quinta-feira, 31 de maio de 2012

Ferrari's F70, an Eco-Friendly Supercar

Many makers of expensive performance cars have long valued one characteristic most: raw power. But now Ferrari, the preferred drug for many deep-pocketed drivers with a need for speed, is turning to fuel-saving hybrid technology to create its most powerful and expensive model. Using technology developed for Formula One racing, the Italian automaker’s first hybrid, dubbed the F70, will combine two electric motors with a 12-cylinder gasoline engine to produce more horsepower than any previous Ferrari while cutting fuel consumption by 40 percent.

The F70 won’t come at a Prius price: The vehicle will probably surpass the €660,000 ($850,000) cost of the automaker’s storied limited-edition Enzo, which the company considers it a successor to, says a person familiar with Ferrari’s plans who was not authorized to talk about them. “Dedicated Ferrari drivers look first at power and technology,” says Fabio Barone, president of the Passione Rossa owners’ club, who has two Ferraris. “The new Enzo will satisfy their appetite.”

Mercedes photograph by Daniel Acker/Bloomberg

The model is part of a wave of green supercars as high-end automakers step up efforts to make their models environmentally palatable while maintaining or boosting performance. As more models become available and emission rules tighten, sales of hybrid supercars may surge from fewer than 100 this year to more than 2,100 in 2015, according to IHS Automotive (IHS).

Porsche, which sells hybrid versions of its Cayenne sport-utility vehicle and Panamera four-door coupe, plans to start deliveries next year of the €768,000 918 Spyder. The top-of-the-line Porsche sports car will combine a 500-horsepower engine with two 218-hp electric motors to hit a top speed of more than 320 kilometers (199 miles) per hour. BMW (BMW) will roll out its own i8 plug-in hybrid in 2014. The BMW supercar, similar to one used in the film Mission: Impossible—Ghost Protocol, will be able to drive up to 35 kilometers (21.7 miles) on electric power and accelerate to 100 kilometers per hour in less than 5 seconds. “If you want to sell a vehicle in the U.S. and Europe, you must show you want to make the difference in terms of lower emissions, even if you sell a €100,000 car,” says Ian Fletcher, an analyst at IHS Automotive. “Even a supercar becomes more usable for city driving if it carries a hybrid engine.”

Toyota Motor’s (TM) Lexus, which has led the green technology shift among luxury-car makers, offers five hybrid models, ranging from the $29,120 CT to the $112,750 LS. Daimler’s (DAI) Mercedes-Benz sells the $91,850 S-Class hybrid and introduced a diesel-electric version of the E-Class in Germany this year. Even Volkswagen’s (VOW) ultraluxe Bentley line is considering a plug-in hybrid version of its planned $201,000 to $252,000 SUV.

The Ferrari hybrid will go on sale next year, with the U.S. likely to be its biggest market, according to the person with knowledge of the car’s rollout. Ferrari will produce a limited number of the model, with the final price yet to be decided, the person says.

The original Enzo, which sports wing doors, a carbon-fiber body, and a 660-hp engine, was limited to a run of 400 vehicles between 2002 and 2004. Because of its rarity, it now sells for about $1 million, according to website Infomotori.com. The Enzo successor will be powered by HY-KERS hybrid technology developed for the brand’s Formula One team. In the system, the electric motors deliver about an extra 100 hp to the wheels by operating through one of the gearbox’s two clutches. The setup transfers power instantaneously between the 12-cylinder engine and the electric motor, Ferrari says.

That brings some important gains for members of the 1 Percent with an eco-bent. A 40 percent savings in fuel economy would give elite car drivers some green bragging rights and about an additional 9 miles to the gallon vs. a conventional car of comparable weight. But the green benefits of the propulsion changes aren’t what has supercar fans excited. Instead, it’s the prospect that adding those supplementary electric motors will actually allow the cars to go even faster without requiring a larger main engine. “Boosted by the electric motors, the new supercar may have more than 900 hp,” says Barone, the Ferrari club president. “It’s going to be a sensational car, and it also lowers emissions.”

The bottom line: Ferrari’s first hybrid vehicle, likely to cost more than $850,000, shows that even elite supercars are under pressure to get greener.


View the original article here

CEO Commencement Wisdom 2012

Eric Schmidt
Google, Executive Chairman
University of California at Berkeley, May 12

“Find a way to say yes to things. Say yes to invitations to a new country. Say yes to meeting new friends. Say yes to learning a new language, picking up a new sport. Yes is how you get your first job, and your next job. Yes is how you find your spouse, and even your kids. Even if it’s a bit edgy, a bit out of your comfort zone, saying yes means you will do something new, meet someone new, and make a difference in your life, and likely in others’ lives as well. … Yes is a tiny word that can do big things. Say it often.”
Dan Akerson
General Motors, CEO
Columbia Business School, May 13

“I hope you came to this great university with more in mind than getting a degree that would help maximize your earning power. Let me be clear. Making money is good. I’m all for it. I have been blessed in ways I never imagined, and I hope everyone has the same opportunities and success I’ve enjoyed. But society needs more from you right now. Some of the institutions our society relies on are in serious disrepair.”
Greg Brown
Motorola Solutions, Chairman
Rutgers University, May 13

“Whatever you strive for, don’t dwell on constructing the perfect plan or search for the flawless solution, because perfect can be the enemy of progress. Have the confidence to forge ahead with a good enough plan, with imperfect knowledge. Then continually adjust, adapt, and learn.”
Muhtar Kent
Coca-Cola, Chairman
University of North Carolina, Kenan-Flagler Business School, May 13

“I was in New York, and I answered a [Coca-Cola] newspaper ad. … I spent the next nine months on trucks. In Atlanta, Georgia, Lubbock, Texas, Needham, Massachusetts, and outside Los Angeles. It wasn’t glamorous work. Getting up at 5 a.m., going into supermarkets, bringing product in off the truck, stacking it on shelves, and building displays. And frankly, there were moments when I asked myself what I was doing. But I always believed that today is better than yesterday, and tomorrow is better than today.”
Charlie Ergen
Dish Network, Chairman
Wake Forest University, May 21

“I encourage you to take the jobs where you will learn the most, and the other paycheck will take care of itself.”


View the original article here

Top 10 Careers For Reality TV Junkies

Thanks to Obamacare, Your Health Insurer May Have to Send You Money

What portion of the money that you spend on health insurance premiums goes toward paying for your medical care? Until recently, it’s been almost impossible for consumers to know how much of their premiums have gone to health services, as opposed to administrative costs and corporate profits.

That will change, starting Friday, with the arrival of an Obama administration deadline for major health insurance companies to reveal how much money they spent on medical claims last year. Consumers can check their insurers’ reports here after June 1.

Health insurance companies spent much of 2011 wrangling with officials over a rule in the Obama administration’s health-care law that requires insurers to spend four out of five of consumers’ premium dollars on medical care. If they don’t, they have to give customers a rebate. Those checks will start rolling out this summer.

We won’t know until June just how much insurers will wind up paying. Estimates from the Kaiser Family Foundation, which tracks health insurance, are high. Kaiser says the industry may have to dole out as much as $1.3 billion in rebates to one-third of individuals on health-care plans and one-quarter of all employers. Crunching Kaiser numbers, my Bloomberg News colleague Alex Wayne says consumers could get checks for as much as $517.

Don’t feel too sorry for the insurance companies. They stand to make huge profits from the 2010 health-care law—particularly the mandate that more people buy insurance. (That is, if the Supreme Court upholds it.) According to a study by Bloomberg Government, insurers will gain $1 trillion in new revenue over the next eight years.


View the original article here

After Dewey & LeBoeuf, It's Lawyers v. Lawyers

Creditors waiting to know if and when they will get paid by Dewey & LeBoeuf may want to consult the case of Coudert Brothers, the law firm that filed for bankruptcy in 2006. Nearly six years later lawsuits related to its collapse are still wending their way through the courts, with a federal judge ruling on May 24 that former partners may be on the hook for revenue from cases they took with them to their new jobs.

Unwinding Dewey, which filed for protection from creditors on May 28, marking the biggest bankruptcy in the legal business, probably will be even more complex. The product of a 2007 merger between Dewey Ballantine and LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, the mega-practice at one point had more than 1,300 attorneys spanning 12 countries. The firm, based in New York, fell apart in a matter of weeks this year after ousting its chairman and watching at least 250 of its 304 partners decamp to competing firms. “I wouldn’t be surprised if the wind down took a minimum of six to seven years,” says Edwin Reeser, a former managing partner for the Los Angeles office of Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal. “It could take 10.”

With few assets except their bills and partners, law firms’ liquidations tend to be drawn out and contentious. “They don’t have much of anything—other than perhaps some lawsuits—once their moneymakers leave,” says Stephen Lubben, a bankruptcy law professor at Seton Hall University School of Law.

