Resource Based View Approach Free Essays

Persuasion Tools Model Kenneth Berrien ‘40s Definition This model helps an individual find the best way to negotiate, by using and recognizing an individuals capabilities and intuition. How does it work? Using a model to see which point an individual stands horizontally represents influencing and vertically represents the intuition needed. For example: one with a low level of intuition but good at influencing it would be best to use logic. We will write a custom essay sample on Resource Based View Approach or any similar topic only for you Order Now Low intuition and poor at influencing, best approach is compromise. Limitations: isky using emotions in negotiations. A clear understanding of the clients is needed. Emotional intelligence, empathy and compassion are skills that people with high levels of these are required to take advantage of, these people can be rare to find. How can these skills be measured? How can each person be assigned a certain quadrant? Good negotiators have a mixture of all of these! Advantages: Provides a clear model tool to seek out with employees possesses which of the quadrants and they can fulfill their role naturally. Good form of management responsibility. Can reap short/long term benefits. Good preparatory skills. Negotiation skills are a good asset and can lend to other areas of life. A useful characteristic! INVESTMENT- SECURING. SALES- SUPPLIERS. EMPLOYEE MANAGEMENT. Link to EQ 1. Knowing emotions 2. Managing emotions 3. Motivating yourself 4. Recognizing and understanding other peoples emotions (empathy). 5. Managing relationships i. e. managing other peoples emotions. Define each quadrant of the model+ examples Logic = Facts, data, computer based models. Use office example Bargaining = high levels of intuition and general intelligence through communication. Use market stall example, or buying goods in china. Compromise = Less skilled negotiators use. Accepting less money to get something you really want. Use time off work. Distributive bargaining: Compromise bargaining, not all negotiations can end in a win-win situation. Win-lose approach! Call up the car garage and work out their monthly target, how much cash they need, what other services they can offer then make a deal that suits both. Integrative bargaining: Both sides fighting over a price, hiding their real positions and aims, like POKER. Fighting over a price of a fixed package of goods or services Evaluation Different industries require different approaches to bargaining. This model is a great way of mapping out person’s skills linked to the negotiation process and linking the two. Comparing integrative negotiation and distributive negotiation = and make own personal judgment in third person. KEY WORDS Translating Confidence influential Exchanging How to cite Resource Based View Approach, Essay examples

Resource Based View Approach Free Essays

Persuasion Tools Model Kenneth Berrien ‘40s Definition This model helps an individual find the best way to negotiate, by using and recognizing an individuals capabilities and intuition. How does it work? Using a model to see which point an individual stands horizontally represents influencing and vertically represents the intuition needed. For example: one with a low level of intuition but good at influencing it would be best to use logic. We will write a custom essay sample on Resource Based View Approach or any similar topic only for you Order Now Low intuition and poor at influencing, best approach is compromise. Limitations: isky using emotions in negotiations. A clear understanding of the clients is needed. Emotional intelligence, empathy and compassion are skills that people with high levels of these are required to take advantage of, these people can be rare to find. How can these skills be measured? How can each person be assigned a certain quadrant? Good negotiators have a mixture of all of these! Advantages: Provides a clear model tool to seek out with employees possesses which of the quadrants and they can fulfill their role naturally. Good form of management responsibility. Can reap short/long term benefits. Good preparatory skills. Negotiation skills are a good asset and can lend to other areas of life. A useful characteristic! INVESTMENT- SECURING. SALES- SUPPLIERS. EMPLOYEE MANAGEMENT. Link to EQ 1. Knowing emotions 2. Managing emotions 3. Motivating yourself 4. Recognizing and understanding other peoples emotions (empathy). 5. Managing relationships i. e. managing other peoples emotions. Define each quadrant of the model+ examples Logic = Facts, data, computer based models. Use office example Bargaining = high levels of intuition and general intelligence through communication. Use market stall example, or buying goods in china. Compromise = Less skilled negotiators use. Accepting less money to get something you really want. Use time off work. Distributive bargaining: Compromise bargaining, not all negotiations can end in a win-win situation. Win-lose approach! Call up the car garage and work out their monthly target, how much cash they need, what other services they can offer then make a deal that suits both. Integrative bargaining: Both sides fighting over a price, hiding their real positions and aims, like POKER. Fighting over a price of a fixed package of goods or services Evaluation Different industries require different approaches to bargaining. This model is a great way of mapping out person’s skills linked to the negotiation process and linking the two. Comparing integrative negotiation and distributive negotiation = and make own personal judgment in third person. KEY WORDS Translating Confidence influential Exchanging How to cite Resource Based View Approach, Essay examples

