Fight Club - When Does Life Have No Purpose? :: essays research papers

David Fincher’s Fight Club is a narrated movie that explains the journey of the narrator’s mid-life crisis; the movie begins with the ending scene, a microscopic view of a gun inside of the narrator’s mouth. All of the particles and germs are very visible to give the viewer an idea of what to expect. This scene suggests a dirty, winding, and emotional journey that the narrator will take. The narrator at first finds himself with insomnia. At the same time he is obsessed with consumer goods–he buys complete sets of everything. He works for a major automobile company as an agent who decides whether the cost of a recall is cheap enough to make profit. His job significantly sets up his depressed life. Day after day he travels to examine cars in accidents with remains of human dead burned to the seats. It is his job by which he feels so burdened, and he seems to try to get away from it by buying furniture. The story revolves around these three examples. The gun is full of bacteria; furniture is bought by money, a dirty obsession, and his job deals with car accidents. The Narrator has surrounded himself with consumer goods to occupy and satisfy himself, but when they can no longer satisfy him he breaks down emotionally. Although David Fincher put significance on soap as being a major part of the movie, it doesn’t relate to every instance that it should. In this movie, soap is used to cleanse the body of luxury goods. Fight Club is all about eliminating things that aren’t necessary. Soap cleanses, and several times soap is not used. When they are fighting in the fight club, blood is a dominant image. It is a sign of being able to let go of all your material goods, if you can let go of your physical health. Here soap has no significance; The Narrator, however, uses soap in what could be his possible financial future. By selling this highly profitable soap he can make an easy living, but it would change nothing in his life. The significance of soap with fighting, therefore, is not easily visible. This is what makes visible the fact that fighting releases anger. If blood is noteworthy and is not to be cleaned off, then it is accepted. The narrator soon finds himself with a severe case of insomnia. He describes it: â€Å"with insomnia, nothing is real.

