Tag: economy

  • Australia’s software disadvantage

    Australia’s software disadvantage

    This morning ABC Radio 702 asked me to comment on Adobe, Apple and Microsoft being summonsed to appear before the Federal Parliament’s IT Pricing enquiry.

    As has been widely reported, the committee has asked the software giants to explain why there are such price differentials between Australian and overseas prices.

    By way of example, Adobe Creative Suite 6 is available on the company website for $1299 US which is AUD 1263 on today’s exchange rate. The listed Australian price is AUD 1974 – a mark up of 56%.

    This is not new

    Australia has long been an expensive place to buy things, I remember my parents in the 1970s asking relatives to send over Marks and Spencer underwear as prices in Melbourne were so expensive.

    Books and music have long been overpriced, the publishing industry openly printed the price of books in various countries and the Australian price has always been substantially higher than UK and US charges given prevailing exchange rates.

    The high exchange rate has focused attention on the high prices, while the Aussie dollar was low consumers were tolerant of the rip-off. With the Aussie dollar high, consumers are wondering why the prices of many imported goods, particularly software, has remained so high.

    A lack of competition

    One of the biggest reasons for Australians being overcharged for many items is the lack of competition in the domestic marketplace. Most distribution channels are dominated by one or two players which lends itself to price gouging in areas ranging from technology to food.

    A good example of this is the brewing industry, a revealing Fairfax article examined the Australian beer sector and exposed the failings and lack of competition in the market which results in the multinational duopoly extracting five times the profits of local retailers.

    The conservative nature of Australian consumers is their own worst enemy as locals, including corporations and governments, prefer to buy major brands rather than experiment with local or lesser known providers.

    Where alternatives exist, the price differentials rapidly fall. The price differential for an iPad is far less than the software apps that run on it. The reason for this are the range of alternatives available to the Apple product.

    If Australian buyers were to explore open source alternatives, smaller suppliers or locally developed products then the prices of imported goods would fall.

    Structural weaknesses

    The pricing inquiry illustrates  the structural weakness in the Australian economy where the nation has become a price taker both in the domestic consumer sector and bulk export industries.

    Where Australia finds itself is an expected consequence of a generation of economic policies which favours debt driven consumer spending underpinned by selling assets and raw commodities.

    Hopefully Australians are realising the price of software is just one of the consequences of current policies and start demanding the nation’s political and business leaders have a clear vision for what the country’s role will be in the 21st Century.

    If that vision for Australia is a quarry with a few retirement homes clinging to the edge, then we’re well on the way to achieving that. At least software prices will be the least of anyone’s worries.

    Similar posts:

  • Managing unemployment perceptions

    Managing unemployment perceptions

    Stephen Koukoulas has a look at the changing composition of the Australian economy in Business Spectator today where he looks at how things have evolved over the last 50 years.

    One of the notable things is unemployment and how our perception of what an acceptable level is;

    Australia’s unemployment rate is 5.4 per cent at present, it was 0.9 per cent in August 1970 while in August 1951 it was a staggering 0.3 per cent.

    In the 1961 Federal election the Menzies government hung on by one seat, having been punished for allowing the unemployment rate to reach the dizzying heights of 3.5 per cent.

    Through the Twentieth Century, Australia’s unemployment rate averaged around 5% as shown in this Treasury graph.

    Australia's unemployment through the twentieth century

    What’s notable in that graph is how high unemployment became the norm in the last quarter of the century. When it became obvious politicians and economists couldn’t move the needle below 5%, the process of convincing us that five percent was ‘good’ began.

    One wonders what the acceptable level of unemployment will be for the next generation. Will they consider us the failures that our grandparents would?

    Image of unemployed carpenters in 1935 courtesy of the NSW State Library via Flickr

    Similar posts:

  • Australia’s grapes of wrath

    Australia’s grapes of wrath

    In a great post, The Wine Rules looks at what ails the Australian wine industry after the news of Cassella Wine’s problems.

    Three things jump out of Dudley Brown’s article – how industry bodies are generally ineffectual, the failure of 1980s conglomerate thinking and how fragile your position is when you sell on price.

    Selling on price

    It’s tough being the cheapest supplier, you constantly have to be on guard against lower cost suppliers coming onto the market and you can’t do your best work.

    Customers come to you not because you’re good, but because you’re cheap and will switch the moment someone beats you on price.

    Worse still, you’re exposed to external shocks like supply interruptions, technological change or currency movement.

    The latter is exactly what’s smashed Australia’s commodity wine sector.

    A similar thing happened to the Australian movie industry – at fifty US cents to the Aussie dollar filming The Matrix in Sydney was a bargain, at eighty producers competitiveness falls away and at parity filming down under makes no sense at all.

    Yet the movie industry persists in the model and still tries to compete in the zero-sum game of producer incentives which is possibly the most egregious example of corporate welfare on the planet.

    When you’re a high cost country then you have to sell high value products, something that’s lost on those who see Australia’s future as lying in digging stuff up or chopping it down to sell cheaply in bulk.

    Industry associations

    “It’s like a Labor party candidate pre-selection convention” says Brown in describing the lack of talent among the leadership of the Australian wine industry. To be fair, it’s little better in Liberal Party.

