Cost Benefit – After Hours http://after-hours.org/ Mon, 21 Nov 2022 11:39:07 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.9.3 https://after-hours.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/icon-1-150x150.png Cost Benefit – After Hours http://after-hours.org/ 32 32 When it comes to greener buildings, Ysael Desage has a plan https://after-hours.org/when-it-comes-to-greener-buildings-ysael-desage-has-a-plan/ Mon, 21 Nov 2022 11:10:07 +0000 https://after-hours.org/when-it-comes-to-greener-buildings-ysael-desage-has-a-plan/ These pieces in their own words are told to Patricia Lane and co-edited with input from the interviewee for the sake of brevity. Ysael Desage teaches buildings to be team players in saving energy. The 26-year-old Montreal-based doctoral student at McGill University works at BrainBox AI, which uses artificial intelligence to help buildings use energy […]]]>

These pieces in their own words are told to Patricia Lane and co-edited with input from the interviewee for the sake of brevity.

Ysael Desage teaches buildings to be team players in saving energy.

The 26-year-old Montreal-based doctoral student at McGill University works at BrainBox AI, which uses artificial intelligence to help buildings use energy efficiently. Desage’s research enables groups of buildings to flatten collective peak demand, optimize the use of renewable energy and reduce overall demand, increasing opportunities for cost savings and energy reduction. use of fossil fuels.

Ysael and his grandmother Françoise on obtaining his master’s degree. Photo courtesy of André St-Amand

Tell us about your project.

Buildings account for 30% of global fossil fuel consumption. BrainBox AI installs a box the size of a shoebox in each building to analyze when cooling, heating, ventilation, gas and electricity are used and how the building itself reacts to temperature changes, precipitation and wind. Cloud-based artificial intelligence then taps into external data sources, such as weather forecasts and utility costs, and “teaches” building energy management systems how to maintain or improve human comfort. while optimizing energy consumption. This means that each building draws less from the grid during peak periods, often reducing fossil fuel consumption. The technology also increases the proportionate use of renewable energy and reduces costs by reducing overall demand.

Since our launch in 2019, we have applied our technology to over 100 million square feet of retail space in 70 cities around the world, often with multiple locations. For example, Sleep Country Canada has our “brain boxes” in each of its 214 stores. A California-based pharmaceutical company is working with us to reduce its carbon footprint and achieve other sustainability goals at its Los Angeles campus. While every building is different, we are often able to facilitate cost savings of 25% and carbon emission reductions of up to 40%.

My work takes this to the next level by linking the AI ​​agents in each individual building and connecting them together so that multiple buildings can cooperate. For example, if one building is in the shade while another is in the sun, linking their energy systems can reduce the demand for both buildings. If users in one building stop working 10 minutes earlier than in another, the resulting differences in their energy needs can benefit both. I am also working to enable the grid to benefit from aggregated unused battery capacity in electric vehicles and other sites.

Ysael and his colleague Nicolas approach the icebreaker CCGS Amundsen. Photo courtesy of Amélie Bentler

How did you get into this job?

The 26-year-old Montreal-based doctoral student at McGill University works at BrainBox AI, which uses artificial intelligence to help buildings use energy efficiently. #YouthClimateAction

I studied physics as an undergraduate and computer science seemed to fit naturally into my abilities. I am actively involved with the Canadian Coast Guard and I take great satisfaction in knowing that I am helping people. When a professor in my master’s program told me about BrainBox AI, it seemed like a great way to support people in the energy transition while using my skills and giving me research opportunities.

Tell us about your journey.

I was raised by my grandparents who took me with them as they brought humanitarian aid to places like Rwanda, Mali, Mexico and Madagascar. One of my earliest memories is of being shocked to realize that the only sources of water for many poor people are contaminated and muddy. I returned to Quebec for my last year of high school. As a child, I learned to deal well with being out of my comfort zone and to adapt. I was also taught to see the changes in the environment around us caused by climate change and to respect the world more than human. There was no doubt that I would earn my living trying to make the world a better place.

Ysael and his colleague Nicolas during the Free Electron challenge in Chicago. Photo courtesy of Filipe Cordeiro

What makes your job difficult?

This has never been done before.

What worries you?

The world has gone through energy transitions before, but never with the passage of time like now. We need to scale, go faster and we need to do it right as well. The responsibility can seem overwhelming.

What gives you hope?

Private and public investors and governments seem eager and ready to support the transition. Investors are often risk averse, but in my work, as we innovate, we rely on proven technology.

Ysael and his colleagues from BrainBox AI walking in Montreal for Earth Day. Photo courtesy of Sam Ramadori

What do you see if we succeed?

We will deliver on our commitment to reach net zero by 2050.

What advice would you give to other young people?

Be bold. Your dreams may come true faster than you think, but it will only happen if you dare to tell others about them.

What would you like to say to older readers?

Trust the young people around you to teach you about technology. We cannot reach net zero by 2050 without it.

]]>
FTC Issues New Policy Statement on Enforcement of “Unfair Competition Methods” Under Section 5 of the FTC Act | Foley & Lardner LLP https://after-hours.org/ftc-issues-new-policy-statement-on-enforcement-of-unfair-competition-methods-under-section-5-of-the-ftc-act-foley-lardner-llp/ Fri, 18 Nov 2022 23:23:36 +0000 https://after-hours.org/ftc-issues-new-policy-statement-on-enforcement-of-unfair-competition-methods-under-section-5-of-the-ftc-act-foley-lardner-llp/ As part of the Biden administration’s ongoing efforts to reinvigorate antitrust enforcement and the promotion of competition, on November 10, 2022, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a new “Policy Statement Regarding the Scope of unfair methods of competition under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act” (the Policy Statement). The policy statement significantly […]]]>

As part of the Biden administration’s ongoing efforts to reinvigorate antitrust enforcement and the promotion of competition, on November 10, 2022, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a new “Policy Statement Regarding the Scope of unfair methods of competition under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act” (the Policy Statement). The policy statement significantly expands the scope of what the FTC considers “methods of unfair competition” prohibited under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 USC § 45 (Section 5). In particular, the policy statement considers Section 5 to affect methods of competition that are unfair and restrictive, even if the conduct does not otherwise violate Sherman or Clayton laws (together, the antitrust laws) and even if the conduct does not actually harm competition or harm consumers.