Rawls Trawls’ Theory of Justice, Hayeks Theory of Freedom

Friedrich Hayek was a British philosopher who wrote from his experiences of World War one in which he served. It is known that based on Hayek’s experience in the war and his desire to help avoid the mistakes that had orchestrated to the war; he was led to this career in which he developed the theory of freedom. Hayek argues that there are many definitions for the term freedom; however he refers to this as â€Å"freedom without coercion. Hayek also speaks to individual and personal freedom in which he argues that a man is either free or not free. Being free he says is acting on one’s own will and not the will of another and emphasises the idea that there are two types of freedom; freedom to and freedom from. When Hayek speaks to freedom, he makes mention of Political, Personal/Inner as well as Economic freedom. John Rawls on the other hand was an American philosopher who wrote from his experiences of World War two. Rawls developed the theory of Justice. Justice is a concept of moral relevance based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, equity or fairness. Rawls refers to â€Å"justice as fairness† and from the theory of justice, the liberty and difference principle was derived. Rawls argues that â€Å"Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as information is of preparations of thought. † From the theory of justice the original position and the veil of ignorance were also developed. You can read also  Justice System Position Paper   These concepts will be explained further. The aim of this essay is to outline and formulate major distinctions between the two theories listed above by stating the similarities as well as the differences that tells them apart and evaluate both theories, subsequently justifying which of the two provides a better explanation. As was mentioned before, Hayek’s theory of freedom refers to freedom from coercion. The term coercion refers to the act of compelling by force or authority. In Hayek’s words â€Å"coercion can be explained as control of a person's environment or circumstances such that â€Å"he is forced to act not according to a coherent plan of his own but to serve the ends of another,† and so â€Å"unable to use either his own intelligence or knowledge or to follow his own aims. † Hayek went on to say that coercion means having control for the environment so that he/she acts in the interest of the person rather than the interest of their own. Coercion he argues is will, because it removes or eliminates the individual as a thinking person that should be valued and asserts that the only way to prevent coercion is through the threat of coercion. The coerced lacks the ability of using his knowledge for his own purposes, since the effective use of aptitude requires that one be able to predict to an extent the conditions that exist in one’s environment and adhere to an arrangement of action. â€Å"But if the facts which determine our plans are under the sole control of another, our actions will be similarly controlled. † p. 34 For Hayek coercion means doing the will of another and not his own and he gives an example of this, â€Å"Even if the threat of starvation to me and perhaps to my family impels me to accept a distasteful job at a very low wage, I am not coerced by him or anybody else. So long as the act that has placed me in my predicament is not aimed at making me do or not do specific things, so long as t he intent of the act that harms me is not to make me serve another person's ends, its effect on my freedom is not different from that of any natural calamity a fire or a Rood that destroys my house or an accident that harms my health. p. 137 However, what may seem to be coercion to some may not be coercion to others, hence, Hayek outlines that the following conditions must be satisfied in order to say that a person has been coerced; The coerced person's environment must be controlled by another so that, while he does choose, he is made to choose what will serve the ends of another rather than his own ends, The coercer must threaten to inflict harm with the intention, thereby, to bring about certain ends, That which the coercer denies to me must be crucial to my existence or to what I most value, That the act of the coercer must be directed at me. Upon careful examination, it will become apparent that Hayek's definition of coercion is radically defective, primarily because it provides no objective and clear cut standard of what is a coercive act but rather leaves it to individual judgment (with reference to what the individual most values) the determination of when a coercive action has been committed. Hayek speaks also about personal freedom and this he explains as â€Å"inner freedom† which he explains as metaphysical or subject freedom which is the extent to which a person guides his actions by his/her own will, reasons and lasting conviction as opposed to momentarily impulses or circumstances. Economic freedom, which refers to freedom from enterprise or state control and Political freedom which refers to freedom from arbitrary rule or arrest and the opportunities people have to determine who should govern and by what principles. To Hayek, the existence of government is not only permissible but also desirable and he considers, as most classical liberals did, that defence, police, and the administration of justice are indispensable functions of government. He asserts that these governmental activities are not hindrances to a free society, but its guarantees and he argues that the only interference in freedom government should have is preventing one from coercing another. For Hayek freedom means the rejection of direct control over individuals’ efforts and he argues that knowledge must be available, free, unrestricted or controlled and that our faith in freedom should rest on the belief that it will create forces of good rather than evil and that the benefits we derive from freedom depends heavily on how others use it, however, he argues also that we cannot achieve certainty in human affairs so we best make use of the knowledge we have. Thus we should stick to the rules of experience which