Latest news with #qualityoverquantity
Khaleej Times
27-07-2025
- Business
- Khaleej Times
Elite realty buyers are on the lookout for offerings that reflect their identity
RH Luxury Properties has remained focused on purpose-led living as actively promoted and supported by its founder and CEO Rebiha Helimi. For years, it has served as a guide for private clients who desire properties that go far beyond its dollar value. Those who particularly look past the monetary amount have resoundingly responded to this direction. Therefore, RHLP continues to meet and far exceed the demand from individuals who clearly live within the concept of 'Quality over Quantity.' Now, elite buyers are on the lookout for realty offerings that reflect their identity, steeped in wellness, and have provision for long-term reward. Rebiha Helimi and her company is guiding future and even present homeowners gain access to some of the most mindful living spaces in the area. Helimi selects residences based on lifestyle alignment that are fortified with architectural tensile strength. Interiors are clean and intentional while neighborhoods offer optimal comfort. Rebiha Helimi has been making the rounds in Dubai, meeting with top developers, speaking at world-class symposiums, guesting at popular podcasts to ultimately showcase the city as the top destination for all things health, individualism, and style. Time and again, she has spoken on different forums to highlight her staunch support for residential developments that cater to peace of mind and cultural appreciation, among others.
Entrepreneur
12-05-2025
- Business
- Entrepreneur
The Costly Mistake Franchise Recruiters Need to Avoid
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. While it's widely accepted that there are as many as 4,000 different franchise concepts in the U.S. today. That means the quest to find quality candidates is becoming an ever-increasing, hyper-competitive fight. And let's be honest, while almost every franchisor in every industry claims to focus on finding quality candidates, the majority of them are more than content to chase volume in the relentless effort to promote brand growth at the unit level. The reality is, chasing high volume over ideal candidates almost always leads to wasted effort that could have been directed elsewhere. Then there's the vaunted evaluation process to consider. Franchisors never seem to tire of promoting their strong vetting process, but privately, many would agree their effort could use some improvement. In reality, franchisors in the trenches today could greatly benefit by ditching the idea of focusing on volume over substance. Let's investigate the many ways brands can improve lead generation by focusing on quality over quantity. Related: Considering franchise ownership? Get started now to find your personalized list of franchises that match your lifestyle, interests and budget. The downside of chasing volume Wasting time and effort aren't the only downsides of chasing quality over quantity. Franchisors also risk losing capital, energy and burning out their teams by sending them on wild goose chases that don't consistently produce real, bottom-line results. This puts undue pressure on sales and development teams, be they internal or external. Then there's the fallout from high volume candidates who somehow manage to make it through the process and are awarded a franchise. When some of these less than ideal franchisees inevitably fail because they weren't the right fit to begin with, this can dilute your brand integrity and subject you to long-term operational — and reputational — damage. Related: Why Your Franchise Leads Are Ghosting You — And How to Win Them Back Finding the perfect fit If franchisors truly want to redefine their effort to find quality candidates that match up well with their core values, mission and brand profile, it may be time to return to the proverbial drawing board. This is especially true if the brand has recently onboarded several inadequate franchisees in succession. While some brands have the means to spend significant capital to determine their ideal persona, you can refine your own candidate profile by retooling your messaging and outreach strategies. Other worthwhile ideas include: Investing in new content that's designed to educate, as well as persuade Go big picture - think beyond the next sale and consider the next dozen sales Use data to your advantage to track lead sources – where are the quality candidates coming from? candidates coming from? Implement tighter qualification tools capable of separating ideal candidates from tire-kickers Explore and invest in how AI can do a lot of this groundwork for you Related: The Franchise Candidate You Should Think Twice About — And Why Can you strike a balance? The conventional thinking here is yes, but only if quality outranks quantity in your efforts. If you're the director of franchise development for an emerging brand, what would you rather have on your radar at the moment — 100 leads to chase, or 10 truly qualified candidates? Yes, it will take time to reevaluate your targeting, filtering mechanisms and procedures. But by doing so, you can eventually scale your screening efforts without sacrificing lead integrity. Here's a caveat to consider – does having more leads always result in closing more deals? If the answer is no, it's time for your brand to redefine the type of candidate you don't want with as much fervor as you put into finding your preferred franchisee. And whatever your sales and development program looks like, it's always advisable to build strong partnerships with platforms and brokers who fully understand your brand's value proposition and key differentiators. If you can put the same effort and focus in building your credibility as you do searching for quality prospects, you'll be surprised how often the right candidates will eventually find you. Because the ideal franchisees you hope to bring into your system will always arrive from a place of trust and credibility, not volume. Related: Choosing Quality Over Quantity Helped Our Company Grow During the Pandemic
