Master Business Administration (MBA)

Yazılımcıların Yaş İlerledikçe Güncel Kalması

Yaş ilerledikçe yazılımcılar yavaşlama hissedebilirler. Bu konuda kazandıkları tecrübenin yavaşlayamayı kapatabileceği söyleniyor. Aynı şey bence yönetici/idari kadro için de geçerli.

Your experience will make up for slowing down.

Şirketin Misyon ve Vizyonu

Misyon ve vizyon şirketlerin olmazsa olmaz şeylerindendir.

Örnekler
Vizyon :
- Dünya çağında bir oyuncu olmak
Misyon :
- Sürekli iyileştirme yaparak sürdürülebilir başarı elde etmek

İş Dünyasında Başarısızlık Örnekleri

Örnek - Atari'nin Ev Bilgisayalarında Para Kaybetmesi
Fiyatta rekabet edememek en büyük sıkıntılardan birisi. 1982 yılında ev bilgisayarlarındaki pazar büyümektedir ve Atari'de bu pazara girmek istemektedir.

Atari's future may lie with its home computer division. The market for home - as opposed to small-business computers - has taken off this year and Atari has seen its sales quadruple, to an estimated $300 million. Yet the division is still losing money, perhaps $25 million $50 million this year.

Ancak rakiplerine fiyat olarak pahalı kalmaktadır. Atari'nin başına gelenlerin açıklaması şöyle.

In 1982 the original 400 and 800 were on the market. These were expensive machines to implement. Even the low-cost 400 was significantly more complex and expensive than something like a VIC-20.

Say what you will about the VIC-20, it was cheap. And it proved that the #1 selling point for a computer was its price. And then came the 64. So as Commodore started to crush Atari in the market, Atari responded by lowering its prices and preparing a new high-end machine to differentiate itself.

So basically it was due to the attempt to keep product flowing into a market that was rapidly moving down the price scale. This has killed lots of companies and will in the future too.

Bu tür sıkıntıların yaşanmasına sebep olarak teknik kapasite olmasına rağmen, yönetimin doğru ürün kararı alamaması gösterilir. Atari'nin başına gelenlerin açıklaması şöyle.

It is difficult to understand how Atari got itself into this situation. They were aware, from the start, that the FCC shielding that drove up the costs were a significant problem. There were also concerns about the price of the SIO. And by 1981, the complexity of the motherboard could be greatly reduced. And the company had purchasing power far in advance of even Commodore, they sold 8 million 2600s in 1982 alone.

Now any competent management should have had a back-burner project to take advantage of these changes, but it seems Atari didn't even start considering such changes until early 1982. At that point, the VIC was eating their lunch. This is not a technical issue; the 600XL could have been in the market and would have been significantly more cost-effective than the 400.

I assume they simply got distracted by the success of the 2600. It seems like a massive waste of talent.

Özellikle uzun vadeli plan yapılmazsa bu tür sonuçlar görülebilir.

The disease that killed Atari was clueless management who prioritized short-term sales of shoddy products over a long-term strategy of ensuring quality and value.

Arbitrage (Arbitraj) Nedir?

Açıklaması şöyle. Fiyat farkından faydalanarak kar etme demektir.

Arbitraj fiyat farklarından yararlanmak amacıyla para, kıymetli maden, tahvil ve hisse senedi alıp satma işlemidir. Farklı piyasalarda aynı menkul kıymetler için farklı denge fiyatları oluşmuş olması durumunda, menkul kıymetlerin ucuz olduğu piyasadan alınarak daha pahalı olduğu piyasada satılmasıdır.

Örnek

Bir örnek şöyle. Transaction cost arbitrajı etkiler.

Assume a store is fairly pricing a bottle of water at $1. Now another store is pricing the same bottle of water for $1.2. Assuming it is possible, you can buy the water at the first store, end sell it to the second store for a $0.2 risk-less profit, as a consequence forcing him to lower the price to $1. At this point you no longer arbitrage.

Now assume instead that the second store is a long journey away, costing you $0.1 in petrol (transaction cost). Hence, you will only buy from the cheap store and sell to the expensive store as long as you make money from it. Initially you make 1.2-(1+0.1) = $0.1 a bottle, but the more you arbitrage the more the second store will lower their price. In fact, they will lower it until you stop, which occurs when the price is $1.10 (you make zero profit).

So including costs will widen the bounds for where there is no arbitrage, simply because no one can bother making pennies when they are eaten up by costs.

Marginal Cost Pricing Nedir? - İlave Üretim Maliyeti

Şöyle bir örnek verilebilir. Burada marginal ilave anlamına geliyor. İlave üretimin getirdiği maliyet fiyatına satış diyebilir sanırım ? Böylece toptan zarar edileceğine en azından bir kısmı sabit işletme maliyeti çıkar

Thinking at the margin works for business decisions as well. Consider an airline deciding how much to charge passengers who fly standby. Suppose that flying a 200-seat plane across the United States costs the airline $100,000. In this case, the average cost of each seat is $100,000/200, which is $500. One might be tempted to conclude that the airline should never sell a ticket for less than $500. But a rational airline can increase its profits by thinking at the margin. Imagine that a plane is about to take off with 10 empty seats and a standby passenger waiting at the gate is willing to pay $300 for a seat. Should the airline sell the ticket? Of course, it should. If the plane has empty seats, the cost of adding one more passenger is tiny. The average cost of flying a passenger is $500, but the marginal cost is merely the cost of the bag of peanuts and can of soda that the extra passenger will consume. As long as the standby passenger pays more than the marginal cost, selling the ticket is profitable.

Zararına Satış

Açıklaması şöyle. Rafta malzeme tutmak daha da pahalıya mal oluyor. Bu yüzden zararına bile olsa satış olabiliyor.

... holding onto inventory is very expensive. You have to pay for warehousing of the good, it takes the spot of some other inventory that might be in high demand. Food is also perishable so it cannot be stored indefinitely.

Stores have to always guess what demand for their products will be, sometimes they get it wrong and order excess inventory. It can often be more profitable to sell excess inventory below the production cost or many times even just to throw it away to make space for new products. Holding onto it would be a sunk-cost fallacy. The costs are already incurred in the past, even if they were a result of a mistake it does not make sense to try to double down on the mistake and hold onto them. It is more profitable to ignore the sunk-costs of getting them and make new decisions of what to do with the inventory based on new information.