Friday, May 22, 2020

Analysis Of Brent Crude Oil Prices - 3061 Words

Overview Of ‘Brent’ Crude Oil: The ‘Brent’ blend of crude oil is the most common form of crude oil used worldwide, with roughly two-thirds of all crude contracts around the world referencing the Brent blend (reference). ‘Brent’ oil is drawn from more than a dozen oil fields spanning across the North Sea off the coast of the UK and Norway. This particular type of crude oil is also considered to be light and sweet (therefore low sulfate), making it ideal for refiners to make gasoline and diesel fuel (). Although the ‘Brent’ is destined for European markets, it forms more than half of the worlds globally traded supply of crude oil. 1.1 Historical And Current Trends In ‘Brent’ Crude Oil Prices: 1.1.1 Long Run Trends:†¦show more content†¦During this period, the price of ‘Brent’ crude oil (like WTI) reached an all time high in July of 145.61 USD/BBL in response to strong economic conditions prior to the Global Financial Crisis hitting in early 2009. The price of ‘Brent’ crude oil also similarly bottomed out in 1970, with a record low of 2.23 USD/BBL and following the GFC, prices sharply fell, with prices at 62.04 USD/BBL as of April 2015. Over the 45-year period, significant events such as the GFC, the Iran/Iraq war, the Iranian revolution and various OPEC cuts (as shown in graph 1) has caused the price of ‘Brent’ crude oil and crude oil as a whole to historically be fairly volatile and as such, these various political and economy-wide factors provide an explanation for volatility in prices over the past 45 years. 1.1.2 Recent Trends And Current Prices: The price of North Sea ‘Brent’ crude oil is sitting at roughly $62 per barrel, with this figure fluctuating around the sport price of $60 per barrel. During the month of April 2015, prices have roughly swung between $65 per barrel and a low of $60 per barrel, as shown in the figure below: Graph 3: (Reference) Overall, prices of the ‘Brent’ blend have fallen over the past 12 months, with a 52-week range of 47. 68 – 115.71 and a 1-year return of -43.61% indicating the sharp decline in the price of ‘Brent’ crude oil from a peak of $112.36 on 01/06/2014 (reference). Although prices of the ‘Brent’

Saturday, May 9, 2020

What Every Body Is Saying About Easy Topics for Essay Writing Is Dead Wrong and Why

What Every Body Is Saying About Easy Topics for Essay Writing Is Dead Wrong and Why You will need to establish what you need to write in your essay. An essay is a fairly short bit of writing on a certain topic. My essay would grow to be a completely different beast. The essay is an amazingly intriguing task that's always different. Bigger works, including plays and novels, may have several motifs. There is barely any student, who wasn't assigned to compose an essay. Writing a superb persuasive essay is not an easy job, however, it's achievable. Examine the essay for plagiarism An exemplary essay is an exceptional essay, therefore a check for plagiarism is a really important stage. Writing about nuclear weapons is always a superb idea. Men and women want to comprehend how to consider the advantages and pitfalls of the choices they make in life every single day. It's possible for you to see which ideas are alike and needs to be grouped together. You need a good deal of thoughts and topics to write about in the event you need to keep the content creature fed. A perspective essay is a chance to voice your ideas and opinions on a particular topic. You will also receive increased insight into how to compose a great test, and what your professor may be on the lookout for in each answer. Ask yourself a collection of questions as you compose the critique. Beyond that are the sorts of questions used. Some requests for written interviews will be quite specific. Isolate key factors of the problem you're addressing to discover the factors for writing and the goal of the major notion of your essay. Look back over your annotated text and choose the portions that you want to have in your essay. Write a list of three or more key ideas you will contain in your thesis and body paragraphs. For each supporting paragraph within the body of your essay, list the most critical points you wish to cover. After you are writing for awhile, it's likely both your outline and draft is going to have to change dramatically. The Birth of Easy Topics for Essay Writing If you're sending precisely the same essay to numerous schools, the cover letter is a chance to tailor the essay to the institution to which you're applying. Plan more than you believe you'll need. My preceding articl e laid out some simple details about the drawn-out essay, a core part of the IB Diploma Programme. An excellent argument is a basic numbers game with a very clear winner. The technical essay is designed to explore a technical or scientific subject, to describe how to carry out a specific technical endeavor, or to argue for a specific process of doing something. Regardless of what topic you ultimately choose, make certain to bring a very clear position on it. You should think about a task to locate a theme not an issue but an opportunity and even a benefit. For instance, you may have been aware of the text before. For example, let's say if you're writing about language history essay than you might have to to incorporate all of the information regarding the history language on earth irrespective of any specific region while in specific language history essay, you would speak about history of the language of a certain region. Thesis statements can take on a lot of distinct for ms, but the main issue is that you have to be in a position to defend it. Also, during the test, make sure to read through your essay when you have time, permitting you to correct obvious typos or errors you could have made. Top Choices of Easy Topics for Essay Writing Whether you're writing a long-term paper or a brief reply, formulating your thoughts onto paper can be hard. While it is clear that essays are an inevitable part of college life, it's the understanding of the small essay writing tips and secrets that makes college professors contented. So whenever you are writing an essay, you're harnessing the complete might of culture to your life. Regardless of what subject you're writing an essay on, it's important in order for it to be well-developed so that you can convey thoughts to the reader in a coherent way. A research paper is normally the very same, regardless of what subject you opt to write about. Essays should be focused on a single topic and present the mater ial in a logical purchase. Argumentative research papers require a bit of structure, unlike the typical essays. You will need to talk about either side of the issues surrounding the discussion essay topic, so make sure that you've got access to good research that supplies pertinent details. General overview would consist of information that's covering the topic for language essay for a whole while specific overview is only going to speak about particular troubles. Some topics request that you write about contemporary difficulties. The multiple topics could be found, for instance, in the dissertation abstracts international database. What will have to be included in your essay will differ based on your level. Give yourself the same quantity of time as you'll have for the actual exameven for an extra-long test. Dependent on the test outcome, students are put in appropriate courses. If building a practice test appears too daunting to you, begin by identifying how many kinds of questions there are.

