Teleworking - still a pipe dream?"

Posted to The Age (12/11/2012) on 13/11/2012 at 11:19 AM
Commenting on "Teleworking - still a pipe dream?"
http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/computers/blogs/gadgets-on-the-go/teleworking--still-a-pipe-dream-20121112-297eq.html

If everyone works from home, the economy will come to a complete stand still. All the commercial buildings will be vacant, and every town and city landscape will be completely changed, devoid of human soul. While we cannot bury our heads in the sand and stop progress, it is illogical to make such broad statement.

Online shopping will soon be a norm for many people, but the warehouses need to be stocked, and surely the items cannot be produced virtually on a computer except on a real machine manned by human on location. The raw materials and finished products need to be transported, and trucks require drivers.

How can people move the wheat fields to the house, or grow all the fruit and vegetables in their backyard? For meat lovers, do they rear chickens and other animals in their apartments? Oh yes, what about the garbage collectors; how do you expect them to collect the waste and dispose of it remotely?

What one must keep in mind is that if the job can be done in a Melbourne or Australian home office, it can be done much cheaper in other countries remotely.

The ugly side of online shopping (Part 2 of 2 Parts)

Posted to The Age (11/4/2012) on 11/4/2012 at 9:06 PM
Commenting on "The ugly side of online shopping"
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/the-ugly-side-of-online-shopping-20120411-1wq5q.html

The new Australian Consumer Laws are not helping the small business operators, especially on refund and return of items. Many unscrupulous "purchasers" have been misusing such loophole which is a better option than hiring the item. Items are “purchased” but returned to the retailers after the intended uses are satisfied, e.g. a HD TV for football final, expensive gown or hat for a special occasion, an expensive camera to take the wedding photos, etc.

The Federal Labor Government is stupid to the highest degree by not taxing many overseas online purchases. These should incur not only the GST, but also an additional tax called the loss revenue tax. When a retail shop closes its door, not only there is directly loss of employment for the staff, but also loss of rental for the premises owner, utility usage, vibrancy of the surrounding business precinct, unemployed staff’s ability to spend which sets another chain reaction, etc.

End of Part 2 of 2

The ugly side of online shopping (Part 1 of 2 Parts)

Posted to The Age (11/4/2012) on 11/4/2012 at 9:00 PM
Commenting on "The ugly side of online shopping"
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/the-ugly-side-of-online-shopping-20120411-1wq5q.html

Time has changed and so must the retailers. Yes, I’m on the side of the retailers, because I can see that their livelihood is seriously being jeopardised. The price of an item sold includes many costs, and besides the brick-and-mortar cost, the running costs, and a large component is the service cost and the related on-cost for the staff. It is not unreasonable that if service is rendered, even though the item is not purchased, the business operator should have every reason to recoup the service cost incurred.

While Canberra Business Council’s intention may be good, their advice on adjusting to the business cycle is far from satisfactory. Many small business operators do not have the purchasing power and hence the bargaining power. Due to the size of our country, and low population density, cost of product distribution is very high. While the concept of jut-in-time may be appropriate for component usage in large manufacturing companies, this may not work for small ticket items in most retail outlets. The opportunity cost for losing sales will also have negative impact on business good will.

End of Part 1 of 2

Big retailers hammered

Posted to The Age (22/3/2012) on 22/3/2012 at 4:20 PM
Commenting on "Big retailers hammered"
http://www.theage.com.au/business/big-retailers-hammered-20120321-1vkdi.html

Besides online shopping, there are other factors at play. China’s design is no longer dreary and dull. Many designs are comparable to European designs, and accepted by many consumers.

In fact, some big boys are importing directly from China, and by cutting off the many middlemen in between, the retail prices are much cheaper. I can get my jeans from Kmart as a price I used to pay in Hong Kong, minus the heckling.

The consumers’ mentality tends more towards disposable. Long product life cycle seems to be things of the past, whether it is fashion or electronics. It does not seem wise to pay for something overpriced, or costs too much, because soon the product will be out-dated and a new one need to be purchased.

Many take on the will-do attitude these days. Furthermore, there are outlets which sell recycle high-end market fashion at bargain basement price.

The generation that grows up Myers and DJ are now beyond the “used by date”. These yesterday consumers, in fact, can most afford but they do not require as much cosmetics, handbags, hats, fashion, etc.

For consumers who are prepared to pay more to go to these well known establishments, they do expect certain level of services. However, this has been downgraded to what had happened in Hong Kong before SARS struck the island – customers received no service, and the staff were kings / queens.

The Ugly Side of Online Shopping (Part 1 of 2)

Posted to The Age (11/4/2012) on 11/4/2012 at 9:00 PM
Commenting on "The ugly side of online shopping"
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/the-ugly-side-of-online-shopping-20120411-1wq5q.html

Time has changed and so must the retailers. Yes, I’m on the side of the retailers, because I can see that their livelihood is seriously being jeopardised. The price of an item sold includes many costs, and besides the brick-and-mortar cost, the running costs, and a large component is the service cost and the related on-cost for the staff. It is not unreasonable that if service is rendered, even though the item is not purchased, the business operator should have every reason to recoup the service cost incurred.

While Canberra Business Council’s intention may be good, their advice on adjusting to the business cycle is far from satisfactory. Many small business operators do not have the purchasing power and hence the bargaining power. Due to the size of our country, and low population density, cost of product distribution is very high. While the concept of jut-in-time may be appropriate for component usage in large manufacturing companies, this may not work for small ticket items in most retail outlets. The opportunity cost for losing sales will also have negative impact on business good will.

