Practicing Reporting Phrases August 2006Here's the next thread. Please make sure to review the previous two threads, as well, as they are equally important for your exam!
Exercise 1:
Choose various essay writing/presentation phrases we've worked through and use them in context of answering the following question:
Please compare the tools "electronic conferencing" and "groupware".
Remember: The focus of the exercise is not primarily content. Rather, the aim is to increase your level of comfort with various elegant writing phrases.
Business report on: Compare the tools “electronic conferencing” and “groupware”
Both electronic conferencing and groupware are part of a topic that is extra ordinary important for companies nowadays: Communication – to be more detailed communication technology.
Of course there are many more technologies supporting communication inside and outside a firm as fax machines, voice mail, e-mail these features are well known to most people. Rather less common are electronic conferencing and groupware which should be explained more detailed before comparing them.
Electronic conferencing is a computer based system that allows people to communicate simultaneously on one and the same document from different locations via software or telephone. Videoconferencing is one of the most known electronic conferencing methods – it allows managers to see and talk to each other without staying in the same room or even being in the same country. Whereas groupware is software that connects members of a group for shared mail distribution, electronic meetings appointments and group writing. The most known programmes are Lotus Notes and Nescape Communicator.
Both features support communication, electronic conferencing enables members of a company to overcome distances, reduce their amount of travelling and in this way save money and time.
Groupware is suitable for the top management as well as for lower positions – it simplifies the daily work. Information on one topic is easily passed on to and shared with everybody who can make use of it. It basically simplifies the communication process, eliminates the possibility to accidentally forget a person and makes everything much quicker and therefore more effective!
Nowadays a company that wants to do successful business and be a strong competition in the market has to have at least some of the above mentioned technical devices. But only owning them doesn’t boost you automatically to the peak of the market employees and most important managers have to know how to use them properly!
Re: Practicing Reporting Phrases August 2006
Business report - Compare 4 types of non-deposit institutions discussed by Griffin/Ebert – name advantages and disadvantages of each
Griffin and Ebert mention in their book “Business” identified four different kinds of so called non-deposit institutions as the most important of their kind: pension funds, insurance companies, finance companies and securities dealers.
First (of all) defining the different types of non-deposit institutions will facilitate the discussion of each’s (is possible to write it like that?) advantages and disadvantages.
Looking at pension funds which are a non-deposit pool of funds managed to provide retirement income for its members nowadays importance of such a fund should be emphasized. People regularly pay a certain amount to the institution and beginning with the first day of their retirement they get refunded a certain amount every month (un-?)till the day they die.
Depending on the government in some countries the state takes care of pension funds for the workforce in other parts of the world nobody except of the employee himself takes care of this. According to that you can divide pension funds into public and private.
The biggest disadvantage of a pension fund is that you don’t have that much money for spending when you are young but this contra point is widely overruled by the big advantage that you can enjoy your pension without worrying over each cent.
Now turning the attention to insurance companies which are non-deposit institutions that invest funds collected as premiums charged for insurance coverage. Insurances are playing with probabilities – how likely is it that something might happen to the client?
There exist many different kinds of insurances and it’s wise to have at least some as an example a health insurance or if you drive a car an automobile insurance wouldn’t be a bad idea. Some people insist on a life insurance. Nowadays you can insure almost everything – even parts of your body – as doctors sometimes do it.
It’s logical, being insured is a good thing, if something happens to the insured item you the company will refund it. You and your beloved are on the secure side but as almost everything else people can overdo it – they pay huge amounts for insurances they will most probably never need. So thinking about insurances should always be done quite reasonably!
The third non-deposit institution mentioned by Griffin/Ebert is the finance company which is specialized in making loans to businesses and consumers. Basically this is all about lending a certain amount of money to an entrepreneur, a company or a private. These non-deposit institutions rely on the credibility of the other person and how likely it is that they are able to pay them back the borrowed amount including interests.
The advantages of loans are that you get the money quickly and you can pay it back bit by bit. The effects of the disadvantages are obvious when people are not able to pay back their debts. Depending on how the non-deposit institution reacts they can lose everything, their property, their family, their liberty.
Last but not least there are securities investment dealers a non-deposit institution that buy and sells stocks and bonds for investors and for its own accounts.
These so called brokers also deal with risky stuff. Investing money – which often isn’t their own - in bonds or stocks and hoping that their value will rise over time so they gain a fortune by selling them.
This business is also quite risky, one wrong decision and you could be ruined for life but if you make the right choice Dagobert Duck could be nothing compared to you.
So all four above mentioned non-deposit institutions have a few things in common: risk and the degree of probability: will you die young or as a Methuselah? How likely is it that certain things might happen to you? And did you do the right choice to put your trust in something?
