Shareholder vs Stakeholder vs Market Failure’s Model

Business and ethics are often considered as opposite ends of a magnet, one in the means of seeking profit and other with the common assumption of refraining from profit maximization; so the question become is business ethics really an oxymoron? The usual perception of business ethics is very poor and pessimistic as many corporate executives say one thing yet do another. Although the maximization of self-interest and profit seeking is what drives the economy forward, but how should one’s actions be justified, is it ok to do as you wish as long as the law permits?Business managers along with other professionals have sets of ethical codes laid out and are to be followed. There is the bar set in place to monitor the practices of each individual lawyer; medical association for doctors as they perform medicine; and a ring to be worn to constantly remind the engineers of their professionalism and the potential consequences of their work (Heath). Managers on the other hand do not have an association to oversee the decisions they make, whether they are permissible by law or meet the moral obligations.However not having the standards on paper does not mean there aren’t any to be followed. In order to make justification for the type of behaviours business managers have and to outline the appropriate actions they should take, many ethical theories have been developed since. There are three that best represent the key perspectives in this matter; Friedman’s Shareholder theory, Freeman’s Stakeholder theory and Heath’s Market Failure Model of business ethics (Heath).Each of them is the pillars of which many other theories are based on but have very different and opposite views. The Shareholder theory suggests that manager has fiduciary duties to the shareholders only and must maximize profits as long as the law permits. The Stakeholder theory on the other hand suggests that managers have fiduciary duties to all stakeholders whom are positive ly or negatively affected by the decisions of the firm; shareholders are only of the stakeholders and their benefits cannot account for all.The making of one group’s benefits can only be made in conjunction of making all other stakeholders better too; shareholders are no more special than the suppliers, customers, employees and communities. Both the Stakeholder and Shareholder’s theories are biased towards different ends, one suggesting profits to be maximized for one group while the other stating that profits should be common good for all. Furthermore, the Market Failure Model of business ethics comes in between the two, yet containing arguments of both but in revised versions.I will argue in this paper that the Market Failure Model is the one that best describes the causes and effects of the business environment we have today and the role ethics play within it. First, an extraction and analysis of the Market Failure Model will be conducted and be used to explain why it is the best fit for the current business environment and ethics. I will then explain the shortfalls of the Shareholder and Stakeholder theories and why they lack considerations on a broader scope. Market Failure Model Market failure is the situation when the competitive market fails to provide an efficient outcome.In order for an efficient allocation of resources, there must be the absence of externalities, symmetrical information between buyers and sellers, insurance markets, and utility maximizing agents whom are rational when making decisions (Heath). However in the real world, the above conditions are rarely met and thus the idea of a perfect market becomes only ideal in theory but impractical in reality. In response to such failure in the market, two corrective phenomenons exist. The first being the creation of corporations which is organized in a system of hierarchy.Managers have fiduciary duty to follow legal as well as moral constraints to achieve profit maximization for members in the hierarchy, in this case the shareholders. Moreover, in order to achieve the highest profits for anyone in the market, they will need to compete in prices as well as product innovation. Many historical scenarios has proven that competition leads to economic advancements where without it would result in economic stagnation. China and India had been communist states in the past where there were minimum price competition and product innovations, the government had full control and attempted to effectively allocate resources.However such intervention only led to full economic stagnation and poverty for its people. By the late 80s, both the Chinese and India government returned control to the market itself where competition for profit resumed and thus the economies began to advance and has brought prosperity upon its people. This not only proved profit seeking, price competition in the market is rather healthy for the economy but also concluded that government interventions in the market can create unneeded deadweight loss.The second response to Market Failure involves preservation of the market transaction and is subject to legal and regulatory constraints (Heath). In a competing market, there are various strategies firms may take to maximize their profits. Strategies that involve only of lower prices, better quality and product innovation that would exist in perfect completion are referred to as preferred strategies whereas the ones involving pollution, misleading advertising, sale of products with hidden defects are called non-preferred strategies (Heath).From the Market Failure’s perspective, the ethical firms will refrain from using non-preferred strategies even if they are allowable by the loophole of the law and regulations. These firms seek non-preferred strategies because they bring easy and quick forms of profits, but it is also short lasting. â€Å"Misleading advertising stands to false advertising as deception does to fraud† (Heath). When firms adopt misleading advertisement for its products, it will bring short term profits before consumers realize they are being deceived.However when consumers do acknowledge the unethical behaviours of the business, they will switch products and by the word of mouth spread unfavourable comments of the firm; thus in the long run, such business behaviour is not practical as bad reputation leads to loss of sales and eventual closedown of operations. Profit seeking often bears negative conceptions due to the frequent exploitation of the market and flaws of the legal and regulatory systems.These firms fail to consider the moral obligations they must also endure. The analogy between â€Å"orporate social responsibility† and â€Å"Good sportsmanship† effectively compares and applies such concept. Having good sportsmanship does not only include not breaking the rules of the game but also refraining from exploiting the loopholes and flaws of the regulations. Taki ng basketball for example, unavoidable physical contact will occur during the game; however