Organization Analysis - Wal-Mart Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Organization Analysis - Wal-Mart - Essay Example The organization has a reputable brand that is globally recognized allowing it to outshine competitors in the field. The company’s brand is distinct; furthermore, Wal-mart has established a group of loyal customers. Spotts (2005) asserts that consumers usually respond to less costly products to sustain their daily needs especially in a current time of economic hardships. Since the company makes purchases in large quantities, it obtains huge discounts that it can pass to its customers. This enables it to offer products at a reduced cost. Furthermore, the organization manufactures its own products allowing it to sell them at subsidized rates. Wal-Mart’s huge capital and customer friendly operations promote the marketing capacity. The strategic pricing is the prominent marketing strength that offers the company a competitive advantage. The organization has a policy that governs the procedures for determining prices for the products. This restricts management from hedging p rices. Furthermore, the company conducts a Rollback promotion strategy that targets customers. This system lowers the prices of the already subsidized products making the company out-price their competitors. The company understands the concept of customer value as highlighted in their customer-oriented scheme. The organization has one of the best contentment guaranteed models that enhances customer goodwill. The organization allows customers to return the purchased products that do not please them and claim a refund.

Law of evidence Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Law of evidence - Case Study Example We have been told that in the question that the judge has already given a direction that, pursuant to section 34 of the criminal justice and Public Order Act 1994, a proper inference could be drawn from Billy's silence at interview. If this is allowed to continue without being challenged in appeal the effect of it will be that the court will allowed to infer "what is proper" from Billy's silence at the court where he has failed to mention his epileptic state and the factum of the argument he had with the deceased prior to the death.However at this point we have not been told whether he was placed under a caution or not. This is important because Section 34 only applies where an interview under caution takes place, so the court will not be able to draw an inference if for example Billy had declined an invitation to attend an interview under caution. In the case of R v Argent1,the Court of Appeal was of the opinion that six criteria had to be met before such a direction could be given. In Billy's case that would be According to the case of R v Milford2,the phrase "in the circumstances" will be interpreted to take into account the time of the interview and the mental and physical state of Billy. This alone could be a basis of appeal as Billy can base his silence on his epileptic state. However the facts point out that he remained quiet based on his solicitors advice. A substantial part of the discussion is thus devoted to this fact and whether the court will take silence based upon the Solicitor's advice into account. It was also noted in the case of R v Milford 3 "fact" will be denoted its literal meaning based on any premises and explanations that the Billy could give for his involvement in the allegation of murder which could convict or absolve or mitigate his liability. In this regard it is worth noting that the recent case law does not support his grounds of appeal.In the case of R. v Lowe (Paul) 4the appellant appealed by way of reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission under the Criminal Appeal Act 1995 s.9 against the dismissal of his appeal5 against conviction it has held that the judge's direction to the jury in relation to the application of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 s.34 could not be appealed despite the fact that the judge had wrongly summed up to the jury that the defendant was under no obligation to answer any questions and that he had a right to silence, and the fact that he appeared to have been indicating to the jury that silence in interview should allow the jury to draw adverse inferences from the silence. It will have to be seen in Billy's case then that the only way out for this appeal ,basing my advice on the ratio of Argent (Brian)6