    There’s no surprise there’s an overlap between politics and industry associations, with no shortage of superannuated mediocre MPs supplementing their tragically inadequate lifetime pensions with a well paid job representing some hapless group of business people.

    Not that the professional business lobbyists are any better as they pop up on various industry boards and government panels doing little. The only positive thing is these roles keep such folk away from positions where they could destroy shareholder or taxpayer wealth.

    Basically, few Australian industry groups are worth spending time on and the wine industry is no exception.

    Australia conglomerate theory

    One of the conceits of 1980s Australia was the idea that local businesses had to dominate the domestic market in order to compete internationally.

    A succession of business leaders took gullible useful idiots like Paul Keating and Graheme Richardson, or the Liberal Party equivalents to lunch at Machiavelli’s or The Flower Drum, stroked their not insubstantial egos over a few bottles of top French wine and came away with a plan to merge entire industries, or unions, into one or two mega-operations.

    It ended in tears.

    The best example is the brewing industry, where the state based brewers were hoovered up in two massive conglomerates in 1980s. Thirty years later Australia’s brewing industry is almost foreign owned and has failed in every export venture it has attempted.

    Fosters Brewing Group was, ironically, one of the companies that managed to screw the Australian wine industry through poorly planned and executed conglomeration. Again every attempt at expanding overseas failed dismally.

    In many ways, the Australian wine industry represents the missed opportunities of the country’s lost generation as what should have been one of the nation’s leading sectors – that had a genuine shot at being world leader – became mired in managerialism, corporatism and cronyism.

    All isn’t lost for the nation’s vintners or any other Aussie industry, Dudley Brown describes how some individuals are committed to delivering great products to the world. There’s people like them in every sector.

    Hopefully we’ll be able to harness those talents and enthusiasm to build the industries, not just in wine, that will drive Australia in the Twenty-First Century.

    Picture courtesy of Krappweis on SXC.HU

    Similar posts:

  • Australia and the Dutch Disease

    Australia and the Dutch Disease

    This week sees the launch of the annual G’Day USA festival where Australian exporters and various celebrities extol the virues of the country across the United States.

    One of Australia’s success stories of the last decade has been Yellowtail Wines which carved a niche for Australian wines in the US in the same way Jacob’s Creek did a decade earlier in the UK.

    Today the Australian Financial Review reports that Cassella Wines, the maker of Yellowtail, is in breach of its banking covenants due to the high Australian dollar.

    Cassella Wines is another victim of Australia’s Dutch Disease infection.

    Dutch Disease owes its name to the Netherlands’ gas boom of the 1960s. By the early 1970s the strong Guilder damaged the rest of the Dutch economy which didn’t profit from extracting natural gas.

    Having sleepwalked into the Dutch Disease, it’s fascinating how Australia’s electorate, policy makers and business leaders are in denial about the effects as successful exporters like Cassella Wines struggle with a high dollar and accelerating costs.

    When commodity prices and the dollar turn, and they always do, its going to be tough for the economy to adapt as much of the industry capacity that was competitive at lower rates won’t be available to take advantage of the lower costs and to pick up the slack from a declining mining sector.

    For Australian businesses, the onus is on managers and proprietors to protect their organisations from the short term effects of a high currency and the medium term effect of a falling dollar pushing up the input prices of imports.

    In other words, getting costs down without becoming too reliant on offshored labour or suppliers. The companies that manage this are going to be very strong after the initial adjustment, but it’s a tough management task.

    While that task can, and will be, done by smart and hardworking leaders no-one should expect any recognition of the scale of this task from governments, media or business organisations who seem to be in denial of reality.

    The Dutch and Australian flags image is courtesy of Emilev through SXC

    Similar posts:

  • Revolution and disconnected leaders

    Revolution and disconnected leaders

    China expert Patrick Chovanec has a provocative blog post on What Causes Revolutions, building upon the Financial Times’ description of how the Chinese Communist Party is struggling with corruption.

    In his article Chovanec quotes Richard Pipes’ Three “Whys” of the Russian Revolution which looked at how the fall of the Tsarist government was largely unexpected.

    This is true with the fall of all great regimes, in the late 1980s the idea that the Soviet Union would cease to exist within a decade was unthinkable.

    Chavonec quotes a key part of Pipes’ book;

    In 1982 [Pipes writes], when I worked in the National Security Council, I was asked to contribute ideas to a major speech that President Reagan was scheduled to deliver in London.  My contribution consisted of a reference to Marx’s dictum that, when there develops a significant disparity between the political form and the socio-economic context, the prospect is revolution.

    “A significant disparity between the political form and social-economic context” could be just as applicable to Western democracies.

    The Economist article makes a point about the French revolution “the widely accepted theory now is that the French Revolution was one of rising expectations that eventually could not be met.”

    As Stratfor’s George Freedman pointed out last week, a generation of Americans have expectations that are not going to be met. The same is true in Europe.

    While there’s no doubt the China’s political structures – like those in all totalitarian nations – are more brittle than those in established democracies, it might not be a good idea for those of us in the West to be smug and complacent about our own systems.

    Zapata image is courtesy of Ferferfer through SXC.

    Similar posts: