Principles in Locating Manufacturing Sites

Principles in Locating Manufacturing Sites Wong Wing Man The general principle in locating manufacturing sites is cost minimization. For locating retail services, what is/are the major principle(s) and theories? Particularly, you need to explain the perplexing phenomenon that stores providing similar services (selling similar products) are located very close to each other (even adjacent), forming spatial clusters (e.g., jewelry stores, hotels). What are the spatial-temporal dynamics involved in producing such patterns? Introduction Locating retail services is different from locating manufacturing sites because retailers mainly serve local residents but rarely engage in export trades. Instead of choosing sites with low transport cost, retailers consider distance as a determinant for proximity to market, which represents incentive for consumers to visit. Locational strategies for retail stores are primarily based on profit maximization through increasing market share and business volume. This essay researches three major theories for locating retail services, and investigates the rationale behind spatial clustering of retail stores. Major principles and theories for locating retail services Central place theory describes functional hierarchy of centres based on order of services retailers offer. Considering the distance consumers are willing to travel and basic demand to sustain businesses, Christaller (as cited in Bell et al., 1974) categorized high-order services which have large ‘range’ and high ‘threshold’, in opposition to low-order services. In a regional scale, retail centres with low-order stores such as fast food shops and convenience stores are located closer to each other because consumers of these services have low incentive to travel a long distance. While high-order centres are far apart to secure a larger market for their high ‘threshold’. Within each centre, bid rent theory describes spatial pattern of retail services using the rule of land occupation by the highest bidder. Keen competition for central locations implies occupation by retailers who could afford high land rent, whilst housing and industries are located at outer zones. Low-order retailers occupy central sites inside neighbourhood retail centres, but are pushed towards the periphery in regional centres when higher-order retailers outbid them (Brown, 1992). Co-location of high-order stores such as department stores, women’s apparel and jewelers in core areas gives rise to retail clustering. Spatial clusters of retail stores selling similar services in a micro scale From microeconomic perspective, Hotelling’s (1929) principle of minimum differentiation argues that two homogeneous retailers initially located at opposite ends of market would leapfrog each other to capture the bulk market, which eventually leads to locations adjacent to each other in market centre at equilibrium. Despite support from empirical research, Hotelling’s position is being criticized for incompatibility with the notion that retail stores should be spatially dispersed to maximize market share, and failure to justify spatial clustering for high-order services (Brown, 1992). Addressing risk reducing behaviour of consumers, Wolinsky (1983) modified the principle by explaining the need for consumers to search the market as a result of imperfect market information. Retail clusters are more attractive to consumers than isolated store because asymmetric information on quality and availability of goods encourages comparison shopping. Retailers offering similar servic es locate in close proximity to benefit from agglomeration economies, which creates additional demand and reduces operating cost to outweigh potential loss from more intense competition. Relaxing assumptions in classical models to allow multi-purpose shopping behaviour, Ãâ€"ner Larsson (2014) also explains the clustering of stores selling complementary services. Spatial-temporal dynamics involved in spatial clusters As economy grows and city expands over time, spatial pattern of retail services change. The classical retail succession model which divides city areas into central, middle and outer zones predicts that retail cluster at central zone would gradually transform from low to high order retail stores under development pressure and rising land rent (Brown, 1992). At the newly expanded suburb, residential patterns changes as household size declines, bringing more low-order services and convenience stores cluster to satisfy single families’ needs (Jones Simmons, 1990). Although classical models explain well for small retailers in post-war period, rapid growth of large retailers creates new dynamics in retail locations. Central and neighbourhood business districts with no pre-set format are gradually transformed into planned shopping centres which entail higher rent (Burnaz Topà §u, 2006). The clustering pattern is no longer explained solely by agglomeration economies but also centra l management of store location in malls, and domination of large chained-brands which could afford skyrocketing commercial rent (Lovreta et al., 2013). Conclusion Retail locations in a macro level are primarily determined by central place theory and bid rent theory. The former describes spatial dispersion of retail service centres, while the latter portrays intra-urban spatial