Yahoo
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump can save Britain from the tsunami of Chinese tat
How many dolls does a child need? 'I don't think a beautiful baby girl that's 11 years old needs to have 30 dolls,' says President Trump. 'I think they'll have two dolls, and the dolls will cost a couple of bucks more,' he elaborated. A few days later, he'd raised this to 'three or four'. For this observation, he was widely vilified. Trump was a 'toy snatcher', according to one academic. A Guardian columnist declared that what he really feared was femininity, claiming 'they want you, and your kids, to be poor, desperate and ignorant'. The libertarian editor-at-large of Reason magazine, Nick Gillespie, sneered: 'Same energy: Trump on dolls, Sanders on deodorants. Horseshoe theory in action'. Ergo, Trump was a closet socialist, too. This punch failed to land. Typically words like 'three dolls is enough' can be heard from some hysterical hair-shirt ascetic on BBC Radio Four, such as George Monbiot, insisting too that we don't 'need' to take an overseas holiday, or eat meat. 12,000 years ago, such people would have been telling us off for extravagantly decorating our caves, or lighting a fire to keep warm. But toy rationing obviously isn't Donald Trump's belief. What he does have is a peculiar genius for articulating something we all know to be true but don't like to say out loud. What's the point of buying 30 dolls if they're all rubbish, and each one breaks within a few days? As consumers, we've chosen to binge on quantity, not quality – on Chinese-made tat, substandard or dangerous products. Our homes have become temporary staging posts for goods on their way to the landfill. In Trump's words, we're buying 'junk'. Meanwhile, and this is not a coincidence, our own industrial base has withered away. Trump is hoping that American manufacturing responds, and makes more dolls, and much else besides. It costs a little more, he argues, but maybe the products will be better. This is a problem recognisable to many readers. One Christmas some years ago, I explained in this column how we'd chosen to buy a badge-making machine for my then-tweens. We opted for a model from eBadges, a husband-and-wife firm in Lincolnshire that had reshored manufacturing back to Britain. It cost around £60, a tenner more than the Chinese competitor on Amazon. But there was a number to ring with a human at the other end, and every part was available as a spare. They told me how they would receive distraught calls from buyers of the Chinese models, which had broken down: no spares, no support, we're sorry. I'm delighted to say the firm is still going – as is our badge machine, and my child's online shop. Trump is inviting us to consider just what kind of bargain we have been getting. Some costs just don't show up straight away, but years later. As Ambrose Evans-Pritchard wrote in The Telegraph a year ago, China's 'exorbitant overproduction' now threatens the social market model in Europe, because of 'strategic over-investment' designed to crush our economic base. Another cost is the vast welfare and health bill that comes from turning an industrious working class into an idle underclass living in broken communities – treating post-industrial ailments ranging from obesity to drug dependency. 'It barely staunches the bleeding,' argues the SDP leader William Clouston. Britain may as well have kept its factories open. Free trade could once claim immense moral righteousness. In 19th-century England, Robert Peel removed tariffs on imported grain to make bread cheaper and improve the lives of millions. His resignation speech in 1848, which you can read online at Hansard, spoke of 'those whose lot it is to labour, and to earn their daily bread by the sweat of their brow' receiving 'abundant and untaxed food, the sweeter because it is no longer leavened by a sense of injustice'. Trade is good, but the utopians have been living off stolen valour for decades. The 29th doll that a household purchases is not quite the same as cheap bread was to a hungry family in Salford 180 years ago. Maga advisors think that we buy a lot of Chinese goods simply because they are cheap – torches that break after a couple of weeks, chargers that are unsafe, EVs that you can't get insured. Even more profoundly, Trump is challenging the utilitarian logic that underpins not only free trade but open borders, too. The logic of globalisation was that we were getting richer in the aggregate, so we must stop complaining. That logic is collapsing before our eyes. Another lesson we can take from the badge machine is that buying something is not merely a transaction, but an investment in the future of the supplier. China's strategic bet is that we don't know this, or don't care – that we just can't resist a bargain, and that we rationally will always buy the cheapest good regardless of quality or the consequences. 'Junk' has two meanings. British merchants once helped get China hooked on opium, and now they've got us addicted to bargains. I think Donald Trump has got lots wrong on trade, and he may also be wildly over optimistic about the ability of America's atrophied manufacturing sector to recover. But he's right in asking that we look to ourselves for the cure. Or as Trump himself said: 'Don't feed the beast'. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Trump can save Britain from the tsunami of Chinese tat
