Market Capturing and Business Expansion Strategy for Gluten-Free Foods in India and USA Using PESTEL Model

The ultimate goal for any business is to grow vertically and horizontally. Successful business is combination of careful analysis of external and internal factor of business environment and adoption of appropriate business strategy. In this study external factors of gluten-free market are studied in detail through PESTEL model (for external factors). The study would facilitate manufacturers to bring gluten-free foods from niche market to main stream market and to make it more affordable for all the sections of the society. The study focuses on markets of India and USA, since both of these nations have high potential for gluten-free foods and the demand further continues to increase every year>>>ClickHere>>>

The gravity model of international Non-tariff measures and sustainable development: trade: a user guide

The gravity model is the workhorse of the applied international trade literature. It has been used in literally thousands of research papers and published articles covering all areas of trade. It is of particular interest to policy researchers because it makes it possible to estimate the trade impacts of various trade-related policies, from traditional tariffs to new “behind-the-border” measures.>>ClickHere>>>

Craft business information

Craft is a machine-learning powered data and analytics platform building the “Source of Truth” on companies and mapping the global economy. The Company organizes financial, operating and human capital data from thousands of sources to provide comprehensive, up-to-date sector and company profiles, ranging from early-stage to the largest companies in the world, with analytics and tools such as signal alerts, trends and benchmarking.

Register of Companies worldwide

Colombia| Canada | Bermuda|Guernsey| Zimbabwe|Ghana|  |Dubai| Israel| Cambodia||Norway| |Portugal| San Marino| | Switzerland |Spain| |Italy| |Finland| USA| Aruba | Nigeria | South Africa | Thailand | Malaysia |Philippines | Srilanka |Singapore | India | Denmark| HongKong | Bahamas | BVI |New Zealand | Australia |Andorra | Belgium | Germany |France | Estonia | Czech Rep.| Cyprus |Gibraltar | Ireland | Isle of Man | Jersey | Latvia | Lithuania | Sweden| Slovak Rep.|Malta | Netherlands | Poland | Luxembourg |Jordan | Liechtenstein| Hungary | Zambia | Panama| China|

Other resources


OpenCorporates – The largest open database of companies in the world |

The business of global Internet access – Violation of a fundamental human right?

I have just been struck by connecting three pieces of data that promise a total disruption of how we perceive access to the Internet connectivity.

The first is a statistics around Internet Access, by the world economic Forum that 4 billion people (mostly living in the developing world), do not have access to the Internet and by extension are not connected to engaging with business as we know it in the rest of the world. They remain disconnected from rest of the world or as Tim Berners-Lee says it is ‘far short of the UN Sustainable Development Goal to achieve universal connectivity‘.

75% of those who have access to the Internet live in a mere 23 countries. The ITU also claims that nearly 50% of the Global population use the Internet.

The second is the declaration by the United Nations that ‘access to the Internet’ is a fundamental human right, or in other words, these 4 billion people are denied a fundamental human right. The last piece of data comes from news reports providing us with tantalising visions of global Internet access using thousands of satellites (both mega and nano). Companies like SPACEx, Outernet, Google and Facebook are leading in the race to provide and in the process, gain first mover advantage in the industry. Governments like the European Union have similar initiatives. The EU is promising that the Galileo GPS replacement system will offer free navigation for anyone globally amongst other features.

Linking all of this together, one gets the impression that the business of providing global broadband (free or paid for) is ripe for disruption. Moving from a business model where we pay for trickle-down cable or fibre based Internet provision which in turn is based on dated telecommunication business models, to one that promises unlimited, unrestricted, untethered Internet access is fascinating.

Out technologically viable capability to connect untapped segments of the global population to any outposts of the fourth Industrial Revolution will disrupt the geographies of economic activity . Imagine the potential of using 3D printing for distributed global manufacturing points across low-cost countries? What about unleashing an additional 8 billion (a very conservative figure of mine) IoT devices using global Internet access?