pattern for various retail types. In micro level, the principle of minimum differentiation incorporating consumers’ risk reducing behaviour is essential in explaining agglomeration economies as a motivation for spatial clusters of retailers selling similar or complementary services. Although classical approach is still supported by empirical research, it is indispensable to address spatial-temporal dynamics since retail structure evolves tremendously during economic and demographic transitions. Retail clustering becomes a composite effect of agglomeration economies alongside mall’s management decisions and large retailers’ domination. References:   (APA 6th Style Referencing) Bell, T.L., Lieber, S.R., Rushton, G. (1974). Clustering of Services in Central Places. Annals of the Association of American Geographers. Vol.64, No.2. Brown, S. (1992). Retail Location: A Micro-Scale Perspective. England: Avebury, Ashgate Publishing Limited. Burnaz, S. Topà §u, Y. Ä °. (2006). A Multiple-Criteria Decision-making Approach for the Evaluation of Retail Location. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis. 14: 67–76. DOI: 10.1002/mcda.401 Hotelling, H. (1929). Stability in Competition. The Economic Journal. Vol. 39, No. 153, 41-57. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2224214 Jones, K. Simmons, J. (1990). Location, Location, Location – Analyzing the Retail Environment. Ontario, Canada: Nelson Canada. Lovreta, S., MiloÃ… ¡eviĆ¡, S. StankoviĆ¡, L. (2013). Competition Policy and Optimal Retail Network Development in Transitional Economies. Economic Annals. Volume LVIII, No. 199. DOI: 10.2298/EKA1399057L Ãâ€"ner, Ãâ€". Larsson, J. P. (2014). Location and co-location in retail: a probabilistic approach using geo-coded data for metropolitan retail markets. The Annals of Regional Science. Vol.52(2), 385-408. DOI: 10.1007/s00168-014-0591-7 Ãâ€"ner, Ãâ€". Larsson, J. P. (2014). Which retail services are co-located?. International Journal of Retail Distribution Management. Vol. 42, Iss 4, 281-297. DOI: 10.1108/IJRDM-11-2012-0105 Wolinsky, A. (1983). Retail Trade Concentration due to Consumers’ Imperfect Information. The Bell Journal of Economics. Vol. 14, No. 1, 275-282. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3003554

Crossing: Fiction and Story Essay

When we hear the title â€Å"Crossing† it will give us a feeling of someone who is still crossing something. This is due to the ing-form because this form will always give us a feeling of an uncompleted or unfinished action. The short story â€Å"Crossing† is by Mark Slouka who is an American novelist and critic. A relationship between a father and a son is the starting point of the story but it has many other angles too. We live in a post-modern society which means we break a lot of traditional norms and we are beyond the scope of fixed boundaries. Many signs indicate that the main character of this story is a modern man too. The modern man is a father of a little boy and is divorced with the child’s mum. It seems very clear that he is the reason to their divorce which can be seen in this quotation: â€Å"when he looked at her she shook her head and looked away and at that moment he thought, maybe—maybe he could make this right. † ( P. 2, ll. 19-20). The man is very depressed which is probably because of the divorce. He wants to make it up and he cares a lot about his child which is mentioned in the two following quotations below: â€Å"†¦when the boy came running into the living room he threw him over his shoulder, careful not to hit his head on the corner of the TV†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (P. 2, ll. 16-17) †It would take a little while, but he’d be able to see him the whole time. † (P. 3, ll. 44-45) Both of the quotations show us that he is a caring father and this can also be the reason to, why he wants to make it up with his ex-wife. The father wants to pass his childhood memories on to his child and one of them is jaunts to the river with his own father and these jaunts mean a lot to him and it’s why he wants to pass the memories on. When they arrive to the place with the river and the barn he realise that the river is bigger than he has expected. He considers to cancel the jaunt but he says that he has nowhere else to go. This consideration can be a symbol of that he is in a middle of something in his life which means that he can’t turn back but that he has to look forward. It can probably be in the connection with his relationship. He is in the middle of their problem and he can’t go back in time and make it up but he can look forward and hope for the best. The barn on the other side of the river is described in a very strange way. It is compared to rib cage and skeleton but in between these strange descriptions, the place is also described as a wonderful place with, for instance herds of elk. During the whole story, we get the feeling of that something really bad is going to happen because of the suspense composition. This composition is only possible with particular settings in the story. Rain, mist, the strange barn and other depressive and strange settings are all sign of that something bad is on its way. At one point the situation gets really bad and the river is about to swallow the man and his child, the river is personified which can be seen in the following quote: †The river. It wanted to be