Wednesday, May 6, 2020

Discuss whether private policing can ever ensure public security Free Essays

Not only is policing conveyed by an escalating array of public bodies organized at a diversity of geographical levels, but the private and municipal parts are themselves becoming more perceptible in this arena. It is far from clear, though to what degree the growth of policing services delivered by agencies other than the state police symbolizes the filling of a gap left by the incapability or disinclination of the state police to give services the public wants. It may represent changes in the nature of modern life and institutions in which the growth of these services lies along, is complementary to, the steady growth in spending on the state police and other public policing services like Environmental Health Officers or the Post Office Investigation Department. We will write a custom essay sample on Discuss whether private policing can ever ensure public security or any similar topic only for you Order Now Nor is it obvious that there has been the immense growth in non-police ‘policing’ which is often claimed. surely there has been a huge increase in the employment of uniformed private security personnel. owever if ‘policing’ in its broadest sense is construed to include those people who, like wardens, caretakers, park-keepers, and gamekeepers, have always been employed to guard, protect, and manage both public and private property and locations, then much of this growth may simply imitate changes in the way the task is done. What is clear is that, for a diversity of reasons, the respective roles of the police and private security organizations now increasingly be related. The boundaries between them are becoming less well defined. This is the consequence, in part at least, of a process referred to as the ‘decreasing equivalence between private property and private space’. The subsequent half of the twentieth century has seen a rapid growth in property which is privately owned but to which the public typically has access. This property includes shopping centers, built-up estates, educational institutions, parks, offices, and leisure centers. More and more public life is being performed on private property. Thus the protection of private property, a fundamental aim of private security-has increasingly come to take in the maintenance of public order as while, for example, there are demonstrations against new road construction. Private security services have intruded more and more on what used to be considered the restricted domain of the state police. The boundaries between public and private policing have further were indistinct because of the operations of an escalating number of agencies whose formal status and functional activities are hard to classify. These have most usually been referred to as ‘hybrid’ or ‘grey’ policing bodies. They take in, for example, the surveillance, investigative, and dogmatic sections attached to central and local government departments. The place of some of these bodies has been made even more ‘grey’ by the privatization programme the government has practiced. For example the British Transport Police will persist to police our railway network: they will, for the foreseeable future, give a contract service that the new railway companies have been given no option but to accept. Johsnton (1999) asserts that private policing consists of two components. ‘Commercial’ policing involves the purchase and sale of security commodities in the market place. ‘Civil’ policing consists of those voluntary policing activities undertaken by individuals and groups in civil society. The history of commercial policing in Britain is a long one, McMullan’s (1987) account of crime control in sixteenth and seventeenth century London pointing to the systematic recruitment of paid informers and thief-takers by a state unable to control unregulated areas. This is an early example of what South (1984) has referred to as ‘the commercial compromise of the state’, an invariable feature of all systems in which the commercial sector has a policing role, though one whose precise character varies with circumstances. The private security industry is a large, lucrative, and growing part of the UK economy. Different estimates of the annual turnover of the industry are obtainable. A 1979 Home Office Green Paper suggested an annual turnover in 1976 of ?135 million and, according to the marketing consultancy Jordan and Sons, total annual sales during the early 1980s were in excess of 400 million. Jordan’s 1989 and 1993 reports suggest respectively that the yearly turnover of the industry increased from ?476. 4 million in 1983 to ?807. 6 million in 1987 and ?1, 225. 6 million in 1990. One recent estimate by one of the regulatory bodies in the private security industry has put the turnover for 1994 at ?2, 827 million (Daily Telegraph, 15 August 1996). Because private security firms take up a position of trust for those who utilize them to protect their persons and property, as the evidence suggests that individuals and groups put off to people who wear uniforms intended to conjure the authority of the police, and as those who provide security services are in a position to abuse that reverence and trust, we do not think it is any longer defensible to allow the private security industry to continue unregulated. There is proof of abuse. There are undoubted cowboys on the loose and there is nothing at present to prevent disreputable and criminally-minded operators from proffering any security service they wish. Indeed, even a Government ideologically committed to reducing the amount of directive has recently come round to the view that some type of control of the private security industry is now essential. In August 1996, the Home Office announced that a statutory body to vet people wanting to work in private security was to be recognized, and that new criminal offences of utilizing an unlicensed guard and working as an unlicensed guard would be introduced. Given that these plans are both indistinct and not accompanied by any schedule for implementation. There is currently no constitutional licensing or regulative system of any kind for the private security industry in Britain. This distinction with almost all other European countries. Britain stands practically alone in not having admission requirements for firms offering security services and, together with Germany, not setting performance rations for private security operatives. Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands. Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland all have some form of governmental control over their private security industries (de Waard J. 1993). Estimates of the size of the industry in Britain have been notoriously inaccurate. However, recent research by Jones Newburn (1998), based on data drawn from the Yellow Pages Business Classification and the Labour Force Survey, has produced far more reliable figures. Total employment in the British contract security industry now exceeds one third of a million (333,631), with employment in the ‘services and equipment sector’ (which includes guarding) standing at 182,596. This latter figure, alone, is equivalent to the total number of police and civilians employed in the 43 constabularies in England and Wales. As is the case in other countries, the most rapid area of expansion is in electronic security. Indeed, out of the total of 6,899 security companies identified in the research, no fewer than 2,547 are in the electronics sector, the remainder being in services and equipment (2,281), the provision of locks and safes (864), detective services (767) and bailiff services (440). In the case of Britain, for example, the estimation of private security employees (70,000) appears to include only those working for member companies of the British Security Industry Association, the main trade body. On the basis of these figures, Britain ranks sixth in terms of private security employees (123 per 100,000 inhabitants) and has a private security to public police ratio of 0. 39:1. By using Jones Newburn’s (1998) data, however, these estimates are transformed dramatically. This happens whether one bases calculation on guard numbers alone, or upon the total number of personnel employed in the security industry. In the first case, the figure of 182,596 guards identified in the research generates 321 security personnel per 100,000 inhabitants and a private security to public police ratio of 1:1. In the second case, 333,631 security employees generates a private security to public police ratio of 1. 85:1, a figure far in excess of the estimate for Germany, the highest ranked country in the sample. In effect, two conclusions can be drawn from Jones Newburn’s (1998) research: that Britain has roughly one private security guard for every public police officer, a figure comparable to that found in the USA during the early 1980s (Cunningham Taylor 1985:106); and that Britain has almost two private security employees for each police officer. Although there are diverse estimates of the number of organizations trading in the private security sector, and the numbers of people working, few of them emerge to be reliable. The best accessible figures suggest that, in broad terms, the number of private security employees, including those persons concerned in the manufacture and installation of security devices, is as a minimum the equivalent of the total complement of the forty-three constabularies in England and Wales; data from the government’s Labour Force Survey propose that there are almost surely over 162,000 people working in the private security industry, but the actual total can be at least half as many again (Jones T. , and Newburn T. 1995). This rapid growth in private security gives a vivid image that policing involves much more than the police and what the police do. The point is made all the more obvious if one thinks that most symbolic of all police tasks, mobile patrol. It is momentarily worth considering two instances where a ‘police patrol’ presence is provided by personnel other than police constables. First is the Sedgefield Community Force. For several years local councils have employed in-house security operations to keep council property and employees. The Sedgefield Community Force, a local authority police force in County Durham, became operational in January 1994. The force provides a 24-hour patrolling service within the geographical confines of the District an area of 85 square miles and a population of 90,000 people. The ten patrol officers wear uniforms similar to those worn by police officers. They travel mostly in cars, though they are encouraged to leave them to patrol on foot. They received 1,284 calls from the public in their first year. Johsnton (1999) asserts that Private policing resolves the tension within that relationship: maximizing consumption by restricting access to those who might undermine the commercial imperative—drunks, beggars and the like. In most western societies—though particularly in North America—there is an increased tendency for residential space to adopt the form of mass private property, people living in private apartment blocks and gated communities, rather than in traditional streets. Though this is undoubtedly a global tendency, however, there may be variations in the speed and scope of its development. Jones Newburn (1998) note that, in Britain, locations which would be archetypal forms of mass private property in North America (such as educational institutions, leisure complexes and hospital sites) have either been owned and run by the state or by non-market ‘hybrid’ organizations (Johnston 1992). For that reason, they suggest, ‘mass hybrid property’, rather than mass private property, may be of greater relevance to the future development of commercial policing in Britain. Though the Sedgefield Community Force provides a noticeable patrol it was set up as a non-confrontational force and has a strategy of ‘observing and reporting’ based on a presupposition of not using officers’ citizen’s powers of arrest. A small-scale piece of research on the Sedgefield Community Force carried out concerning six months after it was set up found that just under two-thirds of local residents said without any prompting that they had heard of the Force (I’Anson J. , and Wiles P. 1995). This part of respondents increased to three-quarters after the force was portrayed to them. There is some indication from the survey that the public feels safer as the Force was introduced, and a considerable proportion of those questioned felt that the Community Force would act to put off criminal activity. There was obvious evidence that local residents saw the Force as setting off what the local constabulary was doing. Generally respondents said they would not be happy to have the members of the Force as the sole deferrers of crime. owever when asked who they would be contented to have patrolling their streets: 91 per cent said police specials or a new rank of police patroller; 83 per cent said a council-employed community force; 43 per cent said common citizens; and 33 per cent said private security guards. A further survey of residents who had asked for help from the Sedgefield Force discovered that the immense majority of calls concerned vandalism, anti-social behavior, and nuisance — incivilities concerning which all the research evidence shows the public is usually concerned though a large minority, about a fifth, concerned straight-forward crime (Wiles P. 996). Moreover those persons calling for help were extremely appreciative of the service they received. Though direct comparisons cannot simply be made, the residents who call the Sedgefield Community Force are as a minimum as appreciative of the service they receive, conceivably more so, than are people who call the police (Bucke, 1996). The second example is the Wands worth Parks Constabulary. Under the Public Health (Amendment) Act 1907, all local authorities in England and Wales can affirm in park employees as special constables though there are few instances of any doing so. Legislation, bearing upon London only, has though been used by several boroughs in the capital to set up Parks Constabularies. in the Ministry of Housing and Local Government Provisional Order Confirmation (Greater London Parks and Open Spaces) Act 1967, Wands worth recognized its Parks Constabulary in 1985. There are thirty full-time uniformed officers and twenty-five part-timers (effectively ‘specials’) in the Wands worth Parks Constabulary. They patrol the parks and open spaces in the borough — about 850 acres in all — and give security services in council premises, particularly the branch libraries, leisure centers, and youth and recreation facilities. The constables aim to act mainly as a restriction rather than an enforcement body. The problems with which they deal emerge to be similar to those dealt with in Sedgefield. They comprise incivilities linked with drunkenness, the control of dogs, the use of bicycles, and the like. however they also deal with crime. In 1994 and 1995 the Wands worth Parks Police made 105 and 134 arrests correspondingly: these included supposed offences of dishonesty (including burglary, theft, and robbery), criminal damage, gross coarseness, and drugs offences. They took their arrestees to Metropolitan Police stations where there appears to have been little complexity in getting the majority of their charges accepted. Certainly the research proof is that the relationship between the Parks Police and the Metropolitan Police is an optimistic and close one (Jones T. , and Newburn T. 998). In addition the constables monitor the CCTV cameras that are positioned in Wandsworth’s parks, act as key holders in relation to a large number of local power buildings, provide a cash-in transit service for some local authority functions, and accompany some local authority employees. Similar, although generally less wide-ranging, parks police also operate in Kensington and Chelsea, Barking and Dagenham and in Greenwich. The public is ever more engaged in activities in areas where policing is undertaken by private organizations. Progressively households, neighborhoods, and institutions (both public and private) are becoming dependent on commercially provided surveillance technology and patrols for their sense of security. As, demands on the police have prolonged, so the police have become reliant on skills available in, and services provided by, the private sector. This is mainly to be welcomed, and positive collaboration between the public and private sectors needs to be encouraged. There are several benefits to be gained from constructive partnership. But it is fundamental that this partnership be based on integrity. The public, pass up the police, must have confidence that the very highest standards are being uphold in any agency with which the police are affianced in partnership. For these reasons we conclude that the time has come to bring in a system of official or statutory directive of the private security industry. There is no case for granting private security personnel powers not accessible to the ordinary citizen and, as far as it is been competent to discover, there is no demand from either within or without the industry that such powers must be granted, except in very particular situation. One such circumstance is given by the contracted-out management of prisons. The Criminal Justice Act gives that the prisoner custody officers employed by the security companies now running five prisons are authorized to search prisoners and their visitors and to use such force as is essential to avert prisoners from escaping. But this kind of exception apart we can see no motive why citizens’ powers are insufficient for dealing with the type of situations with which private security personnel are expected to be confronted while guarding or on patrol. Indeed, quite opposing. The fact that security personnel have no powers beyond those accessible to the ordinary citizen itself gives a desirable check on their activities and evidently demarcates, both in law and in the eyes of the public in general, what is otherwise becoming an increasingly fuzzy border between the police and private ‘policing’ enterprises. The realism of private security is that their personnel are not like usual citizens. They may not have extra powers, but they have precise responsibilities, they are organized, they are usually recruited as of their physical suitability, they are dressed in a way to emphasize their capacity to coerce, they might be trained in self-defense or have experience in how to ‘handle themselves’ in circumstances thought to rationalize reasonable force, they are more expected to employ force, and so on. All these influencing conditions suggest, given the extensive concerns ‘about the de facto power exerted by private security personnel whose reliability is uncertain, whose public liability is non-existent, and whose allegiance is by definition to whomsoever pays the piper, that there is a very well-built case for ensuring that in law they exercise no more right to use force than the rest of us. We conclude that no transform in citizens’ powers of arrest is reasonable. The key area, is where private security staff are concerned in the policing of space which is public -streets, housing estates, and so on — or which the public thinks to be public, although it is actually private, that is places like shopping malls, football grounds, hospitals, and so on. We believe any new form of regulation must certainly cover the work of private security guards, together with contract and in-house guards. The Home Affairs Select Committee excluded in-house staff from its commendations for regulation. However, though the evidence signifies that there are fewer complaints concerning in house security services, the fact that there is considerable mobility between the contract and the in-house sectors leads us to believe that any new system of licensing must cover both. Moreover, given their role concerning either private property or private space to which the public have access, equally nightclub door staff and installers of electronic surveillance and security equipment ought, in our finding, also to come within a new system of directive. How to cite Discuss whether private policing can ever ensure public security, Papers