Background

Adopted in 1914, Section 5 prohibits, among other things, “unfair methods of competition”. For more than a century, the FTC has applied this broadly worded law on a case-by-case basis, without any policy statement on the meaning of the term “unfair methods of competition.” That changed in 2015, when a bipartisan panel of commissioners adopted a simple one-page policy statement (the Advance Statement) to guide the FTC’s enforcement of its “unfair competitive practices” powers in under Section 5. First, the prior statement stated that the FTC would be “guided by the public policy underlying the antitrust laws, which is the promotion of consumer welfare.” Second, the advance statement said the FTC would evaluate the conduct “within a framework similar to the rule of reason,” considering whether a particular conduct is likely to harm competition by weighing the conduct’s potential benefits against its harms. potentials. Finally, the prior statement said the FTC would be “less likely” to challenge an act or practice under Section 5 on a “stand-alone” basis if the act or practice could be sufficiently challenged under antitrust laws. .

One of the first policy actions taken by the FTC under Chairman Lina Kahn was to rescind the Advance Statement, in July 2021. Chairman Khan wrote at the time that the Advance Statement had “repealed[d] the obligation imposed by Congress on the Commission to use its expertise to identify and combat methods of unfair competition even if they do not violate a separate antitrust law. Chairman Khan added that the FTC would “consider whether to issue new guidance or propose rules that will further clarify the types of practices that warrant scrutiny” under Section 5. November 10, 2022 seems to be the culmination of this latest effort. .

The policy statement

The policy statement describes “key principles of general application” that the FTC will use in the future to assess whether a behavior is an actionable “method of unfair competition.”

Competition methods

The policy statement defines a method of competition as “conduct undertaken by a participant in the market — as opposed to a mere condition of the market, not on the part of the respondent, such as high concentration or barriers to ‘hall “. The behavior must involve competition in some way, but the relationship can be direct or indirect. For example, the Policy Statement explains that the misuse of regulatory processes to create barriers to competition (which may relate to licensing, patents or standard setting) can be a method of competition. On the other hand, general legal violations, such as violations of environmental or tax laws that simply give a company a cost advantage over its competitors, are unlikely to be considered a method of competition in under section 5.

Injustice

The policy statement defines “unfair” as conduct that “goes beyond competition based on the merits”. Competing on the merits may include, for example, having “superior products or services, superior business acumen, truthful marketing and advertising practices, investments in research and development that lead to innovative results, or attract employees through better employment conditions”.

To assess whether a conduct goes beyond competition on its merits, the policy statement outlines two key elements. First, a behavior can be qualified as “unfair” if it is “coercive, exploitative, collusive, abusive, deceptive, predatory”, “involves[s] the use of economic power of a similar nature”, or is “otherwise restrictive or exclusive”. Second, the behavior “must tend to adversely affect the conditions of competition”. Examples include conduct that “tends to deny or obstruct opportunities for market participants, reduce competition among rivals, limit choice, or harm consumers.”

Under the policy statement, the FTC will assess both of these on a sliding scale. If the FTC considers the conduct to be clearly unfair, then the tendency to adversely affect the conditions of competition may be weaker or incipient, but the conduct may still warrant application of Section 5. Similarly, even if the indicia of unfairness are unclear, a strong demonstration of adverse effects on the conditions of competition may be sufficient to justify the application of Article 5.

The policy statement also states that behavior that is not “facially unfair” may still violate Section 5. In these cases, the FTC may consider the size and market power of the party and the purpose of the behavior as more relevant to the FTC’s assessment as whether the behavior tends to adversely affect the conditions of competition.

The policy statement also advises that because Section 5 focuses on “incipient” threats to the conditions of competition, actual harm may not always be necessary to justify enforcement. This means that the FTC can challenge conduct that has not yet caused actual harm. According to the policy statement, the FTC may focus on whether the behavior tends to generate negative consequences such as price increases, production or quality reductions, innovation reductions, or reduced the likelihood of competition. The policy statement is explicit that “the investigation will not focus on ‘rule of reason’ investigations more common in Sherman Act cases, but will instead focus on stopping the methods of unfair competition at their inception because of their tendency to harm the conditions of competition.”

Finally, the policy statement recognizes that the affirmative defenses At first glance Violations of Article 5 may exist, but express skepticism as to their applicability. The policy statement outright rejects any attempt to defend allegedly unfair conduct based on traditional “cost-benefit analysis” that focuses only on quantifiable measures. Regardless, the policy statement indicates that the onus is on the respondent to establish that any affirmative defense is legally recognizable, non-pretext, narrowly tailored, and that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, both quantitatively and qualitatively.

Examples of Unfair Competition Methods

The policy statement includes 20 non-exhaustive categories of conduct that the FTC may consider a “method of unfair competition” under Section 5. Without repeating the list in its entirety, a few illustrative examples of conduct that the FTC considers “nascent violations” or violate the “spirit” of antitrust laws are:

  • Invitations to agree;
  • Practices facilitating tacit coordination;
  • A series of mergers, acquisitions, or joint ventures that, while not on their own meeting the Clayton Act’s “substantially lessening competition” standard, have an overall unfair effect;
  • Loyalty discounts, tying, bundling, or exclusivity agreements that tend to escalate into violations of Sherman and Clayton laws due to industry conditions or a company’s position within the industry; and
  • Nested directions not covered by the literal language of Clayton’s Law.

Dissent

FTC Commissioner Christine Wilson voted against the policy statement. In doing so, she posted a lengthy dissent claiming that the policy statement allows the FTC to summarily condemn “any business conduct it finds objectionable” and calls the new normal that of “I know it when I see it.” According to his dissent, the use of adjectives like “coercive”, “exploitative” and “restrictive” are subject to subjective interpretation and lack “established antitrust or economic meaning”. His dissent also argues that by eschewing the consumer welfare standard for a more open-ended approach that takes into account interests such as those of labor and “inefficient competitors”, the application of Article 5 can go to runs counter to the principle that antitrust laws favor “competition, not competitors” and can become “subject to the whims and political agendas of sitting commissioners”.

Key points to remember

The policy statement is a deliberate decision to expand the FTC’s enforcement authority to bring a wider range of conduct into the FTC’s sights. Ultimately, the courts will decide whether the policy statement reflects a proper interpretation of the FTC’s authority under Section 5. At this point, however, companies must assess their conduct through the prism advocated by the FTC in the policy statement. Among other things, companies can consider some of the following steps:

  • Review and develop antitrust training for employees to ensure that the training educates employees on the risks in this area;
  • Perform compliance reviews or audits of high-risk areas of the business for potentially anti-competitive or “unfair” conduct; and
  • Confirm that all applicable standards bodies have rules that protect against fraudulent or unfair participant behavior.