whole, unbroken. It wanted him gone. He could see it, forming and re-forming, thick-walled jade, smoothing out its sides with its thumbs like a hypnotized potter. † (ll. 134-145) The sad mood during the whole story can be a symbol of his life and how he feels when he is alone without his wife. The themes of the story are therefore absolutely loneliness and phase change, because he is about to pass/go into a new phase in his life. All the characters are mentioned as anonym persons, which means nobody in the story has a name. The characters are therefore not individual persons but they are reduced roles in the man’s life. The narrator of the story knows how the man feels , what he thinks and as reader we see everything from his perspective. This kind of narrator is called third person limited narrator and the man’s point of view. It’s called limited narrator because we are not allowed to hear the boy’s thoughts and feelings. The end of the story is open which means the reader has no idea what is going on and it’s up to the reader to decide which ending the story will match. This is also the reason for the title â€Å"crossing†. As a reader you will not know what is going on after the story ends. Slouka, the author leave the characters in the river in between the secure, the wonderful place and the insecure, dangerous river. This could be the symbol of the man’s life. He has to pass many bad things to get a better life as he has before. The man is a clear sign of a modern man, who is divorced with his wife, he can’t complete his jaunt with his son and he has to fight to get a better life.

Mrs. Meier

Citation: Zelma M. Mitchell v. Lovington Good Samaritan Center, 555 NM 2d, 696 (1976) Facts: Mrs. Mitchell was terminated from her position at Lovington good Samaritan Center because of an argument that broke out with the director of the center, Mr. Smith, and the Director of nursing, Mrs. Stroope. It is said by the company that Mrs. Mitchell was terminated for alleged misconduct. After the termination Mrs. Mitchell applied for unemployment compensation and was denied. She appealed the case and was then awarded the benefits. After being awarded the benefits the defendant in the case appealed the court’s decision to give Mrs. Mitchell the benefits and they reversed that decision and the benefits were taken from Mrs. Mitchell. She again appealed the decision of the courts. Ultimately with the definition of â€Å"misconduct† take Issues: The issue in the case is that there is a back and forth story in what misconduct is and what happen the day Mrs. Mitchell was terminated. The defendant’s case is a history of misconduct and the plaintiff is thinking only about the day she was terminated. Mr. Smith is saying that the incident where Mrs. Mitchell called himself and Mrs. Stroope â€Å"Birdbrains† was the last straw. Rule: In order to establish misconduct the defendant must prove the Mrs. Mitchell was â€Å"evincing such willful or complete disregard of the employer’s interests as is found in deliberate violations or disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has the right to expect of his employee, or in carelessness or negligence of such degree or recurrence as to manifest equal culpability, wrongful intent or evil design or to show an intentional and substantial disregard of the employer’s interests or of the employee’s duties and obligations to his employer. Analysis: The courts found that with the definition of misconduct adopted into the system that Mrs. Mitchell’s acts were in fact constituted as misconduct. Starting with her insubordination, improper attire, name calling and other actions evinced blatant disregard to the way the center was ran and handled on a day to day basis. Conclusion: After the appeals of Mrs. Mitchell and Lovington Good Samari tan center, the decision of the commission to have Mrs. Mitchell’s benefits revoked was reinstated. Analogizing/Distinguishing- A similarity in the two cases is they are both applying for unemployment benefits and they were both fired for misconduct also they were both originally denied for benefits and they are both appealing the decision. The differences in the case are Mrs. Mitchell was terminated for not respecting the higher above and not doing her job when asked. Mrs. Attired was terminated for getting a visible tattoo when warned she should not do so. When asked to get the tattoo removed she chose not to and is now terminated from her position. Application to Client’s Facts- The facts in this case that could be applied to my case are that she did continuously pass the evaluations and was a good employee always had stuff to work on but never enough for the owner to terminate the client until â€Å"the last straw† which in this case is the tattoo and in my case was the disrespect in calling the operator a â€Å"bird brains†. Citation: Billie J. Rodman v. New Mexico Employment security department and Presbyterian Hospital, 764 NM 2d, 1316 (1988) Facts: The plaintiff Billie has been terminated from her job of 8 years for misconduct. She has been denied unemployment benefits because she was terminated for misconduct. She is appealing the decision from the district court to revoke benefits. It is said that over the years of her working at the Presbyterian Hospital she had received 3 corrective action notices. Prior to the termination, restrictions had been placed on