be summarized.

First mentioned by Brandes is the obvious aristocratic distinction in the play. This is most evidently seen in the duo, Theseus and Hippolyta, who are most frequently found in the midst of their ‘train’. This evident distinction can be seen in that the nobles are among their servants, whereas the common folk—Lysander, Helena, etc.—are not. Next, Brandes mentioned the play as having contained popular elements too. One of these is nature, as Brandes illustrates: “The country-bred youth’s whole feeling for and knowledge of nature comes to the surface, permeated with the spirit of poetry”, and that “In none of Shakespeare’s plays are so many species of flowers, fruits, and trees mentioned and characterised.” As the writer indicates, Shakespeare had a deeper feeling for, and understanding of, nature, that hadn’t until this time become entirely evident.

Brandes subsequently comments on, what he felt was, a supernatural sense to Shakespeare’s poetry in “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”. The writer is content that this is the start of an altered form of enhanced poetry, which is later reiterated in “Romeo and Juliet”. The final element touched upon by George Brandes, in his epic essay, is that of comedy. He reflects on it with marvel: “Never before has Shakespeare risen to the sparkling and genial humour with which these excellent simpletons are portrayed.” Brandes is undoubtedly impressed with the way in which Shakespeare expressed humor throughout his play. Another means by which Shakespeare articulated comedy in his play, was through satire, as seen in the lines of Quince in Act I. Brandes found this wittiness to be quite distinct for a work of Shakespeare, but nonetheless commended it on its wonderful influence.

George Brandes closes his critical essay of a few elements of “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” by saying: “Shakespeare is far from regarding love as an expression of human reason” and that “The germs of a whole philosophy of life are latent in the wayward love-scenes of A Midsummer Night’s Dream.” What is latent in “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”, though, is what Brandes considers notable elements: aristocratic, popular, comic, and supernatural. These elements, Brandes implies, highlight the intricate and elaborate qualities of Shakespearean work.

Other posts on A Midsummer Night's Dream:

References to Change in A Midsummer Night's Dream
A World of Difference: Hermia's Life in A Midsummer Night's Dream, Shakespeare
What an Allusion: An Example of Change
Aristocratic, Popular, Comic, and Supernatural Elements in A Midsummer Night's Dream; Shakespeare
A World of Difference: Lysander

A World of Difference: Hermia's Life in A Midsummer Night's Dream, Shakespeare

2011-04-17T06:37:00.000-07:00

When we first learn about Hermia, she is an innocent, naïve girl, belonging to a distinguished family. Her father Egeus, however, is tremendously unfair towards her. Hermia has fallen in love with Lysander, and the same is true for the opposite. Unfortunately, Egeus does not particularly favor Lysander, but rather Demetrius instead. This is ironic, for Hermia expresses no desire for Demetrius, whom her father says she must marry. There are alternatives to this option, although each of which would provide no Lysander for her. Hermia’s response to her father’s wishes, is to flee from her residence, with Lysander, to a far-off place where they are able to remain together.

As has been seen through the words of Hermia, remaining at home with her officious father would prove to be only trouble for her and Lysander’s relationship. As Hermia enters the woods with her dear Lysander, there is a sense of excitement in her words. She has high hopes for their future accomplishments together. Before each of them lay down to rest, they exclaim their love for each other, vowing never to stop loving each other until the day they die: “[Hermia] Thy love ne’er alter till thy sweet life end!” (A Midsummer Night’s Dream, II, ii, 67). This particular situation that Hermia finds herself in, is to a great extent, different than what she is accustomed to experiencing.

Hermia found the only route possible in order to remain with her love, Lysander, and she took it; she ran away from home with him. As she enters the woods, she has a sense of high hopes, for she is free at last, and free to marry her love. This is quite different from when she was at home, where she was not allowed to wed her dearest Lysander. Hermia’s life has substantially changed for the better, in her eyes.

Other posts on A Midsummer Night's Dream:

References to Change in A Midsummer Night's Dream
A World of Difference: Hermia's Life in A Midsummer Night's Dream, Shakespeare
What an Allusion: An Example of Change
Aristocratic, Popular, Comic, and Supernatural Elements in A Midsummer Night's Dream; Shakespeare
A World of Difference: Lysander

Works Cited List for Nuclear Arms

2011-04-17T06:36:00.000-07:00

Works Cited
Andrews, Elaine K. Civil Defense in the Nuclear Age. Franklin Watts: New York. 1985.
Brennan, Donald G. Arms Control, Disarmament, and National Security. George Braziller: New York. 1961.
“Foreign Missile Developments and the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States through 2015.” National Intelligence Council. Sep. 1999. 29 Mar 2004 http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/missile/nie99msl.htm.
Garwin, Richard L. “Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century: Prospects and Policy.” 23 Oct. 1999 – 25 Oct. 1999. 29 Mar. 2004 http://www.fas.org/rlg/102599nw21. htm.
Mendelsohn, Jack, and Grahame, David. Arms Control Chronology. The Center for Defense Information: Washington D.C. 2002.
“Nuclear Weapon.” Wikipedia. Nov. 2000 – 29 Mar. 2004. 29 Mar. 2004 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon.
“Nuclear Energy.” Harper’s Magazine. April 2004. 29 Mar. 2004 http://www.harpers.org/Nuclear.html.

Other Works Cited Lists and Annotated Bibliographies:
Works Cited List for Charles Dickens
William Shakespeare: An Annotated Bibliography
Works Cited List for Science
Works Cited List for Science Fair: Germinating Radiated Seeds
A Sample Works Cited List for Charles Dickens
Works Cited Page for Coca-Cola Analysis of Alliances Portfolio
Works Cited for Tata Motors Expansion into US
Works Cited List for Nuclear Arms
Works Cited List for Samuel Barber
Works Cited List for Hoarding Behavior

Deduction Establishes Themes in A Separate Peace

2011-04-17T06:35:00.001-07:00

Throughout the entirety of A Separate Peace, numerous themes are presented to the reader. These themes are often presented through symbolism, and other methods of representation. There are two themes in particular though, that closely relate to one another; denial and jealousy. These themes are bound by a common foundation. That foundation in this particular situation is known as deduction. Deduction is a form of argument, wherein if the stated premises are true, then in fact the conclusion is true. Deduction works to establish the themes of denial and jealousy on countless occasions throughout the novel.
To be established first, is the presence of Gene’s immense jealousy for Finny. This is shown through the way in which Gene narrates the novel. He makes several mentions of this jealousy throughout the novel. It is in the earlier portion of the novel when the basis for Gene’s actions becomes clear. For Finny, sports have come naturally, although academics is another anecdote. Finny has never been required to put any effort into sports; he is naturally superior in all aspects of sporting. Because of this, Finny assumes that since Gene is good in school, that he doesn’t have to work hard either to achieve what ‘naturally comes to him’: “‘What’s the matter?’ ‘Studying!’ I snarled. ‘Studying! You know, books. Work. Examinations.’” (John Knowles, A Separate Peace, 809). He informs Gene of his misconception, which infuriates him, and increases his jealousy for Finny; that Finny’s sports come effortlessly to him, yet he has to work extremely hard for his unparalleled grades. The premise that is true for the preceding conclusion to be true, is: Gene’s expressed anger towards Finny. The theme of jealousy, Gene’s primarily, was established by the conclusion reached through deduction.
The second theme being analyzed is denial. The first premise to be noted is that Gene in fact did jounce the limb on which Finny was standing: “Holding firmly to the trunk, I took a step toward him, and then my knees bent and I jounced the limb” (Knowles 810). This caused his plummet to the ground, causing his leg to become severely broken. This is unquestionably a fact, for Gene admits to Finny that the accident was indeed his fault, bringing about the second premise: “‘I jounced the limb. I caused it.’ One more sentence. ‘I deliberately jounced the limb so you would fall off’” (Knowles 818). This is where Gene’s jealousy for Finny is revealed, as he intentionally takes the life of his best friend into his own hands. According to deduction, because the above stated premises are true, that Gene jounced the limb in an attempt at making Finny fall and that he later admitted to this, then the conclusion that Finny knows that Gene acted the way he did intentionally, is also true.
Finny has a belief that everyone is innately good. He believes that people don’t perform dire acts intentionally, but rather on accident. He prefers this belief when it comes to Gene’s situation, because he never could have imagined his own best friend performing such a heinous undertaking. As deduction has shown in the previous paragraph, Finny knows that Gene acted the way he did on purpose. This conflicts with Finny’s belief that everyone is innately good. Finny chooses to default on his beliefs, thus he denies the truth from not only himself, but Gene and the rest of Devon. This denial continues, until towards the end of the novel, Brinker Hadley decides to hold a hearing on the incident, in an attempt at finding the truth. The truth is revealed, although Finny remains yet unable to accept it, causing him to run from it, in denial. This conclusion, reached through deduction, worked to establish the common, recurring theme of denial.
There are a number of instances throughout the entirety of A Separate Peace, in which deduction works to establish the themes of jealousy and denial. The juxtaposition of a select few of these instances provides premises on which a conclusion can be reached. This leads to, as in this particular case, the establishment of a theme. The following conclusions were able to be reached: sports coming easy to Finny and academics coming as a challenge to Gene, present the reason for Gene’s jealousy toward Finny; and the fact that Finny knows that what Gene did in the tree was intentional. Both of these conclusions, each stating essentially a different theme of the novel, could only have been established through the premises on which they were based; hence deduction.