Wednesday, April 29, 2020

Introduction to Contemporary Society

Introduction Human societies consist of individuals and groups of individuals with different needs, interests, and aspirations. Furthermore, different individuals are endowed with different qualities. For instance, some are physically stronger than others while others are intellectually well endowed than others. Some have special talents and abilities which distinguishes them from the rest of the members of a society.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Introduction to Contemporary Society specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More In addition, we all belong to different and unique socio-economic, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds which profoundly impacts up on our social standing (Perry Perry, 2005). Interactions between and among individuals and groups of individuals takes place within matrices that are made up by these diverse features which more often determines our social status as well as how powerful we are as individua ls or groups in a society. In our endeavor to satisfy our basic need of power and influence, some people take advantage of their privileged status in the society to intimidate others and assert their power in relation to others who are ignorantly and blindly considered less important. Schools are perfect examples of institutions consisting of individual students and groups of students who are different in power and status despite the principle of equality before the eyes of the school rules and regulations and laws of the land. Available statistical evidence shows that senior students in public schools bully new and junior students a trend that is common in most of our public schools and that have reached alarming rates prompting an outcry of concerned stakeholders. Covert or overt bullying in words or actions is definitely a bad and an unacceptable behaviour in all schools and other social set ups consisting of different people. It is a result of misguided efforts of the senior stu dents to achieve, assert and re-affirm their power (Holt Kysilka, 2005). According to Glasser, one of the greatest psychologists of our age, all of our behaviors (good or bad) and choices are motivated by our desire to meet six basic needs including survival, belonging, love, power, freedom and fun (Glasser, 1998). Through harassment in words and actions, senior students in public schools seek to confirm their seniority and power in relation to new and junior students (Crime in America.Net 2009). Bullying results in to devastating, dehumanizing and destructive consequences up on junior students including loneliness, stress, low self-esteem, poor self-confidence and lack of self-assurance among others which ultimately distract students’ concentration in their studies. This results to poor academic performance as well as poor social and emotional development of the bullied students (Crime in America.Net, 2009). The purpose of this paper is to discuss how the media influences p ublic opinion on social issues of concern like bullying which is rampant in our public schools and establish similarities and differences of reporting on Bullying by two articles from a broadsheet and a Tabloid newspaper, that is, ‘The Guardian’ and the ‘The Star’ respectively.Advertising Looking for essay on social sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More How the media influences public opinion on social issues Information is a critical ingredient for unity, stability and socio-economic and political progress of a society. In fact, mature and genuinely democratic cultures grants and safeguards the constitutional rights of individual citizens to access all information on public affairs except any information that can compromise national security of a country. Equally important is the means and avenues through which information is relayed to individuals and groups of individuals in the society. Theref ore, the media (both print and electronic media) plays a significant role in democratic cultures of providing a means through which information on social, political and economic issues at national as well as international levels is relayed to the citizenry. The media enjoys a very influential status in democratic countries where there is freedom of the media from unnecessary and unconstitutional state control. Consequently, media tends to have immense influence up on public opinion on social issues. Mass media is significant given the way they represent the outer world influences in our minds. In other words, the way mass media represents an issues influences our perception and understanding of the issue. Siegel, Siegel Lotenberg (2007) point out that what we see on the internet, television, newspapers and magazines and hear on our radios influences us in two ways. First, it tells us what to think about. Secondly, it influences how we think about it (Siegel, Siegel Lotenberg, 2007 ).In a nut shell, the media plays a significant role in the formation of people’s awareness on issues as well as their opinions of what issues are important. The mass media also plays an influential role in setting the policy agenda, that is, priorities of law makers, senior government servants and policy influencers such as think tanks, political parties and lobbyists (Siegel, Siegel Lotenberg, 2007). Most scholars believe that media’s greatest influence on public affairs and politics is found in their power to put in place political agenda, that is, a list of political and socio-economic issues that the public classify as needing urgent government attention (Janda, Berry Goldman, 2011). In the United States, tremendously believe that the media puts a strong influence on t heir socio-political institutions and about nine out of ten Americans believe that the media strongly influence public opinion (Janda, Berry Goldman, 2011).For example, pictures of cheerful Iraqi s destroying an effigy of Saddam Hussein impacted up on the American public opinion about war in Iraq. However, it is important to note that establishing general effects of the media on public opinion about more general social and political issues is difficult. Sometimes the media force the government to act on distasteful social issues such as child abuse, wrongful execution of death sentence, racial discrimination as well as violence and bullying in our learning institutions and work places (Janda, Berry Goldman, 2011). It can also force the government to deal with issues regarded as exclusively a preserve of the scientific community like cloning, HIV/AIDS and climate change (Janda, Berry Goldman, 2011).Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Introduction to Contemporary Society specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More A Comparison and Contrasting of Two Articles on Bullying from a broadsheet and a Tabloid newspaper How a piece of Information on an issue is passed on to an individual news consumer or the public is critical in determining efficiency and effectiveness of communication in a society. In most cases information about a given happening or issue differs in terms of language, style, content and presentational features used by an individual media outlets (Robertson, 2006). Despite reporting on the same event or issue different newspapers, magazines or television stations differs in the above mentioned aspects. To illustrate this we shall look at the differences evident in reporting on a similar case of bullying by a broadsheet newspaper and a tabloid newspaper. The prime differences between a broadsheet and a tabloid newspaper are their sizes; a tabloid newspaper is half the size of a broadsheet (Franklin, 2008; Batchhelor, 2004;, 2005). As a result, you require a junior reading age to read a tabloid newspaper articles because there are shorter articles, and more pictures (cour, 2005). On the other hand, to read broadsheet newspaper articles you require a senior reading age because they use long terms, they also tend to be more in-depth and detailed (, 2005).Tabloid newspaper consist of the Mirror, Sun and Star. Broadsheet newspapers include the Guardian, the Daily Telegraph and Times. ‘The Daily Star’ a tabloid newspaper and ‘The Guardian’ a broadsheet newspaper reported the incident of the girl who killed herself allegedly because of bullying on thirteenth October 2003 (, 2005). Despite reporting on a similar happening there were key differences in the articles that featured in the two newspapers in terms of language, tone, layout, content, style and presentational approach adopted by the two newspapers. In the Daily Star, the article was titled ‘Taunted to Death’ while in the Guardian it was titled ‘Bullied Girl Kills Herself’ (, 2005). The langu age used by authors of the two newspapers articles is different and has the potential to make different news consumers to create different mental pictures about a similar social issue. This becomes the source of differences on what different readers think about a similar issue as well as how they think about it and understand it. For example, a reader of the article in the Star may think of the issue in terms of mocking by just referring to the title of the article before reading more details. Another reader who has been to a public school and is conversant with bullying may be curious to read the whole story in the Guardian in order to find out what kind of bullying it was that made the girl decide to take away her life. Such a reader may have been bullied or harassed others and may be shocked to hear that what he or she used to think was a normal school culture could have destructive consequences due to the clarity of the title in the Guardian and thus want to read more.Advertisin g Looking for essay on social sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The title of the article in the Guardian can also arouse pictures and memories of bullying in readers during the days of their schooling faster than the title of the article in the Star newspaper. In short, by reading the titles of the two articles in the Guardian and Star only readers may think of different things about the same issue before inquiring into the details of the stories that follow. The style used by the two newspapers also differs significantly. In the Guardian the heading of the article is bold and was written in white letters against a black background in order to attract the attention of the reader. The font of the story’s content is equally big and easily readable by a quick and good reader. On the other hand, the title of the article in the Star is in black against a white background .The font of the heading and the content of the story is relatively smaller (, 2005). The report in the Star is accompanied by more artist impression pictures d epicting cases of bullying involving different grade school students. Much more important is the difference in the amount content of the two reports. The Guardian’s report is more detailed and includes a general public perception of bullying, opinions from psychology experts and reputable educationists about bullying besides a detailed coverage of the circumstances that culminated to the death of the girl. Thus besides reporting the tragic death of the innocent girl, the Guardian report is to a certain extent more educating on the issue of bullying in public schools than The Star’s story. The Star’s story is made more emotional and sensational by its pictorial concomitants. All these differences in language, style and content acts to bring out their differences in the general layout of the reports which also affects the way the two newspapers affect public opinion about bullying in our schools. In journalism, differences in language usually guided and determined by motives of an individual journalist, his or her knowledge and experience levels , specific formatting and writing style preferred by different newspapers in the market and much more important the circumstances surrounding the happening that is being reported. The sad case of the bullied girl suicide came at a time when bullying in our public schools had reached distressing levels attracting great concern from parents, educators and other stakeholders including the media. Thus the language and the tone used by the two newspapers in reporting the incidence is effective in calling for attention to the fatality and seriousness of the unpleasant issue at hand from parents, teachers, educators, government and the general public. The way the issue was reported not only by the two newspapers used as example in this task but also by other media outlets immediately and after the tragic death of the innocent girl played a major role in setting public opinion about bullying. It might have i nstigated the public to exert more pressure up on school administrators and concerned government officials in order to deal with the problem of bullying in our public schools more seriously and sternly than ever before. It also played an important role in changing attitudes of those who regarded bullying in schools as an acceptable rite of passage for new and junior students. Conclusion Mass media is definitely an important institution not only in the democratization process of a society but also its socialization particularly in a democratic culture. Different media outlets play significant roles in forming public and policy agendas. It plays an important role in setting people’s awareness on issues and deciding what issues are more important. Thus it enables them put pressure on the government to deal with issues they consider as requiring urgent attention. It is also important in setting policy agenda because of its inevitable influence up on the think tanks, policy makers , law makers, senior government servants and lobbyists regarding important and urgent socio-economic and political issues of a society. However, it is important to note that different media outlets present their reports about similar happenings and issues in unique and different ways in terms of language use, style, tone, content and layout and thus they end up having differing influences up on opinions of individual news consumers about an issue. Reference List Batchelor, A., Green, T. (2004). Revise GCSE Citizenship Studies for Edexcel. New York, NY: Heinemann. (2005). Compare and Contrast two articles on Bullying from a broadsheet and tabloid newspaper. Web. Crime in America.Net. (2009). Bullying in Schools–US Department of Justice. Web. Franklin, B. (2008). Pulling newspapers apart: analyzing print journalism. New York, NY: Taylor Francis. Glasser, W. (1998). Choice Theory. New York: HarperCollins. Holt, L. C., Kysilka, M. (2005). Instructional pattern s: strategies for maximizing student learning. New York, NY: Sage. Janda, K., Berry, J. M., Goldman, J. (2011). The Challenge of Democracy: American Government in Global Politics. New York, NY: Cengage Learning. Perry, J. Perry, E. K. (2005). Contemporary Society: An Introduction to Social Science. New York: Allyn Bacon. Robertson, J. W. (2006). Illuminating or Dimming Down? A Survey of UK Television News Coverage. Fifth Estate Online: An International Journal of Radical Mass Media Criticis. Web. Siegel, M., Siegel, M., Lotenberg, L. D. (2007). Marketing public health: strategies to promote social change. New York, NY: Jones Bartlett Learning. This essay on Introduction to Contemporary Society was written and submitted by user Angela Vazquez to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

