Response to Kathleen Johnson's Post...

I believe that John Smith should sell off the names of the people that are interested in buying the cars. If he doesn’t want to file for bankruptcy and not lay off the breadwinners of the families of his employees. Selling the names would probably be in everyone’s best interest. John Smith isn’t selling the whole idea he is just selling some potential customers so he can get back on track and not have to lay off any of his employees. But if you read the AMA Statement of Ethics, John Smith needs to take responsibility and deal with his actions. He needs to have respect for both his employees and the customers. I don’t think it would be very ethical to give out the names and numbers of customers, that a company wants to buy. John Smith need to remember that confidentiality is an important aspect for companies; if customers don’t trust you they aren’t going to buy from you and could tell friends/families not to buy from you.  Here are some of the rules I believe apply to this case:

·  Do no harm. This means consciously avoiding harmful actions or omissions by embodying high ethical standards and adhering to all applicable laws and regulations in the choices we make.

·  Foster trust in the marketing system. This means striving for good faith and fair dealing so as to contribute toward the efficacy of the exchange process as well as avoiding deception in product design, pricing, communication, and delivery of distribution.

·  Embrace ethical values. This means building relationships and enhancing consumer confidence in the integrity of marketing by affirming these core values: honesty, responsibility, fairness, respect, transparency and citizenship. 

Along with Honesty, Responsibility and Fairness. 
 What do you think the dilemma is for John Smith? If you were one of the potential customers would you want to be used as a bribe, and be sold out to another company?

Luxury Goods during a economic decline...

With economy not doing so well people still find a need to buy luxury goods!

Economics have many categories for “goods”. “Luxury Goods” are items that people buy more of, as their incomes tend to rise, as opposed to “Necessity goods” like food and shelter, whose demand is unrelated to income. Examples of luxury goods include fine jewelry, expensive sports cars and designer clothing. The Lipstick Effect is the theory that during an economic decline, people buy less costly luxury goods. Instead of buying fur coats, people will buy expensive lipstick. The idea is that people buy luxury goods even during economic hardships; they will just choose goods that have less an impact on their funds. Other less expensive luxury goods besides cosmetics include expensive beer and small gadgets. People don’t seem to care that they are spending there money on useless things, when they should really be saving there money incase something was to happen. Would you be spending your money on “luxury” items if the economy was declining? Why do you think people tend to think this way, that’s its okay to waste money on lipstick instead of bills?

An interesting fact that was attached to this article was that after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on America, lipstick sales DOUBLED.