text:
Haruhiko Mikimoto

Haruhiko Mikimoto (美樹本 晴彦) is a Japanese anime character designer, illustrator and manga artist. Mostly active during the 1980s, during that decade he rose to prominence and is considered one of the top character designers of his time.

He graduated from Keio University, and attended the university in the same years as Macross creator Shōji Kawamori and screenwriter Hiroshi Ōnogi. He joined the animation studio Artland while attending school, and was character designer in several anime series, including The Super Dimension Fortress Macross, Macross 7, Gunbuster and Kabaneri of the Iron Fortress.

Anime works
Listed in alphabetical order.
 * Aquarian Age the Movie (character designer)
 * Astro Boy (1980 TV series) (in-between animation, key animation)
 * Blue Remains (character designer)
 * Delpower X Bakuhatsu Miracle Genki! (Character Design)
 * Gandalla: King of the Burning Desert (character designer)
 * Gunbuster (character designer)
 * Gundam Neo Experience 0087: Green Divers (character designer),
 * Hi-Speed Jecy (character designer)
 * Kabaneri of the Iron Fortress (original character designer)
 * Macross 7 (character designer, Ending Animation)
 * Macross 7: The Galaxy's Calling Me! (character designer)
 * Macross Dynamite 7 (character designer)
 * Megazone 23 (guest character designer (Eve Tokimatsuri))
 * Megazone 23, Part II (guest character designer (Eve Tokimatsuri))
 * Megazone 23, Part III (guest character designer (Eve Tokimatsuri))
 * Mobile Suit Gundam 0080: War in the Pocket (character designer)
 * Rayca (character designer)
 * Salamander (character designer)
 * Super Dimension Century Orguss (character designer, animation director)
 * Super Dimension Century Orguss 02 (character designer)
 * Talking Head (film) (character design)
 * The Super Dimension Fortress Macross (character designer, character animation director)
 * Macross: Do You Remember Love? (character designer, animation director)
 * The Super Dimension Fortress Macross: Flash Back 2012 (character designer, animation director)
 * Super Dimensional Fortress Macross II: Lovers Again (character designer)
 * Tottoi (Character Design)
 * Tōi Umi kara Kita Coo (Character Design)
 * Tytania (Character Designer)

Games

 * Aisle Lord -- Mega-CD (character designer)
 * Dogu Senki -- Dreamcast (character designer)
 * FZ Axis -- Mega Drive (character designer)
 * The Super Dimension Fortress Macross: Scrambled Valkyrie -- Super Famicom (character designer)
 * Khamrai -- PlayStation (character designer)
 * Macross VF-X—PlayStation (character designer)
 * Macross VF-X2—PlayStation (character designer)
 * Quo Vadis -- Sega Saturn, PlayStation (character designer)
 * Quovadis 2—Sega Saturn (character designer)
 * Record of Lodoss War: Advent of Kardis—Dreamcast (cover illustration)
 * A Sherd of Youthful Memories—PlayStation (character designer)
 * The Super Dimension Fortress Macross: Do You Remember Love? (game)—Sega Saturn, PlayStation (character designer)
 * Top o Nerae!—PlayStation 2 (character designer)
 * The Super Dimension Fortress Macross (game) -- PlayStation 2 (character designer)
 * Macross Ace Frontier -- PlayStation Portable (character designer)

Artbooks and collections
Listed in alphabetic order. ISBN is for Japanese release unless otherwise noted.
 * Elverz, ISBN 4-8291-9107-4
 * Haruhiko Mikimoto Illustrations
 * ISBN 0-945814-52-6 (USA, hardcover)
 * ISBN 0-945814-51-8 (USA, softcover)
 * Hoshi no Kismet, ISBN 4-253-01066-0
 * Innocence, ISBN 4-04-853663-X
 * It's Artland, ISBN 4-88144-032-2
 * Michinoku Gashū, ISBN 4-19-669538-8
 * Mikimoto Haruhiko Cel Works, ISBN 4-19-669607-4
 * Movement, ISBN 4-8291-9102-3
 * My Time, ISBN 4-8291-9112-0
 * Quo Vadis Visual Book, ISBN 4-575-28720-2
 * Roman Album Series Haruhiko Mikimoto Illustrations
 * A Sherd of Youthful Memories Deep File, ISBN 4-901159-00-3
 * A Sherd of Youthful Memories Visual Works, ISBN 4-87709-359-1
 * This Is Animation: Chō Jikū Yōsai Macross Character-hen, ISBN 4-09-199521-7
 * Visualist Series: Haruhiko Mikimoto Collection (laserdisc, VHS, and CD-ROM)

Illustration works
Listed in alphabetic order. ISBN is for Japanese release unless otherwise noted.
 * Baby Birth (illustrator, manga written by Sukehiro Tomita)
 * vol.1, ISBN 4-06-349061-0 (Japan), ISBN 1-59182-372-2 (USA)
 * vol.2, ISBN 4-06-349102-1 (Japan), ISBN 1-59182-373-0 (USA)
 * Chō Jikū Seiki Orguss 02
 * vol.1, ISBN 4-09-440193-8
 * vol.2, ISBN 4-09-440194-6
 * vol.3, ISBN 4-09-440195-4
 * vol.4, ISBN 4-09-440196-2
 * Chō Jikū Yōsai Macross TV-ban Anime Novels vol.1, ISBN 4-09-198001-5 (cover, illustrator, novel by Toshiki Inoue)
 * Ecole Du Ciel
 * vol.1 (cover, inside illustration, novel by Kenichi Nakahara), ISBN 4-04-429801-7
 * vol.2 (cover, inside illustration, novel by Kenichi Nakahara), ISBN 4-04-429802-5
 * Gekijoban Chō Jikū Yōsai Macross: Ai Oboete Imasu ka, ISBN 4-09-440004-4 (cover, illustrator, novel by Sukehiro Tomita)
 * Gekijoban Chō Jikū Yōsai Macross 2
 * vol.1, ISBN 4-09-440011-7
 * vol.2, ISBN 4-09-440012-5
 * vol.3, ISBN 4-09-440013-3
 * vol.4, ISBN 4-09-440014-1
 * vol.5, ISBN 4-09-440015-X
 * Gunbuster Perfect Guide (character designer)
 * Hakkenden (cover, illustrator)
 * vol.1, ISBN 4-09-440261-6
 * vol.2, ISBN 4-09-440262-4
 * vol.3, ISBN 4-09-440263-2
 * Hayase Misa: Shiroi Tsuioku, ISBN 4-19-669519-1 (illustrator, novel by Hiroshi Ohnogi)
 * Live of Legend: Lynn Minmay/Mylene Jenius (character designer)
 * Marginal Masters
 * vol.1, ISBN 4-19-669615-5
 * vol.2, ISBN 4-19-669635-X
 * vol.3, ISBN 4-19-669639-2
 * My Inference And Her Reason, ISBN 4-04-428001-0 (cover, novel by Tsuguya Murase)
 * Mysterious Warrior Thief T.T. (cover, illustrator, novels by Eiichiro Saito)
 * vol.1, ISBN 4-04-164701-0
 * vol.3, ISBN 4-04-164703-7
 * vol.4, ISBN 4-04-164704-5
 * New Record of Lodoss War, (Introduction) ISBN 4-04-460426-6 (cover, inside illustrations, novels by Ryo Mizuno)
 * vol.1, ISBN 4-04-460424-X
 * vol.2, ISBN 4-04-460423-1
 * vol.3, ISBN 4-04-460425-8
 * vol.4, ISBN 4-04-460428-2
 * vol.5, ISBN 4-04-460429-0
 * vol.6, ISBN 4-04-460430-4
 * Oboete Imasu ka: Eiga "Chō Jikū Yōsai Macross" yori, ISBN 4-19-669544-2 (cover, illustrator)
 * Seishun! Tonari-gumi: Kimi to Hanashitai, ISBN 4-19-669585-X (cover, illustrator)
 * Titania (cover, illustrator, novels by Yoshiki Tanaka)
 * vol.1, ISBN 4-19-153817-9
 * vol.2, ISBN 4-19-154060-2
 * vol.3, ISBN 4-7575-1135-3
 * Tōsō no Eden, ISBN 4-19-669593-0 (illustrator)

Manga
Listed in alphabetic order. ISBN is for Japanese release unless otherwise noted.
 * Cherish, ISBN 4-04-852489-5
 * Macross 7: Trash
 * vol.1, ISBN 4-04-713105-9
 * vol.2, ISBN 4-04-713122-9
 * vol.3, ISBN 4-04-713142-3
 * vol.4, ISBN 4-04-713183-0
 * vol.5, ISBN 4-04-713198-9
 * vol.6, ISBN 4-04-713230-6
 * vol.7, ISBN 4-04-713293-4
 * vol.8, ISBN 4-04-713397-3
 * Marionette Generation
 * vol.1, ISBN 4-04-852221-3 (Japan), ISBN 1-56931-558-2 (USA)
 * vol.2, ISBN 4-04-852225-6 (Japan)
 * vol.3, ISBN 4-04-852480-1 (Japan), ISBN 1-59116-024-3 (USA)
 * vol.4, ISBN 4-04-852588-3 (Japan), ISBN 1-59116-055-3 (USA)
 * vol.5, ISBN 4-04-852803-3 (Japan), ISBN 1-59116-200-9 (USA)
 * Mobile Suit Gundam École du Ciel
 * vol.1, ISBN 4-04-713520-8, ISBN 4-04-713521-6 (special edition, bonus CD-ROM) (Japan), ISBN 1-59532-851-3 (USA)
 * vol.2, ISBN 4-04-713564-X (Japan), ISBN 1-59532-852-1 (USA)
 * vol.3, ISBN 4-04-713612-3 (Japan), ISBN 1-59532-853-X (USA)
 * vol.4, ISBN 4-04-713641-7 (Japan), ISBN 1-59532-854-8 (USA)
 * vol.5, ISBN 4-04-713687-5, ISBN 4-04-900768-1 (special edition, bonus figure) (Japan), ISBN 1-59816-209-8 (USA)
 * vol.6, ISBN 4-04-713723-5
 * vol.7, ISBN 4-04-713752-9
 * vol.8, ISBN 4-04-713802-9, ISBN 4-04-900780-0 (special edition, bonus figure)
 * vol.9, ISBN 4-04-713854-1
 * Reverb, ISBN 4-04-926186-3
 * The Super Dimension Fortress Macross: The First - Macross Ace Magazine

Other

 * Aquarian Age Trading Card Game (card illustrations)
 * Chaos Gear Trading Card Game (card illustrations)
 * CM's Macross Figure Collection (cover illustration)
 * Gundam the Ride: A Baoa Qu (amusement park ride, character design)
 * Macross VF-X2 Original Soundtrack (cover, inside illustrations)
 * Macross 7 Trash (radio drama, illustrations)
 * Marionette Generation: Out of Ganchu (CD album + illustration book)
 * Megazone 23 Original Soundtrack Part I and II (cover, inside illustrations)
 * Mobile Suit Gundam: Hathaway's Flash (novel illustration)

title: Haruhiko Mikimoto


text:
Succession of states

Succession of states is a concept in international relations regarding a successor state that has become a sovereign state over a territory (and populace) that was previously under the sovereignty of another state. The theory has its roots in 19th-century diplomacy. A successor state often acquires a new international legal personality, which is distinct from a continuing state, also known as a continuator or historical heir, which despite changes to its borders retains the same legal personality and possess all its existing rights and obligations (such as a rump state).