If our efforts to contain the COVID-19 pandemic are successful, data driven digital technologies and services will rapidly change the world of Trade discriminate competitive advantage on the basis of getting access to Internet.

Moving on, if we were to allow existing business models to operate, huge transnational entities would control access to data by virtue of their market dominance and therefore exert a more dangerous form of control over this human right? Do we want faceless, nameless entities shrouded in tax havens to control data?

If you think governments are better suited to the provision of global Internet access, then what about the abuse of privacy? In an age where cyber-attacks using both state sponsored cyber warfare strategies and state condoned cyber-actors are becoming the new normal, will we have ‘Big Brother’ watching every piece of data? Will this lead to a new form of colonisation of states using access to the Internet?

Will you therefore agree with me that regardless of how this disruption takes place, there will still be a violation of someone’s human rights in some form or the other? This is disturbing as we head to a post Covid data driven world where most of us will do business in a networked ecosystem while others are deprived of digital connectivity.

Why ‘revolution’ is the new buzz word in the MENA region.

Last week was so tumultuous that some of us rediscovered TV. The Middle East & North African region has come to life and is now the new Mecca for news producers. Revolution, people/mob power, state sponsored killing sprees, toppling of established power structures and the re-affirmation of the right to protest against the ignominies faced by the common people was staple fare.
What is needed now is a perhaps an analysis into the forces that prompted this?
Some commentators have linked this to the domino effect of Tunisia & Egypt where people tasted success. History has provided many examples of this effect. The crumbling of the Berlin wall followed by a series of government failures in the Soviet Bloc is a related event, You can also argue that 1997 Asian Flu that brought chaos and a recession across many states was a harbinger of the more closely linked one in 2008 that brought many of the G7 states to their knees.
What are then the common linkages in the MENA states that are facing turmoil? My first bet would be on the forces of Globalisation as seen through the lenses of a news hungry media empire. The Twitter/face book inspired street protests were brought to life by tantalizing newsfeeds from embedded reporters and a generous support of Arab nationalism.
The second is Economic: Declining state revenues in states like Bahrain, Egypt, Yemen and Oman combined with anger against a growing income disparity in states like Libya, Kuwait & Saudi Arabia. To this when you add a growing young unemployed population with no hopes of earning a decent living, you set the scene for revolution.
The third linkage is the most quoted one, a lack of democracy and the promulgation of ruling dynasties. Imagine your reaction as an unemployed Libyan to the news that the Gaddafi family & cronies control almost everything from lucrative business empires down to the way you think and live your life. The situation is similar to Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, where thousands of ‘Princes’ have state salaries, freebies and immunity from almost everything while over 40% of the populace live in poverty.
The fourth linkage is geopolitical: a reflection of a transforming Multi Polar world where the Americas of the world must yield to the IRANs and CHINAs of an emerging world. Iran has set this in motion with trying to send two frigates into the Suez across to Syria, leading to a rethinking of our understanding of the military balance in the region. Most of this has been attributed to an isolation of Iran and the Cooperation between Egypt, US and Israel. With regime change in Egypt, there is a fear that this ménage a trios would have to accommodate Iran.
When all of this madness ends, what most commentators argue is that regardless of whether there is regime change or if a transition to democracy happens, the MENA region would have changed so drastically that many of the ‘Power Actors’ would have to rethink their own privileged existence and spend more on the welfare of their states. When that happens, Globalisation would have earned itself pat on the back for changing lives in region long ignored by the rest of the world.

In the name of a just God

Having read Damian ‘s Thompson’s piece in today’s Telegraph , on the destruction of Islam’s heritage in its holiest place, I begin to wonder if there is a politico-demonic agenda behind state driven attempts at destroying the purity within religions. How else can you condone the modernization of Mecca by trampling on its link to antiquity, which has for centuries ensured a steady stream of devotees? How else can you justify as the Taliban blasted 3rd Century Bamiyan Buddha statues to oblivion? or in the recent past, the destruction of 15th century Muslim shrines in Timbuktu, northern Mali by hardliners.