Two Merlins, One Writer

2011-04-17T06:33:00.000-07:00

Two Writers: One Merlin
Geoffrey Hill says how Merlin misses his friends because they’ve all passed on, and that hopefully, they can all be together in England again, sometime in the future. Hill addresses Merlin’s past mostly in his poem. Edwin Muir, on the other hand, is asking Merlin if he can really do the impossible. He doubts that Merlin can do anything (i.e. outrun your own shadow) never before done. Muir’s poem analyzes more, the famous wizard aspect of Merlin, from the legend of King Arthur.

Research Paper Topic Proposal: Nuclear Arms

2011-04-17T06:31:00.000-07:00

The topic for my research paper is going to be the nuclear arms race between the superpowers of Russia and the United States. The time frame I will focus on is the mid 20th century, primarily the late 1940’s to late 1960’s. Included in my paper, will be in-depth details on programs such as the Manhattan Project, the Plowshare Program, Project Gasbuggy, and the SALT and SALT II Proposals. I will touch upon the “balance of terror” between Russia and the US in this time frame, which kept the world alert at all times, and poised with nuclear weapons. Each country built up its nuclear stockpile, and wanted to be the first to launch their nuclear weapons in the form of a preemptive strike. The US and Russia were both afraid that the other would launch their nuclear weapons first, thus causing the feeling of a need for a preemptive strike. This shall be further discussed and outlined, as well as the steps taken by both nations to reduce this level of fear. The “Nuclear Club” and its members will be examined thoroughly, for all of them participated in the race for nuclear arms.

Caesar Discussion

2011-04-17T06:30:00.001-07:00

Brutus thinks that he should be taken more seriously than people are taking him, for he feels that he is way too honest and trustworthy.

Cassius’s heart is thirsty for a commitment by his partners, as he tells Lucius to overfill his cup.

Brutus is basically saying carpe diem, or “seize the day”, because when this high tide is here, it is best to take advantage of it, and not let it pass, or else much harder things will come in life.

Other posts on Julius Caesar:
Information about Shakespeare's Caesar
Julius Caesar, Act III (3) Issues
Julius Caesar, More Act III Issues
Caesar Discussion
The Life and Work of William Shakespeare
Information about Shakespeare's Caesar
Aristotle’s Inspiration on the Work of Shakespeare
William Shakespeare: An Annotated Bibliography

Quick Research About Shamanism

2011-04-17T06:29:00.001-07:00

People: Mythical Transformation to Animals
I researched a tribe, or group of people, that are known to follow a religion called Shamanism. These people worship two idols: the Creator (or God); and a mythical character, who acted almost as a prophet for the religion. A belief of this people is a myth (or so the rest of the world thinks) that states that the world was full of people at one time, and that the majority of them were transformed into animals. For this reason, these people feel a close bond with animals because of their shared human ancestry (before the transformation and now). The way that this bond is exhibited is through rituals that the people commonly practice involving the simulation of animal behavior. This is the explanation of the myth believed by the people of Shamanism involving the transformation of people to animals.

References to Change in A Midsummer Night's Dream

2011-04-17T06:26:00.000-07:00

What an Allusion: An Example of Change

“Run when you will, the story shall be changed: | Apollo flies and Daphne holds the chase,” (A Midsummer Night’s Dream, II, i, 230-31). In this first line, Helena says that by Demetrius running from her is a change of story from the ordinary mythology of the day. In ancient myth, Daphne managed to escape severe physical harm from Apollo. The difference in this is that Helena is right in that it is her that is chasing the man, whereas in the mythology, the man was the one chasing the woman. Shakespeare used this analogy here in order to again touch upon the matter of change. What occurs in this allusion is a change from typical mythological stories. In the first Act, Hermia changes life settings when she decides to abandon her place at home, and leave with Lysander to the woods. Shakespeare focuses much on change throughout this play, and the two lines listed above are just one example of it.

Other posts on A Midsummer Night's Dream:

References to Change in A Midsummer Night's Dream
A World of Difference: Hermia's Life in A Midsummer Night's Dream, Shakespeare
What an Allusion: An Example of Change
Aristocratic, Popular, Comic, and Supernatural Elements in A Midsummer Night's Dream; Shakespeare
A World of Difference: Lysander

A Christmas Memory, Issues

2011-04-17T06:18:00.000-07:00

I would imagine that Capote and his cousin send the fruitcakes to people they hardly know because they wish to possibly make a few new friends, as well as to let those people realize that they exist, and that they are thought about. The two friends merely wish to be friendly.

Capote wishes that he could remain with his cousin forever; this is because he has lived with his friend for as long as he can remember, thus the two are best friends. The boy knows that wherever he may go next, that he’ll never have a friend so close as that he has at home right now.

What Capote means by this is that he desires never to be separated from his friend, until the day he dies, and goes up to heaven with her. He would rather go to heaven with her than go anywhere else, and the kites in this quote are used in symbolism of the unity of the two because they both gave each other kites for Christmas, knowing that each would be blissful with the other’s gift.

The true meaning of gift giving is expressing your feelings for someone, and sometimes people like to use large gifts instead of their words. This isn’t always good, as sometimes, the opposing party wishes to hear the words, for they are more meaningful. In short, gift giving is a form of expression of feelings for another individual.
Analyzing Literature

Capote uses the present tense to describe events twenty years old because he wishes to remember the event as if it just happened, and that makes him feel good inside.

“A Christmas Memory” is a reminiscence in that the author, Truman Capote, is attempting to remember his past, for he too spent most of his childhood in the care of relatives. One of these relatives, an elderly cousin named Sook Faulk, was his special friend, and thus he received the inspiration for this story; to remember his past, and most importantly, his best friend.

Works Cited List for Charles Dickens

2011-04-17T06:16:00.000-07:00

Ackroyd, Peter. Introduction to Dickens. New York: Ballantine Books, 1992.
“All the Comforts of Dickens.” The New York Times Book Review May 15, 1988 p13
col 1
Bodenstein, B. “Reality, unreality and the novel.” The New Republic 2001: 25-8.
Cooper, Lettice. A Hang upon the time; a life of Charles Dickens, by Lettice Cooper. New York, Pantheon Books, 1968.
“Dickens, Charles” Merriam-Webster's Biographical Dictionary. May 1995 p1F58
Hudson, John. Dickens’ Christmas. Stroud, Gloucestershire: A. Sutton, 1997.
Kaplan, Fred. Dickens : a biography / Fred Kaplan. New York: Morrow, 1988.
Kennedy, J. M. “Charles Dickens: Was he an Artist?” The New Age. 15 February 1912, 368.
Kyle, Elisabeth. Great Ambitions : a story of the early years of Charles Dickens / by Elisabeth Kyle. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1966.
Matsuoka, Mitsuharu. “The Dickens Page.” 28 Sept. 1995.
http://lang.nagoya-u.ac.jp/~matsuoka/Dickens.html#New.
Moore, Toni D. “Student Companion to Charles Dickens.(Review) / (book review)” School Library Journal May, 2000
Perdue, David. “David Perdue’s Charles Dickens Page.” 1997-2002 http://www.fidnet.com/~dap1955/dickens/.
Stanley, Diane, and Peter Vennema. Charles Dickens : the man who had great expectations / Diane Stanley & Peter Vennema. New York: Morrow Junior Books, 1993.
Winnebago Online Catalog. A Tale of Two Cities. Sound Recording Prince Frederick Recorded Books, 1986.

Other Works Cited Lists and Annotated Bibliographies:
Works Cited List for Charles Dickens
William Shakespeare: An Annotated Bibliography
Works Cited List for Science
Works Cited List for Science Fair: Germinating Radiated Seeds
A Sample Works Cited List for Charles Dickens
Works Cited Page for Coca-Cola Analysis of Alliances Portfolio
Works Cited for Tata Motors Expansion into US
Works Cited List for Nuclear Arms
Works Cited List for Samuel Barber
Works Cited List for Hoarding Behavior

Film Review of Dead Poets Society

2011-04-17T06:08:00.001-07:00

Dead Poets Society: Why So Notable?