Above all, companies should heed the FTC’s guidance that Section 5 does not prohibit good faith competition on the merits. Therefore, companies must strive to be competitive through “superior products or services, superior business acumen, truthful marketing and advertising practices, investments in research and development that lead to innovative results or by attracting employees through better employment conditions”.

[View source.]

]]>
This Stock Crushes the Market in 2022 (and Has More Room to Maneuver) https://after-hours.org/this-stock-crushes-the-market-in-2022-and-has-more-room-to-maneuver/ Tue, 15 Nov 2022 12:15:00 +0000 https://after-hours.org/this-stock-crushes-the-market-in-2022-and-has-more-room-to-maneuver/ Shares in an agroscience company Corteva (VAT 3.03%) are up 42% since the start of the year, compared to a decline of 16% S&P500 index. This decision demonstrates the advantage of investing in an economically uncorrelated sector such as agriculture. It also reflects the company’s ability to establish sales of its new products as it […]]]>

Shares in an agroscience company Corteva (VAT 3.03%) are up 42% since the start of the year, compared to a decline of 16% S&P500 index. This decision demonstrates the advantage of investing in an economically uncorrelated sector such as agriculture. It also reflects the company’s ability to establish sales of its new products as it moves towards significantly increasing its profit margin by 2025. All of this helps make Corteva a compelling investment option in a tough stock market.

Corteva Overview

The seed and crop protection company was formed as a result of the Dow-DuPont merger in 2017 and spun off as a standalone business in 2019. For reference, it generates the bulk of its seed revenue from the corn and, to a lesser extent, soybeans, with other oilseeds also contributing. Its crop protection products are primarily herbicides, with significant contributions from insecticides and fungicides.

Seed and crop protection are complementary products, primarily when sold as part of a seed herbicide resistance system that Corteva may also market. More on that in a moment.

The Investment Case for Corteva Stock

Key to the investment case for the stock is management’s plan to increase earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) margin to between 21% and 23% by 2025. Management presented the plan when presented at Investor Day in mid-2025. September while forecasting an EBITDA margin of 17.4% for 2022.

Since then, Corteva has released a strong set of third-quarter results, giving management reason to maintain its full-year revenue guidance of $17.2 billion to $17.5 billion, while increasing its EBITDA projection between $3 billion and $3.1 billion, down from a previous estimate of $2.95 billion to $3.1 billion. A few simple calculations imply an EBITDA margin of 17.1% to 18% – the midpoint of which (17.55%) is slightly above the 17.4% estimate from the Investor Day presentation.

How Corteva plans to increase its margin

The outlook update gives investors more confidence in management’s ability to meet its 2025 targets. However, the details and color surrounding the company’s operating performance are even more critical. The plan has five key elements, and recent results show the company is making progress on all of them.

  • Management plans to simplify its portfolio and focus on its core markets.
  • Reduce net royalties ($250 million through 2025) paid to other companies by increasing sales of products using its technology, such as soybeans and the herbicide Enlist.
  • Increase profit margin by selling higher margin differentiated products.
  • Reduce selling, general and administrative (SG&A) costs by $400 million by 2023 by improving operations.
  • Invest in growth through research and development.

In addition to the plan to exit 35 countries and reduce the workforce by 5%, announced in September, management announced further changes. These include the cessation of US production of sunflower seeds for the European market with the withdrawal of the company from Russia and the reduction of production of other products in the United States.

Enlist soybean sales continue to increase (Enlist herbicide sales doubled in Q3 compared to Q3 2021), and management expects Enlist to enter approximately 50% market share soybean growth, up from at least 45% in 2022 and approaching management’s medium-term goal of 60%.

As such, CEO Chuck Magro expects Corteva to cut its royalty payments by $100 million in 2023. The company is on track to hit the $250 million goal by 2025. .

As for cost reductions, Corteva has realized $175 million in productivity savings so far in 2022, helping to offset a whopping $850 million in cost headwinds from increased inflation of raw materials and logistics.

A stock to buy?

All in all, as Corteva faces continued headwinds through 2023, its combination of cost savings, royalty payment costs, productivity initiatives and growing new product sales means its profit margin increase. Given continued positive momentum, Corteva looks likely to meet its targets, making the stock attractive to investors.

Lee Samaha has no position in the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

]]>
African researchers push for human challenge trial to fight TB https://after-hours.org/african-researchers-push-for-human-challenge-trial-to-fight-tb/ Sat, 12 Nov 2022 23:00:00 +0000 https://after-hours.org/african-researchers-push-for-human-challenge-trial-to-fight-tb/ Researchers and nonprofit supporters in Malawi have launched an effort to begin human challenge trials for TB, to accelerate the development of a promising TB vaccine. While TB is easily treated in high-income countries, the disease kills globally – more than 1.6 million people died of TB in 2021 and drug-resistant cases are on the […]]]>

Researchers and nonprofit supporters in Malawi have launched an effort to begin human challenge trials for TB, to accelerate the development of a promising TB vaccine.

While TB is easily treated in high-income countries, the disease kills globally – more than 1.6 million people died of TB in 2021 and drug-resistant cases are on the rise. An effective and long-lasting vaccine could save millions of lives in places where proper treatment cannot be obtained.

The push to accelerate vaccine development comes from the Malawi-Liverpool Wellcome Trust’s Clinical Research Program (MLW), Vox’s Kelsey Piper reported, and it still faces considerable headwinds, including numerous ethical reviews and d other levels of institutional approval.

While TB is easily treated in high-income countries, the disease kills globally – more than 1.6 million people died of TB in 2021 and drug-resistant cases are on the rise.

A challenge to save lives: A human challenge trial (HCT) is a type of clinical trial in which volunteers are deliberately infected – “challenge” – with a pathogen.

The idea is that rather than spending huge sums of money, recruiting tens of thousands of people, and waiting years for infections to occur naturally, like in a traditional phase 3 trial, you could immediately see if your new TB vaccine works, with only dozens or hundreds of volunteers.