Re: Practicing Reporting Phrases August 2006
Compare the terms “absolute advantage” and “comparative advantage” – what does a country have or the other
Having an advantage always means that something is better than something else. Griffin and Ebert are using the expressions “absolute advantage” and “comparative advantage” to explain two different economical situations. Therefore having a closer look on the definition of each term is necessary to be able to discuss the difference between them.
The term “absolute advantage” is usually used when a country is able to produce a service or good much better which means at a much higher quality of much cheaper than any other country in the world. You could compare it to a monopoly status of a company – no other company is able to produce the good at all or at such a high quality so you have no competitor in your market. Although there are some monopolistic companies in the world it’s hard to say that there is a country that has a definite absolute advantage over all other countries. It’s doubtful that there exists one single country in this world that can produce a good or service that nobody could copy at all. Nevertheless to give an example Brazil is leading in the production of high quality coffee beans, France is known to produce the world’s best wines. Probably the production of Champagne could be seen as and absolute advantage of France due to the fact that only the sparkling wine produced in the French region named Champagne is allowed to be marketed and sold as Champagne – everything else is just a sparkling wine.
Now turning to the second term “comparative advantage” the main difference between “absolute” and “comparative” should be highlighted. The definition used by Griffin & Ebert tells that it’s the ability to produce some products more efficiently or better than other products. In this case the point of comparing countries and their production ability was crossed out – it’s about the competition within one country. To make it more clear an example should be given: Austria has a comparative advantage in producing fresh water fish over salt water fish – just because of the fact that Austria doesn’t have access to the sea. Or looking at the Arabian states – they have a comparative advantage in producing crud oil over producing fresh fruits.
As shown there is quite a big difference between comparative and absolute advantages, nevertheless both factors are important for the economy and trade between countries. Therefore these elements should be carefully examined before opening up or expanding a business.
Re: Practicing Reporting Phrases August 2006Original
Both electronic conferencing and groupware are part of a topic that is extra ordinary important for companies nowadays: Communication – to be more detailed communication technology.
Of course there are many more technologies supporting communication inside and outside a firm as fax machines, voice mail, e-mail these features are well known to most people. Rather less common are electronic conferencing and groupware which should be explained more detailed before comparing them.
Electronic conferencing is a computer based system that allows people to communicate simultaneously on one and the same document from different locations via software or telephone. Videoconferencing is one of the most known electronic conferencing methods – it allows managers to see and talk to each other without staying in the same room or even being in the same country. Whereas groupware is software that connects members of a group for shared mail distribution, electronic meetings appointments and group writing. The most known programmes are Lotus Notes and Nescape Communicator.
Both features support communication, electronic conferencing enables members of a company to overcome distances, reduce their amount of travelling and in this way save money and time.
Groupware is suitable for the top management as well as for lower positions – it simplifies the daily work. Information on one topic is easily passed on to and shared with everybody who can make use of it. It basically simplifies the communication process, eliminates the possibility to accidentally forget a person and makes everything much quicker and therefore more effective!
Nowadays a company that wants to do successful business and be a strong competition in the market has to have at least some of the above mentioned technical devices. But only owning them doesn’t boost you automatically to the peak of the market employees and most important managers have to know how to use them properly!
Korrektur
Both electronic conferencing and groupware are parts of a topic that is extraordinarily important for companies nowadays, namely communication, or, to be more precise, communication technology.
Of course there are many more technologies supporting communication inside and outside a firm such as fax machines, voice mail, e-mail. These features are well known to most people. Rather less common are electronic conferencing and groupware, which should be explained in more detail before comparing them.
Electronic conferencing is a computer based system that allows people to communicate simultaneously on one and the same document from different locations via software or telephone. Videoconferencing is one of the most known electronic conferencing methods. It allows managers to see and talk to each other without staying in the same room or even being in the same country. In contrast, groupware is software that connects members of a group for shared mail distribution, electronic meetings appointments and group writing. The most well-known programmes are Lotus Notes and Nescape Communicator.
Both features support communication, electronic conferencing enable members of a company to overcome distances, reduce their amount of travelling and thereby save money and time.
Groupware is suitable for the top management as well as for lower positions. It simplifies the daily work. Information on one topic is easily passed on to and shared with everybody who can make use of it. It basically simplifies the communication process, eliminates the possibility of accidentally forgeting a person and makes everything much quicker and therefore more effective!
Nowadays a company that wants to do successful business and be a strong competitor in the market has to have at least some of the abovementioned technical devices. But only owning them doesn’t automatically boost you to the peak of the market. Employees and, most importantly, managers have to know how to use them properly!
Gut und sehr ausführlich beantwortet. Dein Englischniveau ist grammatikalisch eigentlich sehr gut. Kleine Punkte gab es lediglich in ein paar Stilfragen, da man bei einem Bericht (wie auch auf Deutsch) gewisse Dinge nicht ganz so salop formulieren sollte:
1) "nowadays: Communication – to be more detailed communication technology. ": Das wäre in einem E-Mail z.B. total ok und ich würde bei der Prüfung auch nicht allzu viele Stilpunkte abziehen. Stilistisch viel schöner ist es aber, statt einem Doppelpunkt ", namely ..." zu verwenden und statt dem Bindestrich in diesem Fall etwas wie " or, to be more precise, ..."