How many dolls does a child need? 'I don't think a beautiful baby girl that's 11 years old needs to have 30 dolls,' says President Trump. 'I think they'll have two dolls, and the dolls will cost a couple of bucks more,' he elaborated. A few days later, he'd raised this to 'three or four'. For this observation, he was widely vilified. Trump was a 'toy snatcher', according to one academic. A Guardian columnist declared that what he really feared was femininity, claiming 'they want you, and your kids, to be poor, desperate and ignorant'. The libertarian editor-at-large of Reason magazine, Nick Gillespie, sneered: 'Same energy: Trump on dolls, Sanders on deodorants. Horseshoe theory in action'. Ergo, Trump was a closet socialist, too. This punch failed to land. Typically words like 'three dolls is enough' can be heard from some hysterical hair-shirt ascetic on BBC Radio Four, such as George Monbiot, insisting too that we don't 'need' to take an overseas holiday, or eat meat. 12,000 years ago, such people would have been telling us off for extravagantly decorating our caves, or lighting a fire to keep warm. But toy rationing obviously isn't Donald Trump's belief. What he does have is a peculiar genius for articulating something we all know to be true but don't like to say out loud. What's the point of buying 30 dolls if they're all rubbish, and each one breaks within a few days? As consumers, we've chosen to binge on quantity, not quality – on Chinese-made tat, substandard or dangerous products. Our homes have become temporary staging posts for goods on their way to the landfill. In Trump's words, we're buying 'junk'. Meanwhile, and this is not a coincidence, our own industrial base has withered away. Trump is hoping that American manufacturing responds, and makes more dolls, and much else besides. It costs a little more, he argues, but maybe the products will be better. This is a problem recognisable to many readers. One Christmas some years ago, I explained in this column how we'd chosen to buy a badge-making machine for my then-tweens. We opted for a model from eBadges, a husband-and-wife firm in Lincolnshire that had reshored manufacturing back to Britain. It cost around £60, a tenner more than the Chinese competitor on Amazon. But there was a number to ring with a human at the other end, and every part was available as a spare. They told me how they would receive distraught calls from buyers of the Chinese models, which had broken down: no spares, no support, we're sorry. I'm delighted to say the firm is still going – as is our badge machine, and my child's online shop. Trump is inviting us to consider just what kind of bargain we have been getting. Some costs just don't show up straight away, but years later. As Ambrose Evans-Pritchard wrote in The Telegraph a year ago, China's 'exorbitant overproduction' now threatens the social market model in Europe, because of 'strategic over-investment' designed to crush our economic base. Another cost is the vast welfare and health bill that comes from turning an industrious working class into an idle underclass living in broken communities – treating post-industrial ailments ranging from obesity to drug dependency. 'It barely staunches the bleeding,' argues the SDP leader William Clouston. Britain may as well have kept its factories open. Free trade could once claim immense moral righteousness. In 19th-century England, Robert Peel removed tariffs on imported grain to make bread cheaper and improve the lives of millions. His resignation speech in 1848, which you can read online at Hansard, spoke of 'those whose lot it is to labour, and to earn their daily bread by the sweat of their brow' receiving 'abundant and untaxed food, the sweeter because it is no longer leavened by a sense of injustice'. Trade is good, but the utopians have been living off stolen valour for decades. The 29 th doll that a household purchases is not quite the same as cheap bread was to a hungry family in Salford 180 years ago. Maga advisors think that we buy a lot of Chinese goods simply because they are cheap – torches that break after a couple of weeks, chargers that are unsafe, EVs that you can't get insured. Even more profoundly, Trump is challenging the utilitarian logic that underpins not only free trade but open borders, too. The logic of globalisation was that we were getting richer in the aggregate, so we must stop complaining. That logic is collapsing before our eyes. Another lesson we can take from the badge machine is that buying something is not merely a transaction, but an investment in the future of the supplier. China's strategic bet is that we don't know this, or don't care – that we just can't resist a bargain, and that we rationally will always buy the cheapest good regardless of quality or the consequences. 'Junk' has two meanings. British merchants once helped get China hooked on opium, and now they've got us addicted to bargains. I think Donald Trump has got lots wrong on trade, and he may also be wildly over optimistic about the ability of America's atrophied manufacturing sector to recover. But he's right in asking that we look to ourselves for the cure. Or as Trump himself said: 'Don't feed the beast'.