Lawsuits filed by the bankrupt estate can delay the process—especially when the defendants are lawyers. Heller Ehrman, which collapsed in 2008, and Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison, which dissolved in 2003, are still in the process of being unwound. “Their profession is fighting this stuff, and they’re like professional boxers,” says Chip Bowles, a bankruptcy lawyer with the firm Bingham Greenebaum Doll in Louisville.

In 2008 the administrator in the Coudert bankruptcy sued 10 law firms, claiming they were liable for any profits derived from pending cases the firm’s partners took with them after Coudert dissolved. The firms argued that since Coudert operated on a billable hour model rather than a contingency fee system, the cases ceased to belong to it after it filed bankruptcy. U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon disagreed and denied the firms’ motion to dismiss.

Dewey owes bank lenders and bondholders $225 million, according to its May 28 filings in bankruptcy court in Manhattan. Outstanding bills to clients in the U.S., carried on the books at $255 million, may be collected at the rate of about $3 million to $7 million a week and may never be paid in full, Dewey said.

If the estate deems that Dewey was technically insolvent as early as 2010—that is, it already lacked enough money to pay debts—roughly 200 ex-partners who had equity in the firm could face $500 million or more in demands for compensation clawbacks, as well as an additional $50 million in claims for removing unfinished client business, says Reeser. A group of former Dewey partners has retained legal counsel in the event the estate comes after them.

Ironically, the litigation that prolongs a bankruptcy doesn’t always bring in much money. The Coudert estate doesn’t expect to pay unsecured creditors more than 39? on the dollar. Says Reeser: “Dewey is essentially a zero-asset bankruptcy for the unsecured. There is nothing there for them to get.”

The bottom line: Law firm bankruptcies are long and messy. Lawsuits relating to Dewey & LeBoeuf’s collapse will take years to resolve.


View the original article here

Canceled TV Shows Get a Digital Afterlife

In the world of television, getting canceled doesn’t mean what it used to. The four major U.S. networks have unveiled 31 shows for the 2012-2013 season that begins this fall. Not all will survive. Among the most recent casualties: In mid-May, the short-lived CBS (CBS) medical drama A Gifted Man got the ax after failing to win viewers. Others such as ABC’s Desperate Housewives made a graceful exit following an eight-season run.

Then there’s the case of Pan Am. The 1960s-retro airline drama that aired on Walt Disney’s (DIS) ABC last fall may yet fly again, thanks to the growing demand from new outlets for original programming. Sony Pictures Television (SNE), the producer, has held talks with pay-TV and streaming services to keep the series going with new episodes, say two people with knowledge of the matter who aren’t authorized to speak on the record.

Subscription services such as Netflix (NFLX) and DirecTV (DTV), which compile vast databases on viewing habits, offer shows a chance for a second life. Investing in new episodes of a defunct network series can make financial sense with the right budget and a dedicated, if small, fan base. “Digital can provide a way to recycle shows that have been canceled, because there’s a lot more pressure on those platforms to go toward original content,” says analyst Tony Wible of brokerage Janney Montgomery Scott.

When Netflix ordered a new season of Arrested Development in November, it knew how popular past seasons of the show were with its 26 million subscribers. Despite accolades from critics, News Corp.’s (NWSA) Fox pulled the plug on the sitcom in 2006 after three seasons. “One of the reasons we were so excited about coming to Netflix is that’s where our fans are,” said Mitch Hurwitz, the show’s creator, at a broadcasters’ convention last month. To hold down costs, Netflix ordered 10 new episodes of the show, whereas Fox aired 22 in its first season.

Netflix is also talking with CBS about resurrecting the drama Jericho, which went off the air in 2008, according to two people with knowledge of the discussions. The network is “always willing to talk with Netflix if they’re interested in one of our shows,” says Kelly Kahl, CBS’s chief scheduler. Netflix declined to comment.

DirecTV, the satellite-TV service, has extended the life of Damages, a legal drama starring Glenn Close that originally aired on News Corp.’s FX, by scheduling the program commercial-free on its Audience Network. It’s ordered a total of 20 new episodes, which will begin airing in July. DirecTV also resurrected the football drama Friday Night Lights, running it for three seasons after it was canceled by Comcast’s (CMCSA) NBC. The network later rebroadcast the DirecTV episodes.

Both shows had received critical acclaim, making them attractive, says Derek Chang, DirecTV’s executive vice president of content strategy and development. DirecTV saved money by sharing costs with producers and distributors. “If a show has an excellent cast and writing, it can be a good fit,” Chang says. DirecTV has no plans to pick up any of this year’s canceled shows.

A potential buyer such as Hulu offers studios another incentive to keep their series alive. While Netflix and DirecTV run programs commercial-free, shows offered by Hulu are ad-supported. Industrywide, ad revenue for online video is up 22 percent, to $2.3 billion, this year in the U.S., according to a recent report from Pivotal Research Group. Meredith Kendall, a spokeswoman for Hulu, declined to comment.

Executives at Apple (AAPL), Google (GOOG), and Yahoo! (YHOO) also may be studying reanimating old series as more advertising dollars move toward streaming video, Wible says. Most network programs come with budgets that make it difficult to be profitable without ad support: Ten hour-long episodes can cost about $30 million. In 2009, Google’s YouTube ran all five episodes of The Beautiful Life, which moved to the online service after just two episodes aired on the CW Network. YouTube, Apple, and Yahoo declined to comment.

These companies may have a harder time gauging potential audiences for a series discarded by a network: “The problem, if you’re a Google or a Yahoo, is you don’t have Netflix’s rich data to know the true interest of a show,” says Wible. “Nielsen (NLSN) only gives you a snapshot. You’d need another data point that proves the show is going to pay for itself.”

The bottom line: Netflix and DirecTV are buying canceled TV shows with built-in audiences. Google’s YouTube, Apple, and Yahoo may follow suit.

Sherman is a reporter for Bloomberg News in New York. Fixmer is a reporter for Bloomberg News in Los Angeles.

View the original article here

Careers - Did You Wind Up in a Default Career? Prevention and Remedy

Chipotle's Undocumented-Worker Problem Resurges

(Updates quote from Emily Tulli in the last paragraph.)

Chipotle (CMG), the fast-growing, burrito-slinging chain, has become the government’s highest-profile target in its campaign against employers of illegal immigrants. For the past two years, Chipotle has been subject to a probe by the U.S. Attorney’s office in Washington and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Now the Securities and Exchange Commission is looking into Chipotle’s statements and disclosures for possible criminal wrongdoing, the company revealed in a regulatory filing on May 22.

President George W. Bush’s administration specifically targeted workers in raids that traumatized communities and companies. (I wrote about a raid on a Swift [JBSS3:BZ] meatpacking plant in 2008.) President Barack Obama’s administration has gone after employers, forcing them to take more responsibility for whom they hire.

As a result of ICE’s investigation, which began in 2010, Chipotle fired about 450 Minnesota workers who couldn’t confirm the validity of their work documents. It also conducted audits in other states. Chipotle provided more than 300,000 pages of documents to the government agencies. And it had begun using the Department of Homeland Security’s E-verify program which, as its name suggests, verifies the documents provided by potential employees. “We thought it was winding down, so we were surprised last Wednesday when the SEC called our lawyers and said they would be subpoenaing documents,” Chipotle’s Co-Chief Executive Officer Montgomery Moran said at a Morgan Stanley (MS) conference on Wednesday.

So why now? And why the SEC? “The SEC likes to flex its muscles in areas that are hot buttons for the administration and this may be one of them. I don’t think Chipotle has been flagrantly violating any laws. I suspect this has more to do with the SEC trying to get a little more aggressive,” says Richard Fearon, managing partner of Accretive Capital Partners, a fund that invests in the industry but not in Chipotle. The agency declined comment via e-mail.

Meanwhile, the workers who were fired have been pushed into the underground economy, where companies don’t conduct background checks–or pay minimum wage or taxes, either. “Audits actually create worse working conditions overall because their scrutiny of employers who keep everything above board has the perverse effect of letting off-the-books employers off the hook,” says Emily Tulli, an attorney with the National Immigration Law Center. (Tulli backed off her earlier comment to us about Chipotle being an industry leader on compensation, saying she doesn’t have any personal knowledge of Chipotle’s employment practices.)


View the original article here

The Surprising Global Shortage of Skilled Workers

Want to find a job? That’s not a problem if you are trained as a technician and looking for work in China or Brazil. Ditto for sales representatives, who are in hot demand in Taiwan and Hong Kong. In Japan, engineers won’t sit idle. Meanwhile, in Ireland, IT workers are needed. In the Netherlands, it’s laborers. Even with unemployment running at an historic high of 8.1 percent in the U.S., don’t worry if you are a plumber, welder, or electrician. There’s plenty of demand for your skills.

Even as economists and politicians fret about the problem of global unemployment, those with the right resumes are in hot demand. That’s leading to talent shortages around the world, according to a survey released on May 29 by Milwaukee-based ManpowerGroup (MAN), one of the world’s largest temporary workers agencies.

All told, over one-third of the 38,000 companies Manpower surveyed earlier this year in 41 countries and territories reported that they were unable to find the workers they needed. That is 4 percentage points higher than it was in 2009, during the global financial crisis. The figure is still well below the 41 percent that reported shortages in 2007, before the crisis.

“Companies have gotten sophisticated about who they need and when they need them. In today’s world, it’s ‘stretch out your workplace a bit more and [only] then hire,’” says Jeff Joerres, ManpowerGroup’s chairman and chief executive officer. “Even if we had a robust recovery, I don’t think you are going to see that change. Companies have had too many lessons about how you can get whipsawed the other way.”

Not surprisingly, the largest number of employers reported shortages in Asia, where economies have been relatively resilient to date. Some 45 percent of employers surveyed there cited difficulties in finding the right people to hire. That’s the same number as in 2011, and it’s 17 percentage points above the total when the first survey was carried out in 2006. In the Americas, 41 percent faced challenges getting the right workers, up from 37 percent last year and 34 percent in 2010.

In Europe, as well as the Middle East and Africa, only one-quarter of employers reported labor shortages, similar in number to last year and not much different from pre-crisis levels. That probably reflects the still-precarious nature of the European economy.

The reason companies said they face shortages? The largest share, or 33 percent, said they simply couldn’t find the workers they need. A key issue was a lack of such hard skills as IT knowledge or facility with a foreign language. Insufficient work experience, a dearth of soft skills, or what the survey called “employability”—meaning characteristics like motivation and interpersonal skills, wanting more money, and being unwilling to work part-time—were also factors, in descending order of importance.

Companies will continue to face challenges regarding talent shortages unless educational systems are changed, argues Joerres, who says a major problem is the skills mismatch—the gap between job-seekers’ abilities and what employers need. One way to fix this is to vastly expand the size and number of trade schools, he says.

“The honor of doing and going through a vocational technical program has diminished. Those who would have gone to that school are now going to a four-year university because parents and society say that is what you should do,” says Joerres. “There are not enough welders, plumbers, and draftsmen. We are seeing shortages in these areas. And the pendulum takes a while to swing back.”


View the original article here

Mad Men's Mixed Blessing for Marketers

With just two weeks of Mad Men left to go, it’s clear that the delay of season five didn’t dent the show’s cultural impact. That’s a mixed blessing to anyone whose brand is associated with AMC’s high-style depiction of Madison Avenue in the 1960s. (Creator Matthew Weiner’s refusal to allow more product placement in the show was cited as a factor in the long hiatus.) The level of love or loathing for the series among marketers may depend, in part, on whether their company paid to be there.

Photograph courtesy Banana RepublicAt Banana Republic, consumer enthusiasm for the Mad Men Collection it launched in March helped the Gap (GPS) brand deliver its best first-quarter sales ever. That’s despite limiting the number of pieces to 40, down from 65 types of clothing and jewelry in its first Mad Men line launched last August. The Estee Lauder (EL) Mad Men Collection—which was also launched in March with one “Cherry” lipstick and a cream blush in “Evening Rose”—has generated an “amazing reaction” in terms of media buzz, according to spokeswoman Samantha Kaufman, and will lead to a second collection timed to season six next year.

Jaguar, on the other hand, could hardly celebrate its exposure in a May 27 episode that portrayed the E-Type sports car as unreliable and had the fictional head of its dealers association make his vote in an ad pitch contingent on having sex with office manager Joan Holloway Harris. Jaguar USA’s Twitter feed went from urging followers to retweet “if taking a ride with Joan Holloway in a Jaguar would make you #FeelAlive” a week earlier to cryptically stating “loved the pitch, didn’t love the process” after the show.

So far this season, the show has averaged about 2.6 million viewers, according to Nielsen, up from 2.2 million in season four and 946,000 its first year. While that’s a fraction of the number who tune in for, say, Sunday Night Football or American Idol, it’s proven to be a powerful fan base. New York publicist Alison Brod compares the series’ impact with HBO’s Sex in the City, which made Jimmy Choo and Manolo Blahniks part of the vocabulary a decade ago. Brod credits Mad Men with reviving interest in everything from martinis to La-Z-Boy recliners. “There’s a smoky, sexy sultriness to Mad Men,” says Brod, whose eponymous firm is known for its creative product placement. Series such as The Sopranos may have built similar cult followings, but that probably didn’t move much product beyond pasta and Frank Sinatra tunes. And while fans might envy the accents they hear on Downton Abbey, does anyone want to dress like those characters?

Mad Men, in contrast, is a celebration of consumption and style at a time when both were at their height. While its plot often revolves around products, how they’re portrayed is not always predictable. Lucky Strikes are a struggle to market when their products are already suspected of causing cancer. Alcohol brands are less woven into the script than alcoholism. Unless a brand, such as Heineken, has paid for product placement, it’s hard to know if it will come out ahead. And of course Mad Men’s prism on the 1960s remains a largely white New York world that excludes many of the potential customers that marketers are eager to reach.

Even the characters aren’t all that reliable as marketing vehicles. Betty Draper and Joan Holloway, the cool style icons of season one, have seen their characters morph this season into a dumpy housewife and a single mother who sleeps with a client to get ahead. Holloway’s curvy figure, which may have inspired Mad Men designer Janie Bryant’s limited collection of shapewear now sold through Maidenform.com, is less a source of empowerment when it’s used to please a Jaguar dealer. (Maidenform spokeswoman Norah Alberto notes that “sales have been very positive” and the styles are “modeled off of actual garments from the Maidenform archives with a sexy and modern interpretation from Janie Bryant.”) Jon Hamm gave an eloquent pitch for Jaguar in his role as Don Draper this past week, but Mercedes-Benz (DAI) is the car company that recently hired the actor to be the voice of its brand in U.S. commercials.

(Joan and Betty were also featured in Mattel’s Mad Men Barbie collection. Whether their fates are a factor in why the dolls now sell for $55 instead of the $74.95 price tag when they launched in July 2010 is unclear. The collection is rounded out with dolls for Don Draper, who doesn’t really suit Mattel’s “dashing ladies’ man” label this season, and Roger Sterling, a character who recently initiated his second divorce while high on LSD.)

Far safer, it seems, to produce products that key off the romance that surrounds Mad Men than appear as part of the plot. Isabel Cavill, a senior retail analyst at Planet Retail, argues that the brand has clearly been a boon to the conservative image of Banana Republic. In her view, “it creates buzz for a brand that otherwise doesn’t have much differentiation in the U.S. market.” H&M had a similar instinct when launching a clothing line modeled on the far riskier property, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. While Cavill says Mad Men’s fashion appeal could wane with Banana Republic’s target customer of working women over 30 as the series moves into the late 1960s, she suspects the retailer will look more to Jackie O than Janis Joplin as it cribs styles from that period.

Many in the industry aren’t all that worried about the show’s twists and turns. Baba Shetty, chief strategy officer at Boston ad agency Hill Holliday, worked on a special issue of Newsweek that evoked the advertising and feel of the era. “I think Mad Men is a source of endless fascination for people,” says Shetty. For the right kind of brand, he argues, all that matters is that it “remain a masterfully produced high-quality narrative about the 1960s.”


View the original article here

The Rise of the Occasionally Daily Newspaper

On Thursday, executives at Advance Publications announced that this coming fall they will reinvent the Times-Picayune into a distinctly 21st century kind of news organization: an occasionally daily newspaper. In an item posted on the paper’s website, the company announced that as part of a broader reorganization the Times-Picayune will (a) increase its online news-gathering and (b) reduce its print publication schedule to Wednesdays, Fridays, and Sundays only. The news was followed by word that three regional daily newspapers in Alabama also owned by the Newhouse family—the Huntsville Times, the Birmingham News, and the Press-Register—would also adopt the occasionally daily (Wednesday, Friday, Sunday) schedule.

The Newhouse publications aren’t the first daily papers to back off from their everyday model in the face of declining revenues. (In March, the Newspaper Association of America announced that total 2011 newspaper advertising revenue, including print and online, totaled $23.9 billion—less than half the 2005 level of $49.4 billion.) In December 2008, the Detroit Media Partnership announced it was reducing home delivery of the Detroit Free Press and the Detroit News from seven days a week to Thursdays, Fridays, and Sundays (the company continues to publish traditional everyday versions of the papers for newsstands).

About a year later, Rich Harshbarger, the vice president for consumer marketing at the Detroit Media Partnership told the American Journalism Review that the new model had resulted in “substantial savings.” Detroit News Editor and Publisher Jonathan Wolman said the moves allowed the paper to invest more in its digital operations.

In 2009, the Ann Arbor News in Michigan also reduced its print publishing schedule to Thursdays and Sundays, according to the New York Times. In the months that followed, the model spread elsewhere in the state.

The advantage of the occasionally daily model is that it allows a newspaper to hang onto upwards of 80 percent of its print advertising revenue (Sundays and, to a lesser extent, Fridays being the biggest days) while significantly reducing printing and distribution costs, writes industry analyst Ken Doctor. And while publishers talk about beefing up online news coverage, newsrooms have been shrinking since the advent of online outlets. In April, an American Society of News Editors survey revealed that newspapers now employ 40,600 editors and reporters, down from a high of 56,900 in 1990.

It’s a state of limbo entered into out of necessity while newspapers try to hang on long enough for a viable, all-digital future to emerge.

There are risks. “Big worry: Breaking the daily habit makes newspaper companies far less essential far more quickly,” writes Doctor.


View the original article here

Twitter, Facebook Join the List of In-Car Distractions

Drivers, start your engines—and log in to your Wi-Fi. Just be sure to put the car in park if you’re going to tweet or update your Facebook status. That’s essentially the auto industry’s response to government warnings that a proliferation of models equipped with Web access and other distractions will cause a spike in accidents.

As Audi (NSU), Nissan (NSANY), General Motors (GM), and Ford (F) make a selling point of in-car Internet and social networks, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood is pushing new federal guidelines to discourage their use. The government says carmakers should avoid any feature that would take a driver’s eyes off the road for more than two seconds; interactive devices should only work when the car is stopped. “We don’t have to choose between safety and technology,” LaHood says in an e-mail, “but while these devices may offer consumers new tools and features, automakers have a responsibility to ensure they don’t divert a driver’s attention.”

Photograph by Charles Maraia/Getty Images

The guidelines are just suggestions—they don’t have the force of law and stop short of setting limits on what cars can include. That’s allowed automakers to praise LaHood’s efforts to protect drivers while continuing to develop the features the government is concerned about. The industry’s creative argument: The new gadgets are safer for drivers than fumbling with smartphones while behind the wheel. “They’re going to do those things whether it’s through the vehicle or through a handheld device that they bring with them in the car,” says Wade Newton, a spokesman for the Washington-based Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, whose members include BMW (BMW) and Volkswagen (VOW), “and those are devices that were never designed to be used while in an auto.”

The new Cadillac XTS sedan will include an iPad-like touchscreen and limited voice commands. “When you look at the average car, and we’re guilty of it and so are all of our competitors, you’ve got too many buttons,” says GM Chief Executive Officer Daniel Akerson. Ford, whose MyFord Touch and MyLincoln Touch infotainment systems were panned by Consumer Reports magazine for being too complicated to use, says it’s devising new, easier ways for drivers to get on their favorite sites—when the car isn’t moving. “Our engineers have?…?been working with Facebook engineers to develop unique and safer ways of integrating the car experience with Facebook,” Jay Cooney, a Ford spokesman, says in an e-mail.

No matter how easy they are to use, features such as these “only serve to feed an already ravenous appetite for distracted driving,” says Rob Reynolds, executive director of FocusDriven, which has pressed for tougher penalties for drivers who text or talk on cell phones while driving and now backs putting restrictions on in-car Internet. That’s not likely to happen. LaHood has said that for now he’s satisfied with the voluntary guidelines and won’t push for federal rules with teeth. Instead, he’s hoping to put pressure on car companies with a series of public-service videos featuring people whose family members were killed in crashes caused by distracted drivers. There are plenty: In 2010, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 3,092 people—nearly 10 percent of those killed on the nation’s highways—died in accidents related to drivers who were paying more attention to their screens than to the road.

The bottom line: New federal guidelines ask automakers not to include features that distract drivers—but the industry doesn’t have to follow them.


View the original article here

Remaking J.C. Penney Without Coupons

Here’s a riddle: How do bargain hunters know they’re getting a bargain if there’s no hunt? The answer is, they don’t. That’s just one of the lessons Ron Johnson has learned in his six months as chief executive officer of J.?C. Penney. Johnson developed Target’s (TGT) “cheap chic” persona before moving to Apple (AAPL), where he created the world’s most profitable stores. Now he’s trying something really hard. He wants to wean Penney’s middle-market customers from a steady diet of coupons and almost constant discounting. So far, they’re not buying. “The transition has been tougher than we anticipated,” Johnson said during a May 15 presentation to investors.

Johnson’s strategy was deceptively simple: quickly replace Penney’s relatively high list prices—which it aggressively discounted—with lower everyday “fair and square prices.” The early results of that grand experiment have been dismal. The department store chain, with 1,100 U.S. stores, had overall revenue of $3.2 billion in the first quarter, and lost $163 million during that time. Sales at stores open more than a year fell an average 19 percent. The number of people coming into Penney stores dropped by 10 percent, and the number of those who bought something fell, too, by 5 percent.

“What is the source of this?” asked Mike Kramer, Penney’s new chief operating officer, during the May presentation. “Coupons, that drug,” he said. “We did not realize how deep some of the customers were into this. …?We have got to wean them off this and educate our consumers.” Added Johnson: “We have got to get people to understand our pricing strategy.”

Before Johnson’s arrival, a pair of sandals at Penney might have been priced at $39.99 and, after all the coupons and discounts, sold for $29.99. Now the shoes are available for an everyday price of $30 from the start. Johnson’s setup allows special month-long values for some items; in May, for example, the sandals could go for $22. And if some are still in stock, they would later be marked down to the so-called best price of $15 on the first or third Friday of the month (when most shoppers get their paychecks). “I went into a store a couple of weeks ago, and I couldn’t figure out what was what,” says Jay Margolis, a former executive at Limited Brands (LTD).

There’s no question Johnson knows how to craft a retail makeover. He’s the guy who came up with the designer collaborations at Target that burnished the discounter’s reputation and afforded it more control over its goods—and their prices—than rivals. Then Johnson created Apple’s ultracool stores. From there he was recruited to Penney by Bill Ackman, whose hedge fund, Pershing Square Capital Management, owns 18 percent of the 110-year-old retailer.

In January, Johnson unveiled his four-year plan to transform Penney into America’s favorite store. In a presentation to investors and suppliers, he described a department store built around a so-called town square, with up to 100 boutiques carrying items made by well-known brands specifically for Penney. The first store-within-a-store he announced will sell home goods by Martha Stewart. “Ron Johnson is attempting one of the boldest transformations of any retailer or any company ever,” says Whitney Tilson, founder of hedge fund T2 Partners and an investor in Penney.

But Johnson says first he had to fix the pricing. “We wouldn’t have had access to many of our new brands and design partners without implementing a new pricing model,” he says by e-mail. Less than 1 percent of all Penney merchandise was sold at full price prior to his arrival. The company offered 590 different promotions a year, yet the average customer made only four visits during that time. “That means the customer ignored us 99 percent of the time,” Johnson said in January. “Steve [Jobs] would have called this insanity. J.?C. Penney spent $1 billion [on promotions], and the customer ignored us. It’s like in junior high school, if you keep calling a girl and she doesn’t call back, you seem desperate.”

Although Johnson says future ads will do more to explain the new pricing scheme, that may not help as much as he hopes. “These are not women who feel taken advantage of by coupons and deals,” says Mark Ellwood, whose book, Bargain Fever, comes out next year. “To them, there’s the thrill of the hunt—it’s hunting and gathering with a credit card. No consumers have been complaining about discounts.”

Many shoppers may need to see the markdowns to believe they’re getting a good deal, says Barbara Kahn, a professor of marketing at the Wharton School. That’s especially true when it comes to the basic items—from underwear to dinner plates—that Penney mostly sells. Johnson said at the January presentation that shoppers distrusted the store because it offered so many discounts it was impossible to know the real price. Yet he may have gotten it backward. “Underneath the bargain craziness is a lack of trust in business,” says Kit Yarrow, a consumer psychologist and professor at Golden Gate University. “But now J.?C. Penney has made it look like its customers were buying cheap stuff. People are looking at it the opposite way J.?C. Penney had hoped.”

Penney isn’t the first retailer to try to ditch coupons in favor of everyday low prices. After Macy’s (M) acquired rival May Co. in 2005, executives thought they could reduce the huge number of discounts it offered. But sales fell, the stock dropped, and executives soon abandoned the idea. At an April conference for investors, Karen Hoguet, Macy’s chief financial officer, said, “People love these coupons. They love thinking they got us.”

There is, of course, one way to avoid big discounts: sell Apple products. That is, sell products consumers can’t buy anywhere else at a lower price. Johnson’s vision of an amalgam of 100 boutiques with specially designed items from the likes of Jonathan Adler, Vivienne Tam, and Tourneau may eventually give him some of the pricing power he had at Apple and Target. But here’s another riddle: Which comes first, the price or the products? Johnson “jumped the gun on his pricing strategy,” says Rafi Mohammed, a pricing consultant and author of The 1% Windfall. “He should add the boutiques and the town square, and then he’ll have the mojo to change the pricing.”

The bottom line: Penney has dramatically cut back on discounting. A 10 percent drop in customer traffic in the first quarter shows the strategy isn’t taking hold.


View the original article here

POM's New Ads Stick it to FTC, Quoting Judge Out of Context

Just days after Chief Administrative Law Judge Michael Chappell of the Federal Trade Commission ruled that POM Wonderful made “false or misleading” claims about the effects of its drink, the pomegranate-beverage maker launched an ad campaign on May 24 that quotes an “FTC Judge” describing the product as a “…Natural Fruit Product with Health Promoting Characteristics.” The ads pull further quotes from the opinion.

POM has bought full-page ads in such newspapers as the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times, as well as home-page takeovers on websites like CNN, the Huffington Post, and the Times home page and health pages online, according to a press release from the company.

Judge Chappell likely didn’t foresee his opinion being used to endorse the product, and POM did not seek approval or inform the Federal Trade Commission about the campaign. Still, “POM would not need the FTC’s permission to quote the judge in advertisements that they produce. The judge’s opinion is public. it’s posted on our site,” says Betsy Lordan, a spokesperson for the FTC.

The quote comes from page 103 of the 335-page opinion. The full quote is: “Pomegranate juice is a natural fruit product with health promoting characteristics. The safety of pomegranate juice is not in doubt.”

The opinion found that there was “insufficient competent and reliable scientific evidence to support the implied claims,” in POM’s advertisements, that the juice can combat conditions such as heart disease, prostate cancer, and erectile dysfunction. “The use of the word ‘implied’ is critical because no direct claims were made,” Corey Martin, vice president of corporate communications at Roll Global, POM Wonderful’s sister company, wrote in an e-mail.

POM goes on to state in the release: “[O]ut of 600 print and outdoor advertisements disseminated, the court found less than 2 percent of those misleading. POM is appealing those findings.” Martin confirms that this means 12 of 600 ads make specific health claims.

“Because one or both parties are likely to appeal certain aspects of the administrative law judge’s Initial Decision, the FTC staff has no comment on POM’s new advertising campaign at this time,” says Mary Engle, director of the FTC Division of Advertising Practices. The initial decision is subject to review by the FTC and becomes the Commission’s decision 30 days after it is served, unless a party files a notice of appeal.

“We will continue to make generalized health claims that are substantiated,” Martin says. “If you look at the ruling, essentially, the judge upheld our right to share scientifically proven health benefits.”

The press release says: “The FTC’s objective was to shut down all of POM’s health benefit advertising and to use POM to impose a new standard of double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies and preapproval by the FDA on all food companies desiring to make health claims. In these efforts, the FTC failed.”

Martin says the company will not disclose spending on the ads, but the campaign “will last as long as necessary to inform the public of the truth.”


View the original article here

Briefs

The recovering economy has more Americans gearing up for vacations, allowing carriers such as Delta Air Lines (DAL) and US Airways (LCC) to raise fares on summer travel. The number of bookings for trips in June through August is up 4.3 percent from a year ago, while prices advanced 3.1 percent. Airlines have cut capacity over the past several years to trim costs, so now they can fill planes to near-record levels and raise fares during high travel periods. The carriers may continue to limit the number of available seats for some time. Southwest Airlines (LUV) curbed its expansion plans recently by delaying the delivery of 30 Boeing (BA) 737-800 jets for four years.

PetroChina (PTR), the mainland’s biggest oil and natural gas producer, says it’s looking at refining and storage assets in the Americas and the Caribbean and expects to set up trading operations in the Western Hemisphere. The company is weighing the purchase of a refinery in Aruba owned by Valero Energy (VLO). In 2010 the Chinese state-owned company said it planned to invest at least $60 billion this decade on acquisitions. The company wants half of its oil and gas production to come from overseas, up from just more than a quarter now.

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, which published authors from Mark Twain to J.R.R. Tolkien, filed for bankruptcy protection on May 21 to shed more than $3 billion in debt. It has a prepackaged plan backed by creditors and won conditional permission to borrow $400 million to fund operations during a 30-day reorganization. Under the proposed workout, Houghton’s bank and bond creditors will be paid off with stock in the reorganized company plus $30 million in cash.

BAE Systems (BA/) won a contract valued at $2.5 billion from Saudi Arabia’s Royal Air Force, underscoring the role of Middle East customers in the arms market as western European governments reduce defense spending. BAE will supply equipment for training air crews, including 22 Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer aircraft and 55 Pilatus PC-21s. The defense manufacturer had planned to close a factory in the northern England town of Brough, but the new orders will keep its doors open until at least 2015.

Eastman Kodak (EKDKQ) lost a ruling in a two-year legal fight against Apple (AAPL) and Research In Motion (RIMM) over a patent for digital image-preview technology, a decision that may hurt the value of assets Kodak is selling in its Chapter 11 proceeding that began in January. A judge ruled that Kodak’s original patent was invalid because of its “obviousness.” Kodak, which plans to appeal the findings, has been trying to charge for the use of its digital-imaging patents and suing in instances where that strategy failed.

— Rosneft: Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev tapped Igor Sechin as CEO

— Dexia: Isabelle Bouillot and Francis Vermeiren resign in board shuffle

— General Motors: Alan Batey named vice president of U.S. sales and service


View the original article here

terça-feira, 22 de maio de 2012

Setting Career Objectives - 9 Steps to Achieve Career Goals

Career Counselling - Finding a Career Suited to Your Personality

Wrigley Field: What's Obama Got to Do With It?

(Updated to include comment by economist Matheson.)

When the New York Times published a proposal for a $10 million attack on President Obama to be funded by Chicago billionaire Joe Ricketts and his super-PAC, it threw a heavy monkey wrench into negotiations between the city of Chicago and the Chicago Cubs over funding for $300 million in renovations to Wrigley Field. Mayor Rahm Emanuel is what you might call a close, personal friend of the president. And the Ricketts family bought the Cubs three years ago for $845 million. Joe, his son Tom, who is the team’s chairman, and his daughter Laura have all issued statements distancing themselves from the controversial ad proposal. Still, the mayor, according to an aide, is livid.

The Ricketts certainly haven’t done themselves any favors by angering a negotiating partner not known for his even temper. Yet it’s curious that a personal feud might be the deal’s undoing, as opposed to the large body of evidence that public financing of sports venues does not bring the promised economic returns.

To his credit, Emanuel rejected the team’s original proposal to have the city back the entire cost of Wrigley’s renovation. According to Crain’s Chicago Business, the most recent request from the team involves the city pitching in $150 million via bonds that would be paid using the first 6 percent of city and county taxes on Cubs tickets. Setting aside the massive irony that Joe Ricketts’s super-PAC, the Ending Spending Action Fund, is a vocal critic of public spending, there is little reason for the city to do the deal. The standard justification for public spending on privately owned sports franchises is that teams stimulate economic activity and create jobs. In the last 20 years, according to economists Robert Baade and Victor Matheson, this logic has persuaded public officials to pick up the tab for more than half of the $30 billion that professional teams in the U.S. have spent building and rebuilding their stadiums and arenas (PDF).

The methods behind the boosters’ claims, write Baade and Matheson, are “fatally flawed, resulting in a consistent bias toward large, but unrealized, impacts.” Teams and leagues routinely fail to adjust for spending that is merely displaced from other local entertainment and for potential economic activity that gets crowded out by sporting events. When the NFL, for instance, says the Super Bowl brings $300 million to $400 million to the host city, the actual impact is about a quarter of that (PDF). And inflated figures are only part of the problem. The basic premise of public investment is backward. Sports success follows economic growth, not the other way round.

“This is a perfect example of a great giveaway,” says Matheson of the Cubs proposal. While Wrigley is one of the few sports venues with a legitimate spillover effect in the neighborhood, he says, the team is having no trouble drawing 3 million people a year as it is. And there is essentially zero chance of the Cubs leaving town. Plus, by making the avenues around Wrigley a part of the venue on game days, the proposed changes could be a minus for the city. “It’s trying to take neighborhood money and make it Cubs money,” says Matheson.