Partial and universal state succession
A state succession can be characterized as either being universal or partial. A universal state succession occurs when one state is completely extinguished and its sovereignty is replaced by that of one or more successor states. A partial state succession occurs when the state continues to exist after it has lost control of a part of its territory.

An example of a partial state succession is the case of the split of Bangladesh from Pakistan. There was no challenge to Pakistan's claim to continue to exist and to retain its membership of the United Nations: it was a continuator and not a successor. Bangladesh eventually was recognized as a new state: it was a successor and had to apply for UN membership.

An example of a universal state succession is the dissolution of Czechoslovakia. Neither part claimed any continuity: both the Czech Republic and Slovakia were new successor states.

There are cases where a state is completely extinguished or abolished without having any successor states. Cases like this occur when, for example, one state is annexed or conquered by another and ceases to exist even in nominal form (i.e., not even a "government in exile" is established). The most recent case is the German Democratic Republic (East Germany), which was completely abolished after the German reunification. Modern Germany is a continuation of the Federal Republic of Germany and not a successor state.

Rights and obligations
Consequent upon the acquisition of international legal personality, the difficult matter of succession to treaty rights and obligations arises. Succession may refer to the transfer of rights, obligations, or property from a previously well-established predecessor state to its successor state, and can include overseas assets such as diplomatic missions, foreign-exchange reserves, and museum artifacts; and participation in treaties in force at the date of succession or international organizations. In an attempt to codify the rules of succession of states, the 1978 Vienna Convention entered into force on November 6, 1996.

Classification of cases
In their application to the acquisition of independence, distinctions should be drawn between different cases though the line of demarcation is not always clear:

 * Bilateral and multilateral treaties necessarily give rise to different considerations.
 * There are real treaties and personal treaties. Real treaties affect the territory itself, such as boundary agreements or the grant of transit rights, which can continue irrespective of the personality of the state. The new state must take over the country in the condition in which it finds it, as the parent state cannot give more than it possesses. Such treaties can be described as "treaties creating purely local obligations."

Exceptions to orderly succession
There are several recent examples where a succession of states, as described above, has not been entirely adhered to. This is mostly a list of the exceptions that have occurred since the creation of the United Nations in 1945. In previous historical periods, the exceptions would be too many to list.

Afghanistan
The Taliban state in Afghanistan (the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan) became the de facto government of nearly all the country in the mid-1990s, but the Afghan Northern Alliance was still recognised by many nations and retained the UN seat. In 2021, the Taliban again took power, but it does not have the Afghanistan UN seat.

China
The People's Republic of China (PRC) was established in 1949 in mainland China and claimed succession from the Republic of China (ROC). The ROC's territory was reduced to mainly the island of Taiwan, who took control from Japan in 1945, although it continues to claim control of the mainland. At the start of the Cold War the PRC was recognized by few states; the ROC continued to represent "China" in the United Nations and hold the permanent seat on the UN Security Council. In 1971, the PRC replaced the ROC in the UN through General Assembly Resolution 2758; this followed a trend of greater recognition for the PRC at the expense of the ROC. Although the resolution makes no mention of Taiwan, the ROC continues to be unrepresented within the United Nations but exercises sovereignty over the Taiwan Area. In addition to the Chinese mainland, the ROC also claims borderlands unclaimed by the PRC, most notably Outer Mongolia.

In Chinese history, periods of prolonged political division and dynastic transition saw the existence of more than one claimant to "China" at the same time. China was politically divided during several sustained periods historically, with two or more states simultaneously existing on territories associated with "China" and claiming to represent "China". Examples include the Three Kingdoms, Sixteen Kingdoms, Northern and Southern dynasties, Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms periods, Warlord Era and the Chinese Soviet Republic among others. Just as the PRC and the ROC formally claim exclusive mandate over the entirety of China,  historical Chinese dynasties that existed during periods of sustained political disunity often claimed exclusive Chinese politico-cultural orthodoxy at the expense of others.

During dynastic transitions, it was rare for one dynasty to end abruptly and transition smoothly to a new one, resulting in the existence of more than one entity claiming to be "China". For instance, during the Ming–Qing transition, the Ming dynasty existed alongside the Qing dynasty (or Predynastic Qing) for a period before 1644. The predecessor of the Qing dynasty, the Later Jin dynasty, was established in 1616 and ruled over Northeast China whilst the Ming dynasty ruled over China proper. Following the fall of the Ming dynasty in 1644, remnants of the Ming imperial family, whose regime is known in historiography as the Southern Ming dynasty, continued to rule parts of southern China until 1662. Multiple ephemeral regimes also existed during this period, including the Shun and Xi dynasties on mainland China, and the Ming loyalist Kingdom of Tungning on Taiwan.

Republic of Ireland
Ireland, then called the Irish Free State, seceded from the United Kingdom under the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1922. The new state took the view that when a new state comes into being after formerly being part of an older state, its acceptance of treaty relationships established by the older state is a matter for the new state to determine by express declaration, or by conduct in the case of each individual treaty. In practice, however, the Irish regarded the commercial and administrative treaties of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland previously applying to the territory of the Irish Free State as remaining in force.

Israel
Israel took the view that, by virtue of its declaration of independence in 1948, a new international personality from Mandatory Palestine was created, and that it started with a clean slate, and was bound only by such of the former international obligations affecting the territory as Israel might accept.

Kampuchea/Cambodia
When Democratic Kampuchea led by Pol Pot was militarily displaced by the Vietnamese-backed People's Republic of Kampuchea, the country's United Nations seat was held by Democratic Kampuchea for many years. It is now held by the Kingdom of Cambodia.

Korea
When the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea was formed in 1919, it claimed continuity directly from Korea's pre-1910 status. When the modern Republic of Korea was formed in 1948, it claimed that it was identical to Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea and that the Provisional Government succeeded the Korean Empire. An important tenet of the modern state of Republic of Korea is that the Korean Empire's incorporation into the Empire of Japan from 1910 to 1945 is internationally recognized as an illegal occupation.

South Korea resumed membership to international organizations such as the Universal Postal Union and re-affirmed that pre-1910 treaties were still in force.

Ottoman Empire/Turkey
There is some debate over whether the modern Republic of Turkey is a continuing state to the Ottoman Empire or a successor. The two entities fought on opposing sides in the Turkish War of Independence (1919–23), and even briefly co-existed as separate administrative units (whilst at war with one another): Turkey with its capital in Angora (now Ankara) and the Ottoman Empire from Constantinople (now Istanbul), but this type of scenario is also common in civil wars. The Turkish National Movement, led by Mustafa Kemal who defected from the Ottoman Army, established the modern republic as a nation-state (or new government regime) by defeating the opposing elements in the Turkish War of Independence. There remains debate about whether the conflict was a war of independence, or a civil war that led to a regime change.

The question of state succession is relevant to the issue of Armenian genocide reparations.

Pakistan
After Pakistan was created in 1947, it claimed that it was automatically a member of the United Nations. The United Nations Secretariat, however, expressed the following opinion:

"From the viewpoint of International Law, the situation is one in which part of an existing State breaks off and becomes a new State. On this analysis there is no change in the international status of India; it continues as a State with all treaty rights and obligations, and consequently with all rights and obligations of membership in the United Nations. The territory which breaks off—Pakistan—will be a new State. It will not have the treaty rights and obligations of the old State and will not, of course, have membership in the United Nations. In International Law, the situation is analogous to the separation of the Irish Free State from Britain, and Belgium from the Netherlands. In these cases the portion which separated was considered a new State, and the remaining portion continued as an existing State with all the rights and duties which it had before."

Russia and the Soviet Union
The Russian Federation succeeded to the Soviet Union's seat, including its permanent membership on the Security Council in the United Nations after the 1991 dissolution of the Soviet Union, which originally co-founded the UN in 1945. The succession was supported by the USSR's former members and was not objected to by the UN membership; Russia accounted for more than 75% of the Soviet Union's economy, the majority of its population and 75% of its land mass; in addition, the history of the Soviet Union began in Russia with the October Revolution in 1917 in Petrograd. If there was to be a successor to the Soviet seat on the Security Council among the former Soviet republics, these factors made Russia seem a logical choice. This was also accepted by the rest of the former states of the USSR; in a letter dated 24 December 1991, the Russian President Boris Yeltsin informed the Secretary-General that the membership of the USSR in the Security Council and all other United Nations organs was being continued by the Russian Federation with the support of the nine member countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States. All Soviet embassies became Russian embassies. Ukraine, the successor state of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (legally ) being one of the founding members of the Soviet Union, has not recognized the exclusive Russian claims to succession of the Soviet Union and claimed such status for Ukraine as well, which was stated in Articles 7 and 8 of Law on the Succession of Ukraine issued in 1991. After independence, Ukraine has continued to pursue claims against the Russian Federation in foreign courts, seeking to recover its share of the foreign property that was formerly owned by the Soviet Union.