2) "fax machines, voice mail, e-mail these features are well known to most people.": Das ist ein wichtigerer Fehler. Du beginnst hier mit "These features..." einen neuen Gedanken, d.h. mach auch einen neuen Satz daraus (auf Deutsch würde man auch nicht "Es gibt Faxgeräte, Voice Mail, E Mail diese Tools sind wohlbekannt" als einen Satz schreiben)
3) "explained more detailed": Die Formulierung ist immer "in more detail"
4) "methods – it allows..." ist kein Fehler und ich würde keinesfalls Punkte abziehen. Aber wenn Du auch hier statt Bindestrich einen neuen Satz beginnen könntest, wäre es stilistisch schöner.
5) "Whereas groupware is software that connects members of a group for shared mail distribution, electronic meetings appointments and group writing. ": Ein alter Klassiker: "Whereas" bedeutet "während" und wie im Deutschen muss in einem Satz der Vergleich vorhanden sein (d.h. "Während X das macht, macht Y das."). Deine Alternativen: entweder (1) "whereas" klein schreiben, ein Komma davor ansetzen und an den Vorsatz anhängen oder statt "whereas" "In contrast" verwenden.
Re: Practicing Reporting Phrases August 2006Original
Griffin and Ebert mention in their book “Business” identified four different kinds of so called non-deposit institutions as the most important of their kind: pension funds, insurance companies, finance companies and securities dealers.
First (of all) defining the different types of non-deposit institutions will facilitate the discussion of each’s (is possible to write it like that?) advantages and disadvantages.
Looking at pension funds which are a non-deposit pool of funds managed to provide retirement income for its members nowadays importance of such a fund should be emphasized. People regularly pay a certain amount to the institution and beginning with the first day of their retirement they get refunded a certain amount every month (un-?)till the day they die.
Depending on the government in some countries the state takes care of pension funds for the workforce in other parts of the world nobody except of the employee himself takes care of this. According to that you can divide pension funds into public and private.
The biggest disadvantage of a pension fund is that you don’t have that much money for spending when you are young but this contra point is widely overruled by the big advantage that you can enjoy your pension without worrying over each cent.
Now turning the attention to insurance companies which are non-deposit institutions that invest funds collected as premiums charged for insurance coverage. Insurances are playing with probabilities – how likely is it that something might happen to the client?
There exist many different kinds of insurances and it’s wise to have at least some as an example a health insurance or if you drive a car an automobile insurance wouldn’t be a bad idea. Some people insist on a life insurance. Nowadays you can insure almost everything – even parts of your body – as doctors sometimes do it.
It’s logical, being insured is a good thing, if something happens to the insured item you the company will refund it. You and your beloved are on the secure side but as almost everything else people can overdo it – they pay huge amounts for insurances they will most probably never need. So thinking about insurances should always be done quite reasonably!
The third non-deposit institution mentioned by Griffin/Ebert is the finance company which is specialized in making loans to businesses and consumers. Basically this is all about lending a certain amount of money to an entrepreneur, a company or a private. These non-deposit institutions rely on the credibility of the other person and how likely it is that they are able to pay them back the borrowed amount including interests.
The advantages of loans are that you get the money quickly and you can pay it back bit by bit. The effects of the disadvantages are obvious when people are not able to pay back their debts. Depending on how the non-deposit institution reacts they can lose everything, their property, their family, their liberty.
Last but not least there are securities investment dealers a non-deposit institution that buy and sells stocks and bonds for investors and for its own accounts.
These so called brokers also deal with risky stuff. Investing money – which often isn’t their own - in bonds or stocks and hoping that their value will rise over time so they gain a fortune by selling them.
This business is also quite risky, one wrong decision and you could be ruined for life but if you make the right choice Dagobert Duck could be nothing compared to you.
So all four above mentioned non-deposit institutions have a few things in common: risk and the degree of probability: will you die young or as a Methuselah? How likely is it that certain things might happen to you? And did you do the right choice to put your trust in something?
Korrektur In their book “Business”, Griffin and Ebert identify four different kinds of so called non-deposit institutions as the most important of their kind: pension funds, insurance companies, finance companies and securities dealers.
First (of all), defining the different types of non-deposit institutions will facilitate the discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of each institution.
Looking at pension funds, which are non-deposit pools of funds managed to provide retirement income for their members, the importance of such a fund nowadays should be emphasized. People regularly pay a certain amount to the institution and beginning with the first day of their retirement, they are refunded a certain amount every month till the day they die.
Depending on the government, in some countries the state manages pension funds for the workforce while in other parts of the world, nobody except the employee himself takes care of this. According to this distinction, you can divide pension funds into public and private.