one should avoid purposely injuring other players just to win.Although certain teams do adopt such tactics like those firms using non-preferred strategies to make money, but most top ranked teams along with the most reputable firms still win by applying only of the preferred strategies. Attack on Shareholder’s Theory Milton Friedman’ Shareholder theory argues that there is a fiduciary relationship between the managers and shareholders; managers by all means possible and permissible by law, must maximize profits (Friedman). However recent corporate scandals proof otherwise.The case of Enron for example, where corporate CEO and president along with other top executives engaged in a sequence of deception behaviours to achieve the maximum profit, not for shareholders but for themselves. Even on the verge of bankruptcy, these top managers froze the shares held by common shareholders so they could sell out all their shares while everyone else will suffer the drop in price. This proved the willingness to break the law never mind moral obligations, in order to maximize the self-interests of the managers themselves.It is mistaken to trust the strength of the fiduciary relationship between managers and shareholders where the shareholders are without protection. One may argue that shareholders can simply fire the irresponsible manager, but as Enron proves, these managers can easily cheat shareholders without being found out until it is too late. Another shortfall of the Shareholder theory is the inconsideration for others who are also affected by the firm’s decisions. Lockean argues that shareholders are entitled to the profits as employee deserves their wages, but it is unconvincing because it only defines the legal obligations but not the moral (Heath). We have no legal obligation to give but do not mean we have no moral obligation to give to charity†( Heath) This quote from Heath suggests that even though it is not by law that we must be moral and has concerns for other, but it doesn’t mean there aren’t any moral and ethical codes to be followed. Attack on Stakeholder Theory The Stakeholder theory compared to the Shareholder theory argues that managers have fiduciary duties to everyone who are affected by decisions of the firm, including suppliers, customers, employees and many others (Freeman).It is true that consideration for these stakeholders are important when making business decisions however it doesn’t mean managers have fiduciary duties to all. Managers in corporations are trusted directly of property rights of shareholders with no alternatives and minimum protection against uncertainties. Suppliers, customers, employees and other stakeholder on the other hand have the ability to choose whether they are to be affected by the corporation.If suppliers refuse to agree to conditions and prices offered by firm, they may wish to supply to other firms instead; when customers refuse to pay for certain products or cannot agree to values (values referred to the corporate operations and its effects in the society) offered by the firm, they may choose not to purchase it’s products; and lastly employees may choose to resign from his position when conflict of interest and ethical concerns occur or may blow the whistle and expose the wrong doings of the firm to the public.Each group of stakeholders have their own alternatives in dealing with managers decisions and do not have property rights already invested and paid to managers for the outcomes of their performance thus they cannot be considered as having fiduciary relationships with managers. The major flaw of the stakeholder theory is that it assumes the stakeholders are not capable of making their own rational decisions and has left the responsibility of their wellbeing in the hands of others.The second shortfall of the Stakeholderà ¢â‚¬â„¢s theory is its short-term and narrow scope view of the matter and failed to consider the long-term strategies of the firm and wellbeing of the people. Walmart has been growing exponentially in recent years, but has also been experiencing much negative publicity like poor wages and benefits for its employees. When worker aren’t paid enough, the most common solution they seek is from the managers raising their wages.However most of these workers fail to realize they are only being paid according to their skill sets, rather than holding the managers and corporation responsible they should instead reflect on themselves and obtain higher education or more specialized skills to be worthy of their pay. If workers demand two or three dollars increase of their wage, they also need to consider the overall effects on the firm and not just themselves; it is not about a little more on one person’s pay cheque but the effect of thousands of workers and the incremental costs t hat a firm will bear.The market is competitive in nature, when firms fail to make profits, it will cease in existence in the long run. When the firm becomes bankrupt, all employees will lose their jobs and whom should be held responsible for that? Conclusion In conclusion, all three theories share different views of business ethics and the role of managers should take in it. Shareholder theory argues managers have fiduciary duty to shareholders only and should seek to maximize profits as long as it’s legally permissible; Stakeholder theory states managers have fiduciary duty to all stakeholders and must make ecisions so when certain stakeholders are made better off, the others involved must also be better than their original state. Both of these theories tries to outline what behaviours managers should take on a biased perspective yet fails to fit actual economic and market characteristics. Heath’s market failure model on the other hand suggests that managers do have f iduciary duties to shareholder only but should make decisions meeting their moral obligations as well, meaning adopting strategies that best benefit the firm and the society in the long run.Certain firms may donate to charity because they feel morally responsible or perhaps to cut taxes or simply for publicity; however in the overall wellbeing of the society, intentions matter but results matter even more. Firms that adopt non-preferred strategies will eventually break laws or be publicly criticized, will suffer losses in sale and be eliminated by firms applying preferred strategies because the market works to correct itself of its failures. Bibliography Heath, J. (n. d. ). Business ethics without stakeholders.In F. Allhoff & A. Vaidya (Eds. ), Business in Ethical Focus: An Anthology (pp. 110-126). Peterborough: Broadview. Friedman, M. F. (n. d. ). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. In A. Allhoff & A. Vaidya (Eds. ), Business in Ethical Focus: An Antho logy(pp. 65-69). Peterborough: Broadview. Freeman, E. F. (n. d. ). A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation. In A. Allhoff & A. Vaidya (Eds. ),Business in Ethical Focus: An Anthology (pp. 69-78). Peterborough: Broadview.