The title of this 1989, critically acclaimed release, is Dead Poets Society. The setting for this film is at Welton Academy, a private boarding school located in Vermont, in the year 1959. This extraordinary film was directed by Peter Weir, and the main characters included: John Keating (Robin Williams), Todd Anderson (Ethan Hawke), Neil Perry (Robert Sean Leonard), Charlie Dalton (Gale Hansen), and Knox Overstreet (Josh Charles).
Two main characters had an immense effect on the outcome of the film: Neal Perry and Todd Anderson. Neal Perry was sent to Welton because his father wanted him to become a doctor. Neal was merely following his father’s wishes when he agreed to attend Welton, playing the part of the model son in order to make his father proud. However, Neal had no desire to become a doctor; but rather, he wanted to participate in the arts, acting. Naturally, Neal’s father objected to this proposition, which later had a detrimental effect on Neal’s life. His roommate, Todd Anderson, has been sent to Welton to follow in his brother’s footsteps. Todd’s brother had just graduated from the school the previous year, as Valedictorian of his class. Todd knew he had big shoes to fill, but a motivation from his English teacher, Mr. Keating, led him elsewhere. Mr. Keating was not only Todd and Neal’s English teacher, but the entire casts’ English teacher. Keating acted less like a teacher, and more like a guide and mentor toward the boys, motivating them with random activities, and stories of his pastimes: “Carpe, carpe diem, seize the day boys, make your lives extraordinary.” One of these stories that the boys manage to obtain from him, is that when Keating attended Welton, he acted as part of a group that called themselves the Dead Poets Society. The boys of his English class were both stimulated and inspired by this concept of meeting secretly, and reading aloud poetry for the sheer enjoyment of it. This led to the recreation of the Dead Poets Society at Welton, led by none other than Neal Perry himself. The boys, and teachers for that matter, are expected to conform to the rules and lifestyle of Welton, although Mr. Keating is a nonconformist, who attempts to teach his students to be the same way. His methods of teaching lead a series of events to occur, from which nothing good emerges.
This film was an Oscar winner for Best Original Screenplay (Tom Schulman), and was nominated for Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actor (Robin Williams). The film also won Best Foreign Film for Cesar awards, Best Picture for British Academy Awards, and Best Original Music Score for British Academy Awards (Maurice Jarre). This touching, epic motion picture will keep you on the edge of your seat until the very last scene, where the culmination of previous events occurs.

Julius Caesar, Act III (3) Issues

2011-04-17T06:05:00.001-07:00

The petition to allow Plebus back into the city; he denies the request.

That it will benefit Rome, and that should Caesar have come into power in the first place, he would have turned everybody in Rome into slaves, and used them.

Antony continuously refers to Brutus as being a “noble man.”

Antony’s speech gets the plebians all roused up, and they go run through the streets in search of conspirators; they even kill a man because he had the same last name as one of the conspirators.

Antony himself does not wish to be killed.

Brutus is convinced that Antony agrees with the conspirator’s actions, and thus allowed him to speak at Caesar’s funeral.

Caesar’s will had the people convinced that they were going to have a better life with him as ruler, thus winning over their hearts.

Hitler made speeches at humungous rallies, with vehement speech; he was an excellent orator. This characteristic made the people want to listen to him, and believe him. This is the relationship with Caesar, from the perspective of gaining the public's admiration.

First, Cassius tells Antony that his word is welcome, then tells Brutus, aside, that Antony’s word is dangerous, and shouldn’t be trusted.

Antony first says that Caesar was a grave threat to all, and that it is right that he was killed. Next, he contradicts himself, by denouncing the conspirators.

Brutus proclaims how much he loved Caesar, but then how much it was necessary that he die for the good of Rome.

In studying Caesar, I actually used this "No Fear Shakespeare" guide to better understand the literature. It provides an easy understanding of the play on the opposite side of the page. Very easy to understand, in my opinion.

Other posts on Julius Caesar:
Information about Shakespeare's Caesar
Julius Caesar, Act III (3) Issues
Julius Caesar, More Act III Issues
Caesar Discussion
The Life and Work of William Shakespeare
Information about Shakespeare's Caesar
Aristotle’s Inspiration on the Work of Shakespeare
William Shakespeare: An Annotated Bibliography

Julius Caesar, Act III (3) Issues

2011-04-17T06:05:00.000-07:00

The petition to allow Plebus back into the city; he denies the request.

That it will benefit Rome, and that should Caesar have come into power in the first place, he would have turned everybody in Rome into slaves, and used them.

Antony continuously refers to Brutus as being a “noble man.”

Antony’s speech gets the plebians all roused up, and they go run through the streets in search of conspirators; they even kill a man because he had the same last name as one of the conspirators.

Antony himself does not wish to be killed.

Brutus is convinced that Antony agrees with the conspirator’s actions, and thus allowed him to speak at Caesar’s funeral.

Caesar’s will had the people convinced that they were going to have a better life with him as ruler, thus winning over their hearts.

Hitler made speeches at humungous rallies, with vehement speech; he was an excellent orator. This characteristic made the people want to listen to him, and believe him. This is the relationship with Caesar, from the perspective of gaining the public's admiration.

First, Cassius tells Antony that his word is welcome, then tells Brutus, aside, that Antony’s word is dangerous, and shouldn’t be trusted.

Antony first says that Caesar was a grave threat to all, and that it is right that he was killed. Next, he contradicts himself, by denouncing the conspirators.

Brutus proclaims how much he loved Caesar, but then how much it was necessary that he die for the good of Rome.

Other posts on Julius Caesar:
Information about Shakespeare's Caesar
Julius Caesar, Act III (3) Issues
Julius Caesar, More Act III Issues
Caesar Discussion
The Life and Work of William Shakespeare
Information about Shakespeare's Caesar
Aristotle’s Inspiration on the Work of Shakespeare
William Shakespeare: An Annotated Bibliography

A Separate Peace, Analysis of the Fall

2011-04-17T06:04:00.000-07:00

Gene Experienced Anything but a ‘Blind Impulse’
Finny and Gene have remained the best of friends for at least their entire stay at Devon. They have supported each other, stood up for each other, and most importantly, been there for each other at the most crucial of times. This naturally would indicate that one would deny any wrongdoing of the other. Another point of interest that supports this statement is the fact that Finny has a particular belief that everyone is innately good. With this being the case, Finny would automatically excuse any misconduct on the part of his comrades. Finny’s instinct though, later causes him much pain, both mentally and physically.
Towards the end of the novel, Finny decides to confront Gene about what really happened on the night of the accident. Finny insists that Gene acted on a ‘blind impulse’. Finny makes this statement only because he could not bear to think that his own best friend would dare do such a horrific thing to him. Gene did not act on a ‘blind impulse’, but rather on a premeditated impulse; Gene jounced the limb intentionally, so Finny would fall.
Immediately following the accident, Gene makes an attempt at revealing the truth, although he is unable to, for he is interrupted by Dr. Stanpole before he is able to: “‘I don’t care who I sound like, and you won’t think so when I tell you. This is the worst thing in the world, and I’m sorry and I hate to tell you but I’ve got to tell you.’ But I didn’t tell him. Dr. Stanpole came in before I was able to…” (John Knowles, A Separate Peace, 815). Gene knows that the course of action he took was deliberate, although he knows that Finny would never accuse him of such a thing, for Finny believes that all people are naturally good. “I couldn’t say anything to this sincere, drugged apology for having suspected the truth. He was never going to accuse me” (Knowles 815). Gene unquestionably realizes his guilt, although he is convinced that Finny could never accuse him of committing such an act as he did. “‘It must have been that. I did have this idea, this feeling that when you were standing there beside me, y— I don’t know…’” (Knowles 815). Finny too grasps the reality that the jouncing of the limb was intentional, although he refuses to accept it. Finny’s ‘personal Decalogue’ refuses to allow him to accept the truth, only causing further unnecessary hurt. Some may argue that Gene accidentally disturbed the limb, although Gene’s attempt at a confession clearly illustrates that this is besides the case.
Further on in the novel, Brinker Hadley and a few friends of his decide to investigate Finny’s accident, and to uncover the truth and what really occurred on the limb that day. Brinker decides to call in Leper to hear his interpretation of what actually took place.
“I kept quiet. To myself, however, I made a number of swift, automatic calculations: that Leper was no threat, no one would ever believe Leper; Leper was deranged, he was not of sound mind and if people couldn’t make out their own wills when not in sound mind certainly they couldn’t testify in something like this” (Knowles 877).