The biggest disadvantage of a pension fund is that you don’t have that much money for spending when you are young but this contra point is strongly compensated by the big advantage that you can enjoy your pension without worrying about each cent.
Now, let's turn the attention to insurance companies, which are non-deposit institutions that invest funds collected as premiums charged for insurance coverage. Insurances play with probabilities. They estimate how likely is it that something might happen to the client.
There exist many different kinds of insurances and it’s wise to have at least some forms of insurance. As an example, taking out health insurance or, if you drive a car, automobile insurance, wouldn’t be a bad idea. Some people insist on life insurance. Nowadays, you can insure almost everything – even parts of your body – as doctors sometimes do .
It’s logical that being insured is a good thing. If something happens to the insured item, the company will refund it. You and your beloved are on the secure side but as with almost everything else, people can overdo it – they pay huge amounts for insurances they will most probably never need. So thinking about taking outinsurance should always be done quite reasonably!
The third non-deposit institution mentioned by Griffin/Ebert is the finance company, which is specialized in making loans to businesses and consumers. Basically, this is all about lending a certain amount of money to an entrepreneur, a company or a private person. These non-deposit institutions rely on the credibility of the other person and how likely it is that they will be able to pay them back the borrowed amount including interest.
The advantage of loans is that you get the money quickly and you can pay it back bit by bit. The effects of the disadvantages are obvious when people are not able to pay back their debts. Depending on how the non-deposit institution reacts, they can lose everything, namely their property, their family, and their liberty.
Last but not least, there are securities investment dealers, which are a form of non-deposit institution that buy and sells stocks and bonds for investors and for its own accounts.
These so called brokers also deal with risky issues. They invest money – which often isn’t their own - in bonds or stocks and hope that their value will rise over time so they gain a fortune by selling them.
This business is also quite risky. If you make one wrong decision, you could be ruined for life, but if you make the right choice, Dagobert Duck (Uncle Scrooge) could be nothing compared to you.
So all four abovementioned non-deposit institutions have a few things in common: risk and the element of probability: will you die young or as a Methuselah? How likely is it that certain things might happen to you? And did you make the right choice to put your trust in something?
Wieder sehr ausführlich und geschickt beantwortet. Ein paar Tipps:
1) "In their book “Business”, Griffin and Ebert mention four different kinds of so called non-deposit institutions as the most important of their kind: pension funds, insurance companies, finance companies and securities dealers. ": Hier hast Du unabsichtlich "mention" und "identified" verwendet. Normalerweise würde ich für "mention" plädieren, aber in diesem Fall (da die Institute als "die wichtigsten Non-Deposits" charakterisiert werden) ist "identify" passender. Wie im vorigen Aufsatz wäre es auch hier stilistisch noch eleganter, statt ":" "... of their kind, namely pension funds..." zu verwenden.
2) "will facilitate the discussion of each’s (is possible to write it like that?) advantages and disadvantages.": Ich habe gerade im Internet nachgesehen, und es gibt gar nicht so wenige Native Speakers, die "each's" verwenden. Dennoch würde ich es aus grammatikalischer Sicht nicht empfehlen, sondern eher "each one's" bzw. den Satz so umdrehen, wie ich es oben machte.
3) "Looking at pension funds which are a non-deposit pool of funds managed to provide retirement income for its members nowadays importance of such a fund should be emphasized. ": Bei der Prüfung wäre ich mit so langen Sätzen zurückhaltend. Gerade in einer Stress-Situation neigt man dan eher zu kleinen Fehlern, die man in kürzeren Sätzen sofort erkennen würde. Da Du z.B. mit "Pension Funds" in der Mehrzahl beginnst, must Du das dann auch konsequent im Satz beibehalten. Auch das "nowadays" steht falsch. Wenn Du hingegen zwei Sätze daraus gemacht hättest, wären die bestimmt beide 100% richtig gewesen: "Pension funds are non-deposit pools of funds managed to provide retirement income for their members. Nowadays, the importance of such a fund should be emphasized."
4) "except of the employee": Nach "except" nie "of"
5) "Now turning the attention to insurance companies which are non-deposit institutions that invest funds collected as premiums charged for insurance coverage.": Hier keinen Continuous: "Now let's turn" bzw "Now we will turn"
6) "automobile insurance", "health insurance" usw. schreibt man eher ohne unbestimmten Artikel (d.h. kein "a") 7) "interests": Wenn man "interest" für "Zinsen" nimmt, dann ist das immer ohne "s"
8) "also deal with risky stuff": in einem Mail oder mündlich ok, aber im Report eher "issues" als "stuff"
9) "Investing money – which often isn’t their own - in bonds or stocks and hoping that their value will rise over time so they gain a fortune by selling them.": In diesem Aufsatz tendierst Du einige Male zum Gerund bzw. Continuous, wo es unpassend ist. Hinterfrage das, beim Korrekturlesen Deines Prüfungsaufsatzes- das könnte eine Fehlerquelle sein.