Friday, March 20, 2020

Services Marketing Essays

Services Marketing Essays Services Marketing Essay Services Marketing Essay Australasian Marketing Journal 18 (2010) 41–47 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Australasian Marketing Journal journal homepage: www. elsevier. com/locate/amj How the local competition defeated a global brand: The case of Starbucks Paul G. Patterson *, Jane Scott, Mark D. Uncles School of Marketing, Australian School of Business, University of NSW, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Americanised the coffee tradition. Keywords: Service brands Service quality Global branding International business Starbucks Coffee The astounding growth and expansion of Starbucks is outlined, both on a global scale and within Australia. The focus then shifts to the abrupt closure of three-quarters of the Australian stores in mid 2008. Several reasons for these closures are described and examined, including that: Starbucks overestimated their points of differentiation and the perceived value of their supplementary services; their service standards declined; they ignored some golden rules of international marketing; they expanded too quickly and forced themselves upon an unwilling public; they entered late into a highly competitive market; they failed to communicate the brand; and their business model was unsustainable. Key lessons that may go beyond the speci? cs of the Starbucks case are the importance of: undertaking market research and taking note of it; thinking globally but acting locally; establishing a differential advantage and then striving to sustain it; not losing sight of what makes a brand successful in the ? rst place; and the necessity of having a sustainable business model. O 2009 Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction ‘‘Shunned Starbucks in Aussie exit† (BBC News, 4 August 2008) then shifts focus to describe the extent of the store closures in Australia, before offering several reasons for the failure and lessons that others might learn from the case. 2. Background ‘‘Weak coffee and large debt stir Starbucks’ troubles in Australia† (The Australian, 19 August 2008) ‘‘Memo Starbucks: next time try selling ice to Eskimos† (The Age, 3 August 2008) ‘‘Taste of defeat for the mugs from Starbucks† (Sydney Morning Herald, 31 July 2008) ‘‘Coffee culture grinds Starbucks’ Australian operation† (Yahoo News, 3 August 2008) When the announcement was made in mid 2008 that Starbucks would be closing nearly three-quarters of its 84 Australian stores there was mixed reaction. Some people were shocked, others were triumphant. Journalists used every pun in the book to create a sensational headline, and it seemed everyone had a theory as to what went wrong. This case outlines the astounding growth and expansion of the Starbucks brand worldwide, including to Australia. It * Corresponding author. Tel. : +61 2 9385 1105. E-mail addresses: p. [emailprotected] edu. au (P. G. Patterson), [emailprotected] com. au (J. Scott), m. [emailprotected] edu. au (M. D. Uncles). Founded in 1971, Starbucks’ ? rst store was in Seattle’s Pike Place Market. By the time it went public in 1992, it had 140 stores and was expanding at a breakneck pace, with a growing store count of an extra 40–60% a year. Whilst former CEO Jim Donald claimed that ‘‘we don’t want to take over the world†, during the 1990s and early 2000s, Starbucks were opening on average at least one store a day (Palmer, 2008). In 2008 it was claimed to be opening seven stores a day worldwide. Not surprisingly, Starbucks is now the largest coffee chain operator in the world, with more than 15,000 stores in 44 countries, and in 2007, accounted for 39% of the world’s total specialist offee house sales (Euromonitor, 2008a). In North America alone, it serves 50 million people a week, and is now an indelible part of the urban landscape. But just how did Starbucks become such a phenomenon? Firstly, it successfully Americanised the European coffee tradition – something no other coffee house had done previously. Before Starbucks, coffee in its current form (latte, frappacino, mocha, etc. ) was alien to most US consumers. Secondly, Starbucks did not just sell coffee – it sold an experience. As founding CEO Howard Schultz explained, ‘‘We are not in the coffee business serving people, we’re in the people business serving coffee† (Schultz and Yang, 1997). This epitomised the emphasis on customer service such as making eye contact and greeting each customer within 5 seconds, 1441-3582/$ see front matter O 2009 Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10. 1016/j. ausmj. 2009. 10. 001 42 P. G. Patterson et al. / Australasian Marketing Journal 18 (2010) 41–47 leaning tables promptly and remembering the names of regular customers. From inception, Starbucks’ purpose was to reinvent a commodity with a sense of romance, atmosphere, sophistication and sense of community (Schultz and Yang, 1997). Next, Starbucks created a ‘third place’ in people’s lives – somewhere between home and work where they could sit and relax. This was a novelty in the US where in many small towns cafe culture consisted of ? lter coffee on a hot plate. In this way, Starbucks positioned itself to not only sell coffee, but also offer an experience. It was conceived as a lifestyle cafe. The establishment of the cafe as a social hub, with comfortable chairs and music has been just as important a part of the Starbucks brand as its coffee. All this came with a premium price. While people were aware that the beverages at Starbucks were more expensive than at many cafes, they still frequented the outlets as it was a place ‘to see and be seen’. In this way, the brand was widely accepted and became, to an extent, a symbol of status, and everyone’s must-have accessory on their way to work. So, not only did Starbucks revolutionise how Americans drank coffee, it also revolutionised how much people were prepared to pay. Consistency of product across stores, and even national boundaries, has been a hallmark of Starbucks. Like McDonald’s, Starbucks claims that a customer should be able to visit a store anywhere in the world and buy a coffee exactly to speci? cation. This sentiment is echoed by Mark Ring, CEO of Starbucks Australia who stated ‘‘consistency is really important to our customers . . . a consistency in the product . . . the overall experience when you walk into a cafe . . the music . . . the lighting . . . the furniture . . . the person who is working the bar†. So, whilst there might be slight differences between Starbucks in different countries, they all generally look the same and offer the same product assortment. One way this is ensured is by insisting that all managers and partners (employees) undergo 13 weeks of training – not just to learn how to make a coffee, but to understand the nuances of the Starbucks brand (Karolefski, 2002) and how to deliver on its promise of a service experience. The Starbucks formula also depends on location and convenience. Starbucks have worked under the assumption that people are not going to visit unless it’s convenient, and it is this assumption that underlies their highly concentrated store coverage in many cities. Typically, clusters of outlets are opened, which has the effect of saturating a neighbourhood with the Starbucks brand. Interestingly, until recently, they have not engaged in traditional advertising, believing their large store presence and word-ofmouth to be all the advertising and promotion they need. Starbucks’ management believed that a distinctive and memorable brand, a product that made people ‘feel good’ and an enjoyable delivery channel would create repeat business and customer loyalty. Faced with near-saturation conditions in the US – by 2007 it commanded 62% of the specialist coffee shop market in North America (Table 1) – the company has increasingly looked overseas for growth opportunities. As part of this strategy, Starbucks opened its ? rst Australian store in Sydney in 2000, before expanding elsewhere within New South Wales and then nationwide (albeit with 0% of stores concentrated in just three states: NSW, Victoria and Queensland). By the end of 2007 Starbucks had 87 stores, enabling it to control 7% of the specialist coffee shop market in Australasia (Table 1). By 2008, consumer awareness of Starbucks in Australia was 90% (Shoebridge, 2008), with each outlet selling, on average, double the number of coffees (270 a day) than the res t of Australia’s coffee shops (Lindhe, 2008). 3. Expansion into Asia Starbucks currently operates in 44 markets and even has a small presence in Paris – birthplace and stronghold of European cafe culture. Beyond North America, it has a very signi? ant share of the specialist coffee shop market in Western Europe, Asia Paci? c and Latin America (Table 1) and these regions make strong revenue contributions (Table 2). It is in Asia that they see the most potential for growth as they face increasing competitive pressure in their more traditional markets. Half the international stores Starbucks plans to operate in the next decade will be in Asia (Euromonitor, 2006; Browning, 2008). Indeed, Starbucks has done well in international markets where there has not traditionally been a coffee drinking culture, namely Japan, Thailand, Indonesia and China. In effect it has been responsible for growing the category in these markets. The ? rst Starbucks outside the US opened in Tokyo in 1996, and since then, Starbucks’ Japanese stores have become twice as profitable as the US stores. Unsurprisingly then, Japan is Starbucks’ best performing overseas market outside North America. More than 100 new stores open each year in Japan, and coffee is now more popular than tea in terms of both volume and value (Lee, 2003; see also Uncles, 2008). As opposed to their entry into the Australian market, Starbucks made small changes to its formula for the Japanese market; for example, the invention of a green tea frappucino, and the provision of smaller drinks and pastries to conform to local tastes. Starbucks arrived in China in 1998 and by 2002 had 50 outlets, and 165 outlets by 2006 (BBC News, 2006), quickly becoming the nation’s leading coffee chain. Starbucks now sees China as its key growth market due to the size and preferences of the emerging middle class. In the Asia–Paci? region, Starbucks command of the specialist coffee shop market grew from 15% in 2002 to 19% in 2007 (refer to Table 2). The total market for cafes in China grew by over 135% between 1999 and 2004 to reach US$2. 6 billion. It is projected to grow another 144% by 2008 to reach US$6. 4 billion in sales. More specialty coffee shops are opening across China as a middle class with strong purchasing power emerges, although this rise in coffee con sumption is highly concentrated in large cities such as Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou. Starbucks has said that it xpects China to become its biggest market after the US and the plan is to open 100 stores a year (Euromonitor, 2006). Signi? cantly, certain Western brands are valued by Chinese consumers and Starbucks appears to be one of them. A growing number of China’s 500 million urbanites favour Starbucks for its ambience, which is seen as an important signal of service quality, Table 2 Starbucks’ regional sales performance by outlets and value 2006. Region North America Asia Paci? c Western Europe Australasia World % of company sales (outlets) 79. 0 13. 6. 7 1. 1 100. 0 % of company sales (revenue in $US) 80. 5 10. 8 7. 7 1. 0 100. 0 Table 1 Starbucks’ share of the specialist coffee shop market in each major region. Region North America Western Europe Asia Paci? c Australasia Latin America Source: Euromonitor (2008b). 