A special case for the Baltic states had existed. An important tenet of the modern states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania is that their incorporation into the Soviet Union from 1940 to 1991 constituted an illegal occupation. In 1991 when each Baltic state regained their independence they claimed continuity directly from their pre-1940 status. Many other states share this view, and as such, these states were not considered either predecessor or successor states of the Soviet Union. As a consequence, the Baltic states were able to simply re-establish diplomatic relations with countries, re-affirm pre-1940 treaties still in force, and resume membership in international organizations. A similar situation applies to the Caucasus countries of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, which claimed continuity of the pre-1921 republics before being conquered by the Red Army as well as Ukraine, which as mentioned above, is the de facto successor to the Ukrainian People's Republic that was founded in 1917 before its Sovietization in 1919 (see Soviet–Ukrainian War).

Yugoslavia
After four of the six constituent republics of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia seceded in 1991 and 1992, the rump state, renamed the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, stated it was the continuation of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia—against the objections of the newly independent republics. Representatives from Belgrade continued to hold the original Yugoslavian UN seat—however, the United States refused to recognize it. The remaining territory of the federation was less than half of the population and territory of the former federation. In 1992 the Security Council on 19 September (Resolution 777) and the General Assembly on 22 September, decided to refuse to allow the new federation to sit in the General Assembly under the name of "Yugoslavia" on the theory that the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had dissolved. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (later renamed Serbia and Montenegro) was admitted as a new member to the United Nations on 1 November 2000; in May 2006, Montenegro declared independence and Serbia continued to hold the federation's seat. Additionally, Kosovo declared independence in February 2008.

The Agreement on Succession Issues
The first negotiations on succession issues of the former Socialist Yugoslavia began in 1992 within the framework of the Working Group on Succession Issues of the Peace Conference on Yugoslavia. The agreement was initially prevented by the insistence of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia that it was the exclusive legal and political continuation of Socialist Yugoslavia as well as the owner of all state property owned by the earlier socialist federal government, and that it was willing to renounce a part of it only as an act of goodwill. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia interpreted the breakup of Yugoslavia as a process of serial secessions and not as a complete dismemberment of the earlier state, an interpretation rejected by the other former Yugoslav republics. The Badinter Arbitration Committee recommended a division of assets and liabilities based on principle of equity, referring to the 1983 Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of State Property, Archives and Debt (a convention not in force which at the time was signed by only six states, including SRF Yugoslavia). This proposal was unacceptable to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia which therefore motivated the International Monetary Fund to develop an alternative key model which considered the economic power of republics and their contribution to the federal budget, which was accepted by all. The key determined participation of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia with 36.52%, Croatia with 28.49%, Slovenia 16.39%, Bosnia and Herzegovina with 13.20% and Macedonia with 5.20%. An agreement was also reached on gold and other reserves at the Bank for International Settlements, but the final conclusion was postponed by the beginning of the Kosovo War.

After the end of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia followed next year by the overthrow of Slobodan Milošević, the successor states concluded their agreement. In 2001, with the support of the international community, five countries (Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia – today North Macedonia — and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia – today Serbia and Montenegro) signed the Agreement on Succession Issues which conclusively confirmed that five sovereign equal successor states were formed upon the dissolution of the former SFR Yugoslavia. It entered into force on 2 June 2004, when the last successor state ratified it. The agreement was signed as an umbrella agreement which included annexes on diplomatic and consular properties, financial assets and liabilities, archives, pensions, other rights, interests and liabilities as well as private properties and acquired rights. At the subsequent dissolution of the state union of Serbia and Montenegro (one of the five successor states), the two countries agreed on Serbian sole succession of rights and obligations of their federation.

Examples

 * Serbia, successor state to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (earlier claim to SFR Yugoslavia succession dropped in 2000)
 * The Islamic Republic of Iran, successor state to the Imperial State of Iran
 * Sudan, the reduced state after the creation of South Sudan
 * Predecessors of sovereign states in Africa
 * Predecessors of sovereign states in Asia
 * Predecessors of sovereign states in North America
 * Predecessors of sovereign states in South America
 * Predecessors of sovereign states in Europe
 * Predecessors of sovereign states in Oceania

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Succession of states


text:
Prince John of the United Kingdom

Prince John (John Charles Francis; 12 July 1905 – 18 January 1919) was the fifth son and youngest of the six children of King George V and Queen Mary. At the time of his birth, his father was heir apparent to John's grandfather Edward VII. In 1910, John's father succeeded to the throne upon Edward VII's death, and John became fifth in the line of succession to the British throne.

In 1909, it was discovered that John had epilepsy. In 1916, as his condition deteriorated, he was sent to live at Sandringham House and kept away from the public eye. There, he was cared for by his governess, Charlotte "Lala" Bill, and befriended local children whom his mother had gathered to be his playmates. He died at Sandringham in 1919 after a severe seizure, and was buried at nearby St Mary Magdalene Church. His illness was disclosed to the wider public only after his death.

John's seclusion was subsequently brought forward as evidence of the royal family's inhumanity. However, contrary to the belief that he was hidden from an early age, John was a fully-fledged member of the family for most of his life, appearing frequently in public until after his eleventh birthday, when his condition became severe.

Birth
John was born at York Cottage on the Sandringham Estate on 12 July 1905, at 3:05 am, during the reign of his paternal grandfather, King Edward VII. He was the youngest child and fifth son of George, Prince of Wales, and Mary, Princess of Wales. He was named John despite that name's unlucky associations for the royal family, but was informally known as "Johnnie". At the time of his birth, he was sixth in the line of succession to the throne, behind his father and four older brothers. As a grandchild of the reigning British monarch in the male line, and a son of the Prince of Wales, he was formally styled His Royal Highness Prince John of Wales from birth.

John was christened on 3 August 1905 in the parish church of St Mary Magdalene at Sandringham, with the Reverend Canon John Neale Dalton officiating. His godparents were King Carlos I of Portugal; John's uncles Prince Carl of Denmark and Alexander Duff, 1st Duke of Fife; his great-granduncle Prince Johann of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg; and three of his first cousins once removed, the Duke and Duchess of Sparta and Princess Alexander of Teck. John's father stood proxy for King Carlos, Prince Carl, Prince Johann and the Duke of Fife, while John's aunt Princess Victoria stood proxy for the Duchess of Sparta and Princess Alexander.

Childhood and illness
Much of John's early life was spent at Sandringham with his siblings— Prince Edward (known as David to the royal family), Prince Albert, Princess Mary, Prince Henry and Prince George— under the care of their nanny Charlotte "Lala" Bill. Though a strict disciplinarian, John's father was affectionate toward his children; John's mother was close to her children and encouraged them to confide in her. In 1909, John's grandaunt, the Dowager Empress of Russia, wrote to her son: "George's children are very nice... The little ones, George and Johnny are both charming and very amusing". John's aunt Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone, described him as "very quaint and one evening when Uncle George returned from stalking he bent over Aunt May and kissed her, and they heard Johnny soliloquize, 'She kissed Papa, ugly old man! George V once told U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt that "all [his] children [were] obedient, except John"— apparently because he alone, among the king's children, escaped punishment from their father.

Though a "large and handsome" baby, John had become "winsome" and "painfully slow" by his fourth birthday. That same year, he had his first epileptic seizure and showed signs of a disability, probably autism or learning disabilities. When his father became king, John did not attend his parents' coronation on 22 June 1911, as this was considered too risky for his health; nonetheless, cynics said that the family feared their reputation would be damaged by any incident involving him. Although John was deemed not "presentable to the outside world," the king still showed interest in him, offering him "kindness and affection".

During his time at Sandringham, John exhibited some repetitive behaviours as well as regular misbehaviours and insubordination: "he simply didn't understand he needed to [behave]." Nonetheless, there was hope his seizures might lessen with time.

In 1912, Prince George, John's closest sibling, began St Peter's Court Preparatory School at Broadstairs. The next summer, The Times reported that John would not attend Broadstairs the next term, and that his parents had not decided whether to send him to school at all. After the outbreak of World War I, he rarely saw his parents, who were often away on official duties, or his siblings, who were either at boarding school or in the military. He slowly disappeared from the public eye and no official portraits of him were commissioned after 1913.

Wood Farm
In 1916, as his seizures became more frequent and severe, John was sent to live at Wood Farm, with Lala Bill in charge of his care. He maintained an interest in the world around him and was capable of coherent thought and expression, but with his lack of educational progress, the last of his tutors was dismissed and his formal education ended. Physicians warned that it was unlikely that he would reach adulthood.

At Wood Farm, John became "a satellite with his own little household on an outlying farm on the Sandringham estate... Guests at Balmoral remember him during the Great War as tall and muscular, but always a distant figure glimpsed from afar in the woods, escorted by his own retainers." His grandmother Queen Alexandra maintained a garden at Sandringham House especially for him, and this became "one of the great pleasures of [Prince John]'s life."

After the summer of 1916, John was rarely seen outside the Sandringham Estate and passed solely into Lala Bill's care. After Queen Alexandra wrote that John "is very proud of his house but is longing for a companion", Queen Mary broke from royal practice by having local children brought in to be playmates for him. One of these was Winifred Thomas, a young girl from Halifax who had been sent to live with her aunt and uncle (who had charge of the royal stables at Sandringham) in hopes her asthma would improve. John had known Winifred years earlier, before World War I. They became close, taking nature walks together and working in Queen Alexandra's garden. John also played with his elder siblings when they visited: once, when his two eldest brothers came to visit, the Prince of Wales "took him for a run in a kind of a push-cart, and they both disappeared from view."

Death
John's seizures intensified, and Bill later wrote "we dared not let him be with his brothers and sister, because it upsets them so much, with the attacks getting so bad and coming so often." Biographer Denis Judd believes that John's "seclusion and 'abnormality' must have been disturbing to his brothers and sister", as he had been "a friendly, outgoing little boy, much loved by his brothers and sister, a sort of mascot for the family". He spent Christmas Day 1918 with his family at Sandringham House but was driven back to Wood Farm at night.