HCTs have the potential to cut months or years off the search for vaccines and drugs, which could mean thousands of lives saved. They also carry an inherent risk, as infected volunteers are at risk of serious illness or even death.

The key is to balance these two competing concerns through well-designed assays: using the minimum amount of pathogen needed; only accept young and healthy volunteers; and having medical interventions ready to cure patients who fall ill.

Most important, however, is that volunteers understand the risks and benefits and give informed consent.

Knock down TB: For researchers and advocacy nonprofit HCT 1Day Sooner, this approach could be a particularly powerful tool for developing a better TB vaccine.

It’s a position that has been backed by experts in biotechnology and the University of Oxford, Vox’s Piper reported. The Oxford researchers actually have experience managing multiple HCTs for diseases like malaria and COVID-19.

Although relegated to Victorian fiction in the developed world, the disease burden of tuberculosis is high. According to the WHO, 1.6 million people died of tuberculosis in 2021, making it the second deadliest infectious disease in the world, behind COVID-19 – despite the existence of treatments and a vaccine against tuberculosis available.

According to WHO, a handful of countries in Asia and Africa have a particularly high TB ​​burden: 87% of all cases occurred in Bangladesh, China, DRC, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, the Philippines and Pakistan.

Although there is a widely administered tuberculosis vaccine, it is only about 60% effective in preventing active infections, Piper noted, and although antibiotics do work, there are strains of bacteria that develop drug resistance.

Researchers and nonprofit supporters in Malawi have launched an effort to begin human challenge trials for TB, to accelerate the development of a promising TB vaccine.

The bottom line: With millions still dying from the disease, there is enormous potential to improve our defenses, and researchers and advocates say the speed and cost-effective benefits of HCTs make it a prime candidate to do so.

“Alternatives to a human challenge trial are very, very expensive,” 1DaySooner President Josh Morrison told Piper.

Because TB is primarily a threat in developing countries, the incentive for US and European pharmaceutical companies to conduct large-scale trials for promising new TB vaccine candidates is weak. It will therefore be largely up to non-profit organizations and developing countries themselves to take this issue forward.

According to 1Day Africa Director Zacharia Kafuko, community volunteers are genuinely ready and willing to be infected with TB to protect others – a view that has been reinforced by a study MLW carried out on participants in the sequel to a previous HCT.

“They’re actually wondering why it’s taking so long, why it has to be approved by researchers in the UK,” Kafuko told Piper. “They believe that this research should be pioneering in Africa. The people who should benefit from vaccines are here.

We would love to hear from you! If you have a comment about this article or have a tip for a future Freethink story, please email us at [email protected]

]]>
Biden’s climate rules move forward pending final carbon measurement https://after-hours.org/bidens-climate-rules-move-forward-pending-final-carbon-measurement/ Thu, 10 Nov 2022 11:37:12 +0000 https://after-hours.org/bidens-climate-rules-move-forward-pending-final-carbon-measurement/ The Biden administration is moving forward with federal regulations using a temporary figure to account for the costs of climate change, as a delay in finalizing a permanent estimate sparks frustration among industry and advocates. The use of estimates to measure the overall costs imposed by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases was pioneered by […]]]>

The Biden administration is moving forward with federal regulations using a temporary figure to account for the costs of climate change, as a delay in finalizing a permanent estimate sparks frustration among industry and advocates.

The use of estimates to measure the overall costs imposed by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases was pioneered by the Obama administration and revived by President Joe Biden, who set a tentative $51 dollars per ton while the administration finalizes a new metric.

The carbon cost figure is being touted as a way to better account for the benefits of regulations that reduce emissions, including renewable fuels, methane and tailpipe regulations, as well as efficiency standards for appliances such as microwave ovens, clothes dryers and household ovens.

But without a permanent number, what was originally intended as a temporary fix is ​​increasingly being used to guide an array of energy, air pollution and other regulations the administration pushes through the pipeline. Industry groups say the result is too much business uncertainty. Environmental groups say the temporary figure reduces climate costs and blocks more aggressive action.

The Biden administration planned to roll out a final metric in January 2022. And while an interagency task force has been working on the final estimates since the release of interim numbers in February 2021, the White House said this week it could not still not say when the carbon cost would be finalized.

“This administration remains committed to accounting for the costs of greenhouse gas emissions as accurately as possible, and we continue to evaluate how best to account for these costs in regulatory and fiscal contexts going forward,” a statement said. spokesperson for the White House Office of Management and Budget. said.

“A lot of uncertainties”

Industry groups say the White House panel tasked with coming up with the final estimates has become a “black hole” – a worrying lack of transparency as potentially costly regulations move forward.

“Especially in times of tight labor markets, high energy prices and a lot of uncertainty, it is useful when companies plan their activities in the future to know what regulations are coming and what will be. their compliance obligations,” Chad said. Whiteman, U.S. Chamber of Commerce vice president for environmental and regulatory affairs.

“There’s a lot of uncertainty here, not just about the final numbers, but how agencies can apply them in decision-making,” he said.

The metric estimates the societal costs for each tonne of global warming greenhouse gases emitted, avoiding impacts such as loss of agricultural productivity, property damage from severe storms and reduced water availability gentle.

The White House also used the estimate to tout the benefits of the new climate law (Public Law 117-169). The OMB used the metric to calculate that the act’s cumulative climate-related benefits would amount to $1.9 trillion through 2050.

Yet climate advocates argue that the $51 per ton placeholder low-balls climate costs and hamstrings agencies to pursue more ambitious regulations to tackle the climate crisis.

Work towards a final figure is taking place amid an intense legal backdrop, with courts weighing this year, but so far not stalling, industry-backed attempts to kill use of the provisional estimate .

On October 21, a federal judge in Missouri dismissed the latest major legal challenge against the use of the preliminary estimate, ruling that harm could not be established since there was no definitive figure. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a similar challenge to the metric led by Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry earlier this year.

Cancel a GOP priority

The legal challenge to the metric, if successful, could open the door to challenging regulations that have used the estimates and possibly force the Biden administration to reconsider major pending climate actions.

These actions include the 2023 model year vehicle efficiency standards, where the interim carbon cost estimate was part of the rule’s broader cost-benefit analysis. Republican-led states have target the use of the metric in litigation against exhaust emission standards.