2002 (%) 44 17 15 6 0 2007 (%) 62 21 19 7 18 Source: Percentage of company sales in each region is calculated from retail sales within this market in 2006, with sales data drawn from Euromonitor (2007). P. G. Patterson et al. / Australasian Marketing Journal 18 (2010) 41–47 43 nd Starbucks’ design concept rests easily with China’s consumers, who tend to lounge with friends while sipping coffee. Its outlets in China frequently maintain larger seating areas than average outlets in other countries, and plush chairs and davenports are provided to accommodate crowds that linger. However, success for Starbucks in China is not a given, and they will face several challenges in the coming years. China’s accession to the WTO has led to the gradual relaxation of the policy governing foreign-owned retail outlets, and this will lead to more foreign investment and thereby competition (Lee, 2004). Several multinationals are engaged in selling coffee (including KFC, McDonald’s, Yoshinoya, and Manabe), and a number of local brands have recently emerged, some even imitating Starbucks’ distinctive green and white logo and its in-store ambience (notably Xingbake in Shanghai). Furthermore, the reduction of import tariffs on coffee will also encourage foreign investment in coffee. 4. The Australian retail coffee industry Australia’s taste for coffee is a by-product of the waves of immigrants arriving on the country’s shores following World War II. European migrants, predominantly Greeks and Italians, were the ? st to establish the coffee culture, which was later embraced more widely in the 1980s. For decades Australians enjoyed a variation of the ‘lifestyle coffee experience’ that Starbucks created from scratch in the US. Australians did not need to be introduced to the concept of coffee as many other countries did. Savouring a morning cup of coffee was already a ritual for many consumers. It is fair to describe Australia’s coffee culture as mature and sophisticated, so when Starbucks entered Australia in 2000, a thriving urban cafe culture was already in place. This established culture saw Australians typically patronise smaller boutique style coffee shops, with people willing to travel out of their way for a favoured cup of coffee, especially in Melbourne where coffee has developed an almost cult-like following. For Australians, coffee is as much about relationships as it is about the product, suggesting that an impersonal, global chain experience would have trouble replicating the intimacy, personalisation and familiarity of a suburban boutique cafe. Furthermore, through years of coffee drinking, many Australians, unlike American or Asian consumers, have developed a sophisticated palate, enjoying their coffee straighter and stronger, and without the need to disguise the taste with ? avoured, syrupy shots. This love of coffee is easily quanti? ed. The Australian market is worth $3 billion, of which $1. 8 billion relates to the coffee retailing market. For every cup of coffee consumed out of home, two cups are consumed at home (AustralAsian Specialty Coffee Association, 2006). Per capita consumption is now estimated at 2. kg-twice as much as 30 years ago. Whilst Australians are among the highest consumers of instant coffee in the world, they are increasingly buying coffee out of the home (Euromonitor, 2008c). More than 1 billion cups of coffee are consumed in cafes, restaurants and other outlets each year, representing an increase of 65% over the last 10 years. Even between 2000 and 2005, trade sales of coffee have increased about 18%. In 2007, the growth in popularity of the cafe culture resulted in trade volume sales growing at an annual rate of 5%. Some 31% of the coffee sold through foodservice is takeaway, and it is thought that ‘fast coffee’ will be a growth area in future years (Euromonitor, 2008d). There is also a trend towards larger takeaway sizes, with 400 ml cups increasing in popularity (Euromonitor, 2008d). One might argue that Starbucks drove these trends, especially in regards to larger sizes. There are almost 14,000 cafes and restaurants serving a variety of coffee types in Australia, and during 2006/07, they generated $9. 7 billion in income (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2008). However, despite these statistics, the coffee business does not guarantee success. As Paul Irvine, co-founder of Gloria Jean’s notes, ‘‘Australia is a tough retail market and coffee retailing is particularly tough†. According to of? cial statistics, the cafe business is not always pro? table, with the net pro? tability of cafes falling to about 4%. For a cafe to be successful, it has to offer marginally better coffee than local competitors, and do so consistently. Coffee drinkers in Australia are discerning, and they will go out of their way to purchase a good cup of coffee. They are not as easily persuaded as people from other countries simply to visit their nearest cafe. Secondly, for a cafe to make a pro? t, it needs to turn over 15 kg of coffee a week. The national average is 11 kg, so a cafe has to be above average to begin with to even make a pro? t. Any newcomer needs to understand this before entering the market. The other signi? cant constraint on pro? tability is the cost of hiring baristas, with a good one costing between $1000 and $1500 a week (Charles, 2007). However, it seems that this is a necessary cost in order to deliver a superior product. The question that then begs to be asked is: How well did Starbucks understand this existing coffee culture? Did they under-estimate the relational aspect of coffee purchasing in Australia, as well as the importance of the quality of ingredients and the skills of the person making each cup? Did they overestimate the value consumers attach to the in-store experience and the ‘third place’ concept? Or did they just look at the statistics regarding coffee consumption and think that operating in Australia was a license to print money? Did they simply see Australia as the next logical step to global domination? Starbucks has 87% of the US specialty coffee shop market, and only now is it beginning to feel pressure from non-traditional competitors such as Dunkin Donut, 7 Eleven, McCafe and Krispy Kreme (Burritt, 2007). However, in Australia, the competitive landscape is different. Gloria Jean’s dominates the high-street part of the coffee retailing market and McCafe dominates the convenience end (Shoebridge, 2008). Other signi? cant competitors include The Coffee Club and Wild Bean Cafe (an add-on to BP petrol stations) and Hudson’s Coffee (see Table 3). All offer a similar in-store experience to Starbucks, with McCafe from 2007 onwards refurbishing many McDonald’s stores to imitate the Starbucks’ experience, albeit at the economy end of the market. 5. Growth grinds to a halt . . . store closures In recent times however things have started to go wrong for Starbucks. Internationally, company earnings declined as cashstrapped consumers faced record petrol prices and rising interest rates meaning they have had to pull back on gourmet coffee and other luxuries. Sales fell 50% in the last 2 years, the US share price fell more than 40% over the past year and pro? s dropped 28% (Bawden, 2008; Coleman-Lochner and Stanford, 2008; Mintz, 2008). Consequently, Howard Schultz, the founder and chairman of Starbucks, resumed the position of CEO in 2008 with the aim of revitalising the business. He slowed the pace at which stores were opened (and in fact closed more stores than he will open in the coming year), introduced key performan ce targets (KPTs) and an employee rewards system in the US, and simultaneously shut down every store in America for three and a half hours of staff training (Muthukumar and Jain, 2008). Customer-oriented initiatives have included the addition of more food, the launch of the Starbucks card and Starbucks express, and the provision of highspeed wi-? internet access (Hota, 2008). Notably, Schultz acknowledges that the company’s focus has been more on expansion than on customer service – the very thing that was at the heart of its unique value proposition. 44 P. G. Patterson et al. / Australasian Marketing Journal 18 (2010) 41–47 Table 3 Competition in the Australian specialty coffee chain market (chains arranged in order of the number of stores operating in Australia). Number of stores in Australia Gloria Jean’s 500 Year established in Australia 1996 Business model Price of an espresso coffee (e. g. , ? at white, cappuccino) Regular $3. 25 Small $3. 25 Standard $3. 40 Regular $3. 40 Small $3. 10 Tall $3. 60 Performance highlights and lowlights Franchise Overall Winner, 2005 Franchisor of the Year Sales rose 18% to an estimated $240 m for 07/08 driven by new stores and growth from existing stores The fastest growing cafe brand in Australia and NZ Number of stores up from 60 in 2002 Winner, 2008 Food Franchisor of the Year The number of stores reported here includes NZ Plans to open more sites McCafe Coffee Club Wild Bean Cafe 488 220 105 1993 1989 2004 Some store-owned, some franchise Franchise Part of a franchise with Wild Bean Cafe (BP) Connect Franchise Store-owned Hudson’s Starbucks 45 23 1998 2000 Plans to expand store numbers by 20–30% 08/09 Prior to closures in August 2008 there were 84 stores had a perceived lower quality product Sources: Various company reports as at the end of 2008. However, it seems that these measures were too late for the Australian operation. On 29th July 2008, Starbucks announced that it would be closing 61 of its 84 Australian stores (i. . , 73%) by August 2008, resulting in a loss of 685 jobs. All of these stores had been under-performing (8 were in SA, ACT and Tasmania, 28 in NSW, 17 in Victoria and 8 in Queensland). This decline of Starbucks in Australia was not as sudden as many would have us believe and in fact some reports (Edwards and Sainsbury, 2008; Shoebridge, 2008) indicated that by late 2007 Starbucks already had: accumulated losses of $143 million; a loss of $36 million for that ? nancial year; lost $27. 6 million the previous ? nancial year; loans of $72. million from Starbucks in the US; was only surviving because of its US parent’s support. Whilst the troubled economy might seem an easy scapegoat, with people tightening their belts and eating out less, it is unlikely that this was the core problem as evidenced by the continuing growth of their competitors. Indeed, coffee is no longer considered a luxury item by many Australians, but rather an affordable part of their daily routine. Instead, there is substantial evidence to suggest a number of factors combined to bring about Starbucks’ demise. . 1. Starbucks overestimated their points of differentiation and customer perceived value of their supplementary services ‘‘I just think the whole system, the way they serve, just didn’t appeal to the culture we have here† Andrew Mackay, VP of the Australian Coffee Traders Association, in Martin (2008) Whilst there was initial curiosity and hype about Starbucks, after trying it, many Australians quickly found that it failed to offer a particularly unique experience that was not offered by other chains or cafes. Given the strong established coffee culture and discerning palates of Australians, the core product – coffee – was not seen as particularly different from, say, a latte or short black from a good suburban barista, Gloria Jean’s or Coffee Club. Its point of difference in Australia, where a coffee culture already existed, had to be in its supplementary or value-adding services – i. e. , its unique servicescape, engaging customer service, brand image and so on (Lovelock et al. , 2007). But was this worth a premium price, especially as the competition began replicating Starbucks in-store experience? Starbucks has since been harshly criticised by Australian consumers and the media. Their coffee has been variously described as ‘a watered down product’, ‘gimmicky’, and consisting of ‘buckets of milk’. These are not the labels you would choose to describe a coffee that aspires to be seen as a ‘gourmet’ product. It has also been criticised for its uncompetitive pricing, even being described as ‘‘one of the most over-priced products the world has ever seen† (Martin, 2008). Even the idea of the third place has come under criticism – ‘‘why would you want to sit around a pretend lounge room drinking a weak and expensive coffee when you can go around the corner and have the real thing? † (Wailes, 2008). It seems that Starbucks’ rapid expansion, its omnipresence, somewhat standardised store design and recent insistence on staff achieving various sales KPTs (key performance targets) such as serving ‘x’ customers per hour, all combined to diminish the instore experience. The introduction of sales targets for front-line These closures saw 23 stores kept open in prime locations in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane. But this begs the question: can a 23-store chain be viable for the brand in the long-term? Based on the approximate numbers in Table 3, Starbucks had a 6% share of stores in Australia before the closures; this has now fallen to a share below 2%. Even before the closures, Australasia represented only 1% of company sales (Table 2) and now the ? gure is expected to be much lower. This may not make much commercial sense as it will be dif? cult to achieve economies of scale in terms of marketing and purchasing, and such small numbers are totally out of step with the clustering strategy adopted in its strongest markets – the US, Japan and China. However, it could also be argued that with Starbucks’ strategy of global domination, it is unlikely that it will ever close its Australian business entirely. Whilst Starbucks’ management have been keen to suggest that ‘‘this decision represents business challenges unique to the Australian market and in no way re? ects the state of the Starbucks business in countries outside of the United States†, the US market has also suffered. By September 2008, 600 stores had closed (or were due for closure), with about 12,000 workers, or 7% of Starbucks’ global workforce affected (Mintz, 2008). It should be noted that the situation in the US has only worsened as a result of the global ? nancial crisis. 