On 18 January 1919, after a severe seizure, John died in his sleep at Wood Farm at 5:30 pm. Queen Mary wrote in her diary that the news was:"a great shock, tho' for the poor little boy's restless soul, death came as a great relief. [She] broke the news to George and [they] motored down to Wood Farm. Found poor Lala very resigned but heartbroken. Little Johnnie looked very peaceful lying there."

Mary later wrote to Emily Alcock, an old friend, that:"for [John] it is a great relief, as his malady was becoming worse as he grew older,& he has thus been spared much suffering. I cannot say how grateful we feel to God for having taken him in such a peaceful way, he just slept quietly into his heavenly home, no pain no struggle, just peace for the poor little troubled spirit which had been a great anxiety to us for many years, ever since he was four years old."She added: "The first break in the family circle is hard to bear, but people have been so kind& sympathetic& this has helped us much." George described his son's death as "the greatest mercy possible".

On 20 January, the Daily Mirror wrote that "when the Prince passed away his face bore an angelic smile"; its report also made the first public mention of John's epilepsy. His funeral was the next day at St Mary Magdalene parish church. John Neale Dalton officiated. Queen Mary wrote:"Canon Dalton& Dr Brownhill [John's physician] conducted the service which was awfully sad and touching. Many of our own people and the villagers were present. We thanked all Johnnie's servants who have been so good and faithful to him."Though nominally private, the funeral was attended by Sandringham House staff; "every single person on the estate went and stood around the gates and his grave was absolutely covered in flowers." Queen Alexandra wrote to Queen Mary that "now [their] two darling Johnnies lie side by side".

Legacy
Prince Edward, who was 11 years older than John and had hardly known him, saw his death as "little more than a regrettable nuisance." He wrote an insensitive letter to Queen Mary, which has since been lost. She did not reply, but he felt compelled to write her an apology, in which he stated:"I feel such a cold hearted and unsympathetic swine for writing all that I did ... No one can realize more than you how little poor Johnnie meant to me who hardly knew him ... I feel so much for you, darling Mama, who was his mother."In her final mention of John in her diary, Mary wrote simply, "miss the dear child very much indeed." She gave Winifred Thomas a number of John's books, which she had inscribed, "In memory of our dear little Prince." Lala Bill always kept a portrait of John above her mantelpiece, together with a letter from him that read "nanny, I love you." In recent years, John's seclusion has been brought forward as evidence of the Windsors' "heartlessness". According to a 2008 Channel 4 documentary, much of the existing information about John is "based on hearsay and rumour, precisely because so few details of his life and his problems have ever been disclosed", and the British Epileptic Association has stated:"There was nothing unusual in what [the King and Queen] did. At that time, people with epilepsy were put apart from the rest of the community. They were often put in epilepsy colonies or mental institutions. It was thought to be a form of mental illness..."adding that it was another 20 years until the idea that epileptics should not be locked away began to take hold. One author has claimed that the royal family believed that these afflictions might flow through their blood, which was then still believed to be purer than the blood of a commoner, and, as such, wished to hide as much as possible about John's illness. Others have suggested that John was sent to Wood Farm to give him the best environment possible under the "austere" conditions of World War I. Another author has claimed that the royal family were "frightened and ashamed of John's illness", and yet another has claimed that John's life is "usually portrayed either as tragedy or conspiracy". At the time that Edward VIII (formerly Prince Edward) abdicated, an attempt was made to discredit Prince Albert, who had succeeded as George VI, by suggesting that he was subject to falling fits, like John. In 1998, after the discovery of two volumes of family photographs, John was briefly brought to public attention.

The Lost Prince, a biographical drama about John's life written and directed by Stephen Poliakoff, was released in 2003.

title: Prince John of the United Kingdom


text:
Electorate of Mainz

The Electorate of Mainz (Kurfürstentum Mainz or Kurmainz, Electoratus Moguntinus), previously known in English as Mentz and by its French name Mayence, was one of the most prestigious and influential states of the Holy Roman Empire. In the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, the Archbishop-Elector of Mainz was also the Primate of Germany (primas Germaniae), a purely honorary dignity that was unsuccessfully claimed from time to time by other archbishops. There were only two other ecclesiastical Prince-electors in the Empire: the Electorate of Cologne and the Electorate of Trier.

The Archbishop-Elector of Mainz was also archchancellor of Germany (one of the three component titular kingdoms of the Holy Roman Empire, the other two being Italy and Burgundy) and, as such, ranked first among all ecclesiastical and secular princes of the Empire, and was second only to the Emperor. His political role, particularly as an intermediary between the Estates of the Empire and the Emperor, was considerable.

History
The episcopal see was established in ancient Roman times in the city of Mainz, which had been a Roman provincial capital, Moguntiacum. The first bishops before the 4th century have legendary names, beginning with Crescens. The first verifiable Bishop of Mainz was Martinus in 343. The ecclesiastical and secular importance of Mainz dates from the accession of St. Boniface to the see in 747. Boniface was previously an archbishop though without an assigned see, but that ecclesiastical status did not immediately devolve upon the see itself until his successor Lullus; during his reign Mainz became an archdiocese, in 781. Another early bishop of Mainz was Aureus of Mainz.

The territory of the Electorate included several non-contiguous blocks of territory: lands near Mainz on both the left and right banks of the Rhine; territory along the Main River above Frankfurt (including the district of Aschaffenburg); the Eichsfeld region in Lower Saxony and Thuringia; and the territory around Erfurt in Thuringia.

As was generally the case in the Holy Roman Empire, the territory of a prince-bishopric or archbishopric differed from that of the corresponding diocese or archdiocese, which was the purely spiritual jurisdiction of the prince-bishop or archbishop. During the early modern age, the archdiocese of Mainz (see map below) was the largest ecclesiastical province of Germany, covering Mainz and 10 suffragant dioceses.

In 1802, Mainz lost its archiepiscopal character. In the secularizations that accompanied the Reichsdeputationshauptschluss (German mediatization) of 1803, the seat of the elector, Karl Theodor von Dalberg, was moved to Regensburg, and the electorate lost its left bank territories to France, its right bank areas along the Main below Frankfurt to Hesse-Darmstadt and the Nassau princes, and Eichsfeld and Erfurt to the Kingdom of Prussia. Dalberg retained the Aschaffenburg area as the Principality of Aschaffenburg. In 1810 Dalberg merged Aschaffenburg, Frankfurt, Wetzlar, Hanau, and Fulda, to form the new Grand Duchy of Frankfurt in 1810. Dalberg resigned in 1813 and in 1815 the Congress of Vienna divided his territories between the Kingdom of Bavaria, the Electorate of Hesse-Kassel (or Hesse-Cassel), the Grand Duchy of Hesse and the Free City of Frankfurt.

The modern Roman Catholic Diocese of Mainz was founded in 1802 when Mainz lost its archdiocese status and its territory west of the Rhine River became a mere diocese within the territory of France. In 1814 its jurisdiction was extended over the territory of Hesse-Darmstadt. Since then it has had two cardinals and via various concordats was allowed to retain the medieval tradition of the cathedral chapter electing a successor to the bishop.

title: Electorate of Mainz


text:
Talk:Succession of states

USSR/Russian Federation and Yugoslavia/Serbia & Montenegro examples
How are they "in sharp contrast"? If I understand the passage correctly, the UN recognized the Russian Federation as the successor state to the USSR because the it contained the majority of the former USSR's population and territory, but they didn't recognize Serbia & Montenegro as successor because they contained less than half of the population and territory of the former Yugoslavia.

If that's the case, then the two decisions aren't really in contrast because the referenced consideration (population and/or territory) is consistent. It only seems like a contrast because the first decision is basically 'yes' and the other is 'no'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dekker451 (talk • contribs) 15:03, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

 * I don't think the matter of majority/minority had so much to do with it. The difference was rather, that the dissolution of the Soviet Union was made peacefully and all the states of that union agreed that Russia should take over most of the matters which had been the USSR's, while Yugoslavia went down in war and disagreement. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 15:02, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Not all of the former Soviet republics agreed, as shown by Ukraine's continued disputing of the validity of Russia's claim. — Red XIV (talk) 21:35, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Pleasde clarify the grammar in the leade
"A successor state often acquires a new international legal personality, which is distinct from a continuing state, also known as a continuator or historical heir, which despite change to its borders retains the same legal personality and possess all its existing rights and obligations (such as a rump state)"
 * Please clarify where the second "which" is attached to. Loew Galitz (talk) 21:59, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Czechoslovakia - Czechia
From the article, ‘’ An example of a universal state succession is the dissolution of Czechoslovakia. Neither part claimed any continuity: both the Czech Republic and Slovakia were new successor states.’’ - Is this accurate? In sports, notably football and ice hockey, Czechia is considered a successor state to Czechoslovakia in that it has inherited the previous state’s competitive record, whilst Slovakia started from scratch. This is the same situation as USSR-Russia and Yugoslavia-Serbia. 2A02:C7C:F0D5:F000:7156:E67E:3806:5358 (talk) 2A02:C7C:F0D5:F000:7156:E67E:3806:5358 (talk) 19:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Succession of states


text:
Talk:Prince John of the United Kingdom

Other Views
Princes John's eldest brother Edward VIII referred to him as "little better than an animal." Whatever the accuracy that time and sentiment has displaced, can there not be something other than the sentimental hagiography and internets-ASD diagnoses that proliferate even here? It seems so easy for the ignorant, cushioned by their short-bus-joke conditioned mentalities and their self-ascribed "I'm Asberger's me - cos I like Star Wars" nonsense to fail to understand anything about the problems Prince John may really have suffered - especially those that would have necessitated him being removed from others, especially being subjected to the public eye. No - it never occurs to any of you that he may have been prone to masturbating uncontrollably in public, for example - of course none of you have any idea what it is like for an adolescent with such disabilities, never mind the need to ever contemplate such. None of which is encyclopedic any more than the gushing 'nature's innocent special child' bullshit portrayed and endorsed so enthusiatically here. Plutonium27 (talk) 18:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

 * I agree with you about John's condition being romanticized. Contemporary reports seem to show he was uncontrollable and sometimes violent and destructive. 4.174.14.56 (talk) 00:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC) Roxana