It is the year of 480 and Xerx... free essay sample

It is the year of 480 and Xerxes, King of Persia, leads an army of 5.3 million soldiers against my lacking army of 7,000 men, 300 of which are my own Spartans.1 Many advantages are ours in battle, including unprecedented battle tactics and determination, but even that is not enough to defeat the army of Xerxes. We have no hope of winning, but for honor and glory we must fight to the last man and hope that Greece does not fall into the hands of our enemy. It is the eve of the battle. I lay in my pallet with the words of the Oracle swirling in my mind. The Persian king possesses the might of Zeus and shall not be stopped until either death befalls a Spartan king or Sparta is conquered.2 Those retched words of the Oracle could not be vanquished from my mind. Must I die? Is there not another way for favorable victory? No answers are forthcoming and I can do nothing but wait. We will write a custom essay sample on It is the year of 480 and Xerx or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page We are up before daybreak when a lone, Persian messenger on horseback approaches with a message. My men and I stop eating what very might be our last meal. I take the message from the Persian, break the seal, and read it loudly to my men. Within the message is a polite greeting and words of false flattery that are meant to stroke our egos. Finally, Xerxes finishes the letter with the advice to surrender. Xerxes writes that if we are wise and accept this cowardly, alternate way no harm shall befall a single Grecian. Is this meant to be an insult? I sneer at the Persian who now trembles with fear. How dare the Persians think we are cowards who are so easily wrought with fear that we would even think to surrender. I turn to my men, No, my countrymen, we will not surrender this day nor any day! We shall fight to the last and bring honor and glory to our homeland! Shouts of Greeces honor and the glory of battle ring throughout the troops. One of my officers suggest that we send the head of the messenger to the Persian King to show him what we think of his message. The messenger, whose face has gone as white as that of a ghost, drops to his knees prostrating himself at my feet. I beg of you noble king, do not take my life. I am but a lowly servant and if you will, allow me to live and deliver your return message, begged the disgraced messenger. I laugh at his pitiful state, I wonder, are all Persians so easily terrified as you, little messenger? For if they are, this shall hardly be a fair fight. My men roar with agreement. Looking down at the messenger, I say, Get up you poor excuse of a man and deliver my words to your king. Molon labe (come and take them). 3 With the messenger gone, my men and I now geared ourselves for battle. Not long after organizing the troops in a phalanx formation, the Persians descend on us. The battle continues all day and ends with the death of many Persians but few loss of Grecian lives. I know this first day preludes to a much longer and gruesome battle. We are still doomed to defeat, but, I and my countrymen will die honorable deaths with the knowledge that we will take the lives of many Persians to Hades with us. The next day is much the same as the first. With so many Persians fallen, hope begins to bloom in my heart. Perhaps we shall have a chance at victory. I lay in my pallet, pleased with the outcome of the past two days. Suddenly, an officer bursts into my tent and reports damning news. A traitor has told the Persians of a pass that was left unguarded because of its secrecy. At this point, all hope of victory is crushed and I know defeat is imminent. The Persians have outmaneuvered us and death is at hand. The dawn of the last day of battle comes all too quickly. A council had already been called and all but the Spartans, some Thebans and Thespians have been sent away to live another day. I cheer my men on, A new life awaits us. Tomorrow we dine with full glory in the halls of the gods! Not long into the battle I am struck by an arrow.4 As life flows from my veins, I pray to the gods to save all of Greece. I close my eyes for the final time and embrace the arms of death.Epilogue: Ultimately, the words of the Oracle proved true. The Battle of Thermopylae ended the life of a king, but from it, brought forth a noble legend. The name of Leonidas will go down in history as the name of a great warrior, leader and king.