best serves our way of thinking, although we don’t know the consequences of using this knowledge. He believes civilization is progress and progress is civilization. Hayek also speaks about liberty and stresses that the true meaning of liberty is liberty under the rule of law, rather than unlimited liberty. It follows that freedom of economic activity means ‘freedom under the law, not the absence of all government action’ (Hayek, 1960, p. 220). Rawls on the other hand speaks about the theory of justice, from this the liberty and difference theory was derived and the â€Å"original/initial position† as well as the â€Å"veil of ignorance†. Rawls argued that two principles serve to organize society; the â€Å"liberty principle† which is the first principle of justice that speaks to the fact that person is to have an equal right to the most freedom compatible with everyone else having that same amount of freedom and the â€Å"difference principle† which is the second principle which is an egalitarian conception that unless there is a distribution that makes both parties better off an equal distribution is to be preferred and speaks to the fact that social economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage and attached to the position and offices open to all. Primary Goods is a term used by Rawls to cover all the things that the Two Principles of Justice are going to divide up. They are things like rights, opportunities, incomes, power etcetera. Rawls He rooted the original position in and extended the concept of â€Å"social contract† previously advocated by Hobbes, Rousseau, and Locke which made the principles of justice the object of the contract binding members of society together. The original position as that which representatives with limited information about the interests that they represent attempt to agree as to how society should be ordered and the veil of ignorance is the state of not knowing or having all knowledge or information for the alternatives but arriving at a position. This deal with the initial/original position which sets up a fair procedure that any principle agreed will be just. Rawls also speak of social justice which he states ‘is to be regarded as providing in the first instance a standard whereby the distributive aspects of the basic structure of society are to be assessed’; therefore, ‘they may not elucidate the justice†¦of voluntary cooperative arrangements or procedures for making contractual agreements’ (Rawls, 1999, pp. 7-8). For both theories, it can so far be seen that although both theories are different they also have similarities. The first similarity is that Rawls and Hayek both worked from the same tradition-liberalism in which they argued that individuals should to be free to pursue their own idea of the good life and that the state's role is as an enabler. Secondly, they both agree on â€Å"the essential point,† which is that principles of justice apply to the rules of institutions and social practices, but not to distributions of particular things across specific persons. Thirdly, the government is important and that the government exists to serve the people; the people do not exist to serve the government. Finally, they both argue agreed on the idea that the handicaps should be provided for. The differences as it relates to both theories are that; firstly, Hayek is from an economic standpoint while Rawls is more rationale and social. The main difference between both is their attitude to equality as Rawls believed in egalitarian and social justice which are two concepts that Hayek rejected as Rawls believe that each individual has different skill, talents and understanding hence they cannot be equal. Hayek argues that †Whether he is free or not does not depend on the range of choice but on whether he can expect to shape his course of action in accordance with his present intentions, or whether somebody else has power o to manipulate the conditions as to make him act according to that person’s will rather than his own. (Hayek, 1960, p. 13) His view is that one should work in order to achieve what they want and with this point of view, Hayek argues that ‘we may be free and yet miserable’ (Hayek, 1960, p. 18). In relation to Rawls’ definition of liberty, Hayek stresses that the true meaning of liberty is liberty under the rule of law, rather than unlimited liberty. It follows that freedom of economic activity means ‘freedom under the law, not the absence of all government action’ (Hayek, 1960, p. 220). Also, Hayek equates social justice with distributive justice and dismisses both of them. He claims that ‘liberalism aims at commutative justice and socialism at distributive justice’ and that ‘distributive justice is irreconcilable with freedom in the choice of one’s activities’ (Hayek, 1960, p. 440). In conclusion, I believe that Rawls theory of justice gives a better explanation as it is more accurate, I see this theory as the more applicable of the two to our society rather than that of Hayek’s as his notion of freedom and liberty is too wide and far-fetched for our developing societies. His notion on inequality and giving credit to the countries which are ahead is quite debatable, Rawls however believes in equal distribution of wealth. Rawls believes that if each individual is given the same opportunity then society will be just. Hayek on the other hand believes that each individual’s ability, skills and talent is different thus equality is impossible; this is to some extent true but distribution of state goods should be just and fair. Each individual should have equal opportunity regardless of social class or position. For Hayek an individual should be free to do as he so desires. How applicable would this be to our society? He argues that the government’s role should only to be implement sanctions for an individual’s action if they so believe that this individual has infringed on another’s right. Hayek further makes vague arguments that that the government should recognize and protect private domain and in doing so and that private persons will be given rules as to what the government will do in different types of situation. Again- inequality protruding.