The first line of the article states that his epilepsy was the sole reason for him being hidden from the world. Was that really the only reason? Is there evidence of him having any other problems? Werdnawerdna (talk) 20:47, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Without more evidence, who knows? I'm inclined to agree with Plutonium. I'd like to see any other contemporary accounts, like what Roxana cites. They should be added to the article. --Bluejay Young (talk) 01:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

The Lost Prince
Why should the material about The Lost Prince be removed? The article on Michael Oher, for example, includes a comparable passage about The Blind Side. john k (talk) 20:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * (1) Because this is an article about Prince John, his life, and the people around him. A mention of dramatic or documentary presentations of his life lends a sense of John's place in popular consciousness, but who played whom tells us nothing about John -- the link to the article on the drama itself is there for readers who wish to learn such details.
 * (2) For the record, notability is (part of) the test for whether a topic should have its own article, not a test for article content -- see WP:NNC.
 * (3) Anyway, I feel I have to say that your idea that facts such as ,"The dramatist Stephen Poliakoff wrote and directed ...Charlotte 'Lalla' Bill's character was played by Gina McKee ..." and so on are "the most notable thing about" Prince John, would be laughable if not so weirdly insensitive.
 * EEng (talk) 04:40, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Weirdly insensitive? He was a thirteen year old boy who died almost 100 years ago.  Everyone who knew or cared about him personally is long dead.  Who, exactly, am I being insensitive towards?  The existence of an award-winning dramatic film based on Prince John's life is one of the most notable things about him, and probably the main reason that anybody today knows who he is.  In such circumstances, it's totally appropriate to have a paragraph discussing the movie.  For comparable examples beyond the one I already gave you, see Eric Liddell, Harold Abrahams, Lionel Logue, John Reed (journalist), James J. Braddock.  All of those people probably have considerably more independent notability than Prince John does. john k (talk) 16:09, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Despite the remoteness in time of his death, and his youth thereat, your subordination of the person to the biopic evinces a sensibility I find hard to fathom. And while you're free to limit the modes by which you learn about history to TV (albeit excellent TV) you'd be wise not to assume that everyone else's view of the past is similarly limited.
 * You keep confusing topic notability with article content; please read [[WP:NNC}} as suggested. I repeat that the fact that there's a film is certainly of interest to readers of the article about him, because they may wish to see it, or read more about it, which they can do by following the link to the article on it. But who played the prince in a film has nothing to do with the prince himself and listing such stuff here is just trivia; it belongs in the article on the drama itself.
 * That fact that other article contain similar trivia just means that other articles still need a lot of cleanup.
 * By the way, I put a good deal of effort into copyediting the article overall. Any compliments on that, or criticisms, or did you notice any typos, or have suggestions for improvement?
 * EEng (talk) 04:46, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It is perfectly appropriate to discuss fictional portrayals of historical figures in their articles. Do you really think it's inappropriate to note, for instance, Peter O'Toole's famous portrayal of T.E. Lawrence in that article?  Maybe I'm using the term "notability" in an imprecise way, but my point is that sometimes much of the coverage of a historical subject in reliable sources comes from a fictionalized portrayal of that subject.  The most obvious example would be Macbeth of Scotland.  An article about that medieval king would surely be incomplete without a brief discussion of his portrayal in Shakespeare.  I believe that the case of Prince John is fairly comparable to this.  He may make tangential appearances in biographies of his family members, but Poliakoff's film is probably the most sustained portrayal of the prince, and also the one that has attracted most comment from other sources.  I don't think the biographical information should be subordinated to the movie, but I do think it's totally reasonable to include a not all that long paragraph about this very notable film about a rather marginally important historical figure (if we can even call him that). Beyond that, I'll just note that the fact that you've put a lot of work into copyediting the article is totally irrelevant to what we are discussing.  It's great that you've done that, but I haven't really looked at what you've done and can't comment on it.  The only reason for you to bring it up, that I can see, is basically for an assertion of ownership over the article, to suggest that your opinion is more valid than mine. I'd also add that there's no need to bring personal insults into this.  It is totally unnecessary to suggest, for example, that because I think a paragraph about a film should be included in a biographical article that this somehow means that I "limit the modes by which [I] learn about history to TV."  I have a PhD in history and teach history to undergraduates - I don't know, maybe you do too.  But there's no reason to make snippy judgments about strangers you're arguing with on the internet. john k (talk) 05:57, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

For those who may be wondering, we're discussing my removal of this:
 * The dramatist Stephen Poliakoff wrote and directed the television serial The Lost Prince that covered many of the events that transpired on the world stage during the reign of King George V through the eyes of the youngest son, Prince John. It aired on BBC One in 2003 and November 2009, on BBC Two in 2006, on PBS in 2004 and again in 2005, on Television New Zealand TV One in 2005 and on Australian Broadcasting Corporation ABC in 2007. The title role was played by two young British actors, Daniel Williams (young Prince John) and Matthew Thomas (older Prince John). Charlotte "Lalla" Bill's character was played by Gina McKee. The film won three Emmy Awards.
 * John's story was also the subject of a Channel 4 documentary entitled Prince John: The Windsors' Tragic Secret.

...in favor of this:
 * John's life was the subject of the two-part television drama The Lost Prince, as well as the Channel 4 documentary Prince John: The Windsors' Tragic Secret.

And now back to our regularly scheduled programme, already in progress...
 * A particular portrayal of an historical or mythological figure (let's call him or her X) is worth noting (or depending on the situation, discussing or even elaborating on) -- in the article on X -- to the extent that such a discussion adds to an understanding of X and his or her place in history or popular perception. By that measure O'Toole as Lawrence, and Shakespeare on Macbeth, deserve mention in the Lawrence and Macbeth articles -- in fact they deserve not just mention, but substantial discussion, because details of Lawrence of Arabia and Macbeth (to repeat myself) add to an understanding of Lawrence of Arabia and Macbeth and their place in history or popular perception. (Of course, the film Lawrence of Arabia and play Macbeth have their own articles too, for independent reasons.)
 * Now then. How do the following facts add to the reader's understanding of Prince John's place in history or popular perception?
 * A1. There was a TV drama about him, and here's its title and a link to more about it.
 * A2. Poliakoff wrote the drama.
 * A3. It aired on BBC One in 2003, BBC Two in 2006, and PBS in 2004 and again (!) in 2005! Oh, and on Television New Zealand TV One in 2005!!!  And on Australian Broadcasting Corporation ABC in 2007!!!
 * A4. John was played by Unknown Actors 1 and 2.
 * A5. The nanny was played by well-known actress GK.
 * A6. It won three Emmys (Emmies?). (Actually, The Lost Prince says "an Emmy" -- not three.)
 * B1. There was a Channel 4 documentary as well. No link, but here's enough info to identify it in a library catalog or on Netflix.
 * My opinion:
 * A1 and B1 don't themselves tell the reader much about John, but they do lead the reader to things (the drama or documentary) which themselves would tell the reader more, so they're worth including. (And on reflection, they best belong not in the article text proper at all, but rather under "See also" and/or "External links"; I left the "Channel 4" in because, since the documentary doesn't have its own article, that helps the reader identify it on Netflix or whathaveyou.)
 * A2. Because Poliakoff is so prominent, the fact that he chose John as a subject might in a sense tell us something about John, so it might be worth including. Or not.
 * A3-A6. Tell us nothing at all about John's "place in history or popular perception" (quoting myself here again, of course).  They're just trivia.
 * So I kept A1 and B1, and dropped the rest.
 * EEng (talk) [2am 07Mar2012 UTC]

coronation
The channel 4 documentary "The Lost Prince" showed photographic evidence that the Prince John was at his grandfather's funeral in 1910, and was frequently seen in public until the First World War. This article seems inaccurate because mentions him mostly being shut up at Wood Farm. 74.69.11.229 (talk) 19:36, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Seclusion not evidence of neglect
It is not true that his "seclusion has subsequently been brought forward as evidence for the inhumanity of the royal family". Seclusion is not neglect, but the reverse. It is desirable for members of the royal family to be brought up out of the public limelight.Royalcourtier (talk) 22:54, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Autism Being Force-fed
In all honesty this article seems to be trying VERY HARD to force feed the Autism angle to us. Would be nice if we had an article free from bias and agenda pushing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.11.104.9 (talk) 06:30, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

 * I agree. I am rewriting this opening comment / observation:
 * "In 1909, John was discovered to have epilepsy and was also believed to have some form of intellectual disability and possibly autism."
 * And I am making a few other related changes. Autism was not even in the lexicon in 1909, this is a 21st century speculation, (and one that seem a bit of a reach).  The discussion in the main text on his possible autism is clearer in that it is acknowledged that it is a 2004 diagnosis.  The sentence also suggests that "intellectual disability" was also part of the 1909 diagnosis / discovery, but the timeline is not substantiated in the main article.  When was the discovery?
 * Despite this criticism, it is generally a readable well written article.

GeeBee60 (talk) 14:59, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Contradiction?
The article currently says:

Both these details seems to be sourced to the Channel 4 documentary which I'm not going to try and view but these seems to be a contradiction or at least a poor wording here. I'd interpret the second paragraph to mean from ~1913, he "slowly disappeared from the public eye". But the earlier paragraph seems to suggest he was "appearing frequently in public" until after 12 July 1916 which is a weird if he was slowly disappearing from 1913. There was obviously an abrupt sudden change in 1916 when he was sent away but I sort of think the latter paragraph is more likely to be true and the former is an oversimplification. I wonder if it's better to just remove the bit after the comma, and maybe merge the two paragraphs and then re-jig the lead (which also mentions the eleventh birthday bit). But we'll need someone who knows the documentary to help. Nil Einne (talk) 13:28, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Spurious alleged quote
The note #2 claiming that George V said his father was afraid of his mother, he was afraid of his father, etc, etc. has not been proven to have actually been said by George. In fact, something that George DID say when his father died was that he had lost his best friend. That doesn't sound like someone who was afraid of his father. Also, if you look at photos of him with his children, you can see that they ALL have genuine smiles on their faces. His kids certainly didn't look like they were afraid of him in any way, and he looked like he cared very deeply for his children. This fake quote should not be used as any kind of source or proof of anything. It is completely unproven that he said it, and the known facts do not support the statement. 76.202.192.102 (talk) 00:19, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

New image

 * Someone will need to look into copyright status, but the photo here would be an invaluable addition to the article: . EEng 04:53, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Followup: I see now that, which was previously deleted due to copyright concerns, has been recreated. Great photo, but I don't see how the copyright issue was resolved. EEng 05:54, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Prince John of the United Kingdom


text:
Grand Duchy of Frankfurt

The Grand Duchy of Frankfurt was a German satellite state of Napoleonic creation. It came into existence in 1810 through the combination of the former territories of the Archbishopric of Mainz along with the Free City of Frankfurt itself.