6. So what went wrong? Opinions abound as to why Starbucks failed in Australia. Our research suggests there is some truth to many of these opinions. P. G. Patterson et al. / Australasian Marketing Journal 18 (2010) 41–47 45 employees, for example, meant staff and baristas had less time to engage with customers. It began to stray too far from its roots and the very values upon which the brand was built. Some of these actions were forced upon Starbucks by emerging competitors seeking to imitate the brand, and thus gain a slice of the ever growing lifestyle coffee market. Starbucks’ points of differentiation were systematically being eroded and, in a sense, the brand that taught the world that coffee is not a commodity was itself becoming one. 6. 2. Declining service quality The brand has also come under ? re for declining customer service as it continued to expand. For example, the quality of baristas is said to have declined as Starbucks widened its pool of applicants in order to meet demand at new stores. Can a 17 year old high school student really compete with a boutique trained barista with a passion for coffee? By not offering a better experience and product than emerging direct competitors, Starbucks found itself undermined by countless high street cafes and other chains that were selling stronger brews at lower prices and often offering better or equal hospitality. Whilst they may have pioneered the idea of a ‘third place’, it was an easy idea to copy, and even easier to better by offering superior coffee, ambience and service. Now, with so many coffee chains around, Starbucks have little point of differentiation, even wi-? internet access has become commonplace across all types of cafe. Furthermore, while customers were offered promotional rewards for returning to Starbucks, the card-based scheme is no more sophisticated than equivalent me-too cards at Gloria Jean’s, Coffee Club, Hudson’s and many independent cafes. And as noted earlier, one of the things that set Starbucks apart from the competition – i. e. , acknowledging customers (often by name for regulars) within a few seconds of entering the store and eriously engaging with them, began to unravel when Starbucks imposed both customer service and sales targets for its cafes. The imposition of these targets plus an ever widening range and complexity of coffees to remember and make to perfection, meant staff morale and inevitably customer service levels declined. In fact in the USA some staff were so disillusioned with the impositio n of sales targets (because it meant they simply didn’t have time to engage with customers) they posted blogs openly stating that Starbucks had lost its way. Finally, it appears that Starbucks were not even delivering on their core promise of serving superior coffee in comfortable surroundings, thus justifying its premium price. By switching to vacuum packaged coffee, consumers are denied the store-? lling aroma of the coffee beans. The switching of traditional coffee machines to automated espresso machines (which can make coffees 40% faster and move customers through the lines more quickly), has also resulted in a loss of ‘theatre’ (Grove et al. , 2000) for people wanting to see their coffee made that way and has also had implications for taste. In-store, it has been noted that there are fewer soft chairs and less carpeting, and Starbucks recently lost ground in the ‘service and surroundings’ category of the Brand Keys 2007 Customer Loyalty Engagement Index (Cebrzynski, 2008). It seems that Starbucks is now less about the quality of the coffee, and is more about the convenience of faster service and being on every corner – whilst still charging a premium. 6. 3. Starbucks ignored some golden rules of international marketing Ironically, it seems that the very thing that made Starbucks successful in the ? st place, its ability to adjust the original (European) business model and coffee tradition to local (US) conditions, is the thing that let it down. Whilst Starbucks has made minor changes to its menu in countries such as Japan and Saudi Arabia, it generally offers the same products all around the world. When the company came to Australia, it brought its ‘American’ offering, simply bringing wha t worked in the US and applying it here, without really understanding the local market. But with more than 235 ethnicities speaking more than 270 languages and dialects, companies wanting to get ahead in Australia need to be aware that they are not dealing with one homogeneous market. Unfortunately what worked in the US was ‘‘bitter, weak coffee augmented by huge quantities of milk and sweet ? avoured syrups. Not so much coffee, as hot coffee-based smoothies†. For the Australian consumer raised on a diet of real espresso, this was always going to be a tough sell (Mescall, 2008) As McDonald’s Australia chief executive Peter Bush noted, US retailers that have had trouble making it work in Australia (e. . , Starbucks, Denny’s, Arby’s, Taco Bell) are those that have ‘‘introduced formulae developed for US palates and for the US way of doing business . . . These formulae have, at best, modest relevance in Australia†. Peter Irvine, co-founder of Gloria Jean’s, also noted that ‘‘US retailers often arriv e in Australia thinking the size of their overseas chains and the strength of their brands in other markets will make it easy for them to crack the local market. Their focus is on global domination rather than the needs of the local consumers†. Further, there is a strong sense in Australia of buying local, supporting the community, having relationships with the people you buy from, and supporting ethically-minded businesses. Starbucks clashed completely with that, whereas local stores can differentiate themselves as being local and non-corporate. Furthermore, some would argue that Starbucks has become a caricature of the American way of life and many Australians reject that iconography. Many are simply not interested in the ‘super-size’ culture of the extra-large cups, nor want to be associated with a product that is constantly in the hands of movie stars. . 4. Expanding too quickly and forcing themselves upon an unwilling public In the US, Starbucks started in Seattle as a single store. In a nation bereft of a genuine cafe culture, that single store captured people’s imagination, and soon became a second store, quickly followed by a third. Before long, Starbucks had become a demand-driven phenomenon, wi th everyone wanting a Starbucks in their local area. McDonald’s grew exactly the same way in Australia, opening just one or two stores in each city – nowhere near enough to meet demand – thus creating an almost arti? ial scarcity, which created huge buzz around the brand experience. Krispy Kreme did the same. But when Starbucks opened in Australia, they immediately tried to impose themselves with multiple store openings in every city – adopting the US-model of expansion through store clusters. Australians were not given a chance to ‘discover’ it. As Mescall (2008) points out ‘‘they took key sites, hung huge signs, made us order coffee in sizes and gave the coffees weird names. Starbucks said to us – ‘that’s not how you drink coffee. This s how you drink coffee’†. They took the Coca-Cola strategy of being available wherever people looked, but this quickly led to market saturation. Their expansion di d not hurt their competitors so much as themselves, and they found themselves cannibalising their own stores. Furthermore, by becoming too common, the company violated the economic principles of cultural scarcity and the novelty wore off. By having too many outlets, becoming too commercial and too widely used, it began to lose its initial appeal of status and exclusivity. It began to have a mass brand feel, certainly not the warm feeling of a neighbourhood cafe. Furthermore, they became more reliant 46 P. G. Patterson et al. / Australasian Marketing Journal 18 (2010) 41–47 on less af? uent consumers who now, with a worsening economy, are spending less, making Starbucks more vulnerable to economic ? uctuations. 6. 5. Entering late into a highly competitive market ‘‘In America, Starbucks is a state of mind. In Australia, it was simply another player. † Barry Urquhart, quoted in Delaney (2008) From Day 1, Starbucks got off on the back foot. They lacked the ? rst-mover advantage they had in the US and Asia, ? nding themselves the late entrant in an already very developed, sophisticated and competitive market. Indeed, the competitive landscape in the Australian retail coffee market is very different to that of other countries. Here, Starbucks found themselves competing with hundreds of independent cafes and speciality coffee chains (see Table 3), where the coffee was generally better and the staff knew their customers by name. Signi? cantly, they were also the last of the major chains to gain a presence in Australia. 6. 6. Failing to communicate the brand Worldwide, Starbucks rarely employs above-the-line promotion, and this was also the case in Australia. Instead, they maintained that their stores are the core of the business and that they do not need to build the brand through advertising or promotion. Howard Shultz often preached, ‘‘Build the (Starbucks’) brand one cup at a time,† that is, rely on the customer experience to generate word-of-mouth, loyalty and new business. But in a market as competitive as Australia, with a consumer whose palate is discerning and whose loyalty often lies with a speci? barista, advertising and promotion was essential to communicate the Starbucks message. The issue is not so much about building awareness – which, at 90%, is high – but to communicate what the brand means and to give consumers reasons for patronising Starbucks. Their lack of advertising made this branding issue even worse, with many people unable to articulate why they should be loyal to Starbucks. At the same time, competitors were communicating their messages very effectively – McDonald’s, for instance, is a heavy spending, award-winning, advertiser in the Australian market. Added to which, more subversive counter-messages were coming from those who saw in Starbucks a ‘brand bully’ riding rough shod over the nuanced tastes and preferences of local cultures (Klein, 2000; Clark, 2008). In other words, a range of strong contrary messages were undermining Starbucks’ own very limited communications. 6. 