Rodman’s conduct due to personal problems impacting her and the people she worked with. Rodman was reprimanded in June of 1986 for receiving to many personal telephone calls and personal visitors at her work station. They were disruptive to her work and the work of her co-workers. The formal reprimand informed Rodman that she was to no longer receive personal telephone calls and/or visitors during work hours. Unless it was at a designated break or dinner time, if she were to have visitors at break or dinner time they could not be visible to patients, co-workers, or the doctors in the hospital. After the reprimand extremely disruptive telephone calls and visits continued. Leading up to the day Rodman was terminated. Rodman was to make every effort to resolve the personal issues in her life so they would not affect her at work. Issues: At issue is whether the misconduct Mrs. Rodman is accused of warranted termination from employment at the hospital rose to the level of misconduct which would warrant denial of unemployment compensation under NMSA 1978, Section 51–1–7 of the Unemployment Compensation Law. Rule: In order to establish misconduct the defendant must prove that Billie Rodman was â€Å"evincing such willful or complete disregard of the employer’s interests as is found in deliberate violations or disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has the right to expect of his employee, or in carelessness or negligence of such degree or recurrence as to manifest equal culpability, wrongful intent or evil design or to show an intentional and substantial disregard of the employer’s interests or of the employee’s duties and obligations to her employer. After being reprimanded 3 times and the behavior continuing, the hospital had proof that the actions were documented and the plaintiff was warned they had no choice but to terminate said employee. Analysis: The court found with the evidence provided from the hospital that Mrs. Rodman was reprimanded and warned as the policy states. The hospital put up with the actions of Mrs. Rodman long enough, they had no choice but to terminate Mrs. Rodman After the disregard of the policy. The plaintiff continued with the behavior she was reprimanded for. Conclusion: Although the evidence in the case is amendable to more than one conclusion it is concluded that there was a substantial basis for the District Court to decide that the Plaintiff is not to receive unemployment benefits. Analogizing/Distinguishing- Citation: Its Burger Time Inc. v. New Mexico Department of Labor Employment security department board of review & Lucy Apodaca, 769 NM, 2d, 88 (1989) Facts: Lucy was terminated from her position at Its Burger time Inc. because of misconduct. Lucy came into work one day with purple tinted hair. She had previously asked her store manager John Pena how Mr. McGrath the owner of the cooperation would feel about it. Mr. Pena said he would ask he never asked and Lucy decided to dye her hair. Mr. McGrath sees the purple hair on Lucy and asked Mr. Pena to relay a message to her that she had a week to decide if she wanted her purple hair or her job. Lucy decided not to change her hair color and in doing so she was fired for misconduct. Mr. McGrath stated that it would affect the prosperity of his business. Lucy had no history of issues in the past year she had worked there and in the few days she was there with her purple hair there were no complaints from customers. A few times Lucy even received compliments on her hair color. Issues: The issue in this case is that the company terminated Lucy because of misconduct. According to the definition of misconduct Lucy choosing to keep her hair purple was not misconduct. The company gave Lucy an ultimatum and she chose to keep her hair purple. Rule: In order to establish misconduct the Plaintiff in this case must prove that Lucy was â€Å"evincing such willful or complete disregard of the employer’s interests as is found in deliberate violations or disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has the right to expect of his employee, or in carelessness or negligence of such degree or recurrence as to manifest equal culpability, wrongful intent or evil design or to show an intentional and substantial disregard of the employer’s interests or of the employee’s duties and obligations to her employer. On the other hand mere inefficiency, unsatisfactory conduct, failure in good performance as the result of inability or incapacity, inadvertencies or ordinary negligence in isolated instances, or good faith errors in judgment or discretion are not to be deemed ‘misconduct’ within the meaning of the statute. † In this case Lucy did not commit misconduct in any way she made a choice to color her hair and the company could not prove with documentation of policies or past problems that Lucy was a burden to the company. Analysis: The courts found that Lucy was terminated from the company for misconduct, but the company could not prove that she had committed misconduct. She had never had any problems in the past, she asked permission, and decided that she would dye her hair when given the ultimatum she choose to keep her hair purple. That is not what misconduct when given the definition. Conclusion: The district court is reversed and the decision of the Commission is reinstated. Lucy is now able to receive her unemployment benefits.