The provisional figure was also used in the stricter vehicle fuel economy standards released in April. The Department of Transportation cited a range of benefits, ranging from about $73 billion to $112 billion by 2050. The Environmental Protection Agency’s renewable fuels mandate touted benefits between $3 billion and $51 billion using the metric in its July revision, and the Department of Energy revised. the consumer furnace standard totaled $16.2 billion in climate benefits using the provisional figure.

Leading Congressional Republicans have pressed the administration to disclose where it used the provisional number, including whether the EPA used the metric to review draft environmental impact statements prepared by sister agencies to ensure that energy and other projects requiring federal approval have fully considered environmental impacts.

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (RW.Va.) and Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) — top Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works and House Energy and Commerce Committees, respectively – in a March letter asking EPA Administrator Michael Regan to fully disclose “all assessments, reviews, regulatory activities, briefing materials and litigation” where the provisional figure was used.

Both lawmakers could be poised to take up the hammers of their committees in the next Congress, though control of the House and Senate are still in the balance after Tuesday’s midterm elections.

Capito has repeatedly targeted measuring the cost of carbon, including in legislation (S. 4596) it introduced in July with Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) which has nearly a dozen co-sponsors. of the GOP. The bill is designed to prohibit the use of metrics in the rule-making process. Capito, in a November 4 statement, said it would use “every tool available” to reduce the social cost of the carbon effort.

“Repeatedly, I have directly asked the Biden administration for information on the development and use of its erroneous social cost of carbon, and these requests have been consistently ignored. This is unacceptable,” she said.

Moving Metrics

The impact of the measure on the final regulation can be difficult to decipher since it is only one of the many advantages linked to a regulation which can be weighed against the economic costs that a regulation would impose.

It’s “not at all clear that there’s a direct line between the social cost of carbon and the level at which a standard is ultimately set,” said Amy Sinden, a professor at Temple University’s Beasley School of Law. .

Any final carbon cost figure above the interim estimate is likely to further anger industry groups and spark resistance from Republican opponents.

But the delay also likely stems from the challenge of defining calculations that are a complex mix of scientific and economic modeling, which the White House knows must withstand scrutiny and likely legal challenge, said partner Hunter Johnston. at Steptoe & Johnson LLP.

“These things have to be done with care or they’re easily reversible,” Johnston said. “You have to go through a very disciplined process because you want it to be scientifically and economically justified.”

Those who support estimates of the social cost of carbon note that its dates of use date back to the Obama administration and that even the Trump administration has used the metric, although it has reduced the estimate to as low as $1. the ton. It is “clear” that the cost of carbon emissions is not zero, according to Dan Farber, a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.

“If you leave it out of the cost-benefit analysis, you skew the analysis, just like you ignore any other cost or benefit of the action,” Farber said. “Several agencies have been toppled for ignoring the climate impacts of their work, and CSC is the easiest way to incorporate that.”

Too weak?

But others argue that Biden’s tentative number significantly inhibits agencies from setting regulations by underestimating the costs imposed on society by carbon emissions.

Resources for the Future concluded in September after a multi-year study that the cost of $51 per tonne should be more than three and a half times higher at $185 per tonne – drawing on recent scientific and economic literature showing that earlier estimates greatly underestimate the damage from each additional ton of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere.

That agencies’ continued use of the $51 per tonne figure is driving up regulatory costs is in the eye of the beholder.

Some note that the bulk of the major ongoing climate rules have yet to be proposed, including plans to revise carbon limits for power plants in the wake of the West Virginia vs. EPA decision.

And the regulations that have advanced so far have been “relatively minor,” according to Brian Perst, director of RFF’s Social Cost of Carbon Initiative.

“Maybe they’re seen as big impacts on the relevant industries, and so they’re going to raise a ruckus about it,” said Prest, who noted that only the revised tailpipe emission standards would be considered significant regulation.

]]>
US scrambles to keep up with US weapons in heat of war in Ukraine https://after-hours.org/us-scrambles-to-keep-up-with-us-weapons-in-heat-of-war-in-ukraine/ Tue, 01 Nov 2022 16:28:10 +0000 https://after-hours.org/us-scrambles-to-keep-up-with-us-weapons-in-heat-of-war-in-ukraine/ Comment this story Comment US monitors have conducted in-person inspections for only about 10% of the 22,000 US-supplied weapons sent to Ukraine that require special oversight. US officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to provide details not previously made public, said they were rushing to deploy new means of tracking weapons deemed to pose […]]]>

Comment

US monitors have conducted in-person inspections for only about 10% of the 22,000 US-supplied weapons sent to Ukraine that require special oversight.

US officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to provide details not previously made public, said they were rushing to deploy new means of tracking weapons deemed to pose an increased risk of diversion, including Stinger surface-to-air missiles and Javelin anti-tank missiles, amid what they describe as Ukraine’s “super hot conflict”.

They hope to achieve a “reasonable” level of compliance with US surveillance rules for these high-risk items, but also acknowledge that they are unlikely to achieve 100% of normal checks and inventories, as escalating the country’s war with Russia strains systems to ensure that weapons are neither stolen nor misused.

Since the invasion in late February, which closed the US Embassy in Kyiv for several months, US officials have only been able to conduct two in-person inspections of items requiring heightened surveillance at the arms depots where American weapons had been placed from Poland.

“The conflict creates an imperfect condition for us to adapt quickly,” said a senior State Department official. “We want to use some of these resources to work with our allies and partners to mitigate risk, wherever we can.”

The scramble to adapt oversight rules designed for peacetime has taken on greater significance as US aid volumes reach dizzying levels and congressional scrutiny intensifies.

US and Ukrainian officials say they have not documented any cases of illicit use or transfer of US weapons to Ukraine since Russian President Vladimir Putin launched his invasion on February 24. But other weapons have disappeared; a Swedish grenade launcher, apparently stolen from the battlefield in Ukraine, exploded in the trunk of a car in Russia in May.

Arms trade experts warn that the administration and its allies must remain on guard despite broad Western support for Kyiv’s efforts to deal with Putin’s invasion and the heavy-handed tactics his forces have used against cities and towns. Ukrainian civilians.

Rachel Stohl, vice president of research programs at the Washington-based Stimson Center, said officials also needed to develop longer-term plans to secure surplus US weapons once the conflict with Russia ends, noting Ukraine’s history as a theater of small arms. smuggling after the Cold War.

She said the demands for extensive monitoring may seem at odds with the United States’ desire to help at a moment of existential importance in Ukraine. But, she added, “We have to make sure we don’t let the pace and the urgency trump our long-term interests.”