Cities and states keep plunking down money anyway, because our collective mania for sports makes the industry seem like something much bigger than, say, the cardboard box industry, which, as Baade and Matheson point out, is roughly the same size. Sports make us crazy. Witness Rhode Island lending Red Sox legend Curt Schilling $75 million ($75 million!) to help fund his video game company. Does an entrepreneur who didn’t pitch on an injured ankle get that same deal?

This mania is why a bankrupt baseball team can sell for $2.3 billion. It’s also why teams should pay for their own renovations. They have plenty of more honest ways of separating us from our money than dipping into the public till. As Emanuel himself said of the Ricketts family and the Cubs, “They bought it in 2009, eyes open, well aware.” It’s that sentiment, and not any political payback, that should kill the Wrigley deal.


View the original article here

Why GM And Others Fail With Facebook Ads

Ben_kunz3

Facebook (FB) got a black eye last week when General Motors (GM) announced it would cease advertising on the platform, yanking $10 million in annual ad spending away from Mark Zuckerberg just days before the company’s IPO. The move caused some to wonder if Facebook’s business model is flawed. After all, the social network made 85 percent of its $3.7 billion in revenue last year from those little ad boxes on the side. If marketers stop buying them, Facebook’s stock price could get hit even harder and further than its 11 percent ding on May 21.

That’s wrong-headed, because no free market spends billions on a media format with zero return. What GM’s retreat really shows is the harsh reality that other brands must face: Making social-media communications work requires heavier lift than many organizations can muster.

Before we conclude that Facebook ads don’t work, first let’s put GM’s slap into context. The auto giant is emerging from a bailout crisis in a strong, lean mode, slashing costs to shore up its balance sheet. The company has reportedly targeted $2 billion in marketing expense reductions over the next five years. Cutting Facebook ads by $10 million puts GM only 0.5 percent of the way there. A few days after the Facebook news, GM announced it will not advertise in the 2013 Super Bowl.

GM has a robust presence on Facebook and in other social media, beyond paid advertising. When I riffed on Twitter, “Wow, GM yanks $10M from FB…” Mary Henige. GM’s director of social media, tweeted back: “We have more than 8mil friends on FB; not leaving them; engagement & content isn’t same as advertising.” Fair point, Mary.

But the truth is that Facebook ads work better for some businesses than others. GM did what any savvy marketer facing a budget squeeze does—it optimized away from underperforming media channels. Advertising, after all, is an investment. You need to put your funds against what works best.

Most Facebook ads are bought on a cost-per-click basis. This means the front-end cost of getting a potential consumer to respond is low, typically less than $2 per click. Each click on a Facebook ad puts a consumer on your product web site. If you then can get only 1 percent of those consumers who click on ads to “convert” and buy your product, you’ve achieved a $200 cost per sale. In essence, marketers try to buy customers at the lowest cost per sale possible. Paying $200 per new customer isn’t bad for many business models.

The challenge with Facebook, though, is that conversion rates can be very low in some product categories. Social media users are being social, after all. Unlike the pay-per-click ads that Google (GOOG) serves up only after consumers type in the names of products they are hunting, Facebook ads pop up while you’re bragging about your five-mile run. Curious tire-kickers might click on a GM Facebook ad to see the sexy Chevy Volt, but that doesn’t mean they want to buy one. If your conversion rate—the portion of people who eventually buy after clicking on your Facebook ad—falls from 1 percent to 0.1 percent, you’re now talking a $2,000 per-sale cost. That’s an expensive customer acquisition.

Keeping Facebook conversion rates up and customer acquisition costs down requires a constant battery of audience-targeting refinement, creative testing, and website “landing page” adjustments. Even if all that works perfectly, it’s often very difficult to track all the consumer respondents who come in via Facebook and end up on a sales floor. Salespeople notoriously steal credit for respondents whose interest was triggered by advertising; they often get higher commissions for leads they generate, vs. prospects handed to them by marketing. This challenge in marketing is called “attribution modeling,” and if a marketing model misallocates even one-third of Facebook respondents, the math on Facebook return on investment tips the wrong way.

The second challenge with Facebook is that brands struggle to reap real value from its social interactions, which often start with paid advertising. Facebook is famous for its “likes,” which supposedly open the door to a wonderful engagement between brands and consumers. If a consumer sees your Facebook ad, she might “like” your brand, allowing its content to pop up again later in her Facebook stream. The idea is that you move from being an old-fashioned, interruptive advertiser to become a real “friend” of the consumer, sharing brand stories in the middle of her Facebook page, right next to her college roommate’s cat photos.

The dirty secret social-media gurus won’t reveal is that Facebook likes are becoming a devalued currency. Facebook now receives 1.17 trillion likes and comments from consumers annually, which works out to 3.5 per Facebook user per day. Forty-two million Facebook pages now have 10 or more likes. In a world where liking is as common as blinking, a like no longer signals that a consumer loves your brand.

The third, most glaring challenge regarding Facebook is that most brands stink at maintaining coherent conversations with Facebook users after they are liked. I recently tested a dozen big brands, including Apple (AAPL), Bank of America (BAC), Starbucks (SBUX), and others, “liking” them on Facebook to see how they would respond. I then checked into Facebook 31 times over the next week, each time scrolling back through several hours of friends’ posts, to see which brands would reach out to me. On average, the brands I had liked engaged with me 0.6 times over seven days—an awful performance, given the basic marketing precept that three or four interactions are required per week to trigger consumer response. I liked you, Zappos (AMZN)—and you didn’t return my call.

Finally, personalizing brand interactions on Facebook is difficult. When brands respond to Facebook users who like them, what consumers typically get is a one-size-fits-all promotion for everyone. University of Phoenix (APOL) showed up in my Facebook feed after I liked them; the school offered teaching certification, while my Facebook profile says I work in advertising. Um, no thanks. Pepsi (PEP) popped up with an extended version of its latest TV ad. Thanks, Pepsi, but if I want your TV spot, I’ll turn on the tube. Liking these brands and receiving this level of “engagement” felt like asking a girl for a kiss and being handed a business card.

Facebook can be a wonderful platform for both paid advertising and social communication. It is also extraordinarily difficult to fulfill its promise. An automaker that wants its Facebook ads to succeed must finesse the campaign at every stage, from creative testing to an optimal landing page and on to tracking the consumer’s path through sales channels.

The easy decision with Facebook is to say: “Oh, just whack it.” That’s too bad, because the only problem with Facebook is typically how marketers manage it. And GM, I really do like your Volt.

Ben Kunz is vice president of strategic planning at Mediassociates, a media planning and Internet strategy firm. He is author of the advertising strategy blog ThoughtGadgets.com.

View the original article here

sábado, 19 de maio de 2012

The DeLorean Is Back—This Time as a Bike

For DeLorean enthusiasts who are excited that the cars are coming back but disheartened at the estimated $90,000 price tag, there is a silver—er, stainless steel—lining. Marc Moore, a bicycle maker, has teamed up with Stephen Wynne, president of the new, Texas-based incarnation of DeLorean Motor—which plans next year to release electric versions of the iconic, gull-winged sedans from the 1980s—to introduce the DeLorean Bicycle.

When Wynne was first approached about the idea, he was skeptical. “I basically, said, ‘Yeah, I’m interested, but I don’t want to do a $5,000 bike that’s really a $200 Asian bike with a badge on it,” he says, “which you customarily see from other brands.” Wynne was quickly persuaded, however, that expanding the DeLorean name from four-wheels to two wouldn’t be a shameless, superficial exercise in branding. This is because the bike and the car share a core strand of DNA: the stainless steel body.

“They said, ‘No, we want to do a stainless steel bike because stainless steel is the new cool, if you’re into bikes,’” he says. “It’s sort of taken over from carbon fiber.”

The DeLorean Bicycle’s first model, the “Anyday,” is an 11-speed bike with “luminescent” coated wheels that “appear to turn on” when lights shine on them. The bike retails for $5,495, which may seem a bit high. Like its ancestor, though, the bike will be pitched as an acquired taste. “It’s a bicycle that bike aficionados can look at and say, ‘Yes, that’s cool, and it’s got all of the right equipment on it,’” says Wynne.

Fans of Back to the Future might be underwhelmed, however, as the bike will lack some key equipment—namely, an engine that could propel the rider to speeds up to a time-travel-enabling 88 mph. “It can go as fast as you can pedal,” says Wynne. “Maybe there’s a pedal-per-minute ‘88’ feature that we can factor in there.”