History
Frankfurt lost its status as a free imperial city in 1806 with the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire. The city was granted to the former archbishop of Mainz, Karl Theodor Anton Maria von Dalberg, and became the Principality of Frankfurt. When Dalberg was forced by Napoleon to relinquish his Principality of Regensburg to the Kingdom of Bavaria in 1810, his remaining territories of Aschaffenburg, Wetzlar, Fulda, Hanau, and Frankfurt were combined into the new Grand Duchy of Frankfurt.

Although the grand duchy was named after Frankfurt, the city was administered by French commissioners while Dalberg resided in the city of Aschaffenburg. According to the constitution of the grand duchy, upon Dalberg's death, the state would be inherited by Napoleon's stepson, Eugène de Beauharnais.

Dalberg abdicated in favour of Eugène on 26 October 1813, following Napoleon's defeat at the Battle of Leipzig. The grand duchy ceased to exist after December 1813, when the city was occupied by allied troops. While Frankfurt itself once again became a free city, most of the territory of the grand duchy was ultimately annexed by the Kingdom of Bavaria.

title: Grand Duchy of Frankfurt


text:
Fuamnach

Fúamnach, or Fuamnach, is Midir's first wife and a witch of the Tuatha Dé Danann in the medieval Irish text Tochmarc Étaíne ("The Wooing of Étaín"). The text describes her as being intelligent (gáeth), cunning (trebar) and "versed in the knowledge and power of the Túatha Dé Danand", explaining that her fosterfather had been the wizard druid Bresal Etarlám. She is said to be of the progeny (clann) of Béothach son of Iardanél, who is probably identical with Béothach son of Iarbonel, the father of the Túatha Dé Danann in the Lebor Gabála Érenn.

Summary
When Midir fell in love with Étaín and married her, Fúamnach got so jealous that she cast several spells on her as soon as the couple arrived in Midir's residence in Brí Léith:
 * First, having welcomed the couple and having seated Étáin in the centre of the house, she struck her wand of scarlet rowan (cáerthann) on her, transforming her rival into a pool of water. When Étaín changed from being a pool to a worm and subsequently a beautiful scarlet fly (cuil corcrai), she joined Midir once more as his companion.
 * Second, on a visit to Midir (escorted by Lug, the Dagdae and Ogmae), Fúamnach announced that she would drive Étaín away from him and employed a spell which she had learnt from her fosterfather: she conjured up a mighty wind which blew Étaín through the air for the duration of seven years, after which she came to Óengus (Mac Óc) in the Brug. He lovingly kept her with him in a specially designed, protective bower (grianán).
 * Third, on discovering what had come of Étaín, Fúamnach deceived Mac Óc into coming to Brí Léith on the pretext that she desired to establish peace between them. However, as Mac Óc was on his way, Fúamnach travelled to the Brug by an alternative route and conjured up yet another wind which forced Étaín to roam another seven years without setting foot on land. Étaín finally arrived at a house in Ulster, where she fell into the cup of the (anonymous) wife of the warrior Étar. As she emptied her cup, she swallowed Étaín and miraculously gave (re-)birth to Étaín as her own daughter (the tale goes on to say that Étaín grew up and met a mysterious horseman who had been looking for her).

Fúamnach did not live long to see the fruits of her work. When Mac Óc met Midir at Brí Léith, he discovered what deceptive scheme had led him there. Mac Óc followed Fúamnach's trail to the house of her fosterfather Bresal and there struck off her head, which he carried as a trophy back to the Brug.

Name
The name Fúamnach may be an adjective noun derived from fúaimm "noise, sound". To cite one example, the dindsenchas poem on Nás speaks of fáidiud find-gel fúamnach Fáil ("the lamentation of the fair-skinned vocal women of Fáil"). The form fúaimnech is also attested as a personal name for Fúaimnech, daughter of Conn Cétchathach, who appears in the legal tract Mellbretha.

title: Fuamnach


text:
Talk:Waikato River

Capitalisation
Is it correctly spelt with a capital or small r? Some rivers are capitalised, some aren't. I hope this was downsized for accurate reasons, not part of wiki's bizarre fascination with downcasing uppercased words and making a fool of itself. FearÉIREANN 05:03 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Should be Waikato River with capital R Tiles 05:20 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Heh. You are going to have establish a Capitalisation Guards to ensure this remains with a capital R. There are a bunch of lower-casing nutters on wiki. If they can try to make Prime Minister into Prime minister and Governor-General into Governor-general, (or rather Governors-General into Governor-generals!!!) they will try to lowercase anything. Guard this page! :-) FearÉIREANN 05:36 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Guard in place. There are spiritual values attached to the river and any assault on its mana could lead to dire consequences. Tiles 05:54 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Article needs expansion

 * 1994 - RMA, Waikato River Plan, concerns of Maori
 * warming of water by the Huntly Power Station
 * water source for Auckland and the assoc controversy
 * Conservation accord important for Waikato-Tainui
 * Should the Waikato River Trails, under construction along the river, be mentioned?  Schwede 66  23:24, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Cause/timing of diversion from Firth of Thames
"The present course of the river was largely formed by the large volcanic eruption from the Lake Taupo volcanic complex 1800 years ago. The large outflow of volcanic debris blocked the old channel ...". Contradicted by http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/waikato-region/2. Nurg (talk) 01:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Mangatangi River
Does such a river exist, or should Template:Waikato show the Mangatangi Stream instead? The stream/river is about 40km long, which is a fair length for a river. The 1:50,000 map shows it as a Stream, but LAWA calls it a River, as does Regional Council in documents on swimming and flow, but not in the catchment management plan. Other references to River are on Te Awa, RNZ, District Council, National Library, the local historical group and a Ratification Information Booklet. Are there precedents elsewhere on Wikipedia where the sources seem divided on the name of a waterway? Johnragla (talk) 02:50, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Waikato River


text:
Electorate of Cologne

The Electorate of Cologne (Kurfürstentum Köln), sometimes referred to as Electoral Cologne (Kurköln), was an ecclesiastical principality of the Holy Roman Empire that existed from the 10th to the early 19th century. It consisted of the Hochstift — the temporal possessions — of the archbishop of Cologne, and was ruled by him in his capacity as prince-elector. There were only two other ecclesiastical prince-electors in the Empire: the Electorate of Mainz and the Electorate of Trier. The archbishop-elector of Cologne was also arch-chancellor of Italy (one of the three component titular kingdoms of the Holy Roman Empire, the other two being Germany and Burgundy) and, as such, ranked second among all ecclesiastical and secular princes of the Empire, after the archbishop-elector of Mainz, and before that of Trier.

The capital of the electorate was Cologne. Conflicts with the citizens of Cologne caused the elector to move to Bonn. The Free Imperial City of Cologne was recognized after 1475, thus removing it from even the nominal secular authority of the elector. Cologne and Bonn were occupied by France in 1794. The right bank territories of the electorate were secularized in 1803 during the German mediatization.

The electorate should not be confused with the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cologne, the area over which the archbishop exercised spiritual authority, which was larger. Even larger was the Ecclesiastical Province of Cologne, which included suffragan dioceses such as Liège and Münster (see map below).

History
Cologne was the ancient Roman city of Colonia Agrippina in the province of Germania Inferior, and has been a bishop's see since Roman times. In 953, the archbishops of Cologne first gained noteworthy secular power, when Bishop Bruno was appointed as duke by his brother Emperor Otto I. To weaken the secular nobility, who threatened his power, Otto endowed Bruno and his successors in the bishop's seat with the prerogatives of secular princes. This was the beginning of the electoral state of Cologne. It was formed from the temporal possessions of the archbishopric and included in the end a strip of territory along the left Bank of the Rhine east of Jülich, and the Duchy of Westphalia on the other side of the Rhine, beyond Berg and Mark.

By the end of the 12th century, the Archbishop of Cologne was one of the seven electors of the Holy Roman Emperor. Besides being prince-elector, he was Arch-chancellor of Italy as well, technically from 1238 and permanently from 1263 until 1803. In the Battle of Worringen (1288), the archbishop was captured by soldiers of the city and was forced to grant the city near-complete autonomy. Eventually, the archbishop moved to Bonn to escape jurisdiction conflicts with the city government. In 1475, Cologne became a Free Imperial City, independent from the archbishop. The first pogrom against the Jews was in 1349, when they were used as scapegoats for the Black Death, and therefore burnt in an auto-da-fé. Political tensions arose from issues of taxation, public spending, regulation of business, and market supervision, as well as the limits of corporate autonomy.

Long-distance trade in the Baltic grew, as the major trading towns came together in the Hanseatic League, under the leadership of Lübeck. It was a business alliance of trading cities and their guilds that dominated trade along the coast of Northern Europe and flourished from the 1200 to 1500 and continued with lesser importance after that. The chief cities were Cologne on the Rhine River, Hamburg and Bremen on the North Sea, and Lübeck on the Baltic. The economic structures of medieval and early modern Cologne were based on the city's major harbor, its location as a transport hub and its entrepreneurial merchants who built ties with merchants in other Hanseatic cities.