Substituent Definition

Definition: A substituent is an atom or functional group that replaces a hydrogen atom on a hydrocarbon.In chemical structures, generic substituents are denoted by a capital R. If the substituent is a halide, a capital X.

The 9 Best Podcasts for Learning French in 2019

Analysis Of Gertrude Stein s I Ain t No Oxford

With so many rules in the English language, it is easy for one to wonder how they were created. The dictionary, for example, was only created a few hundred years ago by people who thought that was how language was supposed to be. Many artists have had the mission to go forward and break these â€Å"rules.† Gertrude Stein’s Tender Buttons, bill bissett’s â€Å"text bites,† and John Agard’s â€Å"I Ain’t No Oxford Don† question rules of grammar and synaptic normality. By the way, these poems disrupt words, use non-standard prose, and have ambiguous interpretations they break the rules of grammar and disrupt the formal laws of language, inducing new ways of about the how one produces meaning. Gertrude Stein was not always known as a writer. She became†¦show more content†¦A line just distinguishes it† (Stein, p.6). While asking what is the flattering length she ends up defining it by a line. A line can only be defined by a contour or outline. It cannot be defined by actual matter. Therefore, the serene length ends up being defined by not being able to be defined. This gives readers an unending openness to interpretation and perspective. In Gertrude Stein’s â€Å"Water Raining† she leaves the reader without any certainty. Stein writes â€Å"Water is astonishing and difficult altogether makes a meadow and a stroke† (Stein, p. 10). Without the use of punctuation, the reader is able to interrupt the poem according to how one sees fit. Placing a period after â€Å"astonishing† (Stein, p. 10) makes it so the meadow and stroke are strenuous on their own. A period after â€Å"altogether† (Stein, p. 10) leave the meadow and stroke to come as an aftermath from the water. While a period after â€Å"meadow† (Stein, p. 10) gives serenity a meadow will come from water but, a stroke is an afterthought. Stein was not the only one to use visual art to make literature. bill bis sett as a visual artist and writer links his worlds together. At first glance, bill bissett’s poetry seems to be hard to understand, nonsensical, and almost a fallacy. bissett’s use of synecdoche pushes the reader to reexamine how one reads a poem in the first place. The poem flows from whole to part. Particularly in text bites† the words come across