7. Unsustainable business model Starbucks’ product line is limited primarily to coffee. Sometimes a new product idea will be developed, such as the Frappucino, but these tend to have limited product life cycles and/or are seasonal. For example, the Frappucino has traditionally made up 15% of (summer) sales, but recently sales have been down, suggesting that customers are already bored with it (Kiviat, 2008). Furthermore, in the instance where other products were offered, people failed to purchase them as they only really associate Starbucks with coffee and generally seek food elsewhere. This is a very different model to The Coffee Club which has much more of a cafe feel to it, or McDonald’s which has a full range of breakfast and lunch/dinner items that can be complemented by a McCafe latte. Hence the average transaction value at Starbucks is lower than its competitors, and therefore more customers must pass through its doors to reach the sales and pro? t levels of its competitors. It also creates con? ict with the Starbucks ethos of the third place (and allowing people to sit around for 30 minutes sipping lattes and reading, talking or sur? ng) versus the need to get people in and out quickly and not take up valuable ‘real estate’ (which in itself means that the average Starbucks store needs to be much bigger than the average cafe). Unlike most of the other retail coffee chains, Starbucks does not use a franchise model, preferring to lease and ? t-out its own outlets. This means more cash is being spent upfront, and in Starbucks’ case, more debt accrued. But adopting a franchise model would have numerous other advantages than just minimising this. It would mean that local investors, with a good sense of the local market, put their own money into the business and take an active role in running it and shaping its direction. 7. What are the main lessons from this case study? Several key lessons emerge that should be of interest to both domestic and international marketers. 7. 1. Crossing international borders is risky and clearly Starbucks did not do their homework, or ignored their homework Well conceived market research involving both primary and secondary data, including qualitative and quantitative approaches, would have uncovered the extent of the ‘coffee culture’ that existed in 2000 when Starbucks entered the Australian market. It seems inconceivable that Starbucks management, or at least its Australian representatives, were not suf? iently apprised of the extent to which many consumers were already well acculturated in terms of buying and consuming European styles of coffees such as short black, lattes and cappuccinos, nor the extent to which many customers were in fact loyal to their suburban cafe or competitive brands such as Gloria Jean’s. As a late market entrant, Starbucks clearly failed to do thorough homework on the mar ket before entry – this is a failure in terms of due diligence. Alternatively, they chose to ignore the messages that were coming from any due diligence that they had undertaken. This may or may not have been due to some arrogance on the part of Starbucks, or due to the fact that they considered they had a strong global brand which would meet with universal acceptance. An example of where Starbucks did do its homework, and act on it, was in France when it entered that market in 2006, establishing a cafe in the middle of Paris. Research had clearly shown the American way of consuming and socialising over a coffee was an anathema to many French, so Starbucks held back from entering the French market and when they ? ally entered it was with great trepidation, expanding at a very slow pace and testing the market at every step. 7. 2. ‘‘Think global but act local† This familiar maxim in international marketing should be well understood. While Starbucks had brand awareness as a major global brand, it failed to adapt the product and the customer experience to many mature coffee drinkers in Australia. As noted earlier, all the evidence suggests that it simply tried to transplant the American experience into the Australian market without any adaptation. In particular, it failed to adapt either its core product or its supplementary services to create the intimacy, personalisation and familiarity that is associated with established boutique cafes in Australia. 7. 3. Establish a differential advantage and then strive to sustain it A question of strategy that Starbucks perhaps failed to address was, ‘‘Is our product differentiation sustainable in the long term P. G. Patterson et al. / Australasian Marketing Journal 18 (2010) 41–47 47 and does it continue to justify a price premium? As noted earlier, it can be argued that the core product in this case, that is the coffee itself, is essentially a commodity, and that Starbucks’ coffee, according to many consumers, was no different to the competition, and in some cases inferior. Then Starbucks’ points of difference clearly revolved around its brand image and supplementary services. It was these supplementary services, such as its unique servicescape and exce llent customer service, that they used to justify a premium price. However, as competitors (e. g. , The Coffee Club) quickly imitated the ‘Starbucks experience’ (i. . , their supplementary services, ambiance, etc. ), by providing premium coffee and an intimate casual experience, Starbucks’ value proposition began to fade. In other words, their key points of difference could be easily imitated and were not sustainable. Faced with this scenario, the onus was on management to re-fresh and evolve any lingering differential advantage that Starbucks might have had or, at the very least, give customers reasons to continue patronising Starbucks through its communications. 7. 4. Don’t lose sight of what made you successful in the ? st place As more and more competitors emerged, both individual cafes and chains such as Gloria Jean’s and The Coffee Club, competitive pressures forced Starbucks to impose rigid sales targets on their frontline staff including bar istas to increase store productivity. However, the imposition of these KPTs and the pressure to serve more customers more quickly meant that Starbucks forgot the very thing that made it unique in the early days, namely, to provide a customer experience in an intimate casual setting that set it aside from competitors. As more pressure was placed on staff to have higher throughput, this meant that baristas and other employees had little time to engage with customers. In other words, Starbucks forgot about the very things that made it unique in the ? rst place. This is akin to the Wheel of Retailing hypothesis (Hollander, 1960) where a no-frills retailer gradually moves upmarket in terms of variety of product, price and more services and within several years ? nds itself competing with the more established premium supermarkets that were the very competitors that they tried to distance themselves from in the ? st place. The only difference with Starbucks is that it reversed the direction of the Wheel – by gradually moving downmarket it brought itself into direct competition with cheaper operators and lost sight of what made it successful in the ? rst place. 7. 5. Consider the viability of the business model It has to be questioned whether the Starbucks’ business model is viable in the l ong term, or even the medium term. A business model that uses a premium price to justify the excessive ? or space and elaborate servicescape, and allows customers to sit in this environment for an hour sipping one latte, has to be questioned. Given that Starbucks do not have the array of products that, say, a McDonald’s might have and, as documented earlier in this case, therefore do not generate the same sales volumes and revenues, it is hard to see how the Starbucks’ model is ? nancially viable. 8. Conclusion In summary, it appears on all the evidence that Starbucks not only misjudged the Australian coffee culture but also misjudged the extent of the competition, and failed to adapt its offering to the local market. Furthermore, with the advent of high quality barista training, the availability of premium coffee beans and the technology to produce a high quality cup of coffee (at a modest cost), sole operators who knew their customers by name, were able to set up business as viable competitors. Starbucks may have been responsible for growing the premium coffee category, but the emergence of Gloria Jean’s and the Coffee Club (and McCafe, a premium coffee shop embedded in McDonald’s restaurants) turned out to be serious competitors. Finally, questions have to be raised about Starbucks fundamental business model in a market where many small niche players can easily replicate the ‘Starbucks Experience’. References AustralAsian Specialty Coffee Association, 2006. Australian Coffee Market: Key Facts for 2006. Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2008. Cafes, Restaurants and Catering Services, Australia, Report 8655. 0 for 2006–07. Bawden, T. , 2008. Starbucks reports ? rst loss in 16 years. Times Online, 31 July. (accessed 15. 08. 08. ). BBC News, 2006. China central to Starbucks growth. BBC News, 14 February. (accessed 29. 08. 08. ). Browning, E. 2008. Starbucks hopes growth abroad will save its bottom line. ABC News, 31 July. (accessed 29. 08. 08. ). Burritt, C. , 2007. McDonald’s challenges Starbucks with cheaper lattes. Bloomberg, 11 September. (accessed 29. 08. 08. ). Cebrzynski, G. , 2008. Starbucks-dominated category wakes up and smells McD’s espresso rollout. Nation’s Res taurant News 42 (3), 1–6. Charles, E. , 2007. In the trenches: Coffee. In the Black, May, 28–31. Clark, N. , 2008. Starbucks: The brand we love to hate. Marketing, 2 April. Coleman-Lochner, L. , Stanford, D. D. , 2008. Starbucks reports ? rst loss since 1992, predicts slower growth. Bloomberg, 30 July. (accessed 29. 08. 08. ). Delaney, B. , 2008. Starbucks to go. Guardian, 30 July. (accessed 29. 08. 08. ). Edwards, V. , Sainsbury, M. , 2008. Weak coffee and large debt stir Starbucks’ troubles in Australia. The Australian, 31 July. Euromonitor, 2006. Starbucks Ups Expansion Plans. Euromonitor International. Euromonitor, 2007. Starbucks Corp – Consumer Foodservice – World. Euromonitor International. Euromonitor, 2008a. On-trade Watch: Identifying Key Growth Markets to 2012. Euromonitor International. Euromonitor, 2008b. Company Watch: Starbucks Wakes Up and Smells the Coffee. Euromonitor International. Euromonitor, 2008c. Coffee – Australia. Euromonitor International. Euromonitor, 2008d. Impulse Food and Drink Channels – Coffee – Australia. Euromonitor International. Grove, S. , Fisk, R. , John, J. , 2000. Services as theater. In: Swartz, T. , Iacobucci, D. (Eds. ), Handbook of Services Marketing and Management. Sage Publications, CA, pp. 21–35. Hollander, S. , 1960. The wheel of retailing. Journal of Marketing 25 (1), 37–42. Hota, M. , 2008. Starbucks: brewing more than just coffee. European Case Clearing House (ECCC), 508-025-1. Karolefski, J. , 2002. Conquering new grounds. BrandChannel, 11 February. (accessed 29. 08. 08. ). Kiviat, B. , 2008. Wake up and sell the coffee. Time South Paci? c (Australia/New Zealand edition) 7 (13), 52–56. Klein, N. , 2000. No Logo. Flamingo, London. Lee, H. , 2003. Japan: a nation of coffee lovers. Euromonitor International. Lee, H. , 2004. Coffee brews a future in China? Euromonitor International. Lindhe, J. , 2008. One skinny cap to go. Business Review Weekly, 7 August. (accessed 15. 08. 08. ). Lovelock, C. , Patterson, P. G. , Walker, R. , 2007. Services Marketing: An Asia Paci? c and Australian Perspective. Pearson Education, Singapore. Martin, S. , 2008. Starbucks: a study in liberal failure, Part II. Conservatism Today, 29 July. (accessed 29. 08. 08. ). Mescall, J. , 2008. Starbucks in Australia: where did it go wrong? Unleashed, 7 August. (accessed 29. 08. 08. ). Mintz, J. , 2008. Starbucks closing 600 stores in the US. International Business Times, 1 July. (accessed 14. 09. 08. ). Muthukumar, R. , Jain, S. , 2008. Starbucks suffers: Schultz returns. European Case Clearing House (ECCC), 308-152-1. Palmer, D. , 2008. Starbucks: what went wrong? AFN Thought for Food, 31 July. (accessed 29. 08. 08. ). Schultz, H. , Yang, D. J. , 1997. Pour Your Heart into It: How Starbucks Build a Company One Cup at a Time. Hyperia Publishing, New York. Shoebridge, N. , 2008. Local palate bucks another US retailer. The Australian Financial Review, 4 August. (accessed 15. 08. 08. ). Uncles, M. D. , 2008. Aroma Australia Pty Ltd goes to Japan. In: Schiffman, L. , Bednall, D. , O’Cass, A. , Paladino, A. , Ward, S. , Kanuk, L. (Eds. ), Consumer Behaviour, fourth ed. Pearson Education Australia, Australia, pp. 584–588. Wailes, N. , 2008. Taste of defeat for the mugs from Starbucks. Sydney Morning Herald 31 (July).