During this time, Gene is extremely uneasy, because he knows that Leper is really a smart person, with a photographic memory. Gene knows that Leper will tell the truth, and that makes him uncomfortable because Gene knows that it, in truth, it is his fault that Finny fell out of the tree. Brinker vigorously interrogates Leper, and information is revealed, almost to the point of absolute truth. At this point, Leper realizes that he is being used, and he lets the entire room know this. Leper decides to hide the truth from the world because he knows that Gene is guilty of the crime, and that if he said so, then his testimony would be used against him in the future. During Brinker’s deliberation with Leper, Finny gets up unnoticeably, and announces: “I don’t care!” (Knowles 879). After this, Finny decides to walk out of the auditorium. It is plausible to argue that Finny is just thoroughly annoyed with the consideration of his accident that he is receiving, although he is not walking from any such thing, but rather, Finny is walking away from the truth. Finny is not only physically walking out of the auditorium, from the truth, but he is mentally walking away from the truth as well. He refuses to believe that Gene caused his fall intentionally, for according to Finny, everyone is innately good.
Finny’s venture out of the auditorium, and from the truth, proved to be an immense mistake, for he took a devastating tumble down the flight of stairs just outside of the auditorium. Finny’s leg broke again, and he later died in the operation to reset his bone. This event causes Gene to feel that the death of Finny was his fault, since all of Finny’s problems began with his fall from the tree. Gene knows that he was the cause of that fall, and that if he hadn’t have done that, then he wouldn’t have been in the auditorium investigating the accident in the first place, and thus Finny wouldn’t have run out and fallen down the stairs, bringing about his death. “He [Phineas] possessed an extra vigor, a heightened confidence in himself, a serene capacity for affection which saved him. Nothing as he was growing up at home, nothing at Devon, nothing even about the war had broken his harmonious and natural unity. So at last I had” (Knowles 892). Gene did not act on a ‘blind impulse’ when he jounced the limb on which Finny was standing. What Gene did was undoubtedly intentional, and not only does he know that, but Finny knows it as well. When Finny stated that Gene acted on a ‘blind impulse’, he was merely making an excuse for him, as a way of evading the truth for longer, for according to Finny, everyone is innately good.

Economic Analysis, Basic Questions

2011-04-17T05:58:00.000-07:00

There is no marginal cost for the first 150 miles, but the subsequent 50 miles have a marginal cost of 15 cents per mile. This works out to $7.50 for 50 miles.

A) While attending college, I am giving up the money that I could have made working. I am also spending much more money in the way of tuition, room, and board, that I could have saved by living with my parents.

B) I could have gotten more sleep by not attending this class, as well as had more time to study for other courses, or perform some other efficient task during the time allotted for this class.

C) I forwent the time that I could have spent doing something else, while I attended yesterday’s lecture.

Individuals would not willingly enter into trade if they did believe that they would benefit in some way. In this case, both parties benefit, for sure, however the man who is allowed to keep his life by gaining a new kidney benefits more. This is for exactly the reason just stated: he is allowed to live. It could be seen that the recipient is hurt financially, but that the donor is hurt because the operation could have a negative outcome in his case, and the fact that he is now without one kidney, should the need ever arise for him to utilize one. These sorts of transactions should be allowed by a society, primarily because both parties enter willingly and each party benefits. Assuming that the transaction always emerges as planned, then there is no need to ban this type of agreement, so long as no laws are broken.

Chipo Piece: Zimbabwe Adoption and Western Cultural Values

2011-04-17T05:55:00.000-07:00

In theory, bureaucratic red tape is extant in much of society’s daily routines for the purpose of ensuring that certain actions are taken by only the right people. In Zimbabwe, it is generally viewed as wrong for a Westerner to adopt a child native to that country. For this reason, Neely Tucker and his wife, Vita, were seen as the wrong people trying to take the supposed wrong course of action. Consequently, their pleas for the adoption of Chipo were met with “endless bureaucratic frustrations and resistance.” While frustration with American sociocultural expectations in Zimbabwe is illustrated in this example, Japan has a similar distaste with one of America’s more popular habits: dining on fast food. In Japan, it is not customary for individuals to dine at fast-food establishments on average several times a week. What for Americans has become customary—easy and affordable access to some form of fast food—is viewed as an unhealthy, most untraditional notion in Japanese society. Japanese culture has evolved in such a way that its members expect a leaner, healthier style of living, with strong roots found in one’s diet. Because Japanese dietary expectations of cleanliness, sanitation, and healthiness are not met by American culture with equally extreme a perspective, the Japanese people have grown increasingly repugnant of America’s obsession with the consumption of fast food.
What is commonplace in American society—the adoption of children by whoever is deemed legally capable of providing for the well-being of a child—is not traditionally looked upon by Zimbabwean society as quite as acceptable a practice. Similarly, when Americans consume pounds of mass produced, processed food in one sitting, such an act is looked down upon by members of the Japanese society. Almost everyone has binge eaten at some point in their life, however the frequency, content, and quality of the meals taken under such conditions plays a key role when the Japanese look at Americans’ eating habits. They view it as disgusting that one person can be allowed to consume so much food. However, this is not to say that McDonald’s and Kentucky Fried Chicken are not popular establishments in Japan as well. Japan, like most other countries in the world, is no exception to the endless expansion sought by imperialist fast food corporations once known only to exist in America. The key difference that Japan wields in the fast food business is in the size of the portions sold. Almost every fast food restaurant in Japan serves noticeably smaller portions and better quality food, than that of its American counterparts. An unhealthy diet has not become entirely taboo in America yet; however the tradition that Japanese cuisine has evolved with illustrates distaste with the notion of obesity. Japanese cuisine is lined with vegetables and seafood, two of the more healthy areas of the food pyramid. True, Japanese people crack raw eggs over many of their dishes, and consume seemingly endless amounts of carbohydrates in the way of rice and ramen noodles, but the methods by which they prepare their food are considerably more healthy and sanitary than that of many home kitchens and fast food restaurants found in the United States.
While living in Tokyo for the past two years, I have experienced on several occasions Japanese people refer to McDonald’s as “The American Embassy.” At first it was demeaning for me to hear such a stereotypical comment made about my own society, but the truth is that as stereotypical as this comment seemed at the time, the critic this phrase originated with is right to some degree. Just as the customs officials in Zimbabwe referred to Neely Tucker as “the rich American,” stereotypes will forever follow each society that has a distinctive culture it calls its own. Neely Tucker felt a similar soreness as I when he had his first encounter with the bureaucratic nonsense of the Zimbabwean government. Just as the adoption of a native baby in Zimbabwe by foreigners is socially unaccepted, the concept of eating fast food with some frequency is looked down upon in Japanese culture. Despite this, however, the concepts of adoption and frequent fast food eating are both widely accepted institutions of American society.

Review of Tech Info, Again

2011-04-17T05:52:00.002-07:00

User-interface: human-machine connection. The look and feel of the computing experience, from a human point of view.

UNIX remains the dominant OS for Internet servers.
Basic functions of a computer: input, process, output, storage.

A bit is a binary digit- the smallest unit of information- on or off (0 or 1), can represent numbers, codes, or instructions.
Byte: collection is 8 bits.
Gigabyte: 1 Billion bytes
Kilobyte: 1 Thousand bytes
Megabytes: 1 Million bytes
Hierarchy of data: bits, bytes, fields, records, tables, then databases.

Knowledge, the ability to make decisions based on data we have.

Database: collection of stored operational data used by the application systems of some particular enterprise.

Also: a collection of tables with relationships between the tables.
Table: a collection of records or documents dealing with one organization, person, area or subject.

File Systems preceeded Databases...problems with file systems: inconsistent data, inflexibility, limited data sharing, poor enforcement of standards, excessive program maintenance.

Database Management System (DBMS) Advantages: make it easier to store large quantities of information, make it easier to retrieve info quickly and flexibly, make it easy to organize and reorganize information, and make it easy to print and distribute informat a of ways.
It also minimizes data redundancy, ensures consistency and integration of data, accessibility and responsiveness, data independence, ease of application development, reduced program maintenance, and sharing of data.

Database operations: import, browse, query, sort; print reports, labels, and form letters.

XML is newest, most powerful data description language... a way to structure your html to communicate with a database. It's designed with industrial-strength database access in mind.

PC-based database, and client-server databases, also database web application, and one more: distributed database.

Review of Tech Info

2011-04-17T05:52:00.001-07:00

Data represents a fact or statement of event without relation to other things.
Information embodies the understanding of a relationship of some sort, possibly cuase and effect. Information is anything that can be digitized (books, mags, etc.).
Knowledge represents a pattern that conects and generally provides a high level of predictability as to what is described or what will happen next.

System: input, process, and output.
Process: manner in which work is organized and coordinated to produce a product or service.

Information System (IS): components that work together to process data and produce information (to help companies solve problems and make decisions).

Complications with IS: resistance to change.

-e-commerce: b2b, b2c, c2c- business to business, business to consumer, and consumer to consumer. any business transaction executed electronically between parties involving the exchange of goods and/or services
-enterprise resource planning (ERP) very, very expensive- integrated programs that can manage a company's entire set of business operations; often coordinate planning, inventory control, production and ordering; very expensive and difficult to implement.
-customer relationship management (CRM)- manages ways to deal with existing and potential new customers; coordinates business processes of a firm necessary to provide end-to-end customer care; provides a unified view of customers across the company; consolidates customer data from multiple sources and provides analytical tools for answering questions.
-supply chain management (SCM)- links the organization with customers and suppliers (i.e. the supply chain) as one 'virtual organization'.
-business intelligence (BI)- used to support decision making (e.g. where to build, how much to order) Charateristics: suggests and compares alternatives; problem is complex; information is voluminous.