The challenges in Ukraine echo broader concerns about how weapons produced in the United States, the world’s largest arms seller, are used around the world. Proponents have long complained that despite systems designed to prevent their misuse, foreign partners have sometimes used these weapons against civilians in places like Yemen. Sophisticated equipment has also fallen into the hands of adversaries, allowing the Islamic State to field Abrams tanks and the Taliban to fly Blackhawk helicopters.

The Biden administration is trying to highlight a new surge of surveillance to account for any potential leaks from the massive flow of US weapons – especially as congressional Republicans express growing concerns about aid accountability and the overall volume of aid to Ukraine.

Passing massive aid packages could become more difficult after next week’s midterm elections.

Last week, the administration unveiled a plan to prevent the diversion of weapons to Eastern Europe. With nearly $18 billion in US military aid provided since February alone, the Biden administration’s lifesaving aid to Ukraine is the largest of its kind since the end of the Cold War.

National Security Council spokeswoman Adrienne Watson said Kyiv had been a “willing and capable” partner in arms accountability.

“While we recognize the unpredictability of the fighting, the United States and Ukraine have cooperated to prevent the diversion of illicit weapons since the new Russian invasion began earlier this year,” she said.

U.S. officials say Ukraine is working hard to demonstrate compliance with arms accountability requirements of the United States and other countries, in part because local officials know that any proven cases of hijacking could weaken the strong Western support which is vital to their fight.

Most of the equipment supplied to Ukraine to date is subject to only minimal tracking requirements under the US arms monitoring system, known as “end-use monitoring”. For items such as small arms ammunition or personal protective equipment, considered to pose a lower proliferation risk, an American military officer in eastern Poland is given the sole task of overseeing the transfer of control of this equipment from the United States into Ukrainian hands, including a process in which officials from both countries inventory items.

As happens in any other transfer of US military equipment, Ukraine must agree not to transfer the weapons to other countries without US authorization. But there is little routine monitoring thereafter, officials said.

More sophisticated or sensitive equipment requires a series of additional checks, including an annual inspection, carried out – under normal conditions – by a US officer to ensure that the weapons are stored safely and that the serial numbers match. These items also include Switchblade drones and night vision devices. These devices account for approximately half of the items subject to additional tracking.

Larger weapon systems, like the HIMARS multiple launch rockets and the M777 howitzer, do not require enhanced surveillance.

Officials acknowledged that when the war broke out, they had no plan to follow up arms in a conventional conflict like the fighting in Ukraine. American personnel are unable to venture into the vast swaths of the country occupied by Russian forces or plagued by active fighting.

To compensate for these limitations, officials are relying on technology first adopted during the coronavirus pandemic, using scanners that would allow Ukrainian personnel to inventory serial numbers without U.S. personnel present. Inventory information – which is captured without geotagging the items, for operational security reasons – is then uploaded and provided to US authorities. US personnel began training Ukrainian peers in Poland on the new scanner technology.

Officials are working to deploy the workaround before the first anniversary of the war in February, after which dozens of weapons may no longer be compliant. The challenges are compounded by the size of the growing, but still small, security cooperation team.

US officials are also trying to account for the weapons used by Ukrainian forces, by scanning spent weapons cartridges and obtaining expense reports from the Ukrainian military. Ukraine has also provided “a handful” of reports of loss when equipment, mostly night vision equipment, is broken, they said. Although casualty and expense reports are still received in paper form, officials hope that this too will soon be automated, making it easier to get a real-time picture of how US weapons are being used against Russia.

A 2020 report by the Pentagon’s inspector general found that defense officials had complied with monitoring requirements for javelins and their launchers supplied to Ukraine, but had not done so fully for the devices. of night vision. He cited the failure of the Ukrainian military to consistently report the loss or theft of such items and found that serial numbers sometimes fell off or became illegible, preventing proper inventories.

In Kyiv, officials say the nature of the fight — in which Russian forces regularly strike Ukrainian towns and torture Ukrainian civilians — makes the diversion of weapons unthinkable. Oleksander Zavytnevych, who heads Ukraine’s parliament’s defense and national security committee, said members of a parliamentary committee set up this year to carry out arms checks have visited arms depots and examined rumors of hijacking or theft, but found no “real signal” of illicit activity. .

US officials say the Ukrainian military is now trying to update its own digital tracking system for donated weapons, as the military does for maintenance and logistics.

The Biden administration has begun notifying other countries that supply Ukraine about the U.S. surveillance process in Ukraine. So far, although there are new mechanisms to loosely coordinate arms donations, there is no centralized international tracking system.

U.S. officials acknowledge they are unlikely to be satisfied with the overall results of their evolving surveillance approach — through which they hope to gain “greater than zero” assurances for U.S. taxpayers — but say it shouldn’t. be seen as a reason to curb American support.

“It is our moral and ethical responsibility to help members of the Ukrainian government, and the consequences of not doing so are far worse,” the State Department official said. “So in terms of cost-benefit, it seems very clear.”

Serghiy Morgunov in Kyiv and Dan Lamothe and Alex Horton in Washington contributed to this report.

]]>
Maruti Suzuki stock rises 46% from its lowest level in 1 year thanks to a strong second quarter. Should I buy? https://after-hours.org/maruti-suzuki-stock-rises-46-from-its-lowest-level-in-1-year-thanks-to-a-strong-second-quarter-should-i-buy/ Sat, 29 Oct 2022 14:51:03 +0000 https://after-hours.org/maruti-suzuki-stock-rises-46-from-its-lowest-level-in-1-year-thanks-to-a-strong-second-quarter-should-i-buy/ On Friday, Maruti made its biggest gain in 4 months on the exchanges. On BSE, stock ended at ₹9,494.10 each greater than ₹448.05 or 4.95%. On this exchange, the stock hit a new 52-week high of ₹9,548 each. The market capitalization of the company is approximately ₹2.87 lakh crore. Meanwhile, on the ESB, Maruti shares […]]]>

On Friday, Maruti made its biggest gain in 4 months on the exchanges. On BSE, stock ended at 9,494.10 each greater than 448.05 or 4.95%. On this exchange, the stock hit a new 52-week high of 9,548 each.

The market capitalization of the company is approximately 2.87 lakh crore.