Philosophy Essay Example

Philosophy Essay Example Philosophy Essay Philosophy Essay GITANJALIIntroduction Gitanjali is the one of the greatest book wich is written by the rabindernath tagore and it was written in bengali and it has been tranlated into english, gitanjali is the collcetion of 103 poems and for this poem tagore won nobel price the word â€Å"gitanjali† is drived from th rood git which means â€Å"git† means songs and â€Å"anjoli†means offerings and thus means â€Å"prayer offering of songs†and rabindernath became first non eropian who won the nobel price. It reflects on the iterrelationships among the poet or speaker, the deity ,and the world. He sometimes seems to be resisting tradional religion and prophetically looking towords a new spirituality. It resembles the poetry of mysticism and ofcouse tagore’s reaction ti the vision of reality. Here he presents the divine as the great affirmation, the fountion of energy, the source of life and death, and also the belief of the vedantic doctrine . In the vedantic doctrin e â€Å"that art thou† tagore expains pretty wll about the human existence in the word and also about the nature. Telling the true beauty about these things. His lyrics like a transparent and they open to us the door of inner spaces abd longing for the divine. Tagore like sufi saint brings out the concept reaching god through music and when i read tagore’s works writings would clearly say about the ocean and and personification of the human life and death.Rabindernath writings It is about full of inspiration and full of color. Gitanjali speaks of birth of life, to the death, nature and man’s quest for answers from god. Be it song or rain, nature or god,each poems disply the simplicity of thoughts. Nuances between god and man’s tributions with are captured beautifully in this book.while one poem describes a person waiting for the temple gates to be opened, the other describes beautifully a womean who is ready and awaiting her lord to come and embarence he r. De- mystifying the joys of trhe naature is also one of the Philosophy Essay Example Philosophy Essay Philosophy Essay Philosophy Currently, the Federal Communications Commission suggested changes have raised mixed reactions in the media. Some oppose the changes while some agree to them. These changes will have several implications on the legal and ethical philosophy in the media. Merges would reduce the number of media owners. The implications include unfair competition in the market. Some of the changes suggested include allowing broadcast stations to reach 45% of the United States market, on the geographical area compared to the current 35%, lifting the ban that allows the media to own more than one station and newspaper (Hirst Harrison, 2007). This changes address deregulation of the media. Part A 1. A disagreement is the failure to convene on an opinion presented by a person or group. An argument, on the other hand, is the presentation of opposing views on a particular subject matter. A formal argument is presented in an ordered series of statements called premises that lead to a conclusion. A disagreement is not a prerequisite for an argument. It does provide an incentive for an argument by giving two differing positions on a subject. An argument may exist to analyze the validity of widely accepted concepts further or for intellectual jousting purposes. The existence of two or more people in an argument is not necessary, but it provides differing views that may further the argument. A single person may take different stances on the same topic. 2. An explanation is a statement or a number of statements aimed at providing a clearer understanding of certain facts. An argument seeks to prove that a certain statement is true based of factual premises. This means the argument purposes to contribute knowledge in a given subject. If two people, A and B, address the issue of whether or not a third person, C is sleepy, they may refer to the fact hat he is dosing. This is an argument based on the premise that C is dosing and people dose when they are sleepy. However, if A and B agree on it, they may what to know why C is dosing and hence propose an explanation that C is exhausted from working in the hot weather. The difference is that they both what to show why a case is true. 3. A deductive argument is one that derives a conclusion from a set of premises that arrive logically at a certain conclusion. It directly links the premises presented with the conclusion. If the premises are true, then it follows that the conclusion is true by logical necessity. Validity is determined by the condition that a conclusion is logically evoked by its premises considering each step of the argument is logical. A deductive argument is valid if and only if a true conclusion is drawn from the premises, whatever they may be. It means that an argument can be valid even though the premises are false. An example of a valid deductive argument: Everyone who eats chips is overweight. James eats chips. Therefore, James is overweight. The first premise is false because there are people who eat chips but are not overweight. The conclusion is true because it is derived from the premises. This is a valid deductive argument. 