The ‘Drummond Report’ seemed to hit the airwaves and spread like wildfire. Shortly after tuning on the 6 o’clock news last week, my Twitter and Facebook feeds were instantly inundated with thoughts, feelings, and opinions on what economist, Don Drummond recommended Ontario do to help reduce the $16B debt we currently face. Many people ask if we are really surprised by these recommendations which some have called ‘extreme.’ What really opened my eyes to how serious Ontario’s debt was; being compared to the situation in Greece, and how by 2017 the debt will almost double to just over $30B. WOW.
I haven’t yet taken a deeper dive in to the hundreds of recommendations (Yes, I said hundreds! The Drummond report is over 500 pages long, offers over 350 recommendations, and took him one year to put together!) the Drummond Report offers, but one in particular caught my attention: eliminate the abuse of the “victory lap”. If a student needs to come back; they should have to pay for each course! 
First and foremost, to those who are unaware what a ‘victory lap’ is, it’s when a high school student has completed grade 12 (which is the last grade in the Ontario curriculum) but chooses to stay in school for another year. There are many different reasons as to why some might choose to stay; didn’t get in to college or university, need to upgrade marks, wasn’t sure of the post secondary educational path they want to go in, and in many cases it is very much a social thing.
Hearing the suggestion of making these students pay per course if they choose the ‘victory lap’ route really got me thinking of both the positive and negative effects this could have on students and parents. It’s hard for me to really take a stance one way or the other, but I tried to think of the positives this could really have. A friend of mine who is a high school teacher immediately shared through Facebook what a great idea he thought this was. When I dug a little deeper through the status thread and the conversational buzz he had created by his update, I realized his agreement for this recommendation came from his frustration with the kids who come back because;
1. They never put forth the effort in previous years and didn’t do enough to graduate, and still don’t take school seriously and cause a disruption in his class.
2. The ‘jocks’ who come back just to play sports for one more year and clown around in class because they’re only really there for the sports
Rarely does he find he teaches kids who come back for a ‘victory lap’ who are;
1. Trying to upgrade their marks to get into a post secondary institution of their choice
2. Putting forth a solid effort in classes to figure out their niche and the post secondary path they want to take.
Ultimately, I feel that if this was something the government was to put in to place, the burden would fall on to the parents. Not all students have part time jobs while they are in school and will not have the means to pay per course if they were to take a ‘victory lap’. Looking at that in a positive light; parents who may not be as involved in their child’s education may take more of a stance, and play more of a mentoring role for their children to
a) avoid paying for the victory lap courses
b) help guide them towards their post secondary future (university/college/trades/etc).
This is not to say that those students who take a victory lap to for its intended purpose, of better preparing a student for a post secondary should be penalized. I feel a way in which the government could implement this positively is to charge the students taking a victory lap per course, so there is less of a burden on the tax payers who fund this, but for those who pursue an education after their “victory lap” to have the amount they paid for these courses be deducted from their post secondary education tuition and programs. I feel that this is a smart way to reward those who do not abuse the victory lap offering, and penalize those who abuse it.
Lets face it, when you are in grade 12 some students are still 17 yrs old and may not be ready for a post secondary destination. There are also children with learning disabilities who need that extra time and valuable education to help prepare them for their next steps in life. To completely abolish the ‘victory lap’ from our system would harm many students. However, making them pay per class would avoid poor use of taxpayers money, give those students a bit of a financial boost when they enter post secondary education (who knows, it might even reduce the amount of debt they accumulate in university) and potentially make those students who are not in school for the educational purposes they should be, take it more seriously if it’s going to reduce their spending money, or require financial assistance from their parents.
What do you think?
Why Pay More for a Premium Brand?
Sometimes we as consumers, pay less up front by selecting an inferior brand. Even though we are taking less of a financial risk up front, long term we may pay more in terms of the performance, soft costs and social risk associated to our decision.
Sometimes when we take more of a financial risk up front for a premium brand, we pay less in terms of peace of mind knowing it will give us the best performance.
By default, I’ll illustrate an example related directly to the office equipment industry that I work in.
Let’s say a customer is trying to decide between a low cost competitor and the premium vendor in the market. Compared to the premium vendor, the low cost vendor is $100 less in terms of the overall total cost of operations on a monthly basis. One of the primary ways in which the premium vendor can erode the price gap between the low cost vendor is by the real world performance of the machine.
Manufacturers rate their devices based upon how many prints of a single document on the platen glass can be output in 60 seconds. What happens when a mix of common office documents are printed from multiple network locations – including jobs that involve everyday office requirements like finishing? To find out Buyers Laboratory Inc. (BLI) conducts independent, third party productivity testing on the various copier/printer/scanner models in the marketplace. Efficiency, calculated by dividing the tested speed by the rated speed, is a factor in determining the price/value relationship of a system.
In our example, the low cost vendor has rated their device at a speed of 55 pages per minute (ppm) even though BLI has tested their device speed at 25 ppm. The premium vendor has rated their device at a speed of 55 ppm even though BLI has tested their device speed at 50 ppm. The customer considering both vendors prints 15,000 pages per month in their office.
If you take the tested real world speed from BLI of the low cost vendor of 25 ppm divided by 15,000 prints you get 600 minutes of printing. Divide that by 60 and the low cost vendor’s machine will take 10 hours a month to print.
The real world speed from BLI of the premium vendor’s device 50 ppm divided by 15,000 prints works out to 300 minutes of printing. Dividing that by 60 gives you a total printing time of 5 hours a month.
Conservatively assuming that an office worker earns $20/hour, by saving 5 hours of printing time in a month, a company saves $100/month in wages.
In this example, one performance feature has eroded the perceived price gap between the lost cost vendor and the premium vendor.
As with anything in this life, you get what you pay for and this is the same in the world of office equipment. If you buy a cheaper device from an unknown brand you can’t be annoyed when it breaks down or does not perform as efficient as it’s rated speed – surely you knew this when you purchased it. Everything has a life span, so make sure when choosing your new copier you buy from a brand you can trust where quality is second to none.