buy custom The Countrywide Financial Corporation essay

buy custom The Countrywide Financial Corporation essay The Countrywide Financial Corporation was founded in 1969 by Angelo Mozilo and David Loeb. Angelo Mozilo was the founder and chairman of the corporation. He is also thought to be behind the collapse of the company. In 1969, David Loeb founded the Countrywide in New York. Its intention was to create a nationwide lending firm specializing in mortgage loans. The company proceeded to open retail branches in California and by 1980 they had 40 branches in eight states. The company grew in leaps and bounds and saw it attain a loan origination of 2.2 million totaling to $408 million with 661 branches spread in 48 states. In the year 2008, the company was acquired by Bank of America for $4 billion. Its market value rose to $24 billion in 2006, but in 2007 it rapidly fell, when it emerged that the countrywide mortgages that had been during housing boom were overly risky and was faced with the risk of default. The company set pace on reforms that protected lenders from risks related to loan default. It also led to protection of borrowers with low income from exorbitant interest rates. Was the U.S. federal governments in 1932 intervention in the market for home ownership desirable? How did the creation of Fannie Mae in 1938, Ginnie Mae in 1968, and Freddie Mac in 1970 expand homeownership and shape lending practices at banks and other mortgage lending ?rms? Basing on the achievements realized it is clear that the intervention by the U.S government in the market was desirable. The creation of the Federal Home Loan Bank, for example, gave a provision on which lending to financial institutions is short-term prompting the desire for additional funds for home mortgages. The 1934 National Housing Act promoted homeownership. This is because it provided a system of insuring loans that protected default by borrowers. The creation of Fannie Mae facilitated secondary markets for mortgages. This was issued through guidelines of FHA program. This gave an opportunity to lenders who operated privately. This enabled private lenders to come up with a large count of FHA loans. Furthermore, due to the reason that loans could be sold in the secondary market. Another reason is that the borrower did not have to hold the loan until the loan term elapses. It also meant that another new loan could be created every other time the lender sold enormous loan bundles to secondary market inventors. Fannie Mae also bought mortgages that conventionally conformed to mortgages from the lenders. The reconstituting of Fannie Mae to trade publicly as a government sponsored enterprise saw its activities wiped out from the budget of the U.S federal government and moved its government insured portfolio, FHA mortgages, to corporation, which the government kept under total control. This was later known as Ginnie Mae. However, it remained in custody of Fannie Maes balance sheet. Th chartering of Freddie Mac facilitated the pooling of conforming loans, and came up with securities that were backed by mortgages (MBSs). These were sold as pooled shares on loan to the investors. The yield on interest for these security agencies lay between the U.S Treasury and AAA corporate. This obligation reflected low security risk. The MBSs development widened the secondary market for loans meant to be mortgaged. The reason being that the investors could buy portfolio of loan share other than buy intact portfolio loan. The Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac value to capital share in the market was equivalent to the MBSs obligations and debt guarantee of implicit government of the U.S. It is also important to note that, the Federal Charter demanded that they aid the residential mortgages through the secondary markets. It also obligated them to fund families whose incomes were low or moderate. They were also required to consider mortgage funding geographic distribution. This entailed finance on mortgage for geographic sectors that seemed undeserved. Another benefit that comes along with package of MBSs is that its mandate is to appraise the credit history of the borrower, and guidelines to establish the financial capability of the borrower in meeting the obligations of debt. This is important in establishing the probability of the borrower defaulting. This facilitated the growth of market of mortgage. Also the bolstering of loan program by the Veterans Administration led to zero down payment and reduced interest rates on loans. The housing burst of bubble in the year 2007, when the economy of the United Sates started weakening with the decline in demand for housing caused prices on homes to plummet. The appreciation in prices of homes almost coming to an end saw most of their properties go down. The equity position that was negative led to mortgage balance, which in turn led to fair market value of most of properties. The intervention, therefore, was desirable. This is because most of the issues that affected lending were deliberated on. It led to streamlining of mortgage business. It went along way in ensuring that the lenders were protected from risk that may arise. The borrowers too were not left behind as this ensured that no borrower was discriminated against based on race or geographical locations. The rate on interest towards the borrowers was also fully addressed by the enactment. Why did the U.S. Congress enact the Community Reinvestment Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Depository Institution Deregulation and Monetary Control Act, and the Housing and Community Development Act? Was this legislation effective in expanding homeownership? Did the governments promotion of subprime mortgages and high loan-to-value (LTV) subprime mortgages create additional risks for lenders and the holders of mortgage backed securities (MBSs) or collateralized debt obligations (CDOs)? In order to answer why the U.S Congress enacted the Community Reinvestment Act, it is important to note the reason for enactment. Sources indicates that the CRA and HMDA were enacted after the social activists group started pointing to the statistics that showed that FHA and lenders were involved in the systematic discrimination that was of race. This was directed to minority consumers who leaved in low income neighborhood. This practice was termed as redlining. The activist mobilized the Carter administration and Congress of the United States to come up with this enactment to curb this social injustice in lending and housing. The depository Institution Deregulation and monetary control addressed the concern on lenders who showed the sign of low income redlining of neighborhoods from their disclosures. However, the lenders defended this evil by pointing to the risks associated with loans made to low income earners, employment histories that were not stable, inadequate funds to enable them to make a down payment, or high debt to income levels. The acts, therefore, were enacted to address the concern by wiping out caps on interest rate and giving the lenders the opportunity to highly charge, or subprime rates to borrowers of higher risk. The Housing and Community development act of 1981 set goals for lenders borrowers of low income and gave an opportunity to FHA borrowers with credit records that are not perfect to access loans on mortgage with 90 to 95 percent LTVs. In the year 1995, the administration of Clinton increased the LTV subprime loans causing