4. The quality of validity, as far as deductive arguments are concerned, relates the conclusion arrived at to the premises to judge whether true or false. If the conclusion is true based on the premises, then the argument is valid irrespective of whether or not the premises are true. Conversely, inductive arguments only state the probability of a conclusion being true based on the premises put forth. This gives the inductive its quality of strength based on the degree of probability. Another noteworthy difference between the two types of arguments is that, in an inductive argument, the conclusion may be false despite the premises being true. 5. The argument follows the structure: If P, then Q. When Q happens, the conclusion is made that P is true. This is an invalid argument since the conclusion is false. Not all other possibilities have been excluded to the exception of P. As long as the conclusion of a deductive argument is false, the argument is rendered invalid. A counterexample of the given example is: Miami is in the USA. Sam lives in the USA. Therefore, Sam lives in Miami. The above argument is invalid because the conclusion is false even though the premises are true. 6. A dilemma is a problem that offers two solutions, neither of which is desirable. A common example of such a situation is depicted when one encounters a homeless person asking for change: Either the change will help the person or not. Giving them change may lead to dependency. Denying them change may result in them sleeping hungry. Therefore, dependency or hunger will result from giving change. There are several solutions to a dilemma. The analogy of â€Å"being on the horns of the dilemma† is used to refer to the person facing a dilemma as it is akin to facing a charging bull. The outcome – impalement – is undesirable. The first involves grasping the first horn, which means giving the person the change to prevent the risk of them going hungry. Grasping the second horn means denying the person change to prevent dependency. The other option of going between the horns would be to ignore the request for change hence, avoiding both outcomes. Charging the bull involves changing strategy, resulting in a proactive approach to the dilemma. Other solutions to this dilemma can be broached, such as finding employment for the person to provide sustenance and eliminate dependency. 7. The argument is weak because the conclusion of an inductive argument is probabilistic, that is, given certain premises, the conclusion is probable. The given argument is an example of a weak inductive argument. To turn it into a strong inductive argument would entail changing the conclusion drawn from the premises: I have observed five crows today. All five crows were black. Therefore, there is a probability that most crows are black. The change in the framing of the conclusion changes it to a strong inductive statement because chances are that not all crows are black. Five crows are a small number on which to base an argument. They are not a representative of the entire crow population. The argument is strong because the likelihood that the conclusion is true is higher. 8. Modus ponens is an argument form that follows the structure: if P implies Q and P are true, then Q is true. An example is: If it is sunny, then I will go for a swim. It is sunny. Therefore, I will go for a swim. The fallacy ensues from affirming the consequent â€Å"then I will go for a swim† since â€Å"if it is sunny† was not presented as the only sufficient condition of the consequent of the conditional statement. Part B The Apology, correctly Apologia, is a philosophical work that documents Socrates’ trial. The meaning of apologia is a presentation of a case in one’s own defense, which is what Socrates offered the jury and the public that had gathered to take part in his trial. Socrates was accused of being a heretic by not worshiping the deities of that time and misleading the youth in his charge (Plato 2000). As a leading philosopher, Socrates was in charge of the education of the youth of Athens. The people who brought theses charges against him were those slighted by his philosophies. Socrates believed that he was tasked by the gods to enlighten the people of Athens by showing them that the acceptance of ignorance was the beginning of knowledge. As part of his defense, Socrates offered a speech to the Athenians present, seeking to explain his actions from a philosophical standpoint. In his address, he referred to himself as a gadfly