Even within stable democratic systems, this logic still prevails,-the destruction of the Babri Mosque in India with the world’s 3rd largest security apparatus watched in mute spectacle as 2000 lives were lost in the name of God, is yet another case. Another case was the bombardment of Sikhism’s  holiest Golden Temple complex in Amritsar, in 1984 .
Moving down into history, the story of Jerusalem, holy to three major religions and yet claiming its share of daily human lives while politicians dither, stands out as another case of deliberate unresolved political stalemate

Within the emerged world, the secularization agenda of governments in the UK has brought its share of trampling on the sanctity of religions whilst creating more fundamentalists in the process.

Can we leave this behind and return to being normal children of a just creator? Can we return to the simplicity of practicing our beliefs within personal spaces and respecting everybody else as we practice them?  In the process, can we also strip statues/relics/tourist sites of its religious overtones and admire them for being works of Art that they are. In doing this, we respect the effort that would gone into creating them as well honour the creativity of religions in helping preserve culture for generations. And we also deny fundamentalists of the support, they crave to promote deviant behaviour as the destruction of cultural artifacts.

Are we as Karl marx would have put it ,moving into an era where” Religion is an opium to hold the vast masses in the state’s thrall”? Or is there something more sinister in the air?

Will the Egyptian sphinx smile or cry?

The Egyptian street protests are now in their 7th day and there seems to be no logical end to it. With a protest of this magnitude, fuelled by pent up frustration, media coverage and unprecented coordination of people across cities, you would expected either a total suppression by the regime or a victory for the people. Instead, you see Mubarak ordering the Police to take charge of the situation without firing live ammunition.( some media reports have indicated that live rounds were indeed used). The police fail to take the streets back and then the army is deployed on the same rules. Witness here the spectacle of soldiers chatting with people almost as if they were on a day’s picnic. Why, one would ask, is there no move on the part of any of the belligerents to end this? As always, the answer has to be found in within a web, we call, foreign affairs. Big Brother USA has a vested interest in maintaining a status quo in Egypt, partly for strategic reasons (The Suez falling into wrong hands???) as well as in ensuring Israel’s military balance in the region remains unchallenged. Another could be a need to prop up monarchies/autocracies across a region which produces some much of world oil and in turn control them by manipulating regional rivalries. Egypt could be the breath that brings down the whole house of cards.The US has not publicly denounced Mubarak nor has it supported it. Sending a former ambassador, Frank G Wisner, as a private citizen is also a non- committal stance. Mubarak has tried to play his own set of moves, reshuffling a cabinet, creating a line of sucession outside the family, and raising the spectre of anarchy if he were to fall. All of which leads us to the third part of the web. The Egytian Army has been the backbone on which a post- King Farouk era was forged. It has been well regarded by the common man as a defender of its sovereignity.(How much of that is true or a myth depends on your interpretation of the Yom Kippur War). the army is also the fountain of power from which the pharoahs, ancient and contemporary derive their legitimacy to rule, unlike the monarchies which obtain the right to rule from divine grace. The army by its actions wants to present a Iron fist clad in a velvet glove as they walk a line between the people and Mubarak. Some reports have even gone to suggest that Mubarak is now being told what to do by the army. But why does the Army want to retain power?  An entity that recieves over 1% of the country’s GDP as foreign aid from the US would not want to rock the boat, even if it needs to sacrifice some old pharaohs. Nor does it want to be subject to a greater power than its own after almost 50years of indirect rule.What do the protesters want? Nothing more than Mubarak quitting. No future plans are being discussed. The opposition groups are in opposition to each other and cannot unite. All one hears is the cacophony of ‘Go Mubarak!!!. Perhaps, the Army might graciously ask Mubarak to leave and with an estimated 20billion in , the Sphinx might attempt a wry smile as he savours life in the midst of plenty. For the people with their immediate need met, they might look forward to another sphinx ruling for 30 more years.

Loading...