the CRA to increase home ownership for the Americans who in one way or another were not able to acquire mortgage loans through the conventional criteria of underwriting. The subprime mortgage created an additional risk to the lender. The reason being that-: the lender did not need the borrower to demonstrate how capable he is to repay the loan. The lender granted the borrower with low credit score, a high debt to income level, or a small down payment. The increased MBSs appetite on Wall Street, the brokers of mortgage expanded their net sales to entail requirements on documentation that was relaxed and limited or impaired the history on credit. This lending technique ensured that many borrowers accessed the loan. However, this could impact negatively on the lender incase the borrower defaulted in repaying. It is also important to know that the crisis of S L facilitated mortgage business unbundling. The origination of mortgage and servicing of loans led to a split. It led to pushing of most originations of mortgages into secondary markets as debt which is collateralized known as Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDOs). The ability of originators of mortgage to sell mortgages that were newly recorded as MBSs led to an increase of mortgage originators. The less strict nature of lending poses a risk on the side of the lender incase of default by the borrower. Buy custom The Countrywide Financial Corporation essay

Free Essays on Personalities At The Workplace

I manage a collision/mechanic repair center for my father. After many years of trial and hardship I am proud to say we operate a very positive productive business. It was not easy to get to this point. Honestly what really helped us get to this successful point was learning my employee’s individual personality and needs, as well as finding my own. So this paper is a perfect opportunity to explain my situation. I will start by describing each employee. In our mechanic shop we employee two older men. The first man has been employed with us for just a little over ten years. He is not the better of the two mechanics. He is a little slower getting jobs done, Some of the jobs take a second time around to get them right. However h e is without a doubt the most dedicated employee we have. He comes in early and will work as late as needed. He will do whatever is asked of him. He is genuinely a very kind hearted man. Our other mechanic, how has been employed with us for almost 25 years is a perfectionist. He is fast and makes very little mistakes. He, on the other hand works from eight to five everyday, nothing more. They have a pretty good working relationship despite their different personalities. After all they have worked together for years. We have four employees working in the body shop. The first employee is our painter. He has been employed with is for eight years. He is well known in our community for his excellent painting skills. He loves to talk, joke and is very outgoing. He makes our working environment very positive and fun. The second employee is my uncle who is our body man. He very rarely talks and sticks to himself most of the time. He does only what is expected of him. He is very good at his job. The third employee is our other body man who is a longtime family friend. He works extra hard and will work on anything that is put in front of him. He is basically very easy going and easy to get along with. The third employee ... Free Essays on Personalities At The Workplace Free Essays on Personalities At The Workplace I manage a collision/mechanic repair center for my father. After many years of trial and hardship I am proud to say we operate a very positive productive business. It was not easy to get to this point. Honestly what really helped us get to this successful point was learning my employee’s individual personality and needs, as well as finding my own. So this paper is a perfect opportunity to explain my situation. I will start by describing each employee. In our mechanic shop we employee two older men. The first man has been employed with us for just a little over ten years. He is not the better of the two mechanics. He is a little slower getting jobs done, Some of the jobs take a second time around to get them right. However h e is without a doubt the most dedicated employee we have. He comes in early and will work as late as needed. He will do whatever is asked of him. He is genuinely a very kind hearted man. Our other mechanic, how has been employed with us for almost 25 years is a perfectionist. He is fast and makes very little mistakes. He, on the other hand works from eight to five everyday, nothing more. They have a pretty good working relationship despite their different personalities. After all they have worked together for years. We have four employees working in the body shop. The first employee is our painter. He has been employed with is for eight years. He is well known in our community for his excellent painting skills. He loves to talk, joke and is very outgoing. He makes our working environment very positive and fun. The second employee is my uncle who is our body man. He very rarely talks and sticks to himself most of the time. He does only what is expected of him. He is very good at his job. The third employee is our other body man who is a longtime family friend. He works extra hard and will work on anything that is put in front of him. He is basically very easy going and easy to get along with. The third employee ... Free Essays on Personalities At The Workplace I manage a collision/mechanic repair center for my father. After many years of trial and hardship I am proud to say we operate a very positive productive business. It was not easy to get to this point. Honestly what really helped us get to this successful point was learning my employee’s individual personality and needs, as well as finding my own. So this paper is a perfect opportunity to explain my situation. I will start by describing each employee. In our mechanic shop we employee two older men. The first man has been employed with us for just a little over ten years. He is not the better of the two mechanics. He is a little slower getting jobs done, Some of the jobs take a second time around to get them right. However h e is without a doubt the most dedicated employee we have. He comes in early and will work as late as needed. He will do whatever is asked of him. He is genuinely a very kind hearted man. Our other mechanic, how has been employed with us for almost 25 years is a perfectionist. He is fast and makes very little mistakes. He, on the other hand works from eight to five everyday, nothing more. They have a pretty good working relationship despite their different personalities. After all they have worked together for years. We have four employees working in the body shop. The first employee is our painter. He has been employed with is for eight years. He is well known in our community for his excellent painting skills. He loves to talk, joke and is very outgoing. He makes our working environment very positive and fun. The second employee is my uncle who is our body man. He very rarely talks and sticks to himself most of the time. He does only what is expected of him. He is very good at his job. The third employee is our other body man who is a longtime family friend. He works extra hard and will work on anything that is put in front of him. He is basically very easy going and easy to get along with. The third employee ...

