Replies
Reply 1 Alfred Calixte
Hello Alfred, I agree with you that Amvac has a sustainable business strategy. In addition to your point on an income of $200 million going forward, I believe, since the sales of the company are high, makes it have a sustainable strategy. When discussing whether the law should prohibit the exportation of the barred pesticides, in my opinion, the law should prohibit the exportation. Even though the USA also accepts banned items, banned items mean they are toxic and dangerous (Robert Basedow, 2016). It becomes confusing if other countries allow for the utilization of these pesticides, then the law should not prohibit. This situation requires international trade laws to intervene. When saying you would purchase the stocks, are you not worried about the possibility that these countries may ban the pesticides, and you would incur many losses before the stock is sold completely?
Reply 2 Steele Smith
Hello Smith, I agree with your post on everything. I feel that we think alike. The fact that Amvac can venture into opportunities where other companies could have dropped down makes it a sustainable business strategy. However, I keep wondering, what if many of the countries Amvac sells these products ban them, will the company still survive? The question of banning products is tricky. Some countries allow these products, making it just. What about international trade laws? Who will regulate the safety and required quality of products? If a country bans a product, there could be harmful reasons (Robert Basedow, 2016). I admire your decision to take a financial analysis to determine the short and long-term advantages and disadvantages of purchasing from Amvac.
Reference
Robert Basedow, C. K. (2016). International Trade and Good Regulatory Practices: Assessing The Trade Impacts of Regulation. Retrieved from OECD Regulatory Policy Working Papers No. 4: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/5jlv59hdgtf5-en.pdf?expires=1570987300&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=0C2A9BD988D85C1E5CEF94D390D45FFB