10) "above mentioned": Achtung: Das ist ein Wort ("abovementioned"); als zwei Wörter ist es grammatikalisch falsch.
Re: Practicing Reporting Phrases August 2006Original
Having an advantage always means that something is better than something else. Griffin and Ebert are using the expressions “absolute advantage” and “comparative advantage” to explain two different economical situations. Therefore having a closer look on the definition of each term is necessary to be able to discuss the difference between them.
The term “absolute advantage” is usually used when a country is able to produce a service or good much better which means at a much higher quality of much cheaper than any other country in the world. You could compare it to a monopoly status of a company – no other company is able to produce the good at all or at such a high quality so you have no competitor in your market. Although there are some monopolistic companies in the world it’s hard to say that there is a country that has a definite absolute advantage over all other countries. It’s doubtful that there exists one single country in this world that can produce a good or service that nobody could copy at all. Nevertheless to give an example Brazil is leading in the production of high quality coffee beans, France is known to produce the world’s best wines. Probably the production of Champagne could be seen as and absolute advantage of France due to the fact that only the sparkling wine produced in the French region named Champagne is allowed to be marketed and sold as Champagne – everything else is just a sparkling wine.
Now turning to the second term “comparative advantage” the main difference between “absolute” and “comparative” should be highlighted. The definition used by Griffin & Ebert tells that it’s the ability to produce some products more efficiently or better than other products. In this case the point of comparing countries and their production ability was crossed out – it’s about the competition within one country. To make it more clear an example should be given: Austria has a comparative advantage in producing fresh water fish over salt water fish – just because of the fact that Austria doesn’t have access to the sea. Or looking at the Arabian states – they have a comparative advantage in producing crud oil over producing fresh fruits.
As shown there is quite a big difference between comparative and absolute advantages, nevertheless both factors are important for the economy and trade between countries. Therefore these elements should be carefully examined before opening up or expanding a business.
Korrektur If something has an advantage over something else, it always means that something is better than something else. Griffin and Ebert use the expressions “absolute advantage” and “comparative advantage” to explain two different economical situations. Therefore, having a closer look at the definition of each term is necessary to be able to discuss the difference between them.
The term “absolute advantage” is usually used when a country is able to produce a service or good much better than another country which means at a much higher level of quality or much cheaper than another country. You could compare it to a monopoly status of a company – no other trading partner is able to produce the good at all or at such a high level of quality. Although there are some monopolistic companies in the world, it’s hard to say that there is a country that has a definite absolute advantage over all other countries. It’s doubtful that there exists one single country in this world that can produce a good or service that nobody could copy at all. Nevertheless, to give an example, Brazil leads in the production of high quality coffee beans, France is known to produce the world’s best wines. The production of champagne could probably be seen as an absolute advantage of France due to the fact that only the sparkling wine produced in the French region named Champagne is allowed to be marketed and sold as champagne – everything else is just a sparkling wine.
Now, turning to the second term, namely “comparative advantage”, the main difference between “absolute” and “comparative” will be highlighted. The definition used by Griffin & Ebert states that it’s the ability to produce some products more efficiently or better than other products in relation to another country. In case country A produces both towels and cars more efficiently than country B, specialization and trade between the two nations might still make sense. This is the case because of the following. If B specializes in producing only the product it can manufacture comparatively better (e.g. towels) and A specializes in producing only the other product (e.g. cars), then both nations can trade their surplus and end up with more products than they would have had if they'd produced both goods by themselves.
As shown, there is quite a big difference between comparative and absolute advantages. Nevertheless, both factors are important for the economy and trade between countries. Therefore, these elements should be carefully examined before opening up or expanding a business.
Sehr fleißig, aber inhaltlich nicht ganz richtig:
1) "Griffin and Ebert are using the expressions": Present Simple für eine allgemeingültige Feststellung "G & E use the..."
2) "You could compare it to a monopoly status of a company": Inhaltlich nicht ganz richtig. "Absolute Advantage" besteht nur vis-a-vis den Ländern, die in die Analyse eingehen, aber nicht automatisch gegenüber ALLEN Ländern der Erde.
3) "Brazil is leading in the production": Wieder Present Simple, da allgemeine Feststellung
4) "Now turning to the second term “comparative advantage” the main difference between “absolute” and “comparative” should be highlighted.": Ich habe in einem obigen Aufsatz gemeint, man sollte "Now let's turn" verwenden und nicht den Continuous. Das würde ich grundsätzlich beibehalten (weil ich den Satz in zwei aufbrechen würde: "Now, let's turn to the second term, namely “comparative advantage”. The main difference between “absolute” and “comparative” is as follows."). ABER: wenn Du in Deinem ursprünglichen Satz ein Komma nach "advantage" einbaust, dann ist der Continuous hier ausnahmsweise grammatikalisch richtig.