Application for the Use of Human Research Participants Essay

Application for the Use of Human Research Participants - Essay Example Signed materials can be submitted by mail, fax (434-522-0506), or email (scanned document to irb@liberty.edu). Signed materials can also be submitted via regular mail or in person to our office: Campus North, Suite 1582. Please be sure to use the grey form fields to complete this document; do not change the format of the application. You are able to move quickly through the document by using the â€Å"Tab† key. Note: Applications with the following problems will be returned immediately for revisions: 1) Grammar/spelling/punctuation errors, 2) A lack of professionalism (lack of consistency/clarity) on the application itself or any supporting documents, 3) Incomplete applications. Failure to minimize these errors will cause delays in your processing time. II. BASIC PROTOCOL INFORMATION Protocol Title:  ?UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES WHO DID NOT COMPLETE HIGH SCHOOL  Principal Investigator (PI): Richard Warner Wieringo Professional Title:  Sch ool/Department: Liberty University School of Education Mailing Address: 125 Woodgate Court APT 2C, Charlottesville, VA 22901 Telephone: (434) 251-2255 LU Email: rwweringo@liberty.edu Check all that apply:  Faculty  Graduate Student  Undergraduate Student  Staff This research is for:  Class Project  Master’s Thesis  Doctoral Dissertation  Faculty Research  Other (describe):  Have you defended and passed your dissertation proposal?  Yes  No  N/A If no, what is your defense date?  Faculty Advisor: Verlyn Evans, Ed.D, Chair  School/Department: Liberty University School of Education Telephone:  LU Email:  Non-key Personnel: Name and Title:  School/Department:  Telephone:  LU Email:  Consultants: Name and Title: Dr. Russ Yocum School/Department: Graduate School of Education Telephone: (434) 592-5462 LU Email: ryocum@liberty.edu Liberty University Participants: Do you intend to use LU students, staff, or faculty as participants in your study? If you do not intend to use LU participants in your study, please indicate â€Å"no† and proceed to the section titled â€Å"Funding Source.† If yes, please list the department and classes you hope to enlist, and the number of participants you would like to enroll.  No  Yes   Department Class(es) In order to process your request to use LU participants, we must ensure that you have contacted the appropriate department and gained permission to collect data from them. Please obtain the original signature of the department chair in order to verify this. Signature of Department Chair Date Funding Source: If research is funded please provide the following: Grant Name (or name of the funding source):  Funding Period (month/year):  Grant Number:  Anticipated start and completion dates for collecting and analyzing data:  III. OTHER STUDY MATERIALS AND CONSIDERATIONS Does this project call for (more detail will be required later): Use of voice, video, digit al, or image recordings?  Yes  No Participant compensation?  Yes  No Advertising for participants?  Yes  No More than minimal

Relationship Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Relationship - Essay Example on to jobs as service crew at two ice cream parlors and later on transferred to a travel agency as an accounting assistant and travel agent at the same time. I did all this to help my mother who is the only close family member with me here in America. My father passed away some years ago and all my determined efforts are both to help out my mother and prove to myself and perhaps to my late father that I can make it out on my own. My job at the travel company entailed a lot of accounting work and was happy this is so because it closely correlated with my college degree. My fluency with both Chinese and English together with a third language was really a big help in my job with this casino-related travel company where I got to meet lots of people, greatly improved my marketing and selling abilities, enhanced my people skills and most importantly, gave the needed practice to boost my self-confidence. This job also gave me the much-needed work experience which was all more valuable as it related to what I am pursuing in college. Hardships I had encountered made me a stronger person and I hope this will help make me realize my full potentials. I am ambitious and totally focused on my life goals; probably also because I am a woman. If a person will ask me why I strive so hard, I will perhaps answer it is because I am a woman and I need to prove to myself and everybody that I can do the same job even better; that I can also accomplish great things when given the chance. I consider this opportunity to study in the United States as a rare once-in-a-lifetime chance which I will obviously not just squander away doing inconsequential things. I dream big and aspire for bigger things to come. At the moment, I had temporarily given up my job to concentrate on my studies and I intend to fully achieve my dreams by totally focusing on it for the time being. I also know that sometimes it is harder for a woman to get ahead in this society despite some progress towards gender

Formation of a Legally Binding Business Contract Essay - 3

Formation of a Legally Binding Business Contract - Essay Example It is important to consider what constitutes a valid offer. There are various statements which seem like offers but actually not offer. A distinction must be among offer, invitation to offer, an invitation to treat. Jess advertised a second-hand van for sale on a car trade website for  £2650. This is not an offer but a mere invitation to offer. This means that if anyone shows interest in the van, Jess reserves the right of refusing to sell it. As seen in the given case, Mr. Powell showed interest in the van but Jess told him that she would sell it if any other customer came before him. The interest shown by Mr. Powell was the actual offer but it was not accepted by Jess. Jess agreed to sell the van to him but she qualified her acceptance by saying that she would sell the van to any customer that came before him. A qualified acceptance is not a valid acceptance which is why they did not have any agreement yet. Mr. Powell told Jess that he would pay  £450 in advance if she did not sell the van to any customer for three days. Normally, when general offers are made, the offeror is not bound to keep the offer open for any particular offeree. However, when an offeree agrees to pay a consideration for keeping the offer open for a certain period, the offeror becomes bound to keep it open for the stipulated period as seen in Dickinson v Dodds. Mr. Powell has obtained a promise with the consideration of  £450 from Jess that she would keep the offer to sell the van to Mr. Powell open for three days. Now Jess and Mr. Powell have an agreement that is separate from that of selling of the van. Another important fact is that Jess’ invitation to offer turned into an offer during this negotiation. It is because anyone could have made an offer to Jess before she promised to keep her offer open.

Violence in the NBA Essay Example for Free

Violence in the NBA Essay Violence in the NBA is spontaneous as well as erroneous. Due to its competitive and physical style of play, players usually get involved in altercations which eventually lead to a free-for-all brawl which is unbecoming of a sport that is known to produce gentlemen of finesse and prestige on and off the court. Each ruckus is always in focus of the meticulous and keen eyes of the media as well as the public. Arguably, it is reflective of what the sport of basketball wants young fans to emulate without the violence of course. Yet violence within the league is rampant amidst the guide of game officials, which are always on the forefront of any untoward incident that tends to spoil the spontaneity and momentum of the game. Due to the spontaneity that is in the nature of the sport, nobody can predict may it be a fan or a referee whenever an imminent brawl is about to take place. Some basketball analysts say that this aspect of the game is what draws fans from all walks of life to the game itself. Violence is exciting as much as athleticism is. Thus, making the sport of basketball a game where masculinity is exemplified and where violence is considered a norm. Players display fits of anger and sparks fly which sometimes involve irate fans. In most recent memory, â€Å"basketbrawls† were instigated by young and raw players which are considered the future of the NBA. Basketball is more than a game of brawns. It is a sport that is fueled by strong emotions that lead to spontaneous violence. Basketball Officiating: Boon or Bust? Being a referee in the NBA is not â€Å"a walk in the park† job at all. Referees are expected to have a rational and sound judgment in every call they make. Each decision of a referee is a crucial part of his job and whenever he makes a call or decision, not only players will react but fans will retaliate in every call as well. Referees are not highly considered to have a vital role in the NBA yet they act as a shock absorber in every loophole that the game has. They are always lambasted by players and fans alike yet they are there to stabilize the pace of the game and performing the task of mandating the rules of the game. Some might say that they are simply doing their job for the betterment of the game but recently there has been an official that was involved in a gambling issue over at Las Vegas. With this in mind, some fans have really lost their complete trust on referees. And fans don’t really care about referees or game officiating at all, fans flock the arenas to watch their home team win and not to be victimized by mediocre officiating. Fans have meticulous and keen eyes when it comes to bad calls as much as referees are also sharp on making calls on players. However, some decisions made by a referee are not favorable to a home team which creates a ruckus among the fans, this happens whenever a call is made and fans don’t like it which results to an unpleasant feedback among the fans. At some instances, fans sometimes instigate â€Å"basketbrawls† and before the referees know it some guy has a fist on his face already. This creates a self-defeating image for the NBA. Remember that this is not ice hockey or football where athletes wear protective gears that will protect them from imminent injuries that result from abrupt and unexpected altercations during the game. An example of â€Å"bad† officiating happened recently when rookie Al Horford of the Atlanta Hawks unintentionally hit Toronto Raptors guard T. J. Ford when the latter was driving towards the basket. This created an eclectic plethora of feedbacks around the league. For the fact that Ford has been hampered with injuries since he entered the league which some experts say that Horford’s foul wasn’t intentional yet it was made one because Ford is frail and has a history of serious injuries. Now, this is not objective officiating per se, Basketball is a contact sport and it’s a reality as well as a conviction that is shared by players. Reputation and a player’s salary is always at stake in every call a referee makes. Though Horford was fined and suspended for a couple of games, the Atlanta Hawks rookie showed sportsmanship by visiting and attending to Ford at the hospital, a deed of a suspended player which does not usually happen and simply shows how some kids in the NBA show class and finesse which is good for the image of the league. Hoopsworld. com correspondent Jason Fleming has this to say about the incident: â€Å"But does anyone out there think Horford intentionally tried to hurt Ford? He felt horrible about it after it happened and even went to the hospital to spend time with Ford in Atlanta. He explained the foul, too, to anyone who would listen after that game on Tuesday. † (Fleming, J. 2007. p. 1) When it happened with a minute and a half left, we were still down by eight [92-84], Horford said. He got the steal. I just tried to go and block the shot. When he went up, I went up too. He tried to use the rim and I thought he was going to stay on [one] side so I went up and tried to hit the ball and I hit his head. † (Fleming, J. 2007. p. 1) He just made a good move and fooled me. Horford said. (Fleming,J. 2007. p. 1) â€Å"That quote has been seen repeatedly. And, if you ask the Raptors, they also wont say it was intentional. Heck, even T. J. Ford understands it wasnt intentional. † (Fleming,J. 2007. p. 1) It wasnt a dirty play at all, Ford said. I think I just kind of tricked him with the move and he got caught in a bad spot. Hes a good kid. I told him Im not holding anything against him. (Fleming, J. 2007. p. 1) â€Å"During those hours in the hospital, where Horford talked to Ford, it was Ford picking up Horford. I know that Horford feels awful about it, Colangelo said. He spent a couple of hours at the hospital with (T. J. ) last night and, true to T. J. s form, he was probably doing more of the consoling. I think the kid (Horford) was pretty shaken up about it. He felt awful. I dont think there was any intention to do harm. (Fleming, J. 2007. p. 1). â€Å"So, with these multiple accounts of no intent of harm on the record, again, why did Al Horford receive a one-game suspension? Is it because of how bad it looked? Is it because of the fragility of Ford given his past issues with his neck and spine? Is it because this could have been much worse than it was? Honestly though, thats going to be true going forward too. No matter what anyone says, basketball is a contact sport. Sure, contact is regulated by the calling of personal fouls, but players get fooled all the time. To be real clear here, this is no different than a player going for a steal on a dribble and accidentally hitting the player with the ball in the groin. It happens. Fouls are called. Basketball moves on. Sometimes players have to leave games with injuries. † (Fleming, J. 2007. p. 1). Basketball Fans