During the 16th century, two Archbishops of Cologne converted to Protestantism. The first, Hermann von Wied, resigned the archbishopric on converting, but Gebhard Truchsess von Waldburg, who converted to Calvinism in 1582, attempted to secularize the archbishopric. His marriage the following February, and his refusal to relinquish the territory resulted in the election of a competing archbishop and prince-elector, Ernst of Bavaria, brother of the Wittelsbach Duke of Bavaria. In the Cologne War that followed, the pope funded Italian and Spanish mercenaries and the Catholic Bavarians also sent an army to support Ernst, while the Protestant Netherlands supported von Waldburg. The war ruined most of the Electoral economy, and many villages and towns were besieged and destroyed. The Siege of Godesberg in November–December 1583 ended with the destruction of Godesberg Castle and the slaughter of most of its inhabitants. After several more sieges, von Waldburg gave up his claim to the see and retired to Strasbourg with his wife. Ernst became archbishop–the first major success of the Counter-Reformation in Germany. Under Ernst's direction, Jesuits supervised the reintroduction of Catholicism in the Electorate. From 1583 to 1761, the archbishopric was effectively a secundogeniture of the Bavarian branch of the House of Wittelsbach. As the archbishop in this period usually also held the Bishopric of Münster (and often the Bishopric of Liège), he was one of the most important princes of northwestern Germany.

From 1597 until 1794, Bonn was the residence the Elector, and consequently the capital of the Electorate.

After 1795, the electorate's territories on the left bank of the Rhine were occupied by France and were formally annexed in 1801. Cologne was part of the département of Roer; Bonn was part of the département of Rhin-et-Moselle. The Reichsdeputationshauptschluss of 1803 secularized the rest of the archbishopric, giving the Duchy of Westphalia to the Landgraviate of Hesse-Darmstadt and Vest Recklinghausen to the Duke of Arenberg. Cologne was, however, reestablished as the seat of a Catholic archbishop in 1824, and is an archdiocese to the present day.

title: Electorate of Cologne


text:
Reg Mombassa

Christopher O'Doherty, also known by the pseudonym Reg Mombassa, is a New Zealand-born Australian artist and musician. He is a founding member of the band Mental As Anything and member of Dog Trumpet (alongside his brother Peter O'Doherty).

Early and personal life
Mombassa was born Christopher O'Doherty in Auckland, New Zealand, on 14 August 1951. O'Doherty, his parents and younger brother Peter immigrated to Sydney, Australia, in 1969. He enrolled in what is now the National Art School in Darlinghurst in 1969 but left the following year. He returned again in 1975 and obtained his Diploma of Painting in 1977. Between and during his stints at college he supported himself with menial jobs such as builder's labouring, cleaning, house painting and working on the railways.

In 1976 he formed the rock band Mental as Anything with four fellow art school students, ostensibly to play at school parties. Although they did not initially intend to be a serious band, the Mentals, as they became known, eventually turned professional.

Mombassa is the father of comedian Claudia O’Doherty.

Art career
Mombassa's artwork is in two distinctive styles. The type of artwork he designs for the Mambo fashion label is almost cartoonish and in vivid colours, incorporating religious, political and popular culture themes. He also produces landscapes and portraits, many of which are inspired by his childhood in New Zealand. His artworks can be found in the Art Gallery of New South Wales, the National Gallery of Australia and regional galleries. Patrick White, Elton John and Ewan McGregor have all purchased his work.

Mombassa's first public showing was in a group exhibition held at Watters Gallery in Sydney in 1975 while he was still attending art college. It was at this exhibition that Patrick White purchased some works and subsequently became a patron, purchasing many others over his life. He first exhibited solo at Watters in 1986, the year he also began designing clothing for Mambo. His works were exhibited in three Mental as Anything collective exhibitions in 1982, 1990 and 1998. Further solo shows were held at Watters in 1991, 1993, 1995 and 1998. Alongside posters, record covers and merchandise for Mental As Anything and Dog Trumpet, he has designed record covers for the likes of PIL, Crowded House, Mondo Rock and Paul Kelly. He has gifted artwork to many charitable and environmental organisations including Greenpeace and The Wilderness Society.

As Mombassa's artistic output and demand increased it prompted him to make the difficult decision to cease touring with the Mentals in April 2000. He has continued to design for Mambo and hold sellout exhibitions at Watters in 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2009.

In January 2000, a career retrospective of his work was held in Sydney at the S. H. Ervin Gallery. An 80-page catalogue was released by the National Trust to coincide with this exhibition. It also saw the release of "Golden Sandals" directed by Haydn Keenan, a documentary on Mombassa featuring animated versions of his artwork. In March 2007 his self-portrait was selected as a finalist in the Archibald Prize. 2 May 2007 saw the broadcast of "Golden Sandals" on SBS independent. One of his most famous works was "Self-Portrait with Spots and Veins" (2003). He was also featured on the ABC TV profile show Talking Heads. In 2009 he was featured on BBC TV's Peschardt's People. In November 2009 HarperCollins released a biography by Murray Waldren called "The mind and times of Reg Mombassa", which includes over 200 art works.

In 2013, Mombassa was the creative ambassador for Sydney New Year's Eve; the event featured a special one-minute display inspired by one of his paintings, and artwork of a giant blinking eye on Sydney Harbour Bridge.

The origin of the name Reg Mombassa
In the early days of the Mentals, the band would often invent pseudonyms for each other that combined an exotic last name with a common Australian first name. "Reg Mombassa" was one of the products of that amusement. He has stated in interviews that some of his earlier pseudonyms included "Brett Orlando" and "Dorky Bladder".

Dog Trumpet
In 1991, Mombassa formed the band Dog Trumpet with his brother Peter O'Doherty. Since leaving the Mentals this has been his sole musical outlet. Dog Trumpet has released eight studio albums and three EPs. The band's sixth album, Medicated Spirits was released in August 2013 and was long-listed for the Australian Music Prize Album of the Year award for 2013. Dog Trumpet released the album Great South Road in May 2020 and signed to Demon Music in 2021; and all of their albums at that time were issued on Vinyl on 29th Oct 2021. Dog Trumpet's seventh album, Great South Road, featured the singles "Gravity", "Wallpaper", "Lonely Death Cleaning Company", "You've Heard it All Before" and "Overseas and Elsewhere". The album garnered great reviews and because of COVID19 the brothers decided to do various performances live on Facebook to promote the album.

A new single and video, "F**king Idiots", was released 20 May 2022. Dog Trumpet released a further single. "The Ballad of Clayton Looby" on 9 September 2022, from their album, Shadowland, which was released on 4 November 2022, on vinyl, CD and digitally worldwide by the Demon Music Group. The video for "The Ballad of Clayton Looby", contains footage from some of Australia's 1970s surf films, including Alby Falzon's Morning of the Earth and Phil and Russell Shepard's A Winter’s Tale and Paul Witzig's The Lost Witzig Reels. "Nina Simone" the third single from Shadowland, was released on 7 October 2022. A video for the title track was released on 12 December 2022

Shadowland is a distinctive blending of psychedelia, folk and blues, the album probes the perils and absurdities of human existence, kicking off with the title track "Shadowland", a nervous musing on digital over-surveillance; followed by "Nina Simone", a song reflecting on romance and memory. "F***ing Idiots" points out the shameful idiocy of our addiction to war and militarism; "The Ballad of Clayton Looby" is an anti-establishment ode to a larrikin surfer.

Other music and films
In 1987, with Peter, Martin Plaza and members of GANGgajang, Mombassa recorded a country music album credited to The Stetsons.

Mombassa has also appeared in a number of small Australian films, including Tender Hooks (1989), Strange Planet (1999) and Love's Brother (2004).

title: Reg Mombassa


text:
Porter's five forces analysis

Porter's Five Forces Framework is a method of analysing the operating environment of a competition of a business. It draws from industrial organization (IO) economics to derive five forces that determine the competitive intensity and, therefore, the attractiveness (or lack thereof) of an industry in terms of its profitability. An "unattractive" industry is one in which the effect of these five forces reduces overall profitability. The most unattractive industry would be one approaching "pure competition", in which available profits for all firms are driven to normal profit levels. The five-forces perspective is associated with its originator, Michael E. Porter of Harvard University. This framework was first published in Harvard Business Review in 1979.

Porter refers to these forces as the microenvironment, to contrast it with the more general term macroenvironment. They consist of those forces close to a company that affects its ability to serve its customers and make a profit. A change in any of the forces normally requires a business unit to re-assess the marketplace given the overall change in industry information. The overall industry attractiveness does not imply that every firm in the industry will return the same profitability. Firms are able to apply their core competencies, business model or network to achieve a profit above the industry average. A clear example of this is the airline industry. As an industry, profitability is low because the industry's underlying structure of high fixed costs and low variable costs afford enormous latitude in the price of airline travel. Airlines tend to compete on cost, and that drives down the profitability of individual carriers as well as the industry itself because it simplifies the decision by a customer to buy or not buy a ticket. This underscores the need for businesses to continuously evaluate their competitive landscape and adapt strategies in response to changes in industry dynamics, exemplified by the airline industry's struggle with profitability despite varying approaches to differentiation. A few carriers – Richard Branson's Virgin Atlantic is one – have tried, with limited success, to use sources of differentiation in order to increase profitability.

Porter's five forces include three forces from 'horizontal competition' – the threat of substitute products or services, the threat of established rivals, and the threat of new entrants – and two others from 'vertical' competition – the bargaining power of suppliers and the bargaining power of customers.

Porter developed his five forces framework in reaction to the then-popular SWOT analysis, which he found both lacking in rigor and ad hoc. Porter's five-forces framework is based on the structure–conduct–performance paradigm in industrial organizational economics. Other Porter's strategy tools include the value chain and generic competitive strategies.

Threat of new entrants
New entrants put pressure on current organizations within an industry through their desire to gain market share. This in turn puts pressure on prices, costs, and the rate of investment needed to sustain a business within the industry. The threat of new entrants is particularly intense if they are diversifying from another market as they can leverage existing expertise, cash flow, and brand identity which puts a strain on existing companies profitability.

Barriers to entry restrict the threat of new entrants. If the barriers are high, the threat of new entrants is reduced, and conversely, if the barriers are low, the risk of new companies venturing into a given market is high. Barriers to entry are advantages that existing, established companies have over new entrants.

