Failing to Act is Acting to fail

It is interesting and at the same time a pity to read how a company can drive away huge clients and lose money without taking immediate action to tap the source of the problem. I'm speaking about Royal Mail and the strikes which have been on and off since last July. This left a sizable dent on the image of Royal Mail, a reliable postal partner, as well as its bottom line.

Two huge companies, Amazon.co.uk and ebay.co.uk have take action to avoid being caught in the issue both directly and indirectly. Whereas Amazon has decided to act directly (given that it contract the postal provider itself) ebay is using lobbying to try to diminish the impact that such strikes are having on sellers depending on Royal Mail.

It was announced that Amazon is searching an alternative mail partner that will ensure as minimal disruption as possible to its services in the run up to the Christmas period, which is seen as vital after the recession. This could lead to Royal Mail losing a contract of a reported value of about £25 million (Amazon is the second largest client of Royal Mail). Apart from this, one needs to consider the extensive damage that these strikes are having on the brand of Royal Mail. While companies are starting to look at alternatives (which will give a boost to competition), many customers are trying to avoid Royal Mail as it is slow and inefficient.

In my opinion, although the company should not give in to any request made by Unions (who sometimes use strike measures as a threatening tool), it must sit around a table with the representative of its employees and Unions and try to find a solutions as quickly as possible. The sooner this is done the less the harm Royal Mail will suffer...Should it decide to wait and see it might face a higher damage then if it gave in to union request.

P.S. This will be my last article for the next two weeks as I won't be having access to Internet...will see you soon.

Ebay proclaimed innocent...is this the beginning of a new customer driven era?

L'Oreal has sued eBay in the courts of various European countries including Britain, Germany, France, Belgium and Spain over the sale of bogus cosmetics and fragrances carrying the logo of the said brand on it's site. This move was said to be a necessary step to take as the sale of fake items was on the increase on eBay. Negotiations were underway between the two companies to come to a solution on this issue however, the online auctioneer said all talks were suspended as L'Oreal was being unreasonable in it's requests.

The first decision has been pronounced by the British court...Justice Richard David Arnold ruled out the claims of L'Oreal and said that that eBay Europe was not liable for trademark infringements committed by its users. Ebay said that this decision is a one which promotes free competition and will enable users to buy products a very competitive prices on its virtual marketplace.

A similar case in France was left in the hands of both companies to come up with an amicable resolution and gave then until the May 25 to come up with a mediated settlement. Other cases elsewhere in Europe are still pending.

While eBay claimed victory, L'Oreal said the court agreed that eBay could do more to stop trademark infringement. However of the 15 products hand-selected by L'Oreal as evidence against eBay UK, none was proven to be counterfeit. Could this be a strategy to try to safe guard L'Oreal premium pricing strategy and the protection from grey imports? We can just wait and see however it's very difficult to stop the online avalanche and anybody who does not embrace it risks getting overwhelmed.