View the original article here

Career Development Plan - Understanding Your Career Anchors

Book Review: 'Private Empire,' by Steve Coll

There’s a startling scene early in Steve Coll’s Private Empire in which Lee Raymond, then the chief executive of ExxonMobil, speaks with offhanded candor about where his loyalties lie. Asked by an industry colleague if his company might consider building more refineries domestically, the better to protect the U.S. from potential gasoline shortages and security crises, Raymond shrugs off the question. “I’m not a U.S. company,” Raymond says, “and I don’t make decisions based on what’s good for the U.S.”

As objectivist statements of rational self-interest go, that one’s a lulu—up there with Margaret Thatcher’s “There is no such thing as society.” You’d expect a Big Oil chieftan to be ruthlessly profit-minded, but to the point of putting profits ahead of country? Nevertheless, Coll writes, Raymond “saw no contradiction” in this stance: “He did indeed regard himself as a very patriotic American and a political conservative, but he was also fully prepared to state publicly that he had fiduciary responsibilities.”

This is one of many fascinating glimpses that Coll provides into the curious world of ExxonMobil, which, though it was surpassed recently by Apple as the globe’s largest nonstate-owned corporation in terms of market capitalization, remains unsurpassed as the globe’s most secretive. Raymond, an Exxon lifer who reigned over the company from 1993 until his retirement in 2005, consummating an $81 billion merger with Mobil along the way, is Private Empire’s dark-prince protagonist, a worthily fearsome heir to his corporate forebear, John D. Rockefeller. (Exxon is the most successful and profitable of the “Baby Standards” that arose in the aftermath of 1911’s Supreme Court-mandated breakup of Rockefeller’s Standard Oil.)

Private Empire could easily have been a very different book than it is. Coll could have gone the Michael Moore route, marshaling his reams of interview transcripts and WikiLeaks finds into a bilious, scorched-earth indictment. Raymond, with his brusque manner, back-channel access to Dick Cheney, and villainous mien—picture John Sununu with jug ears and an even flappier goiter—is an almost irresistible target. Yet Coll, a staff writer for the New Yorker and the president of the center-left New America Foundation think tank, goes about his business with restraint. Private Empire is a book meticulously prepared as if for trial, a lawyerly accumulation of information that lets the facts speak for themselves. To anyone who, unlike Raymond, believes in global warming, the goal of U.S. energy independence, and not partnering with regimes with spotty human-rights records, these facts will paint a damning portrait. But just as easily, a fan of Ayn Rand might read this book as a heroic narrative, pumping his fist and shouting “Yes!” every time Raymond or his successor, Rex Tillerson, shuts out his critics’ voices and redoubles his efforts to drill for crude, glorious crude.

Private Empire opens during a rare episode of vulnerability for Exxon: the 1989 Exxon Valdez crash and oil spill, which, Coll notes, was more a result of systemic failure than the fact that the tanker’s captain, Joseph Hazelwood, was drunk. For Raymond, then serving as the company’s president under his predecessor as CEO, Lawrence Rawl, it was a never-again moment, a lesson that the company needed to tightly control every aspect of its operations.

Under Raymond, Exxon truly did become a private empire, conducting its own foreign policy, using its own metrics to report its financial performance and oil reserves, and policing employee behavior to an almost Singaporean degree (good: church, being married, golf; bad: bohemianism, gay-friendliness, extreme sports). The corporation’s guiding principals were A) that, for all the talk of alternative and renewable energy, fossil fuels shall remain the primary and most remunerative energy source for decades to come; and B) that Exxon must do whatever it takes to discover or buy new oil and natural-gas reserves to replace what the company produces annually.

Much of Private Empire’s action centers around the lengths to which ExxonMobil has gone to ensure that its reserve-replacement figures remain boffo. This is not just a matter of bragging rights, but of survival: An energy company is required to file a report each year with the Securities and Exchange Commission disclosing the extent of its reserves, so that stockholders have a fair sense of whether the company is keeping pace or, perish the thought, contracting.

The trouble is that reserve replacement grows ever trickier an endeavor to pull off, especially on the monumental scale that Exxon, by its sheer size, demands. Much of the world’s oil and gas is now in the hands of state-owned companies in countries hostile to the U.S., such as Iran and Venezuela. As such, ExxonMobil has had to look increasingly far afield, to countries it euphemistically labels “transitional” and internally acknowledges as unstable and corruption-riddled—conflict-riven developing nations such as Nigeria, Chad, and Equatorial Guinea.

Doing deals in such places is fraught with risk and the potential for entanglement in rebellions, coups, and civil wars—to say nothing of the potential for running afoul of U.S. interests and ethical codes. At one point, Coll dryly describes ExxonMobil and the U.S. government as existing essentially “in alignment but each in its sovereign sphere,” yet the reality is no laughing matter. Much space is devoted to the company’s messy dealings in the resource-rich but independence-minded Indonesian region of Aceh, where the company is said to have propped up a homicidal national army that ran roughshod over the local Acehnese population in the late nineties. (A human-rights suit by a group of villagers against ExxonMobil is still pending.)

Raymond himself appears to have been naive in his Russian dealings, hastening if not causing the downfall of the young post-Soviet petrogarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky. In 2003, Khodorkovsky was itching to cash out a minority stake in his company, Yukos. Raymond was interested but said he would buy in only if he received assurances that ExxonMobil could eventually obtain majority control of Yukos—what would have been a reserve-replacement grand slam. In September of that year, when Vladimir Putin visited New York, Raymond met with the Russian president and lobbied him one-to-one on the matter. Raymond thought the meeting went well, but Putin, Coll’s sources say, bristled at the American’s arrogance and, evidently, at Khodorkovsky’s presumptuousness in shopping around Russian resources. A few weeks later, Khodorkovsky was arrested on fishy fraud and tax-evasion charges, for which he continues to serve time.

More often than not, Private Empire is a compelling and elucidatory work, though its disciplined, very ExxonMobil-esque adherence to rigor and propriety does make for some moments of reader fatigue. (Would a light sprinkling of personality-based gossip or insouciant asides have hurt?) On the other hand, Coll’s reputation and approach are probably what made Raymond cooperate, to some degree, with the book’s preparation.

Private Empire is not without its suggestions of authorial bias. There’s a sinister cast to the way Coll frames the company’s continuing prosperity under Tillerson, whose recent triumphs include a 2011 agreement with Putin for ExxonMobil to work with Rosneft, a state-owned Russian oil company largely assembled from former Yukos assets, to drill beneath the frigid Kara Sea—where, it so happens, “oil development has become easier because of the rapid retreat of Arctic sea ice, most likely due to global warming.”

Yet the book’s general evenhandedness indicates that Coll also sees some logic in the ExxonMobil way as promulgated by Raymond and his heirs: Fossil fuels do indeed remain the immediate future of energy, and therefore the surest and swiftest way to profit; yeah, that’s the ticket. In Private Empire, as in George Lucas’s Star Wars hexalogy, the dark side is seductive, too.


View the original article here

sexta-feira, 18 de maio de 2012

Singapore Airlines' Competition Rises

Singapore Airlines (SIA) has long been known for its iconic Singapore Girls, the demurely smiling stewardesses whose beauty and in-flight pampering harken back to a day when aviation was glamorous—and profitable. That allure, made famous in ads, drew high-paying premium-class flyers to Singapore Air, which in 2006 became the airline with the highest stock market value in the world. Thanks to belt-tightening by business travelers and the rapid growth of Middle Eastern airlines intent on offering even more in-cabin luxury, Singapore Air’s passenger count has fallen 12 percent since 2008—the biggest drop among 12 major full-service Asia-Pacific carriers. Air China overtook it in 2009 to become the world’s most valuable airline by stock value. Even worse, Singapore Air, which hasn’t recorded a full-year loss since it went public more than a quarter century ago, on May 10 reported red ink for the first quarter and slowed capacity growth at its flagship unit. “The fact is that they’re hurting,” says Peter Harbison, executive chairman of CAPA Center for Aviation, a Sydney-based company that advises airlines. “There’s good cause for a fundamental review of Singapore’s strategy.”

The carrier, controlled by Singapore state-investment company Temasek Holdings, reported a loss of S$38.2 million ($31 million) in the three months ended March 31, compared with a S$171 million profit a year earlier. That followed five straight quarters of declining earnings. The company’s yields, a measure of average fares, are “under pressure” as competition forces it to keep prices low, Goh Choon Phong, Singapore Air’s chief executive officer, told reporters on May 10.

Adding to the pressure, the price of jet fuel in Singapore has risen 37 percent since April 2010. Fuel now accounts for 41 percent of Singapore Airlines’ costs vs. an average of 27 percent since 2004. A “high fuel price and weak economic environment are particularly challenging to long-haul airlines,” Goh said.

