Sinorama Case Study Paper (Term Paper Sample)

Sinorama Case Study Paper Student Name Institutional Affiliations Date Sinorama Case Study 1. What regulations regulated Vacances Sinorama, and what do you think the purposes of the regulations are? Vacances Sinorama as a travel business was regulated by the Travel Agents Act and the regulation respecting Travel agents administered through the OPC office with the main objective of protecting customers from traders. The OPC regulation is meant to issue licenses to Vacances Sinorama as a travel business is able to receive and investigate every claim and complaints from customers as well initiate litigations against travel agents who are accused of committing evil. Just like any other business law, the travel agent laws which govern Sinorama in Canada and outside are meant to maintain order, protect liberties and rights of clients and the corporation, establish and enforce standards in the travel industry, resolve unforeseen disputes in business and interactions with clients, agencies and other businesses (Wang & Badr, 2022). Another regulation facing Vacances Sinorama is the AMF regulation which regulates the Quebec financial markets, consumers of financial services and products. This regulation is meant to monitor the security in travel business by administering the necessary controls in regard to access to the public capital market. Such regulatory moves are important because they aid the business in utilizing the economies of scale faster and tackling every information asymmetries while protecting the clients (Svantesson, 2017). 2. Describe specific examples of corporate actions taken by Sinorama, incorporating concepts that you have learned in at least two courses such as business law/legal environment, accounting, economics, international business, marketing, finance, and management that likely contributed Sinorama’s decline. Vacances Sinorama took followed the wrong path by making two very disastrous corporate mistakes which definitely led to their decline. These corporate actions are poor pricing strategy which is a case of marketing and international business concept and the other one is the issue of non-compliance which is a concept in the legal environment. Poor Pricing Strategy (marketing corporate action): Vacances Sinorama adopted an aggressive low-pricing strategy at the inception of the business in all its tour-package sales which became disastrous and even necessitated that it be accompanied by vague descriptions on adverts. The narrow-profit margin business model could not hold Sinorama in place for long. The model led to price wars since Sinorama had reached its absolute bottom price which meant that the company could only lose its competitive edge since competitors came under such a similar pricing strategy. This meant that Sinorama couldn’t harvest enough profits to sustain the business which led to a perception of poor quality as seen in accompanying vague adverts on accommodation and hotel packages (Johnston, 2019). The danger here was that, once the clients loses trust in that Sinorama was not truthful in its advertising, they definitely lost them which meant even if they could set higher prices, there was no one to trust whether they had the capability offering quality. The risk of losing profits which was unforeseen beckoned against Vacances Sinorama which was well evident when equity investments were quickly sucked away by the increased market expenditures. Non-compliance issues (legal corporate action): In the daily handling of activities, the travel organization could not remain compliant in regard to the Regulation respecting Travel agents and the travel agents Act. Sinorama failed to comply with the law in that they did not place funds to the trust account as expected by the travel agency. Non-compliance led to legal actions against the company which further weakened the corporate operational adhesive forces of Sinorama pushing it towards liquidation (Juneja, 2015). Non-compliance leads a business to security breaches, reputational damage and loss of productivity. In a more general sense, the cost of non-compliance is estimated to be three times higher than that of compliance. This means that Vacances Sinorama aggravated its issues by non-compliance since the legal consequences of penalties and fines, lawsuits, regulatory scrutiny are even more expensive. In regard to the travel business, non-compliance meant that Sinorama was to experience disruptions, loss of revenue, security breaches and a poor brand image. All these will definitely make the customer to withdraw and the business declines towards insolvency (Sadiq & Governatori, 2014). 3. Did the business owners in the Sinorama case act ethically? Explain. No! The owners of Sinorama were in unethical conduct in their business. This is because, the corporate actions which Sinorama personnel adopted towards growing its company were not ethical right from deceptive pricing, subtle manipulation and false advertising to non-compliance issues were all unethical. Sinorama used deceptive low-pricing strategy to win the larger travel clientele to itself, a tragedy which they could not recover from (Moriarty, 2021). Through its website, Sinorama published low pricing strategy which was only deceptive to attract customers but it wasn’t a good business strategy which could be sustainable in the long-term. This was unethical because it made other organizations to follow the same deceptive route. Secondly, the case of Sinorama doing vague description of its accommodation conditions for meals and hotels and air travel arrangements meant that this was an issue of unethical false advertising and subtle manipulation. Overstatements when it comes to sales are unethical and are cases of subtle manipulations. Thirdly, Sinorama did not want to comply with legal standards willingly and knowingly (Wang & Badr, 2022). This was unethical since it means that Sinorama was running a substandard business. 4. Describe the overlap between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and social justice. Did the actions of Sinorama as a corporation further or hinder any social justice principles (access, participation, equity or rights?) How? Should companies be responsibility for CSR and social justice? Explain Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) refers to a concept in management where business organizations integrate social and environmental concerns in the operations of the business and interactions with stakeholders (Hatimah, 2017). A company like Sinorama must create policies and practices in order to influence the society positively. On the other end, social justice refers to a theory which is focused on fairness in relation to the individuals in the society advocating for equal access to social privileges, wealth and opportunities. The principles of social justice include equity, rights, participation and access (Mayo, 2015). The overlap between the two concepts ...