Krishna
Burberry:

Burberry moved manufacturing work overseas to China (offshoring). This involved the closure of their factory in Rhondda, causing 300 jobs to be lost in Rhondda. Consequently staff were crying when given the news and protests were held, causing the reputation and brand image to worsen in the short-term of Burberry as a result of making such an unethical move. This was a large concern as Burberry provided well-paid, quality employment, so the 300 job cuts in Rhondda meant a sad loss to the development of the economic infrastructure of Rhondda. Also in the short-term Burberry had to suffer larger cash outflows due to the redundancy payments. However the lower labour costs in China, although rising, allowed profits to rise. Also Burberry saw a 19% sales revenue rise, due to the rising customer disposable incomes in China, and as a result profits rose. Therefore in the short-term the move to China was not good as it meant large cash outflows due to the redundancy payments, and the job cuts in the UK made Burberry receive an unethical, negative brand image and reputation, reducing sales and profits. Although in the long-term Burberry is likely to benefit from greater sales and so more profits, particularly due to lower labour costs, but this depends on the rate at which labour costs are rising in China relative to that of the UK, and how high the shipping costs are of the goods from China to the UK.

Dyson:

Dyson's very innovative bladeless fan was the result of 4 expensive years of R&D carrying large costs. Despite the technology being patented, there are a number of Chinese firms violating the IP rights by illegally copying the successful designs and producing cheap replicas. Consequently Dyson spent £3.5m pursuing often futile legal cases in Chinese court, increasing costs and reducing profits. Also Dyson suffered a loss of sales and market