The History of Root Beer and Inventor Charles Hires

According to his biography, Philadelphia pharmacist Charles Elmer Hires discovered a recipe for a delicious tisane—a form of herbal tea—while on his honeymoon in New Jersey. Not long after, he began selling a dry version of the tea blend but it had to be mixed with water, sugar, and yeast and left to ferment for the carbonation process to take place. On the suggestion of his friend Russell Conwell (founder of Temple University), Hires began working on a liquid formulation for a carbonated root beer beverage that would be more appealing to the masses. The result was a combination of more than 25 herbs, berries, and roots that Hires used to flavor carbonated soda water. At Conwells urging, Hires introduced his version of root beer to the public at the 1876 Philadelphia Centennial exhibition. Hires Root Beer was a hit. In 1893, the Hires family first sold and distributed bottled root beer. The History of Root Beer While Charles Hires and his family contributed greatly to the popularity of modern root beer, its origins can be traced to pre-colonial times during which indigenous tribes commonly created beverages and medicinal remedies from sassafras roots. Root beer as we know it today is descended from small beers, a collection of beverages (some alcoholic, some not) concocted by American colonists using what they had at hand. The brews varied by region and were flavored by locally grown herbs, barks, and roots. Traditional small beers included birch beer, sarsaparilla, ginger beer, and root beer. Root beer recipes of the era contained different combinations of ingredients such as allspice, birch bark, coriander, juniper, ginger, wintergreen, hops, burdock root, dandelion root, spikenard, pipsissewa, guaiacum chips, sarsaparilla, spicewood, wild cherry bark, yellow dock, prickly ash bark, sassafras root, vanilla beans, hops, dog grass, molasses, and licorice. Many of these ingredients are still used in root beer today, along with added carbonation. There is no single recipe for root beer. Fast Facts: Top Root Beer Brands If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then Charles Hires would have a lot to feel flattered about. The success of his commercial root beer sales soon inspired competition. Here are some of the most notable root beer brands.A W: In 1919, Roy Allen bought a root beer recipe and began marketing his beverage in Lodi, California. A year later, Allen partnered with Frank Wright to form AW Root Beer. In 1924, Allen bought his partner out and obtained a trademark for the brand that is now the top-selling root beer in the world.Barqs: Barqs Root Beer debuted in 1898. It was the creation of Edward Barq, who along with his brother Gaston were the principals of the  Barqs Brothers Bottling Company founded in the New Orleans French Quarter in 1890. The brand is still owned by the Barqs family but is currently manufactured and distributed by the Coca-Cola Company.Dads: The recipe for Dads Root Beer was created by Ely Klapman and Barney Berns in the basement of Klapmans Chicago-area ho me in the late 1930s. It was the first product to make use of the six-pack packaging  format invented by the Atlanta Paper Company in the 1940s.Mug Root Beer: Mug Root Beer was originally marketed as â€Å"Belfast Root Beer† during the 1940s by the Belfast Beverage Company. The product name was later changed to Mug Old Fashioned Root Beer, which was then shortened to Mug Root Beer. Currently manufactured and distributed by PepsiCo, Mugs brand mascot is a bulldog named â€Å"Dog.† Root Beer and Health Concerns In 1960, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration banned the use of sassafras as a potential carcinogen. Sassafras is one of the main flavoring ingredients in root beer. However, it was determined that the potentially dangerous element of the plant was found only in the oil. Once a method to extract the harmful oil from the sassafras was found, sassafras could continue to be used without harmful repercussions. As with other soft drinks, classic root beer is classified by the scientific community as a sugar-sweetened beverage or SSB. Studies have linked SSBs to a number of health concerns including obesity, hypertension, Type 2 diabetes, and tooth decay. Even non-sweetened beverages, if consumed in too great a quantity, have the potential for negatively impacting health.