5) "In this case the point of comparing countries and their production ability was crossed out – it’s about the competition within one country.": Ist inhaltlich falsch. Man vergleicht schon zwei Länder. Es geht so. Land A produziert sowohl Handtücher als auch Autos effizienter als Land B. Allerdings produziert Land B - relativ gesehen - Handtücher noch immer als Autos. Deshalb ist es volkswirtschaftlich betrachtet trotzdem für beide Länder sinnvoll, sich auf die Produktion von nur einem Gut zu spezialisieren und den Überschuss zu tauschen - so haben beide letztendlich mehr (auch Land A). Das steht hinter "Comparative Advantage" (bedeutet "ich kann zwar beides nicht so gut produzieren wie Du, aber bei der Herstellung von Produkt B komme ich zumindest näher an Dich heran als bei der Herstellung von Produkt A. Ich produziere d.h. nur Produkt B und Du nur Produkt A und wir tauschen. Insgesamt werden wir am Ende beide mehr haben, als wenn wir unsere Zeit darauf verteilen müssten, jeweils Produkt A und Produkt B zu erzeugen).
Re: Practicing Reporting Phrases August 2006Exercise 2:
Choose various essay writing/presentation phrases we've worked through and use them in context of answering the following question:
Please discuss the organizational forms a company can adopt if it wishes to go abroad.
Remember: The focus of the exercise is not primarily content. Rather, the aim is to increase your level of comfort with various elegant writing phrases.
Re: Practicing Reporting Phrases August 2006
Welcome to my presentation dealing with the topic "What organizational forms can a company adopt if it wishes to go abroad".
First I would like to introduce myself, my name is Johanna Kastner and I am a student for marketing and sales at the FH Wien.
For today's speech I plan to outline the main reasons why most successful domestic companies want to get a foothold in the international market place and what they have to think of/take care of before they do so.
Afterwards I plan to introduce the audience (you - or just I want to introduce the different ...) to the different organizational forms a company can adopt and what the advantages and risks of each idea are.
(I am sure some questions will pop-up during the presentation which I would love to answer in detail after I have finished the general part. ( I guess "pop up" is too casual?)
or
Questions which might arise during the presentation will be answered in detail after I opened the floor for comments or a little discussion.
So why do successful domestic companies have the desire to go international?
There exist several different motives for a company to expand. Probably the firm wants to get a second foothold for the same product in another country. The idea behind this is if the economy of the home country declines, which might affect the profits of the company as well, the economy (sales figures) of the other country might be stable or increase and so the firm's sales figures will be stable or increasing as well. According to that the company isn't depending on the success and wealthy ness of one country.
Another very good reason to expand your business would be the chance to gain more market share over the competitors. Especially if the product is new for the market, being the first one to sell it helps to establish the brand name and a good company image.
To explain this a little more I would like to give an example. Red Bull was the first company selling and promoting the product "energy drink" internationally. Nowadays this company covers 70% of the worlds energy drink market and all competitors had to fight for every little bit of market share or brand recognition.
But not every product is suitable for a foreign market therefore every company should first answer two questions before trying to enter another country.
First, is there a demand for my product in this country? Or to make it more tangible: Do people in Africa don't really need umbrellas?
Secondly: Do we have to adapt the product? Does the company have to change anything before the good could be sold in/to another country?
I also would like to give an example for that: For entering the asian market Mac Donalds had to change/adapt the formula of their burgers because the taste of Asian people differ from the taste of Europeans.
There exist many obstacles that might hinder doing successful business in a foreign country which all have to be considered and dissolved before a company can go on.
Now it’s time to turn to the main topic of today’s presentation: The different organizational forms a company can adopt in order to do business in or with foreign countries.
Exporting, namely just selling your goods to a foreign firm would be the simplest and less risky method to do business with other countries. Followed by licensing where the licenser just sells the right to use his recipe, his marketing idea or any thing else he developed and probably trademarked, to the licensee and therefore receives royalties. Franchising is the best known licensing method and as an example used by companies as Starbucks, Subway or Mac Donalds.
Both methods are highly qualified for testing a new foreign market for it’s readiness to accept a new product (for the degree of demand for the product?). The biggest advantage of these methods is that the firm has a foreign partner who is carrying the risk and the domestic company is gaining profits without a big effort.
Merging together with a foreign company or agreeing on a joint venture is a little bit more risky for the company because in this case it has to invest money and energy. Nevertheless there is still the advantage of having a partner who knows the does and don’ts of the foreign market and how to handle them best. Moreover the risk is split between two partners.
As disadvantage could be seen the loss of liberty. With a partner you have to find a consensus and a business strategy both can agree on.
The riskiest method to enter a foreign market would be a foreign direct investment. In this case a company establishes eg.: a production plant in the foreign country. Even if it has full liberty in the decision making process, it has to carry all the risk and has to face a new environment, new economical conditions, etc. on its own.