poking the lazy horse that was Athens from its slumber. The metaphor referred to Socrates’ calling to investigate on the prevalence of knowledge among the experts on different fields of study. His findings illustrated that those proclaimed experts only pretended to have profound knowledge, but lacked in-depth understanding of their fields of expertise. Socrates went about stirring them into action from the state they had put themselves. The relevance of this metaphor to the role that philosophy to intellectual pursuits is to stir the academicians from a state of contentment with the advances made so far. As a gadfly, philosophy should continuously wake the academicians, ensuring that the inquisition of knowledge is relegated. Philosophy serves to remind that the pursuit of knowledge and understanding should stem from the acceptance of ignorance, contrasted with the arrogance of the Athenians who purported to possess wisdom but on further inquisition by Socrates were proved arrogant in their ignorance. The men in Socrates time were insulted by his inquisitions, which proved their ignorance on matters they professed excellence. Instead of seeing the challenged posed by Socrates’ findings, they were quick to take offence (Plato 2000). The inquiries were viewed as a personal attack by Socrates, and the ‘targets’ instead sought to eliminate Socrates by propagating trumped up charges against him. These charges were proved baseless, but all the same, Socrates was condemned to death. This defensive strategy adopted by the Athenians did not help them in the long term. Constructive criticism is useful to the development of academic fields. As a part of his defense, Socrates mentioned that the unexamined life is not worth living. He referred to his opponents and their objection to his inquiries into their intellectual pursuits. They were opposed to the examination the Socrates carried out into their work and understanding of it. Most were found to lack an understanding of the fields they purported to be experts. Socrates had humiliated them by exposing their ignorance. In their anger, they missed the point of the inquiries Socrates made into their work. An examination of their lives’ work was vital to provide insight into the accomplishments and failures made. This point is relevant to our daily lives. The stocktaking that Socrates mentioned is important to illuminate the advances people make as well as the shortcomings encountered. Organizations carry out this analysis on a regular basis to ensure its survival and growth. This review should not only be restricted to such organizations but also extended to all spheres of life. Without it, there is no account made to the activities carried out on a daily basis. It is philosophically immoral to live a life without introspection, as this is a requirement of any being that possess intelligence and a desire of self-improvement. The only way to ensure constant development and avoid stagnation, such as the lazy horse Socrates described Athens to be, is to set the course of constant introspection and improvement (Plato 2000). As a society and individuals, stagnation arises from arrogance nurtured by perceived excellence. There is so much that the human race is yet to understand; hence, arrogance would be folly. These types of fallacies are cultivated by egos that refuse to accept the limited nature of the human mind verses the limitless universe. There is a lot to be discovered, and even that, which is known, can still be improved. The knowledge of human ignorance is the only key to gain wisdom. Socrates understood the prophecy of the oracle at Delphi to be a riddle as he was considered himself the most ignorant man in Athens. His wisdom, as prophesied by the oracle, lay in his acknowledgement of his ignorance. Socrates was open to learn as opposed to the other distinguished men in Athens who considered themselves masters in their respective fields. Their ignorance lay in their arrogance juxtaposed with Socrates wisdom that lay in his acceptance of ignorance. To truly learn, one must accept the limited knowledge one possess, hence the process of learning will emanate from the quest to eliminate the ignorance. Socrates was a pioneer in the methods used in presentation of arguments. In his trial, the formal arguments he presented served to negate the accusations levied against him by his detractors. He used various methods in his cross-examination of the accusers, for example, Meletus. He backed Meletus into a corner by proving that his allegations of heresy and atheism were unfounded because Meletus accused Socrates of believing in demigods who were sons of gods (Plato 2000). It does not make sense to believe in something but not its progenitor. In his lifetime, Socrates provided philosophies that are still applicable to our lives today and to the future generations.

