Can you please respond to this post below. $1.$ It was necessary for TOMS to evolve their business model because if they were to continue the path selling shoes within boutiques and other similar businesses at a small margin they would have never survived. Therefore, as they grew, they started to apply what the shoe cost along with what it would take to provide less fortunate kids a pair of shoes at the same time while making a small profit. So not only is someone buying themselves a pair of shoes but also providing someone who is less fortunate the opportunity to have new shoes or simply have shoes in general.

$2.$TOMS most important stakeholders would definitely have to be their customers, because without them they would not be able to do what they do$.$ Therefore, with the customers supporting and purchasing their product, they are truly the driving factor of what this company is able to do$.$ With that said looking at the numbers $$two years after officially establishing TOMS, the business had $$9\mathrm{.}6$ million in revenue$$ showing us the clear support they had from their customers $($Ferrell et al$.,2022).$ Without the customers there would be no stakeholders because without them TOMS would not be able to donate shoes without sales.

$3.$ Yes, the one for one business model is appropriate for other companies. For instance, Nike has the capability to provide clothing for each sale they make. Yet it is not the question of what companies are able to do it$,$ but what companies are willing to do it$.$ Though outside of clothing there are food companies that could utilize this idea in order to provide food for the less fortunate. So yes, this business model can be incorporated into other companies.