The "waterfall approach" to software development: having several different teams produce pieces of a larger software project and waiting until the very end of the project to merge all of the pieces together to see if they work jointly (or not). Mid 70's to late 80's this was popular. Then things changed: MS now merges pieces on bi-weekly or monthly bases to ensure that kinks are worked out early in, rather than several years down the road when a project is supposed to be near completion.

MS uses the "synch-and-stabilize" process to work out kinks as the production of a piece of software goes along. MS makes products in a market where companies have to take the approach of releasing software when it is "good enough," and then working out bugs with patches and future releases/updates, instead of waiting until a program is "perfect."

2 categories of software: Applications software (programs), and System software (OS's).

What is an OS? A bridge between your PC and the software you run on it. Functions: communicating with peripherals, coordinating concurrent processing of jobs, memory management, etc.

Laptops in the Classroom: Grades Will Fall

2011-04-17T05:50:00.000-07:00

Laptops in the Classroom: Grades Will Fall

Internet access in the classroom is considered by most to be a marvel to society. It’s amazing that the vast resources of the almighty internet can be brought right into any classroom, wirelessly. What many disagree upon, however, is whether or not this marvel is actually useful. Many like myself argue that internet on tap is a hindrance to learning when students use it for purposes other than class-related activities. There are myriad perspectives to this issue, however it is the negative which I wish to highlight.

When an instructor wants to incorporate and online activity into his or her lecture, it is important that students be able to call up the net from their own chairs. Once the activity is over, and the instructor continues the not-so-interactive lecture, the odds of he or she being able to re-captivate his or her audience is slim. Short of a professor proclaiming “put your computers away, NOW!,” there is nothing to keep students from playing online games, or even from studying for other classes. Students are guaranteed to miss out on key portions of lectures that follow “infotainment” portions, as Dennis Adams, in Wireless Laptops in the Classroom (and the Sesame Street Syndrome) calls it (26).

A laptop offers much of the same capability as a game console, in the way of entertainment options. While gaming consoles are made specifically for gaming, they have limited gaming options. Laptops, while allowing users to create documents and check e-mail, also provide for virtually unlimited online mini-gaming capability, through the magical portal of the Internet. USA Today sums up what happens to college freshman who become distracted with interactive media: “First-year students whose roommates brought a video game player to college studied 40 minutes less each day on average, [which] translated into first-semester grades that were 0.241 points lower on the 4.0 grade scale” (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/gaming/2007-09-18-videogame-GPA_N.htm?csp=34). Although no studies have yet been completed regarding the effect of laptops in classrooms on students’ GPAs, a reasonable correlation can be made in this case from video gaming consoles to interactive gaming on laptops. In essence, a distraction is created, which inhibits students’ willingness and ability to learn and be as successful.

From personal experience, I can say that the students who spend each accounting class sending messages on Facebook are not the ones who perform well on exams. Laptops should not be allowed in classrooms, because they invariably prevent students’ attention from being focused entirely on the professor. As a result, it is more difficult for instructors to perform their jobs, and more difficult for students to succeed in their wirelessly connected classrooms.

Works Cited
Adams, Dennis. "Wireless Laptops in the Classroom (and the Sesame Street Syndrome)." Communications of the ACM 49.9 (2006): 25-27.
Naseef, Kate. "Video Games Can Shoot Holes in GPA." USA TODAY. 19 Sept. 2007. 27 Nov. 2007 .

Southwest Washington DC History Paper

2011-04-17T05:47:00.000-07:00

The History of Southwest DC

The southwest quadrant of the District of Columbia has a very unique and animated past, compared with many of the suburbs of DC. Southwest became in 1815 separated from the rest of DC by the Washington City Canal, which was later filled. This separation made Southwest a convenient place for crime and the area slowly developed into a slum (Southwest Neighborhood Assembly, Inc. (SWNA), http://www.swdc.org/about_swdc/swdc_history.htm). To be highlighted in this paper are the effects that immigration had on Southwest’s deterioration, diversity, and housing markets. The history of the quadrant can be complex in some respects, but I will focus on breaking down the history in a way that correlations (i.e. cause and effect) can be made clearly and be easily understood. Pictures following this paper recap many of the subjects mentioned.

According to the Southwest Neighborhood Assembly, “some historians and residents consider the years between 1895 and 1930 to have been Southwest's "golden years"” (SWNA). Essentially, a wave of European immigration in the latter 19th century ensued. Immigrants came in large numbers from Germany, Poland, and Russia. According to Larry Rosen, many of these immigrants opened up stores (primarily grocery) along Southwest’s busiest streets and as such, lived nearby, either above, in, or behind their stores (http://www.swdc.org/about_swdc/walking_ tour_old_swdc.htm). But, as more people crowded into Southwest, the quality of life began to deteriorate over time. SWNA says that between 1920 and 1940 conditions declined dramatically, and Southwest was quickly considered a slum. Overpopulation became a deterring factor to development and modernization. During this time, Mr. Rosen tells us that it took $3.00 to fill a car’s entire gas tank, and once World War II began, ration tickets were needed to purchase many things. He also mentions that stamps were 3 cents each, hair cuts were 25 cents, and that rent was $40 per month. Over the 70 years since this time, rent in Southwest has exceeded the average inflation rate of the US’s GDP. Housing today, as I talk about below, is proportionally much more expensive.

The living conditions and lifestyle of Southwest DC suffered immensely during the time of World War II and beyond. It was noted by many that the Washington monument was visible from Southwest. The concern was that Southwest was also visible from the Capital area, and that a place in such close proximity to the nation’s capital should not be a slum and a haven for crime. It was during this time that the government endorsed developers’ desires to flatten Southwest. SWNA says that wide-scale urban development began to take place in 1954, and was complete by 1961 with no structures in Southwest left standing. It was at this time that the Metro, as well as other transportation resources such as highways, came to Southwest. The idea behind demolishing most of the quadrant was that poverty would be driven out, and newer, more modern living facilities would replace what was there before. Developers planned for Southwest to be a desired place, where many of the city’s elite would want to domicile themselves while working in and around the nation’s capital.

Spared from the 1950s demolition of most of Southwest was Wheat Row. Wheat Row, according to the website Cultural Tourism DC is believed to be the first set of row houses built in the District (http://www.culturaltourismdc.org/dch_tourism2555/dch_tourism_show.htm?doc_ id=43314). Around the time when Congress decided the fate of Southwest (demolition, that is), it was trying to determine how to deal with other aging cities in America. The attached brochure provided by the non-profit Cultural Tourism DC (also found at http://www.culturaltourism dc.org/usr_doc/SW_Heritage_Trail_brochure.pdf) says that Congress had two choices when dealing with aging cities: repairs or demolition. Southwest, in effect, served as a “test lab” for Congress, who removed 23,500 people and allowed developers to build a new town (Brochure, River Farms to Urban Towers). What Congress also removed, indirectly, was the crime, disease, and poverty native to Southwest at the time.

Jeanne Fogle and Joanna Sloame talk about the changing face of Washington shortly after this period of “urban renewal,” as it was called. Beginning in the mid 1950s, the white population of the District began to migrate out into the suburbs. Fogle talks of new houses, better schools, and inter-city school integration as all being reasons why DC’s white population was quick to flee the city (http://www.exploredc.org/index.php?id=10). This clearly contradicts what the developers of a “new Southwest” were hoping for. The idea was that middle-to-upper class citizens would move into Southwest, which was only a short commute from the capital, and make it a thriving, desirable location. Fogle says that in the few decades following 1954’s school integration legislation, the African-American population of the District grew from 20-35 percent of the population to almost 70 percent. Sloame adds to this by saying that DC’s Jewish population experienced a large influx as well, multiplying five-fold between 1945 and 1970(http://www. jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/vjw/dc.html). No matter the causes, the diverse ethnic population of DC flourished and became a New York-style melting pot by the time Southwest had received its designer make-over around 1970.

The Southwest Neighborhood Assembly, referenced above, was founded as a non-profit organization in 1964, where shortly thereafter “huge impersonal federal office buildings were built,” along with a highway and large apartment complexes, where slums used to stand (Fogle). Because so many financially challenged families, most of races other than Caucasian, were forced to dislocate during the urban revitalization, organizations like SWNA were founded to bridge the gaps between differing demographics of people. When the expensive condominiums were put in, a different class of people moved in, prompting many class conflicts between new and old residents. What was worse, even the churches and synagogues that once housed communities of people in Southwest were demolished, too. Out of these conflicts spawned many organizations in Southwest that try to help residents get along better.

Southwest today is still poised for much more renovation to come. Surrounding the metro station is two large apartment buildings. They were built by developers who had planned to make the mini-mall connecting them the focal point of the Southwest community. As it turns out, the character that Southwest had maintained with its mom-and-pop shops disappeared, but very few people moved into these two apartment buildings. The government moved into them, using them for a government agency. The agency later moved out, and now the buildings have been condemned, along with the vacant mini-mall that joins the two buildings. Plans are to demolish these buildings and build a roadway in place of where the mini-mall stands now.