versus Athletes Basketball is inherently a physical and competitive sport. Suffice to say that the sport exudes hints of violence due to the physical nature of the game. Yet sometimes the physicality of the game goes overboard and results to chaotic brawls which include players and fans alike. At some instances, these spectators are usually the linchpin to instigate basketbrawls. The heat of the game overwhelms everyone in the stadium and before you know it beer bottles, stadium paraphernalia and other objects are being thrown at the arena and add more tension in an already brewing commotion among players. There are numerous instances that players are overwhelmed by their emotions and retaliation is always imminent on the part of these players. We have to consider that due to the competitive nature of the game, these athletes have high testosterone levels that result in extraordinary aggressive behavior. Which leads us to a behavioral disorder called Intermittent Explosive Behavior which is imminent in these athletes. Intermittent explosive behavior is described as a disorder as having extreme expressions of anger and uncontrollable rage which is inappropriate to a certain situation. George Orwell, author of the book Shooting an Elephant: The Sporting Spirit has this observation about the role violence plays in every sport aside from basketball: Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealousy, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence: in other words it is war minus the shooting. (Orwell. 1950. ). This quote tells us that no sport has an inherent sense of fair play. And every sport is fueled by athleticism and sportsmanship camouflaged by arrogance as well as a certain sadistic nature in terms of watching it for the sake of the gratification brought about by violence. In the NBA, there are numerous basketbrawls but nothing compares to the infamous Pistons-Pacers brawl that happened on November 19, 2004 at the Palace of Auburn Hills in Michigan, The incident that is better known as â€Å"The Malice at the Palace† sparked a myriad of negative feedbacks from the media to the public. This was arguably the most notorious basketball incident in recent memory since the â€Å"Bad Boy Days† of the Detroit Pistons of the late 80’s. The incident generated repercussions throughout the league and legal authorities as well. The incident involved Indiana forward Ron Artest and Detroit center Ben Walllace. Wallace was on his way for a fastbreak lay-up when Artest abruptly grabbed the former with his two arms causing Wallace to fall in an awkward manner. Wallace then retaliated by shoving Artest causing the latter to almost hit the bench. After this, chaos followed and players from both teams left the bench to join the fray and Piston fans joined the ruckus as well. Punches were thrown be it player against player or player against spectator. It was an embarrassing moment for the NBA and generated speculations about the conduct of players in the league. Each player in the NBA was placed under public scrutiny and is considered responsible for each deed he commits on the court as well as off the court. Sadly, media attention focused on Ron Artest which was suspended for a season, there was a debate regarding Artest rushing to the stands to hit a fan who threw a cup of beer on him, commentators said that it was not a valid excuse to rush to the stands and retaliates in order to hit the fan. The media heavily blamed the players for instigating the melee which was a huge upset for the entire league. Speculations of hooliganism in the league were fueled by the incident and Piston fans were placed in close public scrutiny. The Pistons had defeated the Pacers in a tight Eastern Conference Finals series five months prior to the incident, which eventually paved the way to their first championship since the Bad Boys Era. The game on November 19 was televised nationally on ESPN as well as locally on select Michigan television stations including Detroits NBC affiliate WDIV-TV (Channel 4) and statewide across Indiana through the Central Indiana bureau of FSN Midwest (which was later spun off to FSN Indiana), would be the first rematch between the two rivals since the Eastern Conference Finals. And emotions found its way to run high on either team (Wikipedia Pistons-Pacers Brawl. 2004. p. 1). Let us take a closer look on what transpired after the infamous incident: Players and spectators who were part of the incident are deemed to be subjected to criminal charges and will be thoroughly investigated by The Auburn Hills Police Department as well as the Oakland County Prosecutors Office. Two spectators filed and claimed monetary damages. The final legal actions of the incident for those involved may take months to determine (Wikipedia Pistons-Pacers Brawl. 2004. p. 1). â€Å"On November 30, Oakland County Prosecutor David Gorcyca announced that he will seek charges against all players involved in the melee. † â€Å"Whoever was involved in fisticuffs will be charged, regardless if they were wearing a jersey. Its obvious there were several Pacer players and fans that dealt blows. †(Wikipedia Pistons-Pacers Brawl. 2004. p. 1). When Basketball Rears its Ugly Head Players are always at risk whenever they display unruly behavior on the court yet most players dont really care about the consequences that will be brought about by such behavior. Players dont really care about consequent suspensions as well as fines for their misconduct. Players are not really concerned that they are being watched by people around the world and each action they make is a mirror image of the NBA. These athletes are only there to perform their best because that what they are paid for and does not really mind if they are playing â€Å"prison rules† basketball in a prestigious league such as the NBA. What is surprising about the violence which is apparent in the NBA is that people couldnt care less about it. Arguably, NBA afficionados are used to the competitive and physical style of play wherein players thrive upon. And whats contradicting is that these players are deemed responsible for their actions on the court yet sometimes they themselves enjoy a little fistfight once in awhile. Since the incident in Detroit which was called â€Å"The Malice at the Palace†, some basketball analysts bluffed that having a resident psychiatrist in every team in the NBA will help each player as much as a physical condition trainer helps a player with regards to physical health, so why not consider mental health as well? One of the most penalized game altercations after the infamous Pistons-Pacers brawl would be the Knicks-Nuggets brawl which happened on December 16, 2006 which resulted to the suspension of seven players from both teams and a fine of $500,000 dollars each. The fine was arguably stiff due to the fact that Commissioner Davide Stern was trying polish the leagues