Meanwhile, on the ESB, Maruti shares zoomed by 506.05 or 5.06% to finish at 9,548. Here the stock hit a 52-week high of 9,549.95.

On BSE, the stock had hit a 52-week low of 6,540 each on March 3, 2022. Since that one-year low, the stock has now risen by 3,008 or 45.99% on the trade to date (taking into account the new 1-year high).

Given BSE’s closing price on Oct. 28, shares climbed more than 2,954 or 45% from 1-year lows.

Maruti is also among the dividend king stocks. In FY22, the company paid a whopping 1,200% dividend totaling 60 per share. Currently, its dividend yield is around 0.6%.

In the second quarter of FY23, the company recorded net income of 2,061.5 crore — more than 4 times from a PAT of 475.3 crores in the same quarter last year. Revenue jumped 47.9% to 28,543.5 crores in Q2FY23 vs. 19,297.8 crores in the second quarter of the prior year.

Additionally, in Q2FY23, Maruti sold a total of 517,395 vehicles in the quarter, the highest ever in a quarter. Domestic market sales amounted to 454,200 units. Exports amounted to 63,195 units.

At the end of the September 2022 quarter, pending customer orders stood at approximately 412,000 at Maruti, of which approximately 130,000 vehicle pre-bookings are for newly launched models.

Is it worth buying Maruti shares after Q2 results?

Mitul Shah, Head of Research at Reliance Securities, said, “Maruti Suzuki delivered a strong performance in 2QFY23, with EBITDA margin of 9.3% (up 509bps y-o-y/up). of 204 bps QoQ), compared to our estimate of 9.6%. Revenue increased by 46%. YoY (up 13% QoQ) to Rs 299.3 billion, broadly in line with our estimate of Rs 298 billion Revenue growth was driven by ASP growth of 7% YoY and 2% QoQ to Rs 5,78,490 and Volume growth of 36% YoY (up 11% QoQ) to 5 17 395 units EBITDA was Rs 27.7 billion (up 224% YoY and 45% QoQ), compared to our estimate of Rs 28.7 billion due to scale of operations and lower RM prices coupled with a favorable exchange rate. Its PAT increased 334% YoY (up 104% YoY). quarterly smoothing) to reach 20.6 billion rupees, which is largely in line with our estimate of 20.4 billion rupees. »

Shah added, “We believe an improved product mix, likely ease of production, rising pricing and a stable RM environment would support MSIL’s margin expansion going forward. 3QFY23E and following.”

The Reliance Securities expert reported that the company plans to introduce more vehicles including more CNG variants into the existing product portfolio. Moreover, he expects a better response from the hybrid segment compared to electric vehicles in the next 1-2 years due to various factors. Its recent launch of the new Grand Vitara with a booking of >75K indicates strong response for new products with 35% strong hybrid is preferred in its Grand Vitara backlog.

Additionally, Maruti expects most new bookings to be geared towards the best variants, which will result in better ASPs and better margins.

The brokerage firm’s expert believes that its product portfolio would remain strong in FY23 with the number of new launches (especially in the SUV segment), refreshes and increased CNG options. This would promote its market share gain and gradual growth in the future. MSIL’s healthy CAPEX plan on capacity and network expansion would drive industry-leading penetration and volume growth.

“We expect a favorable currency impact on export realization and lower import costs (due to JPY weakness) to feed through to 3QFY23 P&L. These factors would increase its margins to double digits in 2HFY23E. We expect its EBITDA margins to grow from 9.3% currently to 11.8% in FY24E,” Shah added.

Shah further added, “We expect MSIL’s domestic volume to grow 26% in FY23E. We estimate a solid CAGR of 15% for export in FY23.” 22 to FY24E, driven by better sales from the Toyota combination. Taking into account better volume and ASP, we are revising our revenue estimates by 4% and 5% for FY23E and FY24E.”

Additionally, Shah concluded that “we believe that increased production due to ease of semiconductor supply issue, favorable currency and stable input cost would improve MSIL’s operating margins. going forward. Accordingly, we are increasing our EBITDA margin estimates by 60bps/76bps for FY23E/FY24E. Accordingly, we are increasing our EPS by 15%/11% for FY23E/FY24E. Given the strength of the basket of products, market share gain, strong yield rates and likely improved margins ahead, we reiterate our BUY rating on MSIL with the revised Target Price of Rs 11,000, valuing the stock at a revised P/E multiple of 27.5x.”

Meanwhile, in a report, ICICI Direct analysts said, “MSIL’s share price increased approximately 2.2% CAGR from 8,114 levels in October 2017, broadly in tandem with the Nifty Auto Index at this time.”

The analysts further note, “We maintain our Buy rating which tracks industry tailwinds from the domestically underpenetrated PV segment, benign RM price outlook and strong order book,” adding, “ By improving our estimates, we now rate MSIL at 11,200 i.e. 32x P/E on FY24E EPS of 350/share (previous target price 10,000).”

Disclaimer: The opinions and recommendations made above are those of individual analysts or brokerage firms, and not of Mint.

Catch all the trade news, market news, breaking events and the latest updates on Live Mint. Download the Mint News app to get daily market updates.

More less

]]>
The cure for corporate culture ills https://after-hours.org/the-cure-for-corporate-culture-ills/ Sun, 23 Oct 2022 10:06:32 +0000 https://after-hours.org/the-cure-for-corporate-culture-ills/ Good morning! Employees are drowning in a sea of ​​applications. But bailing them out is a trickier challenge than it seems. Fight software bloat 1,200. This is the number of times, on average, an office worker switches from one application to another during a working day. Equally surprising, the number of apps run by the […]]]>

Good morning! Employees are drowning in a sea of ​​applications. But bailing them out is a trickier challenge than it seems.

Fight software bloat

1,200. This is the number of times, on average, an office worker switches from one application to another during a working day. Equally surprising, the number of apps run by the average business has grown to 187, a huge jump from 77 in 2015. And some have many, many more. But despite the growth of computing over the past seven years, worker productivity has slowed at a slow pace, according to federal data, which begs the question: What’s the benefit of all this technology?

It’s no surprise that businesses are cluttered with so many potentially useless apps. For decades, IT vendors convinced businesses that whatever inefficiencies they had, they could be fixed by adopting yet another new program.

