Question 1: Buying Computers Online (Dell–Hongkong site: )
1.1 Small Business category offers the best deals when buying computers in bulk. In this category, the Dimension 1100 package is the best deal for a small business. It has basic essentials, but could still be customized for multimedia needs. It also offers a great value for entry level. This system is great for consumers and small business that need internet, email and basic productivity applications.
DimensionTM 1100 – Costs HK,899 but if bought online, only costs HK,799. It has Intel Celeron 3.06Ghz processor, genuine WindowsXP Home SP2 Edition (Traditional Chinese) (with label) operating system, 90 days warranty with technical phone support, 512MB 400Mhz DDR SDRAM memory, 80GB 7200RPM hard drive, an Intel 865GV chipset, 16X Max DVD-ROM Drive, 15” Flat Panel LCD Monitor (analog only), Dell USB keyboard in traditional Chinese, Dell Optival USB Mouse with Dell Mouse Mat, Integrated 2.1 Audio, Integrated 10/100 Fast Ethernet, Intel Extreme Graphics, System Driver CD kit, and McAfee Security Center in Traditional Chinese. Inclusive of shipping, handling and insurance charges.
1.2 The site is great for online buyers! It is user-friendly and browsing is done at ease. Categories are simplified for users to easily identify the help or support needed. It has Workstation Advisor for potential buyers and Solution Center for those who need technical support.
Dell’s solutions helps customers get started, maintain computers and guarantee maximum productivity.
Question 2: All people born in a particular country (Eg Australia, Singapore etc) share the same cultural values and therefore can be expected to act in a similiar manner. Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Use examples to illustrate your points.
I have to agree. But let me clear out first that people don’t act the same, but similarly only to a point where it differs somehow.
Values vary depending on cultural differences where you came from (2002). That means an individual’s values depend wherever he had come from. What differs is how we handle conflicts.
Throughout man’s history and development, conflicts arise in all formats. Yet, despite the survival nature of man, these conflicts are always controlled for the benefit of the majority. In a more easier light, although man involves himself with a conflict of whatsoever, he always makes sure that his main purpose is for others to sustain from that act.
This has happened over the centuries in the similar manner but done in different approach. The Reign of Terror (1793-1794) in France and EDSA Revolution (1986) in the Philippines are examples. Both had shown hostility over rulings. In The Reign of Terror, Robespierre showed efforts of creating a secular society through the guillotine where he was later executed for his participation (Desaulniers,1995). Ferdinand Marcos on the other hand, similar to Robespierre’s secular society, created the new society. Because of his alleged devotion to develop the Philippines’ economic status, had declared Martial Law (1991).
There are differences if we’d look closely. But the similarities are still obvious. What differed both situations was that it happened at a different place and time. The Reign of Terror happened in France from 1793 to 1794, where as the EDSA Revolution happened in the Philippines in 1986. Nevertheless, both incident happened for a sole purpose. To create and rule a ‘better’ society.
However, what failed them was their greed for power. Despite telling everyone that what they were doing was what’s best, they were both ousted. But acting in the same manner never always got this pessimistic. By far, the most significant values are those that impose upon questions of human rights and democracy. The so-called ‘third wave of democracy’ that has swept through Pacific Asia in the 1980s and 1990s discredited the application of this argument to democracy. South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia and Thailand have all shared in the democratic moment. Even China and Vietnam have encouraged a semblance of democracy at village level, and Cambodia at least makes a half-hearted attempt to pretend to be democratic.
That is why Robespierre was killed and Marcos exiled. They were both ruled out because they had violated human rights and democracy. They’re subordinates had done the similar things to the benefit of their countrymen.
Question 3: Does the notion of high “status crystallization” in society reduce the usefulness of social class as a predictor of consumption behaviour.
First of all, status crystallization has never been accurately or correctly measured or formulated for it to claim any sort of thing. And yet, since its first introduction half a century ago, status crystallization have always been associated with distributive system, social mobility and various sociological issues. In the basic context, status crystallization is the measure of whether persons with a disproportionate share of economic resources are also persons with a comparable share of social prestige. In our current social structure, it is not hard to differentiate consumption styles. These behaviors merely correspond with various levels of income (2003).
So the answer is no. Status crystallization does not reduce the usefulness of social class as a predictor of consumption behaviour because status crystallization uses social class to determine consumption styles. It actually specifies these behaviors with how much take home money an individual or a family has.
The principle of Status Crystallization (SC) is that people have prospects about how various kinds of social status should compare with one another. ‘Crystallized’ statuses are those, which include a variety of status at roughly the same levels. The educational attainment of a person is reliable with the occupation help and the income received. When the various measured dimensions of status are so connected then the status of that individual is said to be ‘crystallized’ or ‘consistent’. People with degrees who work as drivers, clerks or waiters are among those with uncrystallized or inconsistent positions on their various status dimensions.
Question 4: How would you compare Global Marketing against International Marketing?
Strategies play a major role in marketing. There is not much difference with strategies when it comes to Global and International Marketing. Global marketing just does its market in a broader perspective. International marketing meanwhile, involves the states with great importance. But due to noticeable involvement of multinational corporations in international trades, some author refer global marketing as international marketing ( 2000).
Because the most profitable and sustaining way to maximize marginal contributions to fixed costs is to boost sales, firms have come to confer more responsibility upon marketing than in any prior era. What more better way to do this but to go global. This is new condition, termed globalization has varying definitions that seem to point to a single, ostensibly self-contradictory binarism: extreme disintegration and connectivity. By contrast, connectivity theorists emphasize that the world has become governed by the life force of a single economy and its attendant technologies and expectations. Whether these facets of globalization are regarded as a cause for celebration or dread, globalization is taken as a social fact.
Some authors prefer the term internationalization. They argue that the frontiers of countries, in a broad sense, are far from being dissolved, and therefore this globalization process is not happening, and probably will not happen considering that in world history, internationalization never turned into globalization (the European Union and NAFTA are yet to prove their case).
In this view, there is no difference between Global and International Marketing per se.