Wednesday, March 4, 2020

Moon Jellyfish Facts

Moon Jellyfish Facts The moon jellyfish (Aurelia aurita) is a common jelly that is easily recognized by its four horseshoe-shaped gonads, which are visible through the top of its translucent bell. The species gets its common name for the way its pale bell resembles a full moon. Fast Facts: Moon Jellyfish Scientific Name: Aurelia auritaCommon Names: Moon jellyfish, moon jelly, common jellyfish, saucer jellyBasic Animal Group: InvertebrateSize: 10-16 inchesLifespan: 6 months as an adultDiet: CarnivoreHabitat: Tropical and subtropical oceansPopulation: AbundantConservation Status: Not Evaluated Description The moon jellyfish has a translucent 10 to 16 inch bell with a fringe of short tentacles. The tentacles are lined with nematocysts (stinging cells). Most moon jellies have four horseshoe-shaped gonads (reproductive organs), but a few have three or five. The bell and gonads may be translucent white, pink, blue, or purple, depending on the animals diet. The jellyfish has four fringed oral arms that are longer than its tentacles. Habitat and Range The species lives in tropical and subtropical oceans worldwide. It is common along the Atlantic coast of North America and Europe. Moon jellyfish frequent coastal and epipelagic areas (top layer of the ocean) and can survive the lower salinity of estuaries and bays. Diet and Behavior The moon jellyfish is a carnivore that feeds on zooplankton, including protozoa, diatoms, eggs, crustaceans, mollusks, and worms. The jelly is not a strong swimmer, mainly using its short tentacles to stay near the water surface. Plankton get trapped in the mucus coating the animal and passed via cilia into its oral cavity for digestion. Moon jellyfish absorb their own tissue and shrink if they are starved. They grow to their normal size when food becomes available. Although water currents group jellyfish together, they live solitary lives. Scientists believe jellyfish may communicate with one another using chemicals released into the water. The jellyfish life cycle includes both sexual and asexual phases. Dorling Kindersley / Getty Images Reproduction and Offspring The jellyfish life cycle has a sexual and asexual component. Each adult (called a medusa) is either male or female. In the open ocean, jellyfish release sperm and eggs into the water. Fertilized eggs develop and grow in the water as planula for a few days before attaching to the sea floor and growing into polyps. The polyp resembles an upside down medusa. Polyps asexually bud off clones that develop into mature medusae. In the wild, Aurelia jellyfish reproduce for several months. Near the end of summer, they become susceptible to disease and tissue damage from the exertion of reproduction and diminishing food supplies. Most moon jellyfish probably live about six months, although captive specimens may live many years. Like the immortal jellyfish (Turritopsis dohrnii), the moon jellyfish can undergo lifecycle reversal, essentially growing younger rather than older. Conservation Status The IUCN has not evaluated the moon jelly for a conservation status. The jellyfish are abundant, with adult populations spiking or blooming in July and August. The moon jellyfish thrives in water containing a lower than normal concentration of dissolved oxygen. Dissolved oxygen drops in response to increased temperature or pollution. Jellyfish predators (leatherback turtles and ocean sunfish) cannot tolerate the same conditions, are subject to overfishing and climate change, and may die when they mistakenly eat floating plastic bags that resemble jellies.Thus, jellyfish numbers are expected to grow. Moon jellyfish blooms in summer have environmental causes and consequences. Michael Nolan / Getty Images Moon Jellyfish and Humans Moon jellyfish are consumed as food, especially in China. The species is of concern because an overabundance of the jellies significantly decreases plankton levels. People frequently encounter moon jellyfish because of their abundance and preference for coastal waters. These jellyfish do sting, but their venom is mild and considered harmless. Any clinging tentacles may be rinsed off with salt water. The venom may then be deactivated with heat, vinegar, or baking soda. Sources Arai, M. N. A Functional Biology of Scyphozoa. London: Chapman and Hall. pp. 68–206, 1997. ISBN 978-0-412-45110-2.He, J.; Zheng, L.; Zhang, W.; Lin, Y. Life Cycle Reversal in Aurelia sp.1 (Cnidaria, Scyphozoa). PLoS ONE. 10 (12): e0145314, 2015. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0145314Hernroth, L. and F. Grondahl. On the Biology of Aurelia Aurita. Ophelia. 22(2):189-199, 1983.Shoji, J.; Yamashita, R.; Tanaka, M. Effect of low dissolved oxygen concentrations on behavior and predation rates on fish larvae by moon jellyfish Aurelia aurita and by a juvenile piscivore, Spanish mackerel Scomberomorus niphonius. Marine Biology. 147 (4): 863–868, 2005. doi:10.1007/s00227-005-1579-8Solomon, E. P.; Berg, L. R.; Martin, W. W. Biology (6th ed.). London: Brooks/Cole. pp. 602–608, 2002. ISBN 978-0-534-39175-1.