Felons Democracy and Equal Protection Clause Free Essays

Coleman Wahlborg Richard English IV, 1A 9 September 2011 Felons and Voting This year 5. 3 million people will be unable to vote not because they are mentally unable, not because they are underage, but because they are felons and ex-felons (Holding, 2006). Ex-felons are people who committed a felony and have served their punishment, dictated by the judiciary system, and are living in the community. We will write a custom essay sample on Felons: Democracy and Equal Protection Clause or any similar topic only for you Order Now When previous convicts are released from prison they are considered citizens again. Being a citizen, one is promised certain rights and responsibilities. As an ex felon one is a free citizen who can exercises the rights and responsibilities granted by the Constitution of the United States of America. Since former felons have earned their rights back shouldn’t this include voting? Whether ex-felons should be able to vote or not is a very popular issue among people. The two sides in the issue can be fairly biased. Some people might know felons that they think should be able to vote and others are on the other side of the argument. However, research says that there are several reasons why ex-felons should and shouldn’t be able to vote. The Fourteenth Amendment states, â€Å"no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or the immunities of citizens in the United States. † This law sets forth that citizens have privileges and no one has the right to deprive citizens of these privileges. Current felons are not members of society, but previous felons’ civic rights are restored when they complete their sentence. Denying ex-felons the right to vote abolishes their rights (Krajick, 2004). Only two states allow current felons to vote, and ten states permanently prohibit former felons from voting (Zotti, 2000). This means that people who used poor judgment in the past, paid their debt to society, and were released from jail, are still being punished and shunned from being normal everyday citizens. Prohibiting ex-felon voting is not only a punishment to them, but also to society (Should felons be allowed to vote, 2008). The people of United States will be fortunate if 40% of eligible voters cast a ballot for the next presidential election (Holding, 2006). â€Å"Instead of prohibiting felon voting, we should require it† (Holding, 2006). We should be finding ways to get people to the polls, not keeping them away. Ex-felons who are going to return to their ways are not going to be interested in having a voice in the government. Individuals who are not already deterred from crime by the threat of confinement are not likely to be swayed by the prospect of losing their right to vote (Mauer, 2004). Individuals who have changed are the ones that want to vote, and the ones who have not changed will most likely wind up in the criminal justice system again â€Å"Voting is not a privilege; it is the basic right that defines a citizen. Those denied it are, in effect, stateless — people without a country† (Krajick, 2004). Voting is a right that defines a citizen in the since of when a person votes they are considered responsible and knowledgeable for not just complaining about the government but casting a vote to try to change things. When one does not vote, and is disconnected from the government in which they live, and they are stateless because they have no control over decisions that are made. The efforts to block ex-felons from voting makes those individuals feel more detached from society, which increases the chance that they will continue to break the law (Williams, 2010). Past felons feel they cannot get involved in their government because they are turned away, which essentially leads so many ex-felons to resort to their old ways. In 2000, the Alexander v. Mineta Supreme court case that dealt with the Equal Protection Clause came to the conclusion; â€Å"The Equal Protection Clause does not protect the right of all citizens to vote, but rather the right of all qualified citizens to vote. However, the Eighth Amendment prohibits excessive sanctions, and demands that punishment for crimes should be graduated and proportioned to the offense (Karlan, 2004). Therefore, felons who are released from jail have been punished for their crime; more punishment on their part is inhumane of society. The states that continue to exclude all felons permanently are outliers, within the United States and the world (Karlan, 2004). People who argue that ex felons should not have the right to vote believe that they have presented poor judgment and it is absurd to let them help in he choosing of our representatives (Carlson, 2006). This is agreeable to a certain extent, but when one takes a deeper look, the harsh answer is former convicts are stereotyped by most people. While these previous felons have presented poor judgment in the past, who is to say they will never change (Chapman, 2006)? The government lets ex-convicts marry, have children, drive and have the freedom of religion. In many places, the assumption is that ex-felons cannot be trusted to help choose our leader. If we thought criminals could never be reformed, we would never let them out in the first place (Chapman, 2006). There are many reasons why felons should be able to take place in the voting system; however there are reasons why they shouldn’t be able to. Felons become felons by presenting an act of poor judgment in most cases. Felons cannot vote for similar reasons that children can’t vote. â€Å"We don’t let children vote, for instance, or noncitizens, or the mentally incompetent. Why? Because we don’t trust them and their judgment. We have different reasons for not trusting them, but it seems to me that that is their common denominator† (Clegg, 2004). People who have committed crimes in their life have already shown us that they are not trustworthy people (Clegg, 2004). â€Å"And, as to equity, if you’re not willing to follow the rules yourself, you shouldn’t be able to make the rules for everyone else† (Clegg, 2004). Because voting determines in the long run who will make the rules for our country, there is no reason why the country should allow people who can’t follow the rules, vote on the rules. Now, I will freely concede that there are felons who ought to have their right to vote restored, but that should be done on a case-by-case basis, weighing (a) how serious the crime was, (b) how recently it was committed, (c) whether there has been a series/pattern of crimes, and (d) whether the individual has otherwise shown that he or she has turned his or her life around† (C legg, 2004). Clegg states that not all felons are in the same category. It is understandable that murderers should not be allowed to vote. On the other hand, some people really have gone through a long process to change their life around for the better. The right to vote is not granted to those under the age of eighteen. That age limitation demonstrates that voting rights may be restricted when there is reason to doubt the potential voter’s good judgment† (Latham, 2006). Latham shares similar ideas to Clegg on how the age limitation on voting and whether felons should be able to vote are connected due to prior judgment or lack there of. The interests of convicted felons might also differ from the primary interest of the American citizen body who want to be protected from criminals (Latham, 2006). A primary issue for the convicted felons as a whole is that 2/3 of felons released commit crimes within the next three years; not counting the ones that were not caught. Holding, Reynolds. â€Å"Why Can’t Felons Vote? – TIME. † Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews – TIME. com. 1 Nov. 2006. Web. 19 Oct. 2011. Krajick, Kevin. â€Å"Why Can’t Ex-Felons Vote? (washingtonpost. com). † Wahlborg 2 The Washington Post: National, World D. C. Area News and Headlines – The Washington Post. 18 Aug. 2004. Web. 19 Oct. 2011. http://www. washingtonpost. com/wp-dyn/articles/A9785- 2004Aug17. html How to cite Felons: Democracy and Equal Protection Clause, Papers