End of Part 1 of 2

Online threat brings high street prices down

Posted to Adelaide Now (29/10/2011) on 29/10/2011 at 5:15 AM
Commenting on “Online threat brings high street prices down”
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/online-threat-brings-high-street-prices-down/story-e6frede3-1226180035831

Just less than 5 decades ago, footwear and clothing industry could not compete with cheap imports; the industry is now almost vanished. The early oil crisis caused the tumble of demand of large cars produced in Australia. Japanese gained strong foothold in Australian car market with less fuel hungry and much cheaper small cars. The Korean followed. The Holden-Ford's domination started to decline.

These and many other manufacturing industries employed a lot of workers, and those were the days no one had any trouble getting a job or two. The continual growth of online shopping will kill off the retail shops; the consequence is a total destruction of Australian shopping centres and cities. The ghosts of unemployment will rise from Hell, creating massive job losses and building ghost towns. If business people don't make money, less people will be employed. Cynically speaking, the one that loses the job could be the one buying all their goodies from online overseas stores.

Retailers told the enemy is within

Posted to The Age (5/8/2011) on 5/8/2011 at 11:48 PM (Not published yet)
Commenting on "Retailers told the enemy is within"
http://www.theage.com.au/national/retailers-told-the-enemy-is-within-20110804-1idm5.html

If everyone boycotts Harvey Norman, Myers, David Jones, JB Hi-Fi, just to name a few large retail outlets, because they charge more to cover costs in employing people, leasing buildings, using utilities, advertising, etc., this will lead to unemployment for many sales staff, tradespeople, property management, service providers, accountants doing tax returns, chefs, waiters, etc. Those who have made savings buying online, if they are still in employment, will eventually pay more taxes to cover the increasing number of welfare recipients.

This stupid and stubborn government fails to take note of the long term repercussion of great exodus of in-shop purchases, and refuses to tax all items purchased from overseas under $1000. At present, the cost of collection of these taxes may be more than the taxes receivable, but the scenario will change very soon as on-line transactions continue to grow. Who will be paying for the shortfall of tax revenue?

This is a double whammy. Just be careful, it could be the online shoppers’ job on the chopping board if this unfair practice is allowed to go on unchecked.

Productivity Commission calls for a shake-up in laws governing retailers

Posted to The Australian (4/8/2011) on 4/8/2011 at 10:06 PM (Not published by Newspaper)
Commenting on "Productivity Commission calls for a shake-up in laws governing retailers"
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/productivity-commission-calls-for-a-shake-up-in-laws-governing-retailers/story-fn59niix-1226108247819

If everyone boycotts Harvey Norman, Myers, David Jones, JB Hi-Fi, just to name a few large retail outlets, because they charge more to cover costs in employing people, leasing buildings, using utilities, advertising, etc., this will lead to unemployment for many sales staff, tradespeople, property management, service providers, accountants doing tax returns, chefs, waiters, etc. Those who have made savings buying online, if they are still in employment, will eventually pay more taxes to cover the increasing number of welfare recipients.

This stubborn government fails to take note of the long term repercussion of great exodus of in-shop purchases, and refuses to tax all items purchased from overseas under $1000. At present, the cost of collection of these taxes may be more than the taxes receivable, but the scenario will change very soon as on-line transactions continue to grow. Who will be paying for the shortfall of tax revenue?

This is a double whammy. Just be careful, it could be the online shoppers’ job on the chopping board if this unfair practice is allowed to go on unchecked.

Online retailers' tax advantages, regulated shopping hours must go

Posted to Adelaide Now (4/8/2011) on 4/8/2011 at 9:44 PM
Commenting on "Online retailers' tax advantages, regulated shopping hours must go - Productivity Commission"
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/online-retailers-tax-advantages-regulated-shopping-hours-must-go-productivity-commission/story-e6frea6u-1226108284276

If everyone boycotts Harvey Norman, Myers, David Jones, JB Hi-Fi, just to name a few large retail outlets, because they charge more to cover costs in employing people, leasing buildings, using utilities, advertising, etc., this will lead to unemployment for many sales staff, tradespeople, property management, service providers, accountants doing tax returns, chefs, waiters, etc. Those who have made savings buying online, if they are still in employment, will eventually pay more taxes to cover the increasing number of welfare recipients.

This stubborn government fails to take note of the long term repercussion of great exodus of in-shop purchases, and refuses to tax all items purchased from overseas under $1000. At present, the cost of collection of these taxes may be more than the taxes receivable, but the scenario will change very soon as on-line transactions continue to grow. Who will be paying for the shortfall of tax revenue?

This is a double whammy. Just be careful, it could be the online shoppers’ job on the chopping board if this unfair practice is allowed to go on unchecked.

Online shopping tax grab delayed by Productivity Commissioner report into retailing

Posted to Herald Sun (4/8/2011) on 4/8/2011 at 6:39 PM
Commenting on "Online shopping tax grab delayed by Productivity Commissioner report into retailing"
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/online-shopping-tax-grab-delayed-by-productivity-commissioner-report-into-retailing/story-e6frf7jo-1226108306696

If everyone boycotts Harvey Norman, Myers, David Jones or JB Hi-Fi just because these outlets charge more for employing people and leasing buildings, there will be unemployment for many sales staff, tradespeople, property management, service providers, etc. Those who have made savings on buying online will eventually pay more on taxes to foot the welfare system.

The stupid and stubborn government refuses to tax all items including those under $1000 purchased from overseas, there will be a reduction of tax revenue. So who will be paying for the shortfall?

This is a double whammy. Just be careful, it could be job on the chopping board if we allow this unfair practice to go on unchecked.