Singapore Air faces greater competition on Europe-Asia routes as Emirates Airline and Qatar Airways expand their more centrally located hubs and win premium passengers with improved front-cabin service. At the same time, regional and economy travelers are being targeted by low-fare airlines such as AirAsia (AIRA) and the Jetstar unit of Qantas Airways (QAN). “They’re being squeezed at both ends of the plane,” says Andrew Orchard, a Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) analyst in Hong Kong. “They have less growth now and a lot more competition.”

Last year Qatar was named the world’s best airline by rating group Skytrax, an award that Singapore Air received in three of the five years through 2008—and has not won since. Southeast Asian rivals Thai Airways International (THAI) and Malaysian Airline System (MAS) will this year both add Airbus A380s, Singapore Air’s flagship plane. “Clearly, the competition in some areas has got a lot better,” notes Skytrax spokesman Peter Miller, citing Qatar and Seoul-based Asiana Airlines. “We are seeing a more level playing field in product standards as many carriers seek to match Singapore.”

At Singapore’s Changi Airport, Emirates and Qatar now operate a total of 74 flights a week. Low-cost carriers including Tiger Airways Holdings, part-owned by Singapore Air, have boosted their share of Changi’s passengers to 26 percent last year, from 5.6 percent in 2005, helped by the opening of a budget terminal. Singapore Air now accounts for about a third of Changi’s passengers, down from more than half in 2008. Tourist spending in the city has jumped by half since 2008, aided by two new casinos and a 23 percent rise in passenger traffic through Changi. Many of those flyers didn’t choose Singapore Air, however.

With its front-cabin business under pressure, Singapore Air’s management is moving to increase the airline’s presence in the low-fare market. Besides its 33 percent stake in Tiger Air, Singapore Air is setting up a long-haul discount operator called Scoot. It will start budget flights from its base in Singapore to Tianjin in China, Bangkok, Sydney, and Australia’s Gold Coast this year.

Singapore Air may have little choice since business travelers, long the backbone of its profitability, are trading down. First- and business-class growth industrywide peaked in May 2010 and has lagged the overall market since October, according to the International Air Transport Association. Singapore Air’s available-seat kilometers—the standard measure of capacity—have fallen by 5.1 percent since 2008. And the number of seats occupied by paying passengers has dropped even further, sinking 7.3 percent over the period. The carrier isn’t expecting a robust turnabout anytime soon: It recently began offering some of its pilots up to two years of unpaid leave to seek work with other carriers. “The world has changed for them,” says CAPA’s Harbison. “The days of being able to rely on the Singapore Girl to pull people in are gone.”

The bottom line: Singapore Air, which faces new competition from Middle East carriers, has seen its passenger count fall by 12 percent since 2008.


View the original article here

Liz McDougall on Defending Classified Ads for Erotic Services

In the summer of 2008, a partner at our Seattle law firm asked me to work with Craigslist. I’d been focused on Internet law and cyber crime for clients like Microsoft (MSFT) and Amazon.com (AMZN), and I’d done work with victims of abuse. Craigslist was drafting new guidelines for its erotic services section. These ads may be distasteful, but services like stripping and phone sex are legal.

Craigslist had let people post these ads for free. It added a fee after pressure from the states attorneys general; payments make it easier to track predators. Then the attorneys general turned around and accused them of profiting from the exploitation of women and children. In 2010, I was sitting in our firm’s office in San Francisco when [Craigslist] Chief Executive Officer Jim Buckmaster told me they were going to shut the section down. It was heartbreaking. I knew the content would just migrate.

Around that time, Backpage.com [the Village Voice Media-owned classified ad branch] had come out swinging to defend its ads. It was aggressive. When one of their board members reached out to me in February, I flew to their headquarters in Phoenix and met with Executive Editor Michael Lacey and CEO Jim Larkin. I was impressed with their commitment. These are family men. They want to stop the exploitation of children. We monitor these ads and do everything we can to help law enforcement trace traffickers.

Craigslist and Backpage are competitors. It was clear I’d have to leave [my firm] to work with them. They gave me their word that they are not going to back down on this. I quit and took them on as my only client. I don’t enjoy the scrutiny. It’s scary, and it can be very unpleasant. As long as we fight trafficking, I can live with people demonizing us.

Has the Internet increased the incidence of prostitution and trafficking? It wouldn’t surprise me. There is a lot of public pressure to shut down the ads. I understand why people think there’s a tipping point. With Craigslist, there was a tipping point. But that’s not the culture of this company, or the personality of Jim or Michael or me.

If they shut down the adult category, I’ll leave. Backpage is best positioned to fight this. If that happens and I quit, I don’t know what I’ll do. This is all-consuming for me. — As told to Diane Brady 


View the original article here

Better Gas Mileage, Thanks to the Pentagon

U.S. automakers have until 2025 to raise the fuel economy on their cars and trucks to 54.5 miles per gallon—double the current standard—or face government fines. The industry has spent years pouring billions of dollars into research and development to comply with the mandate. Now it may get a boost from an unexpected source: the Pentagon.

Government researchers at a new $60 million laboratory are road-testing dozens of alternative fuel technologies for fighting vehicles, from converting body heat into electricity to perfecting fuel cells that transform hydrogen into power—and they plan to share them with U.S. carmakers. “The military operates in very extreme environments,” says Al Schumacher, assistant associate director of ground vehicle power and mobility at the military’s Tank Automotive Research and Development and Engineering Center. “If we can make these vehicles function” under those conditions, “we should be able to implement them in commercial applications that are cheaper and very reliable.”

The military’s researchers are aiming to improve parts that drain energy, such as radiators, air filters, and mufflers. In one experiment, workers are trying to recapture engine power that’s wasted as exhaust heat and convert it into electricity that could recharge batteries or run internal computers. After they develop a working prototype they’ll install it on a tank and test it at temperatures ranging from 160F to -60F, going “from Yuma to Antarctica in a day,” says Michael Reid, the lab’s director of vehicle testing. Experimenting on 60,000-pound war machines can yield clues about how 5,000-pound pickups would fare with the same part, he says.

The lab opened last month in Warren, Mich., just north of Detroit—on a site dubbed “The Arsenal of Democracy,” where the U.S. Army contracted with Chrysler during World War II to build tanks. After the war ended, carmakers began adapting some of the technology developed for combat vehicles. “Just about any material used in a passenger car was probably improved with military research,” says John Wolkonowicz, an independent auto analyst.

General Motors (GM) perfected its automatic transmissions for Cadillacs after installing them in M-5 light tanks built to fight the Germans. The first Jeep, built to navigate European battlefields, rolled off the Willys-Overland Motors assembly line in 1941; its pioneering four-wheel-drive system soon found its way to American driveways. And a shortage of natural rubber in World War II spawned a government project to improve the synthetic version used in virtually every car and truck today.

The Pentagon says more efficient tanks would lead to fewer fuel convoys and repairs during combat, saving money and lives while offering up technologies the auto industry can adapt for civilians. Mary Beth Stanek, GM’s director of federal environmental and energy regulatory affairs, says the company is considering working on hydrogen fuel-cell tests with the lab. “It’s a state-of-the-art facility,” says Stanek, “And with [its] proximity, we should be able to leverage these assets for the whole auto industry.”

The bottom line: In a new lab near Detroit, the military is working on fuel-efficiency technologies for tanks that it will share with U.S. carmakers.


View the original article here

Why Warren Buffett Really Likes Newspapers

When Warren Buffett announced that his company, Berkshire Hathaway, was buying 63 newspapers from Media General on May 17, he issued a soaring statement about his belief in a beaten-down industry.

“In towns and cities where there is a strong sense of community, there is no more important institution than the local paper,” Buffett said. “The many locales serviced by the newspapers we are acquiring fall firmly in this mold, and we are delighted they have found a permanent home with Berkshire Hathaway.”

Many see the deal as a rare expression of faith by an important investor in an industry that Wall Street has shunned. “It’s obvious … that this is a statement that local newspapers are going to be around for a while,” veteran newspaper industry analyst Ed Atorino of Benchmark told the Richmond Times-Dispatch, a Media General paper.

It’s true that Buffett is a newspaper fan. Berkshire Hathaway already owns the Buffalo News and a stake in the Washington Post. It also startled some observers with its purchase last December of the Omaha World-Herald, Buffett’s hometown broadsheet.

Yet it’s also important to look at the price Berkshire is paying for the Media General papers. As recently as six years ago, newspaper companies sold for more than 9 times Ebitda (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization). Bank of America Merrill Lynch’s Stephen Weiss writes today that Buffett’s company paid around 4 times Ebitda for the Media General assets.

At that low price, Berkshire Hathaway could make a nice return on its money. As the Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month, it has done surprisingly well since purchasing the debt last November of Lee Enterprises, another troubled newspaper publisher, from Goldman Sachs.

Buffett may have a soft spot for newspapers. But when it comes to investing, he’s no sentimentalist.


View the original article here