Many expensive condominiums have gone up along the waterfront in Southwest. A couple can now easily pay $300,000 or more for a living space in one of these towers. Recently, RFK stadium which long stood in Southwest was closed. The quadrant is much safer nowadays than it used to be. Like many other neighborhoods in the District, the entire quadrant of Southwest has undergone quite a revamping. Unlike other parts of the city, Southwest was dramatically leveled in the hope of starting completely anew. What has resulted over the past five decades has culminated in mass gentrification and modernization. While an economic boom has yet to occur, in terms of retail stores migrating into Southwest, a housing boom seems to be nearing completion. Several cranes still litter Southwest’s skyline, indicating that the tradition of urban revitalization begun 50 years ago, while officially over, is still faintly active.

Two new trends developed several years ago in Southwest, relating to the building of new housing structures. First was the trend which helped lower-income families. Recycled and lower-quality materials were used in creative ways to build cheap, yet functional housing. This included using newly developed building materials like aluminum for things like roofs. A second trend impacted the more wealthy residents of Southwest. It was believed that a building was more aesthetic and safe if it had a glass, see-through bottom. Apartment buildings developed that did not place residents on the first floor; the first floor was a staffed entrance to the apartment building, and was visually very open to the public from all sides- this was accomplished with the use of glass. The pictures that follow illustrate these trends.

Located in Southwest to help visitors explore the history of the area is the Southwest Heritage Trail. Large signs at specific locations provide visitors with a guided walking tour of Southwest. The signs catacomb the events that took place by providing pictures from previous eras and by summarizing the most influential historical events that took place there. The Cultural Tourism DC brochure previously mentioned is a fantastic guide to the trail.

Works Cited
Cultural Tourism Dc. "River Farms to Urban Towers: Southwest Heritage Trail." Cultural Tourism DC. 2 Dec. 2007. 2 Dec. 2007 http://www.culturaltourismdc.org/information2546/information_show.htm?doc_id=253635.
---. "Wheat Row." Cultural Tourism DC. 2 Dec. 2007. 2 Dec. 2007 http://www.culturaltourismdc.org/dch_tourism2555/dch_tourism_show.htm?doc_id=43314.
Fogle, Jeanne. "The World's Capital." Exploredc.Org. 2001. 2 Dec. 2007 http://www.exploredc.org/index.php?id=10.
Rosen, Larry. “"Back to Southwest" Walking Tour.” Southwest Neighborhood Assembly, Inc. (SWNA) 26 June 2006. 2 Dec. 2007 http://www.swdc.org/about_swdc/walking_tour_old_swdc.htm.
Sloame, Joanna. "The Virtual Jewish History Tour: Washington, DC." Jewish Virtual Library. 2007. The American-Israeli Cooperation Enterprise. 2 Dec. 2007 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/vjw/dc.html.
SWNA. "History of Southwest DC." Southwest Neighborhood Assembly, Inc. (SWNA). 26 June 2006. 2 Dec. 2007 http://www.swdc.org/about_swdc/swdc_history.htm.

Reflection of Help the Homeless Walkathon and Helping Hope and a Home

2011-04-17T05:45:00.000-07:00

My role in this project has taken many forms. I have been a public speaker, promoting our non-profit client, recruiting walkers for the Help the Homeless Walkathon, and soliciting donations. I have been charged with keeping our nine-person team organized, on the ball, and together as one driving force in accomplishing a large task. Our goals were numerous: promote awareness of the homelessness epidemic in the District of Columbia, solicit walkers from the American University campus and community to walk in the Walkathon, and in turn support the initiatives of our non-profit client, Hope and A Home.

I have written a memorandum every three weeks keeping our client updated of our progress as a team, and more specifically with my own personal progress in the role of Project Manager. Mike and Ann of Hope and A Home were fantastic directors to work with, making their organization a wonderful client with which to interact. Our team was a diverse collection of individuals, most of whom I truly enjoyed working with. I enjoyed the most working with a few truly motivated teammates who proved their reliability, punctuality, knowledge, creativity, intuitiveness, and work ethic. As with most teams, I experienced a few bad apples. Overall, however, I feel that our team’s heart was in the right place and everyone seemed to care about our overall set of goals, even if they didn’t care about their own personal goals as much.

I was very happy to be able to embark on this philanthropic endeavor for several reasons. One of these reasons was my privilege to work with the many gifted persons at Hope and A Home, and within my own team. I was able to receive a lot of support from a few key individuals, all of whose help I praised and whose enthusiasm I nurtured and encouraged. Secondly, I was able to help a good cause. While I was just one person, I was organizing the collective force of nine, and in turn my impact on the lives on many people has been finite. I know for a fact that the job that I have performed has impacted the lives of many people. Our team worked to raise over $500 for Hope and A Home. While I don’t know specifically what these five-hundred dollars will be used for, I can offer a few examples: feeding several hundred hungry, homeless people at a food shelter; or substantially reducing the rent burden on Hope and A Home for a month at one of their properties. Next, working on this project, and playing such big role, has left me with a sweet sense of satisfaction. Now that my position is expired in the sense that my job is complete, I am able to stand back and look at everything that I’ve accomplished, and be wowed.

I made a detailed day-by-day schedule of what our team needed to accomplish, detailing specifically who was responsible for what. I also e-mailed the entire team several times weekly reminding them of upcoming due dates, project facets needing closure, and of other related tasks. My position consisted mostly of organizing team members in an efficient way and coordinating tasks to ensure that everything came together in one synergy. During this process I have been able to identify many of my strengths. I have found that do well at facilitating meetings with group members. I also do a good job of keeping group tasks organized, and keeping hard working team members engaged in the project at hand. I am a fantastic public speaker and presentation coordinator/synthesizer, and as such our client was impressed with my presentation abilities and the organization of our team presentation that I prepared.
One particular weakness of mine surfaced, and it’s an issue which I plan to address sooner in future management positions: identifying sooner those team members whom aren’t pulling their weight, and bring the issue of group accountability to their attention sooner. I think that during this project I was too soft on those members of our team that contributed significantly less than others. I suppose a limiting factor to my ability to control wasteful resources being spent on useless team members was the fact that I have no power over their salary of employment status. This project has been part of a University course, and as such, the only motivation that flailing team members have had to do even the small bit they did was their desire not to receive a failing grade. I could not, in this case, simply “fire” a student for underperforming (or in some cases, not performing at all).

In general I have historically been somewhat ignorant of issues concerning the homelessness epidemic in the United States. This project was a great opportunity for me to acquaint myself with some of DC’s, and the United States’, issues relating to poverty. I am a better versed person now, and I more fully understand the causes and cures related to issues in poverty. A large reality that has dawned upon me is that most homeless persons are not the ones that we see. They are not bums holding up ridiculous signs just to make a buck. So many homeless persons are homeless because they are out of work, or they simply cannot afford formal housing arrangements. It is not always the fault of the homeless, why they are on the streets.

I feel that our philanthropic event planning was definitely successful. Our team set an optimistic goal of recruiting 150 walkers. Three huge factors worked against our campaign: the AIDS walk; Thanksgiving weekend; and our audience, college students, whom wish not to wake as early as the Walkathon required. In light of these factors, we recruited only about 50 walkers. Our campaign consisted of all the elements of a successful campaign; however our walker goal never came to fruition because of the above stated reasons. Our more important goal of informing our audience of the issue of homelessness in DC was accomplished, however. A thousand people received our outreach messages teaching them about the Help the Homeless Walkathon and about the issue of homelessness in general. We also widely distributed the name of our client, who is trying to expand its contact base. I believe our team did a more than sufficient job of accomplishing the goals that we set forth, and because of such I consider our project to have been a big success.

I have developed qualities within myself as a result of being Project Manager for this endeavor. I’ve become better at distributing work among team members and engaging the most prominent talents in those team members. I’ve gotten better at writing professional memorandums, and at public speaking. I feel that my persuasive public speaking abilities have improved, and my ability to engage an audience in the material that I am presenting has been enhanced. In future Washington Initiative projects of this nature, I would recommend that the outreach undertakings of the group be distributed and engaged much sooner than our group did. I felt that our entire project timeline was very rushed, and while this did enhance my ability to handful high-stress situations successfully, I feel that much of the stress could have been avoided, had our group begun planning earlier. Overall, the experience has been enjoyable and quite educational. I would gladly engage in endeavors of this kind at my places of employment in the future, having taken away the leadership and planning skills from this project that I have.