Michael E. Porter differentiates two factors that can have an effect on how much of a threat new entrants may pose:
 * Barriers to entry
 * The most attractive segment is one in which entry barriers are high and exit barriers are low. It is worth noting, however, that high barriers to entry almost always make exit more difficult.
 * Michael E. Porter lists 7 major sources of entry barriers:
 * Supply-side economies of scale – spreading the fixed costs over a larger volume of units thus reducing the cost per unit. This can discourage a new entrant because they either have to start trading at a smaller volume of units and accept a price disadvantage over larger companies, or risk coming into the market on a large scale in an attempt to displace the existing market leader.
 * Demand-side benefits of scale – this occurs when a buyer's willingness to purchase a particular product or service increases with other people's willingness to purchase it. Also known as the network effect, people tend to value being in a 'network' with a larger number of people who use the same company.
 * Customer switching costs – These are well illustrated by structural market characteristics such as supply chain integration but also can be created by firms. Airline frequent flyer programs are an example.
 * Capital requirements – clearly the Internet has influenced this factor dramatically. Websites and apps can be launched cheaply and easily as opposed to the brick-and-mortar industries of the past.
 * Incumbency advantages independent of size (e.g., customer loyalty and brand equity).
 * Unequal access to distribution channels – if there are a limited number of distribution channels for a certain product/service, new entrants may struggle to find a retail or wholesale channel to sell through as existing competitors will have a claim on them.
 * Government policy such as sanctioned monopolies, legal franchise requirements, patents, and regulatory requirements.

 * Expected retaliation
 * For example, a specific characteristic of oligopoly markets is that prices generally settle at an equilibrium because any price rises or cuts are easily matched by the competition.

Threat of substitutes
A substitute product uses a different technology to try to solve the same economic need. Examples of substitutes are meat, poultry, and fish; landlines and cellular telephones; airlines, automobiles, trains, and ships; beer and wine; and so on. For example, tap water is a substitute for Coke, but Pepsi is a product that uses the same technology (albeit different ingredients) to compete head-to-head with Coke, so it is not a substitute. Increased marketing for drinking tap water might "shrink the pie" for both Coke and Pepsi, whereas increased Pepsi advertising would likely "grow the pie" (increase consumption of all soft drinks), while giving Pepsi a larger market share at Coke's expense.

Potential factors:
 * Buyer propensity to substitute. This aspect incorporated both tangible and intangible factors. Brand loyalty can be very important as in the Coke and Pepsi example above; however, contractual and legal barriers are also effective.
 * Relative price performance of substitute
 * Buyer's switching costs. This factor is well illustrated by the mobility industry. Uber and its many competitors took advantage of the incumbent taxi industry's dependence on legal barriers to entry and when those fell away, it was trivial for customers to switch. There were no costs as every transaction was atomic, with no incentive for customers not to try another product.
 * Perceived level of product differentiation which is classic Michael Porter in the sense that there are only two basic mechanisms for competition – lowest price or differentiation. Developing multiple products for niche markets is one way to mitigate this factor.
 * Number of substitute products available in the market
 * Ease of substitution
 * Availability of close substitutes

Bargaining power of customers
The bargaining power of customers is also described as the market of outputs: the ability of customers to put the firm under pressure, which also affects the customer's sensitivity to price changes. Firms can take measures to reduce buyer power, such as implementing a loyalty program. Buyers' power is high if buyers have many alternatives. It is low if they have few choices.

Potential factors:
 * Buyer concentration to firm concentration ratio
 * Degree of dependency upon existing channels of distribution
 * Bargaining leverage, particularly in industries with high fixed costs
 * Buyer switching costs
 * Buyer information availability
 * Availability of existing substitute products
 * Buyer price sensitivity
 * Differential advantage (uniqueness) of industry products
 * RFM (customer value) Analysis

Bargaining power of suppliers
The bargaining power of suppliers is also described as the market of inputs. Suppliers of raw materials, components, labor, and services (such as expertise) to the firm can be a source of power over the firm when there are few substitutes. If you are making biscuits and there is only one person who sells flour, you have no alternative but to buy it from them. Suppliers may refuse to work with the firm or charge excessively high prices for unique resources.

Potential factors are:
 * Supplier switching costs relative to firm switching costs
 * Degree of differentiation of inputs
 * Impact of inputs on cost and differentiation
 * Presence of substitute inputs
 * Strength of the distribution channel
 * Supplier concentration to the firm concentration ratio
 * Employee solidarity (e.g. labor unions)
 * Supplier competition: the ability to forward vertically integrate and cut out the buyer.

Competitive rivalry
Competitive rivalry is a measure of the extent of competition among existing firms. Price cuts, increased advertising expenditures, or investing in service/product enhancements and innovation are all examples of competitive moves that might limit profitability and lead to competitive moves(Dhliwayo, Witness 2022). For most industries, the intensity of competitive rivalry is the biggest determinant of the competitiveness of the industry. Understanding industry rivals is vital to successfully marketing a product. Positioning depends on how the public perceives a product and distinguishes it from that of competitors. An organization must be aware of its competitors' marketing strategies and pricing and also be reactive to any changes made. Rivalry among competitors tends to be cutthroat and industry profitability is low while having the potential factors below:

Potential factors:
 * Sustainable competitive advantage through innovation
 * Competition between online and offline organizations
 * Level of advertising expense
 * Powerful competitive strategy which could potentially be realized by adhering to Porter's work on low cost versus differentiation.
 * Firm concentration ratio

Factors, not forces
Other factors below should also be considered as they can contribute in evaluating a firm's strategic position. These factors can commonly be mistaken for being the underlying structure of the firm; however, the underlying structure consists of the five factors above.

Industry growth rate
Sometimes bad strategy decisions can be made when a narrow focus is kept on the growth rate of an industry. While rapid growth in an industry can seem attractive, it can also attract new entrants especially if entry barriers are low and suppliers are powerful. Furthermore, profitability is not guaranteed if powerful substitutes become available to the customers.

For example, Blockbuster dominated the rental market throughout 1990s. In 1998, Reed Hastings founded Netflix and entered the market. Netflix's CEO was famously laughed out of the room. While Blockbuster was thriving and expanding rapidly, its key pitfall was ignoring its competitors and focusing on its growth in the industry.

Technology and innovation
Technology in itself is a rapidly growing industry. Regardless of the advanced growth, it presents its limitations; such as customers not being able to physically touch/test products. Technology stand alone cannot always provide a desirable experience for a customer. "Boring" companies that are in high entry barrier industries with high switching costs and price-sensitive buyers can be more profitable than "tech savvy" companies.

For example, quite commonly websites with menus and online booking options attract customers to a restaurant. But the restaurant experience cannot be delivered online with the use of technology. Food delivery companies like Uber Eats can deliver food to customers but cannot replace the restaurant's atmospheric experience.

Government
Government cannot be a standalone force as it is a factor that can affect the firms structure of five forces above. It is neither good or bad for the industry's profitability.

For instance,

 * patents can raise barriers to entry
 * supplier power can be raised by union favoritism from government policies
 * failing companies reorganizing due to bankruptcy laws

Complementary products and services
Similar to the government above, complementary products/services cannot be a standalone factor because it's not necessarily bad or good for the industry's profitability. Complements occur when a customer benefits from multiple products combined. Individually those standalone products can be redundant. For example, a car would be unusable without petrol/gas and a driver. Or for example, a computer is best used with computer software. This factor is controversial (as discussed below in Criticisms) as many believe it to be 6th Force. However, complements influence the forces more than they form the underlying structure of the market.

For instance, complements can

 * influence barriers of entry by either lowering or raising it e.g. Apple providing set of tools to develop apps, lowers barriers to entry;
 * make substitution easier e.g. Spotify replacing CDs

A strategy consultant's job is to identify complements and apply them to the forces above.

Usage
Strategy consultants occasionally use Porter's five forces framework when making a qualitative evaluation of a firm's strategic position. However, for most consultants, the framework is only a starting point and value chain analysis or another type of analysis may be used in conjunction with this model. Like all general frameworks, an analysis that uses it to the exclusion of specifics about a particular situation is considered naïve.

According to Porter, the five forces framework should be used at the line-of-business industry level; it is not designed to be used at the industry group or industry sector level. An industry is defined at a lower, more basic level: a market in which similar or closely related products and/or services are sold to buyers (see industry information). A firm that competes in a single industry should develop, at a minimum, one five forces analysis for its industry. Porter makes clear that for diversified companies, the primary issue in corporate strategy is the selection of industries (lines of business) in which the company will compete. The average Fortune Global 1,000 company competes in 52 industries.

Criticisms
Porter's framework has been challenged by other academics and strategists. For instance, Kevin P. Coyne and Somu Subramaniam claim that three dubious assumptions underlie the five forces:
 * That buyers, competitors, and suppliers are unrelated and do not interact and collude.
 * That the source of value is a structural advantage (creating barriers to entry).
 * That uncertainty is low, allowing participants in a market to plan for and respond to changes in competitive behavior.

An important extension to Porter's work came from Adam Brandenburger and Barry Nalebuff of Yale School of Management in the mid-1990s. Using game theory, they added the concept of complementors (also called "the 6th force") to try to explain the reasoning behind strategic alliances. Complementors are known as the impact of related products and services already in the market. The idea that complementors are the sixth force has often been credited to Andrew Grove, former CEO of Intel Corporation. Martyn Richard Jones, while consulting at Groupe Bull, developed an augmented five forces model in Scotland in 1993. It is based on Porter's Framework and includes Government (national and regional) as well as pressure groups as the notional 6th force. This model was the result of work carried out as part of Groupe Bull's Knowledge Asset Management Organisation initiative.

Porter indirectly rebutted the assertions of other forces, by referring to innovation, government, and complementary products and services as "factors" that affect the five forces.

It is also perhaps not feasible to evaluate the attractiveness of an industry independently of the resources that a firm brings to that industry. It is thus argued (Wernerfelt 1984) that this theory be combined with the resource-based view (RBV) in order for the firm to develop a sounder framework.

Other criticisms include:

 * It places too much weight on the macro-environment and doesn't assess more specific areas of the business that also impact competitiveness and profitability
 * It does not provide any actions to help deal with high or low force threats (e.g., what should management do if there is a high threat of substitution?)

title: Porter's five forces analysis


text:
User:Slathering

http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~ncb/

title: User:Slathering