image since the Pistons-Pacers brawl. The altercation started when Denver guard J. R. Smith was on a fastbreak and was about to dunk when suddenly New York rookie Mardy Collins strangled him when he the former was in mid-air causing Smith to fall hard on the floor. New York guard Nate Robinson rushed to them then pushed Smith in order to break the fight. The three players were surrounded by the team mates and officials who were trying to restrain the altercation. Yet this didnt help restrain the imminent on-court fight which was further escalated when Denver forward Carmelo Anthony strangled Robinson. At this time, New York forward David Lee was holding back Smith but the latter broke free and tackled Robinson then slammed Smith on the courtside resulting spectators and media to depart from the scene. Again, chaos overwhelmed the hardwood and more fighting followed. More pushing and shoving followed as well then eventually cooler heads prevailed and order was restored. Yet the seemingly restrained fight was inflamed again when Anthony made a cheap shot on Collins, The Nuggets star sucker-punched the Knicks rookie which had Knicks players chasing after him while he was leaving the court (Wikipedia Knicks-Nuggets Brawl. 2006. p. 1) The media has speculated that Knicks General Manager and Head Coach was the main culprit for the brawl which generated the notion that was Thomas dire attempt to revive the physical and rough brand of play which was reminiscent of the Detroit Pistons â€Å"Bad Boys Era† for him to inspire his team and give them the confidence boost they need in order to overwhelm a sense of inferiority against upper echelon teams. Criticisms surfaced as well due to the fact that Commissioner Stern didnt hand Thomas a suspension for his verbal provocation on Nuggets star Carmelo Anthony, telling the latter not to enter the paint which suggested that the Knicks were planning mayhem right at the start of the game itself. Denver Head Coach George Karl said that this was a mediocre attempt on insulting his friendship with former Knick coach Larry Brown who was fired by Thomas and had a tumultuous relationship with after Browns departure from New York (Wikipedia Knicks-Nuggets Brawl. 2006. p. 1) George Karl was furious the next day and made a harsh comment on Thomas saying: â€Å" Thomas made a bad situation worse. Hes a jerk for what hes trying to do. My team has blown 10-point leads, 11-point leads with two minutes to go. I watched Utah blow a 12-point lead to Sacramento two nights before that with four minutes to go in the game and youre telling me that Im running the score up? Hes an asshole † (Karl. 2006) The comments made by Carl was scrutinized and criticized by media men speculating a brewing bad blood between Carl and Thomas which dates to Thomas firing of Larry Brown who happens to be a close friend of the Nuggets mentor (Truehoop. com. 2006. p. 1) With this in mind, violence in the NBA does not start from players alone. One cannot help on being skeptic on how coaches think and manipulate their players. In the aftermath of this Knicks-Nuggets brawl, speculations on coaches surfaced on how they motivate as well as manipulate their players. Specially players who are raw and new to the league. Prior to this incident, New York Knicks GM and Head Coach Isiah Thomas was being accused already to display provocative tactics as well as unruly behavior among these are: ? The pre-season game versus New Jersey Nets on October 27 was glimpse of things to come. Thomas confronted Nets assistant coach Tom Barisse after a potential on-court brawl that resulted from a hard play which involved a Nets player and three Knicks players. Nets head coach Lawrence Frank didnt acknowledge or responded to the bickerings of Thomas. Thomas exclaimed that: The better teams dont like when the teams on the bottom give them a hard time Sometimes they get a little upset with that. We have to give them a hard time and I hope they dont take it personally. (Thomas. 2006) ? In a game against the San Antonio Spurs on November 11, Thomas appeared to instigate a fight against Spurs forward Bruce Bowen, which Bowen accused Thomas of yelling at his players to â€Å"break his foot! † In retaliation how Bowen used his legs on when Knicks guard was attempting a jumpshot. Other than that, Thomas started shouting match against Spurs head coach Gregg Popovich. Thomas said: I was trying to stoke a little fire. We were playing three games in four nights against a pretty tough opponent in a getaway game. We were almost ready to pack our bags. (Thomas. 2006. p. 1). He later mentioned his Bad Boys Era in Detroit and exclaimed that if ever someone tried that on him, â€Å"I would murder him† (Thomas. 2006. p. 1) Thomas actions and innuendos were unbecoming of a hall of famer and a team general manager. This lead to a bevy of feedbacks about his conduct not only as a team official but a person as well. Perhaps this was a result of the job pressure he was receiving from the media and fans who wanted him out in New York. Thomas was considered to bring the unfavorable atmosphere in Madison Square Garden. Final Analysis The imminent violence that thrives in the NBA will always be part of the game. People have to accept the fact that every sport will be dealt with the consequent physicality and relative competitiveness that is a crucial part of every sport that is played. The NBA should do its part in assessing each brawl accordingly so as to be fair to the players. Players have should be responsible for their actions on court and off court as well. Its a good thing that the league has started having a dress code in order to polish the image of its players. Yet it doesnt end there and players should always carry with them a sense of sound conduct amidst the strong emotions that is always at play during games. Sportsman-like rivalry coupled with a sense of camaraderie will always overwhelm the hint the ugly notion of prison rules basketball. But players will always be true to their game which comes along with their passion for the game that makes the notion of violence a norm in each game played. References Fleming, J. 2007. Horford’s Suspension Unfair. p. 1. Retrieved December 13,2007 from Hoopsworld. com Levesque, J. 2004. Violence part of NBAs history. Retrieved November 23,2004 from Seattlepi. com Celizic,M. 2004. Fans as much to blame as players. Retrieved November 22,2004 from MSNBC. com Wikipedia. 2007. Violence in Sports. Retrieved December 20,2007 from Wikipedia. com Wikipedia. 2007. Pistons-Pacers Brawl. Retrieved December 22,2007 from Wikipedia. com Wikipedia. 2007. Knicks-Nuggets Brawl. Retrieved December 26,2007 from Wikipedia. com ESPN News Services. 2007. Raptors guard Ford injured after flagrant foul in victory. Retrieved December 11,2007 from ESPN. com Orwell, G. 1950. The Sporting Spirit, Shooting an Elephant. p. 153 New York: Harcourt, Brace, Co.