Eco-Friendly Activities of Anheuser-Busch Company

2011-04-17T05:40:00.001-07:00

Environmental Responsibility
1) Environmental Management Program
- Use of environmental management system models such as ISO 14001, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA) Performance Track

2) Regulatory Compliance
- NOV- Notice of Violation
3) Sustainable Real Estate Development & Design
- Brownfield Redevelopment – acquiring and redeveloping environmentally impaired properties

4) Greenhouse Gas Emissions
- Energy efficiency & conservation
- Example: Solar roofing panels

5) Recycling, Waste Reduction and Management

- Goal: “Reduce, Re-Use, and Recycle”
6) Environmentally-Friendly Products
- Organic, all natural, and recycled products

7) Partnerships with Environmental Agencies

Rosenbaum-Cunningham International Tax Situation

2011-04-17T05:36:00.000-07:00

Author: James Prichard
Publication/Web URL: http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/02/22/ap3454810.html
Publish date: February 22, 2007

The article focuses on failure of Rosenbaum-Cunningham International, Inc., a cleaning services company, to report its employees earnings to the IRS, hence evading tax, as well as its failure to hire legitimate, legal workers. The three managers charged also set up off-shore bank accounts to conceal revenue from the IRS.

The stakeholders involved were the three managing officials charged, the illegal immigrants the company employed, the IRS who is owed $18 million in taxes, and the companies who hired RCI for its cleaning services.

Honesty- Being truthful to the US Government and maintaining integrity as business people running a company. Rights- The right of the Mexican workers to earn fair wages for the work they were doing. Fairness/Justice- Paying the government the taxes it was supposed to pay, and hiring legal, unemployed Americans who deserve the job first, before illegal immigrants.

In what way should the managers of the company better accounted for ethical issues in making their decision to hire illegal immigrants, and paying them substandard, under-the-counter wages, as opposed to legal Americans?

The company ultimately decided to hire 203 workers and contract them out to places like Planet Hollywood, Hard Rock Café, and ESPN Zone to perform cleaning tasks. The company paid these illegal Mexican immigrants substandard wages, and did not report of this to the IRS, or any other governmental or non-governmental entity. In my opinion, this was a terrible choice, not only because an operation that size was bound to get caught sooner than later, but because it is unethical to hire illegal immigrants, and pay them very little money, given the fact that they must feed a family off of that income. I would say the decision by RCI was a very weak one, and they should have taken a different approach in their attempt to run a legitimate and profitable business.

The Mexicans that were hired enjoyed the benefit of employment, wage, and living in America, whereas the same number of legal, American citizens remained unemployed throughout. Also, we’ve discussed the concept of honesty in not only the workplace, but the business world in general. You do not have to stab somebody in the back to get ahead in the world. The RCI managers chose to lead a lavish lifestyle while lying to the corporations they contracted workers out to, the IRS, and the employees themselves.

Wal-Mart in the News, Adoption of Eco-Friendly Activities

2011-04-17T05:35:00.000-07:00

Description:

The article focuses on Wal-Mart’s adoption of eco-friendly initiatives.

Stakeholders involved:

The primary stakeholders were the environment, Unilever, PepsiCo, Universal Music, and Environmental Defense, an environmental group who’s opening a new office new Wal-Mart’s headquarters in Bentonville, Ark.

Ethical issues involved:

Actual and future potential harm to the environment: Sustainability is the key to securing the future of our natural resources and environment. The article focuses on Wal-Mart’s attempts at increasing sustainability through more economically friendly business practices.

Duty to the society: Wal-Mart has a duty to not just Americans but to the rest of the world that can and will ultimately be affected by the greenhouse emissions that the Wal-Mart chain’s stores emit every year.

Key ethical question the company must resolve:

How will Wal-Mart limit the damage it does to the environment through its daily activities?

Manner in which the company managed the issue:

In the article, Wal-Mart claims to have taken two steps in increasing overall sustainability for the future. First, they have outfitted refrigerator cases in over 500 stores with a new LED lighting system. Secondly, Wal-Mart claims to be working with local farmers in producing a “zero waste” alternative to recycling food that isn’t sold. Both efforts claim to increase sustainability, but now I shall evaluate the validity of the claims. In the case of the new lighting system, Wal-Mart claims the plan with save the company “$3.8 million a year and reduce its carbon dioxide emissions by 65 million pounds.” Seeing as the extra money could also be used in further sustainability projects, I would say this effort is definitely very effective, and strong. In the case of zero waste, given that, if the plan succeeds, none of the food that Wal-Mart can’t sell will be wasted, the plan is a good one in terms of recycling. It will aid in fertilizing fields and thereby provide cheaper alternatives for farmers who do fertilize.

Other posts on Wal-Mart financial analysis:

Wal-Mart: Comparison of ROCE for Wal-Mart’s Alternative Cash Management Strategies
Analysis of Wal-Mart Financial Ratios
Analysis of Wal-Mart Financial Ratios, P/E Growth
Analysis of Wal-Mart Financial Ratios, P/B
Wal-Mart: A Potential Management Issue Resulting from Excess Cash
Analysis of Wal-Mart Financial Ratios P/E, V/E
Wal-Mart in the News, Adoption of Eco-Friendly Activities

Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: Reporting Assault and Theft of E-Property in Government Databases

2011-04-17T05:31:00.002-07:00

Many people believe that all accounts of hacking and/or theft of e-property should be reported and stored in a publicly available government database, in an attempt to track malicious activity and ultimately reduce cyber crime. Having property stolen or assaulted only benefits the thief, at least until they are caught. The complement of this verity, though, is what Joseph M. Kizza, the author of three computing impact books, would like to address.
Kizza: “Many of those who would have liked to report such crimes do not do so because of both economic and a psychological impact such news would have on both the shareholders’ confidence and the overall name of the company. Some companies are reluctant to report any form of computer attacks on their systems in fear that others, including shareholders, will perceive company management as weak with poor security policies” (Computer Network Security and Cyber Ethics, 57). Not only would reporting to a public database show harm that has already been inflicted upon a company, but further harm to that company, as well as the minds of those stakeholders involved, would ensue as a result.

James Riley, a reporter for The Australian, insists that a cyber-crime tracking database “would give authorities the best chance of collecting suitable evidence to present to a court” (http://the-other.wiretapped.net/). So it appears that a government database would be useful, for it would help in nabbing the criminals who assault e-property, and who many times end up stealing it. The number of stakeholders a company has is usually much larger than the number of employees a company has. So, by not reporting cyber intrusions or the theft of company documents as a result of such intrusions, thousands of people are spared the fear and hassle of evaluating the damage done to their company. This is contrary to the few people who would truly appreciate the value of knowing what has happened. Regardless of how many extra Internet criminals would be caught as a result of instituting a database system of this kind, overall criminal activity would, in all likelihood, still increase and still be rampant and uncontrolled. The happiness factor in this argument gives the win to Joseph Kizza, for his take on the topic creates by far the most social utility, for the most people.
It looks as though we are out of time for tonight. It’s clear that utilitarianism yields all kinds of different results, given the context in which it is applied. Many things that might be considered immoral, such as widespread file sharing involving copyrighted materials, are justified with utilitarianism, while things like spam and Windows source code remain taboo and protected. The bottom line is, file sharing creates a massive amount of social utility, while spam and a crash and burn of Windows can, and most likely would, take that utility right back. The focus of utilitarianism lies on what makes the most people happy, most of the time. Theoretically, all humans should act this way, thereby creating the most social utility, and everyone is then supposed to be happy. The message to be taken from the contexts in which we have placed utilitarianism tonight, is that the majority usually wins. It’s an elementary concept that if something makes more people satisfied than it does upset them, then the larger group gets what it wants. Millions of people engage in file sharing, and the thrill it provides all of them is far greater than what the RIAA and its affiliates would feel if file sharing were to cease. However, utilitarianism expands on the intangible feeling of happiness by leveraging it with ignorance. This is where the occasional minority, educationally superior on the topic at hand, conquers over the ignorant majority, as in the debate over whether or not to make available Windows source code. Despite what most people may want, what they do not know could end up hurting them dearly, hence making them very upset with the consequences that allowing this action would result in. Limitations to utilitarianism, primarily due to legislation, exist as well. An instance, creating and distributing spam e-mail creates social utility for those who choose to exercise their right to free speech, yet many times this seemingly wasteful act leads to legal action. Utilitarianism maintains a reputation for being a flexible theory in terms of characterizing morally correct actions, and tonight, this verity has once again proved to be true. Thanks for watching, and have a great night.