The Fallacy of Division

The Fallacy of Division In critical thinking, we often come across statements that fall victim to the fallacy of division. This common logical fallacy refers to an attribution placed onto an entire class, assuming that each part has the same property as the whole. These can be physical objects, concepts, or groups of people.   By grouping elements of a whole together and assuming that every piece automatically has a certain attribute, we are often stating a false argument. This falls into the category of a fallacy of grammatical analogy. It can apply to many arguments and statements we make, including the debate over religious beliefs. Explanation The fallacy of division is similar to the fallacy of composition  but in reverse. This fallacy involves someone taking an attribute of a whole or a class and assuming that it must also necessarily be true of each part or member. The fallacy of division takes the form of: X has property P. Therefore, all parts (or members) of X have this property P. Examples and Observations Here are some obvious examples of the Fallacy of Division: The United States is the richest country in the world. Therefore, everyone in the United States must be rich and live well.Because professional sports players are paid outrageous salaries, every professional sports player must be rich.The American judicial system is a fair system. Therefore, the defendant got a fair trial and was not executed unfairly. Just as with the fallacy of composition, it is possible to create similar arguments which are valid. Here are some examples: All dogs are from the canidae family. Therefore, my Doberman is from the canidae family.All men are mortal. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. Why are these last examples valid arguments? The difference is between distributive and collective attributes. Attributes which are shared by all members of a class are called distributive because the attribute is distributed among all members by virtue of being a member. Attributes which are created only by bringing together the right parts in the right way are called collective.  This is because it is an attribute of a collection, rather than of the individuals. These examples will illustrate the difference: Stars are large.Stars are numerous. Each statement modifies the word stars with an attribute. In the first, the attribute large is distributive. It is a quality held by each star individually, regardless of whether it is in a group or not. In the second sentence, the attribute numerous is collective. It is an attribute of the entire group of stars and only exists because of the collection. No individual star can have the attribute numerous. This demonstrates a primary reason why so many arguments like this are fallacious. When we bring things together, they can often result in a whole which has new properties unavailable to the parts individually. This is what is often meant by the phrase the whole is more than the sum of the parts. Just because atoms put together in a certain way constitutes a living dog does not mean that all atoms are living - or that the atoms are themselves dogs, either. In Religion Atheists often encounter the fallacy of division when debating religion and science. Sometimes, they may be guilty of using it themselves: Christianity has done many evil things in its history. Therefore, all Christians are evil and nasty. One common way of using the fallacy of division is known as guilt by association. This is clearly illustrated in the example above. Some nasty characteristic is attributed to an entire group of people - political, ethnic, religious, etc. It is then concluded that some particular member of that group (or every member) should be held responsible for whatever nasty things we have come up with. They are, therefore, labeled guilty due to their association with that group. While its uncommon for atheists to state this particular argument in such a direct manner, many atheists have made similar arguments. If not spoken, its not unusual for atheists to behave as if they believed this argument was true. Here is a slightly more complicated example of the fallacy of division which is often used by creationists: Unless each cell in your brain is capable of consciousness and thinking, then the consciousness and thinking in your brain cannot be explained by matter alone. It doesnt look like the other examples, but it is still the fallacy of division - its just been hidden. We can see it better if we more clearly state the hidden premise: If your (material) brain is capable of consciousness, then each cell of your brain must be capable of consciousness. But we know that each cell of your brain does not possess consciousness. Therefore, your (material) brain itself cannot be the source of your consciousness. This argument presumes that if something is true of the whole, then it must be true of the parts. Because it is not true that each cell in your brain is individually capable of consciousness, the argument concludes that there must be something more involved - something other than material cells.   Consciousness, therefore, must come from something other than the material brain. Otherwise, the argument would lead to a true conclusion. Yet, once we realize that the argument contains a fallacy, we no longer have a reason to assume that consciousness is caused by something else. It would be like using this argument: Unless each part of a car is capable of self-propulsion, then self-propulsion in a car cannot be explained by the material car-parts alone. No intelligent person would ever think to use or accept this argument, but its structurally similar to the consciousness example.

Balanced Scorecard and answer 2 questions Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Balanced Scorecard and answer 2 questions - Essay Example They need to get a clear picture of performance in order to identify and align their initiatives. With the implementation of the scorecards they will be able to link their strategies with long term goals Governments are trying to be more business-like and are trying to use result oriented sector management tools, thus the adoption of the scorecards. Although the scorecard is not yet implemented full many government organizations have started adopting it and customizing it to fit their needs. The several organizations and governments that have already adopted it demonstrate that the balanced score card can be applied successfully to the government sector. The customer perspective should be at the top in a governments balance scorecard. However, the other three perspectives are not provided for in the order in which they should appear, but all of them eventually lead towards the customer in the balanced score

UK FILM INDUSTRY Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

UK FILM INDUSTRY - Essay Example The advent of the Internet and related technologies has also brought about a paradigm change in the way enterprises are performing their business operations. The speed, technological superiority and economical operating costs are features that attract more and more businesses to put their money in internet technologies to conduct their business in a far better and cost effective manner. Films are increasingly being distributed through the internet thanks to the increasing speed of the internet and the capacities of the PC that is growing by leaps and bounds. Today, producers are distributing their wares through the internet, which gives them an advantage over costs and logistics. For example, producers can definitely have an advantage of cost when they distribute films through the internet. This also means that they gain a lot through cost savings in the logistics department. Distribution of films through the internet started in 1994 when films were streamed through the internet. However, producers of films had to contend with issues such as privacy and lack of security that often meant that their films could easily be stolen through the internet. However, newer technologies will help them to distribute their films through the internet without the fear of its being stolen. With regard to consumers, distribution of films through the internet has simplified the process of film viewing. Now, consumers can sit at home and watch their favourite movies on demand. This also means that the films that they want to watch are available to them at their convenience. They do not have to depend on physical distribution networks or make time to watch the movie. It is available to them at their beck and call. However, consumers will miss the experience of watching a movie in the theatre when they resort to the internet to watch the movie. None the less, newer technologies that will beam films direct to the theatres are expected to mix the pleasures of film watching