As I have already said before doing successful business in a foreign country isn’t as easy as it seems at the first glance, but with a good product and the right insights and lots of effort and energy you have good chances and it might pay back!
This brings me to the end of my talk, I would like to thank you for giving me your time and attention. Now please feel free to ask questions, give comments or interesting inputs.
Re: Practicing Reporting Phrases August 2006Original
Welcome to my presentation dealing with the topic "What organizational forms can a company adopt if it wishes to go abroad".
First I would like to introduce myself, my name is Johanna Kastner and I am a student for marketing and sales at the FH Wien.
For today's speech I plan to outline the main reasons why most successful domestic companies want to get a foothold in the international market place and what they have to think of/take care of before they do so.
Afterwards I plan to introduce the audience (you - or just I want to introduce the different ...) to the different organizational forms a company can adopt and what the advantages and risks of each idea are.
(I am sure some questions will pop-up during the presentation which I would love to answer in detail after I have finished the general part. ( I guess "pop up" is too casual?)
or
Questions which might arise during the presentation will be answered in detail after I opened the floor for comments or a little discussion.
So why do successful domestic companies have the desire to go international?
There exist several different motives for a company to expand. Probably the firm wants to get a second foothold for the same product in another country. The idea behind this is if the economy of the home country declines, which might affect the profits of the company as well, the economy (sales figures) of the other country might be stable or increase and so the firm's sales figures will be stable or increasing as well. According to that the company isn't depending on the success and wealthy ness of one country.
Another very good reason to expand your business would be the chance to gain more market share over the competitors. Especially if the product is new for the market, being the first one to sell it helps to establish the brand name and a good company image.
To explain this a little more I would like to give an example. Red Bull was the first company selling and promoting the product "energy drink" internationally. Nowadays this company covers 70% of the worlds energy drink market and all competitors had to fight for every little bit of market share or brand recognition.
But not every product is suitable for a foreign market therefore every company should first answer two questions before trying to enter another country.
First, is there a demand for my product in this country? Or to make it more tangible: Do people in Africa don't really need umbrellas?
Secondly: Do we have to adapt the product? Does the company have to change anything before the good could be sold in/to another country?
I also would like to give an example for that: For entering the asian market Mac Donalds had to change/adapt the formula of their burgers because the taste of Asian people differ from the taste of Europeans.
There exist many obstacles that might hinder doing successful business in a foreign country which all have to be considered and dissolved before a company can go on.
Now it’s time to turn to the main topic of today’s presentation: The different organizational forms a company can adopt in order to do business in or with foreign countries.
Exporting, namely just selling your goods to a foreign firm would be the simplest and less risky method to do business with other countries. Followed by licensing where the licenser just sells the right to use his recipe, his marketing idea or any thing else he developed and probably trademarked, to the licensee and therefore receives royalties. Franchising is the best known licensing method and as an example used by companies as Starbucks, Subway or Mac Donalds.
Both methods are highly qualified for testing a new foreign market for it’s readiness to accept a new product (for the degree of demand for the product?). The biggest advantage of these methods is that the firm has a foreign partner who is carrying the risk and the domestic company is gaining profits without a big effort.
Merging together with a foreign company or agreeing on a joint venture is a little bit more risky for the company because in this case it has to invest money and energy. Nevertheless there is still the advantage of having a partner who knows the does and don’ts of the foreign market and how to handle them best. Moreover the risk is split between two partners.
As disadvantage could be seen the loss of liberty. With a partner you have to find a consensus and a business strategy both can agree on.
The riskiest method to enter a foreign market would be a foreign direct investment. In this case a company establishes eg.: a production plant in the foreign country. Even if it has full liberty in the decision making process, it has to carry all the risk and has to face a new environment, new economical conditions, etc. on its own.
As I have already said before doing successful business in a foreign country isn’t as easy as it seems at the first glance, but with a good product and the right insights and lots of effort and energy you have good chances and it might pay back!
This brings me to the end of my talk, I would like to thank you for giving me your time and attention. Now please feel free to ask questions, give comments or interesting inputs.
Korrektur
Welcome to my presentation dealing with the topic "What organizational forms can a company adopt if it wishes to go abroad".
First, I would like to introduce myself. My name is Johanna Kastner and I am a student of marketing and sales at the FH Wien.
For today's speech, I plan to outline the main reasons why most successful domestic companies want to get a foothold in the international market place and what they have to consider before they do so.
Afterwards, I plan to familiarize the audience with the different organizational forms a company can adopt and discuss what the advantages and risks of each idea are.
(I am sure some questions will pop-up during the presentation which I would love to answer in detail after I have finished the general part. ( I guess "pop up" is too casual?)
or
Questions which might arise during the presentation will be answered in detail after I have opened the floor for comments or a little discussion.
So why do successful domestic companies have the desire to go international?