Other posts on Utilitarianism and online activites:
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: Should Spamming be Allowed?
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: Introduction
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: The Ethical Implications of File Sharing
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: The Openness of Windows Source Code
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: Reporting Assault and Theft of E-Property in Government Databases

Works Cited
Baase, Sara. A Gift of Fire: Social, Legal, and Ethical Issues for Computers and the Internet. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Pearson Education, 2003.
Banic, Mike. "Resolving The P2P Dilemma." Business Communications Review Jan 2007: 63-65. ProQuest Computing. ProQuest. American U Lib. 11 Feb 2007 http://proquest.umi.com.proxyau.wrlc.org/pqdweb?did=1200701421&sid=3&Fmt=3&clientId=31806&RQT=309&VName=PQD.
Dyer-Witheford, Nick. "E-Capital and the Many-Headed Hydra." Critical Perspectives on the Internet. Ed. Greg Elmer. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2002.
Gates, Bill. "Why I Hate Spam." Microsoft.com. 23 Jun 2003. Microsoft Corp. 11 Feb 2007 http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/ofnote/06-23wsjspam.mspx.
Graham, Gordon. The Internet: A Philosophical Inquiry. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Kizza, Joseph Migga. Computer Network Security and Cyber Ethics. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, 2002.
Lettice, John. "MS Windows Source Code Escapes Onto Internet." The Register 13 Feb 2004. 11 Feb 2007 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/02/13/ms_windows_ source_code_escapes/.
Mill, John Stuart. On Liberty and Utilitarianism. New York: Bantam Books, 1993.
Riley, James. "Users told: Report all hacks." Wiretapped. 19 Nov 2000. 11 Feb 2007 http://the-other.wiretapped.net/security/info/papers/law-enforcement/australian-federal-police/afp-1998-mar-report-all-hacks.txt.
Zunk, Amy R.. "Morpheus Found Guilty In File-Sharing Case." Geek.com. 9 Oct 2006. 11 Feb 2007 http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2006Oct/gee2006100903 9058.htm.

Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: Should Spamming be Allowed?

2011-04-17T05:31:00.001-07:00

Spam can be defined generically as unwanted mail, in this case digitally, that is useless, bothersome, or offensive in some way to the majority of its receivers. It comes in the form of chain letters, monetary requests, and porno ads. Spam, however, may mean something to the person who created it, for it is their property. The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to free speech. Most people don’t want spam, however, which is where this right produces conflict. Essentially, people want to be heard, but do not want to listen to others.

John Stuart Mill is probably the most well known proponent of utilitarianism ever in history. “Who can compute what the world loses in the multitude of promising intellects…who dare not follow out any bold, vigorous, independent train of thought…” (On Liberty and Utilitarianism, 39). What he is saying is that society is at a loss when free speech is restricted. Most people would agree that spam involves “independent train[s] of thought,” so what right anyone has to stifle such creativity is the real question to be answered. According to utilitarianism, though, the rest of society has this right, given that, collectively, their utility afterward will be much greater than that lost by the spammers. I feel that nobody truly benefits from spam, people only think they benefit from spam sometimes until they realize they are participating in a scam.

Microsoft CEO Bill Gates joins us tonight to lament on his own problems with spam: “Spam is worse than irritating. It is a drain on business productivity, an increasingly costly waste of time and resources that clogs corporate networks and distracts workers” (“Why I Hate Spam”). Gates also infers that “spam threatens to undo much of the good that e-mail has achieved.” Clearly, spam is a detriment to those people whose e-mail accounts fall victim to its cumbersome grasp. The number of people, it is safe to say, that benefit from spam is relatively low. Usually, individuals only benefit from spam for a time until they realize the illegitimacy of what they’re dealing with. Thus, humans should not engage in sending spam e-mail messages because it benefits society much more when they are not sent, than when they are.

Other posts on Utilitarianism and online activites:
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: Should Spamming be Allowed?
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: Introduction
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: The Ethical Implications of File Sharing
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: The Openness of Windows Source Code
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: Reporting Assault and Theft of E-Property in Government Databases

Works Cited
Baase, Sara. A Gift of Fire: Social, Legal, and Ethical Issues for Computers and the Internet. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Pearson Education, 2003.
Banic, Mike. "Resolving The P2P Dilemma." Business Communications Review Jan 2007: 63-65. ProQuest Computing. ProQuest. American U Lib. 11 Feb 2007 http://proquest.umi.com.proxyau.wrlc.org/pqdweb?did=1200701421&sid=3&Fmt=3&clientId=31806&RQT=309&VName=PQD.
Dyer-Witheford, Nick. "E-Capital and the Many-Headed Hydra." Critical Perspectives on the Internet. Ed. Greg Elmer. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2002.
Gates, Bill. "Why I Hate Spam." Microsoft.com. 23 Jun 2003. Microsoft Corp. 11 Feb 2007 http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/ofnote/06-23wsjspam.mspx.
Graham, Gordon. The Internet: A Philosophical Inquiry. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Kizza, Joseph Migga. Computer Network Security and Cyber Ethics. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, 2002.
Lettice, John. "MS Windows Source Code Escapes Onto Internet." The Register 13 Feb 2004. 11 Feb 2007 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/02/13/ms_windows_ source_code_escapes/.
Mill, John Stuart. On Liberty and Utilitarianism. New York: Bantam Books, 1993.
Riley, James. "Users told: Report all hacks." Wiretapped. 19 Nov 2000. 11 Feb 2007 http://the-other.wiretapped.net/security/info/papers/law-enforcement/australian-federal-police/afp-1998-mar-report-all-hacks.txt.
Zunk, Amy R.. "Morpheus Found Guilty In File-Sharing Case." Geek.com. 9 Oct 2006. 11 Feb 2007 http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2006Oct/gee2006100903 9058.htm.

Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: The Openness of Windows Source Code

2011-04-17T05:31:00.000-07:00

The Openness of Windows Source Code

The most valuable item of e-property that Microsoft possesses is the code to its operating systems. Given the code, hackers and antivirus manufacturers alike could do a whole lot more in finding and either dealing with, or taking advantage of, exploits in the code. Operating systems like Linux have always had open sourced code with which developers and software engineers could express their creativity while producing a more functional product. Microsoft, on the other hand, has always kept its source code secret, and many people feel that Microsoft would benefit society better if it were to release its code.

Here with us to discuss the topic is John Lettice, a technology writer for The Register. John offers his viewpoint on the topic: “It'd be nice if escaping source code prompted Microsoft to take a more rational view of the whole issue, stop pretending it's secret and adopted the rival view that openness helps security, but we fear that'll take a few more leaks” (“MS Windows Source Code Escapes Onto Internet”). What John is saying is that if Windows were to release its source code, it would benefit society by making it safer. This is a weak argument, however, because the potential for corruption is far greater than the potential for security developments in this case.

Nick Dyer-Witheford, an expert on Internet relations, provides some complementary insight on this matter about Microsoft in his essay, “E-Capital and the Many Headed Hydra”: “The outcome of this interaction between commercialization and free software is, however, uncertain. One obvious prospect is the corruption of the open source movement” (146). What Dyer-Witheford is saying is that if Windows were to open up its code, then so many vulnerabilities to outside forces, including malicious script and virus writers, would emerge. The potential risk to the hundreds of millions of Windows users worldwide is seemingly immeasurable. This would result in the crash and burn of the software, causing much more unhappiness than the emotional gain a few modders and hackers would receive. Hands down, Dyer-Witheford deserves the win in this argument. Not only does Microsoft’s secrecy around its most valuable piece of e-property provide the most utility for people whether they realize it or not, the amount of damage that the release of this information would do to the computing world simply cannot be measured. Lettice’s argument that open-sourcing Windows code would help society, not hurt it, is completely debased as a result.

Other posts on Utilitarianism and online activites:
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: Should Spamming be Allowed?
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: Introduction
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: The Ethical Implications of File Sharing
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: The Openness of Windows Source Code
Utilitarianism Applied to E-Property: Reporting Assault and Theft of E-Property in Government Databases

Works Cited
Baase, Sara. A Gift of Fire: Social, Legal, and Ethical Issues for Computers and the Internet. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Pearson Education, 2003.
Banic, Mike. "Resolving The P2P Dilemma." Business Communications Review Jan 2007: 63-65. ProQuest Computing. ProQuest. American U Lib. 11 Feb 2007 http://proquest.umi.com.proxyau.wrlc.org/pqdweb?did=1200701421&sid=3&Fmt=3&clientId=31806&RQT=309&VName=PQD.
Dyer-Witheford, Nick. "E-Capital and the Many-Headed Hydra." Critical Perspectives on the Internet. Ed. Greg Elmer. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2002.
Gates, Bill. "Why I Hate Spam." Microsoft.com. 23 Jun 2003. Microsoft Corp. 11 Feb 2007 http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/ofnote/06-23wsjspam.mspx.
Graham, Gordon. The Internet: A Philosophical Inquiry. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Kizza, Joseph Migga. Computer Network Security and Cyber Ethics. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, 2002.
Lettice, John. "MS Windows Source Code Escapes Onto Internet." The Register 13 Feb 2004. 11 Feb 2007 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/02/13/ms_windows_ source_code_escapes/.
Mill, John Stuart. On Liberty and Utilitarianism. New York: Bantam Books, 1993.
Riley, James. "Users told: Report all hacks." Wiretapped. 19 Nov 2000. 11 Feb 2007 http://the-other.wiretapped.net/security/info/papers/law-enforcement/australian-federal-police/afp-1998-mar-report-all-hacks.txt.
Zunk, Amy R.. "Morpheus Found Guilty In File-Sharing Case." Geek.com. 9 Oct 2006. 11 Feb 2007 http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2006Oct/gee2006100903 9058.htm.