The only part of this entry I truly take seriously is my joke about a sandwich

'I still say it's an interesting question. I will talk to Kevin and provide further clarification next tutorial.' Despite the upper-class English accent, this response provided no justification to support the currently debated theory.

'The fact is the book says "Diversification" is the act of expanding corporate interests into other areas of business.' I believed and argued simultaneously. The air was full of tension as the dozen economic students deliberated on whether or not a business that employed a strategy of selling their same, existing product for a cheaper price with a different label somehow qualified as 'corporate diversification'. It clearly didn't. Even Wiggles would know that. The only way this scenario should have even come up is if the tutorial question had asked 'please come up with the only possible business level competitive strategy that does not involve corporate diversification in any way, shape or form.'

Unfortunately it seems the nature of all social science/humanity topics is that any answer is correct assuming you can write a paragraph explaining why using, although not necessarily semantically correctly, the appropriate buzz-words. My IT based humanities compiler was having none of it though. There was no way I could casually accept the accurate definition of corporate diversification being knocked around like a volley ball on a Brazilian river mouth. Especially since the tutorial was a quarter done (three quarters complete chronologically) and I hadn't even prepared for the last two questions. So when it was suggested that the concept of selling your baked beans with different labelling at a cheaper price could be in any way defined as corporate diversification I put my foot down. Did even the simple concept of 'industry' escape these people? Or were they simply just asking shit, spontaneous questions as if to provide a fuel to my fire for debating economics with people who, unlike me, had probably actually even read the lecture notes for this week?

Nevertheless adrenaline flooded me with the force of a sixteen year old football player having a wet dream after not getting laid for six weeks because of so much goddamn training. I eventually managed to convince a classroom full of people who completely did not care that diversification required resources being applied in two or more separate areas that could, although did not require, a synergy that ensured both areas of effort resulted in increased value for the organisation/entity. If a company produces two types of baked beans and sells them with different labelling for different prices that is NOT diversification. I learnt this in the 10 minutes I spent organising for the tutorial right before it started. During this time I also ate a peanut butter and jam sandwich. For anyone who knows corporate strategy economics: Studying and eating a sandwich at the same time, now that's true corporate diversification.