There exist several different motives for a company to expand. Probably the firm wants to get a second foothold for the same product in another country. The idea behind this is that if the economy of the home country declines, which might affect the profits of the company as well, the economy (sales figures) of the other country might be stable or increase and so the firm's sales figures would be stable or increase as well. Due to this, the company isn't dependent on the success and wealth of one country.
Another very good reason to expand your business would be the chance to gain more market share over the competitors. Especially if the product is new for the market, being the first one to sell it helps to establish the brand name and a good company image.
To explain this a little more, I would like to give an example. Red Bull was the first company to sell and promote the product "energy drink" internationally. Nowadays, this company covers 70% of the world's energy drink market and all competitors had to fight for every little bit of market share or brand recognition.
But not every product is suitable for a foreign market, therefore every company should first answer two questions before trying to enter another country.
First, is there a demand for my product in this country? Or to make it more tangible: Do people in Africa really need umbrellas?
Secondly: Do we have to adapt the product? Does the company have to change anything before the good can be sold in/to another country?
I would also like to give an example for that: To enter the Asian market, Mc Donalds had to change/adapt the formula of its burgers because the taste of Asian people differs from the taste of Europeans.
There exist many obstacles that might hinder companies from doing successful business in a foreign country which all have to be considered and dissolved before a company can go on.
Now it’s time to turn to the main topic of today’s presentation: The different organizational forms a company can adopt in order to do business in or with foreign countries.
Exporting, namely just selling your goods to a foreign firm would be the simplest and least risky method of doing business with other countries. This strategy would be followed by licensing, where the licenser just sells the right to use his recipe, his marketing idea or anything else he developed and probably trademarked, to the licensee and therefore receives royalties. Franchising is the best known licensing method and as an example is used by companies such as Starbucks, Subway or Mac Donalds.
Both methods are highly suitable for testing a new foreign market in regards toits readiness to accept a new product. The biggest advantage of these methods is that the firm has a foreign partner who carries the risk and the domestic company gains profits without a substantial effort.
Merging together with a foreign company or agreeing on a joint venture is a little bit more risky for the company because in this case, it has to invest money and energy. Nevertheless, there is still the advantage of having a partner who knows the do's and don’ts of the foreign market and how to handle them best. Moreover, the risk is split between two partners. A potential disadvantage might be the loss of independence. With a partner, you have to find a consensus and a business strategy both can agree on.
The riskiest method to enter a foreign market would be a foreign direct investment. In this case, a company establishes eg.: a production plant in the foreign country. Even if it has full liberty in the decision making process, it has to carry all the risk and has to face a new environment, new economical conditions, etc. on its own.
As I have already said before, doing successful business in a foreign country isn’t as easy as it seems at the first glance, but with a good product and the right insights and lots of effort and energy you have good chances and it might pay back!
This brings me to the end of my talk, I would like to thank you for giving me your time and attention. Now please feel free to ask questions, give comments or interesting inputs.
Inhaltlich ausgezeichnet, sprachlich gut und solide. Du tendierst weiterhin ganz gern zum Continuous wo Present Simple passt. Denke daran: Falls diese Frage heute theoretisch Teil des Business Reports wäre, dann müsste Du es in Report-Form und nicht (wie hier) in Presentation-Form beantworten.
1) "what they have to think of/take care of": "Take care of" ist grundsätzlich von den beiden besser, am elegantesten ist aber "consider"
2) "I plan to introduce the audience (you - or just I want to introduce the different ...) to the different organizational forms a company can adopt": Etwas knifflig: "introduce the audience to X" bedeutet eigentlich, man möchte dem Subjekt X das Publikum vorstellen. D.h. müsste man den Satz eigentlich umdrehen. Statt "introduce" ginge aber auch "familiarize the audience with"
3) "(I am sure some questions will pop-up during the presentation which I would love to answer in detail after I have finished the general part. ( I guess "pop up" is too casual?) ": Mündlich (d.h. bei einem echten Vortrag) wäre "pop up" auf jeden Fall ok und da Du hier de facto ein mündliche Präsentation 'nachschreibst' wäre es auch da absolut ok. Wenn Du etwas gehobeneres willst, dann nimm "arise".
4) "According to that": "According" bedeutet "Laut" (z.B. "According to labor law,..."). Für "Deshalb" passt "Therefore," oder "Due to this,"
5) "I also would like to give an example for that:": Kein Fehler, aber "would also like" wäre hier flüssiger.
6) "(for the degree of demand for the product?)": Ginge auch und wäre sehr elegant
7) "As disadvantage could be seen the loss of liberty": Funktioniert grammatikalisch nicht. Gute Phrase für so etwas "A potential disadvantage might be..."
Per Email an einen Freund
Topic Commands
Anklicken, um Email-Benachrichtigung bei neuen Antworten zu bekommen 
Anklicken, um Email-Benachrichtigung bei neuen Antworten einzustellen