4Ps Marketing Mix Selling Proposition

Question: Discuss about the4Ps Marketing Mix for Selling Proposition. Answer: Introduction According to Bowman and Gatigton (2010), the concept of marketing mix refers to a combination of controllable tools of marketing that a business firm can utilize to promote the sales of its products in its target market. A marketing mix is crucial in the process of marketing because it captures and promotes the unique selling proposition of the involved product by differentiating it from its competitors. A marketing mix is divided into four categories of variables commonly referred to as the 4Ps. The 4Ps are the Product, Price, Place, and Promotion as shown in figure 1 below. Many business organizations incorporate the 4Ps in their marketing efforts to ensure that they reach their target markets successfully. In line with these aspects, this paper is going to examine the importance of 4P marketing mix in the marketing process using illustrations from the Samsung Electronics. Figure 1: Retrieved from, https://marketingmix.co.uk/ Importance of 4Ps marketing mix in the marketing process Product This refers to the tangible or intangible good that is being offered to the target consumers. The good or services that is offered to the consumers is vital in the marketing process because it what satisfies the needs of the consumers (Mahajan and Mahajan, 2015). In this regard, the product should be designed in such a manner that it meets the needs of the target market. Because of the heterogeneous characteristics of the target market, it is important that a business organization should offer a wide variety of products that meets the needs of the different categories of consumers in the target market. One example of a successful marketing process where different categories of products have been successfully offered to consumers is with Samsung Electronics (Bhasin, 2016). Samsung has a portfolio consisting of different products, for example, smartphones, household appliances such as fridges, home theaters, microwaves, televisions, and washing machines. These products are offered in d ifferent designs, variety, packages, and quality (Lancaster and Withey, 2007). The ability of Samsung to offer a wide variety of products to consumers has enabled the company to expand its market share. In addition to this, all the products are of this company are of high-quality, and therefore, the consumption of one product establishes customer loyalty. Winning the trust and loyalty of customers has facilitated the marketing process of Samsung products across the globe because retaining customers is easier that attracting new ones. Price This refers to the amount of cash at which the product is offered at to consumers. In the marketing process, the pricing strategy is critical in promoting the sales of a given product (Bowman and Gatigton, 2010). Pricing as a marketing mix involves the offering of discounts, credit terms, and providing of allowances to the target consumers. Current consumers are very sensitive to prices at which goods are offered, and therefore, it is necessary that a business firm should implement effective pricing strategies. Samsung has successfully used the pricing strategy as a marketing mix in its marketing process (Littleson, 2007). Samsung has successfully utilized the skimming pricing strategy to remain ahead of its competitors and to improve its sales volume and profit margin. Here, Samsung introduces high-value products such as Samsung Edge smartphone and sells them at high prices before they become obsolete. In addition to this Samsung also utilizes the competitive pricing strategy. Here it offers products for all categories of consumers, for example, are expensive products for the high class and cheaper products for the middle and lower class ((Bhasin, 2016)). Place This refers to the channels over which the product can be accessed by the consumers. The major objective of all businesses is to make profits through the sales of their products and to make sales, and hence, it is mandatory to reach the target consumers. The selection of the appropriate channel is critical because it determines whether the products offered will reach the intended market for the sales to take place. Some of the common channels of distribution include wholesale and retail outlets. In the modern technology-driven society, the Internet has also emerged as a major channel of distribution of products through online shops. In this regard, it is critical that business organizations should choose the most appropriate channels over which to offer their products to the target consumers. Samsung Electronics has effectively utilized place as a marketing mix in its marketing process (Bhasin, 2016). Samsung Electronics makes use of selective distribution intensity strategy to distr ibute its products to target consumers. The consumers can acquire this product from several but selected outlets such as Walmart stores, The Kroger Co., Costco, and The Home Depot (Burrows, 2008). There are also various intermediaries in the indirect marketing channel play different roles to bring value to customers. The agents contact the wholesalers regarding the availability of this product, and hence, enables the goods to move quickly from the manufacturers. Promotions Promotion refers to the strategies that are used to promote the product and persuade the target audience to purchase it. These include strategies for product promotion such as advertising and product promotion (Ritcher, 2012). Promotional efforts are aimed at presenting the features and benefits of the product involved so as to attract consumers. Samsung Electronics have successfully utilized promotion in its marketing process across the globe. This company has used a combination of both advertisement and product promotion to highlight the benefits of its products and to increase its sales volume (Bhasin, 2016). Samsung advertises its products over television and internet platforms developed and developing countries, and this has enabled it to expand its market share by reaching new consumers. For example, in the year 2014, Samsung expanded its market share by 5% in the Asian region through advertising and product promotion (Obhrai, 2015). Conclusion In summary, the marketing consists of four elements, product, price, place, and promotion. Marketing mix facilitates the planning and execution of a marketing plan, and hence, it influences an increase in demand for the involved product. A business that offers high-quality products succeeds in its marketing process. Effective pricing strategy also helps a business to make more sales. These have to be incorporated by the use of effective product promotion methods and appropriate channels to reach the target market. The incorporation of the marketing mix contributes to a successful business as demonstrated by Samsung Electronics. References List Bhasin, H. (2016). Marketing mix of Samsung 4P of Samsung. [Online]: Available at: https://www.marketing91.com/marketing-mix-of-samsung/ Bowman, D. Gatigton, H. (2010). Market Response and Marketing Mix Models: Trends and Research Opportunities. Hanover, MA: Now Publishers, Inc. Lancaster, G., Withey, F. (2007). Marketing fundamentals. Burlington, MA: Butterworth- Heinemann. Littleson, R. (2007). Supply chain trends: What's in, what's out. Manufacturing.net. Retrieved September 29 2016, from https://www.manufacturing.net/articles/2007/02/supply- chain-trends-whats-in-whats-out Mahajan, J. P. Mahajan, A. (2015). Marketing Management. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House. Obhrai, P. (2015). Marketing Strategies of Samsung in India. International Journal of Research in Humanities Social Sciences, 3(6), PP. 46-52. Piercy, N. Evans, M. (2015). Managing marketing information. New York, NY: Routledge. Ritcher, T. (2012). International Marketing Mix Management: Theoretical Framework, Contingency and Empirical Findings from the World-Markets. Berlin: Logos Verlag Berlin GmbH.