  • The rise of software as a service has only exacerbated this problem, as it has made it easier for companies to deploy new products, increasingly without going through IT gatekeepers.
  • Add to the fact that most large companies have acquired a slew of smaller companies, all with their own unique computing stacks, plus the pivot to remote working, which seems to require a whole new set of apps, and it’s easy to see how quickly the portfolio spirals out of control.

Industry experts note, behind the scenes, that most technology portfolios within companies are glued together. Not all software is snake oil. But many are unable to succeed in isolation. Instead, the real value comes when various apps work together. That’s why companies like Oracle have long touted the potential cost savings from consolidating their suites.

  • This is more of a promise than a reality, even for products purchased from the same supplier. This forces companies to enlist the costly help of consultants and even more software vendors to help put these disparate systems together.

These efforts clearly did not succeed. Users are still forced to switch between tons of different systems to get their work done. Basic tasks still require extensive human intervention. And businesses still can’t get immediate answers to basic questions like, “How many employees do I have?”

  • CEOs and technology leaders have few options. Once the software is deployed throughout the company, it is difficult to reject an application due to, among other things, employee rejection. Even though those monthly bills add up, the return on investment rarely justifies the cost. It’s easier to let things go.
  • And that’s why companies like Oracle and IBM continue to reap the dough from aging software. This is slowly changing as new options emerge. But even as these companies turn to modern technology, many of these legacy systems are still running in the background.
  • Part of the problem also lies in the work dynamics in a company. If a department receives a budget for technology, it will spend it.

There’s a shift happening in the enterprise software world that promises a solution. Instead of building software targeted at a specific function, vendors are increasingly trying to build tools to manage entire processes. Instead of just sourcing, for example, image software that handles everything from sourcing to logistics to payment.

  • That’s why marketing materials from Salesforce, ServiceNow and Microsoft are now hyper-focused on the concept of “workflow”, which means integrating widely used systems under a single user interface to try to prevent the dreaded change of tab. It’s basically a band-aid for the underlying problem of app bloat that came from those same vendors overselling customers on things they probably didn’t need.
  • There are also significant investments in programs capable of analyzing information stored in multiple central systems in a company, a trend that promises to allow companies to finally use the decades of data they have collected to advantage. competitive.
  • And new vendors are building their core systems so that external sources can be connected more easily. Combining Asana and Slack, for example, can make it easier for managers to track employee work without that pesky app switch.

Software is an industry that was built on over-promise and under-delivery. But despite some horror stories, it’s clear that companies that invest in the right technology early can outpace their rivals very quickly.

  • As IT seeps deeper into the business, it is imperative that leaders become smarter buyers, a difficult task as vendors constantly push new payment models and must-have technology “categories”.
  • A smart business is no longer one that simply burns a lot of money to get tons of shiny new apps. Increasingly, as programs become more advanced, it takes a very strategic approach to be successful – and with it, dedicated talent to support integrations. Alongside developers, for example, the IT department may consider hiring user experience experts to streamline the work.

Tech leaders love to say that we’re still only at the beginning of a long digital modernization journey. If so, buckle up, because the road ahead is bumpy. And given the software industry’s track record, sometimes customers have to create their own.

A CAPITAL ONE SOFTWARE MESSAGE

Many business owners don’t know where to start when it comes to migrating to the cloud. To help organizations adapt to this revolution, Capital One has launched Capital One Software, a new enterprise B2B software company focused on providing cloud and data management solutions.

Learn more

The best of protocol

  • Jensen Huang and his wife, Lori Huang, donate $50 million to Oregon State University for a new innovation complex that will include an Nvidia supercomputer. The investment, Huang said, aims to help people simulate the future, using AI to “predict the impact of climate science and the magnitude of the impact in different parts of the world.”

Confessions of a Metaverse Unicorn – Janko Roettgers

  • Horizon Worlds is relatively barren, with only around 200,000 total users. Protocol’s Janko Roettgers is one of 200,000 people who fell in love with Arena Clash, which the company described as “a team-based laser tag game” earlier this year. Even with its glitches and moderation challenges, Arena Clash is proof that Horizon Worlds can actually be fun.

AWS has a clear advantage among enterprise cloud markets: it has the most customers — Donna Goodison

  • Since its launch in 2012, AWS Marketplace has made a name for itself as the most mature cloud application marketplace among the big three vendors – and many software vendors see it as a crucial part of their go-to-market strategy. market. Its secret is its “private offers,” which allow SaaS companies to negotiate custom licensing agreements, pricing, and payment schedules with customers without leaving Amazon’s marketplace.

Connecting crypto wallets is scary. Plaid wants to change that. — Tomio Geron

  • Plaid’s latest product, which helps developers connect consumer crypto wallets to their apps, aims to make crypto more secure. But it also fuels an ongoing debate about how crypto can be decentralized while meeting consumer needs for secure, easy-to-use apps.

Maryland’s Digital Ad Tax Shows How Tough a ‘Simple’ Policy Can Be – Ben Brody

  • A Maryland court struck down the state’s first tax on Big Tech’s digital ads. The ruling could force several states considering similar laws back to the drawing board and shows how tricky Big Tech regulation can be, even with something as simple as a tax.

Salesforce Please: The Definition of “Team” is Evolving — Allison Levitsky

  • The next stage of work is not just to rethink what it means to be in an office, but to rethink what it means to be part of a team, said Kat Holmes, senior vice president of user experience and design. of products at Salesforce, at Protocol. For some companies, being part of a team doesn’t mean working on the same product, but rather being in the same space and finding “a connection that can be made through that local community.”

Carbon removal has a funding gap. This climatic association tries to fill it. — Michelle Ma

  • Big tech companies like Microsoft, Alphabet, and Salesforce are all committed to eliminating carbon dioxide. Terraset, a nonprofit that came out of stealth mode this week, is stepping in to help channel private philanthropy into the nascent field to fill its funding gap.

Why Security Teams Are Losing Trust in the Term “Zero Trust” — Kyle Alspach

  • The cybersecurity term “zero trust” is cryptic, overused, and often misinterpreted. When used correctly, experts agree it’s the best way to stop cyberattacks in their tracks. But vendors who attribute the title of “zero trust” to every cybersecurity product they offer are confusing security teams.

A CAPITAL ONE SOFTWARE MESSAGE

The flexibility of the cloud helps companies like Capital One unlock access to their data with performance that can scale instantly. But this flexibility and scalability can also create a unique challenge for organizations and users unfamiliar with cloud optimization.

Learn more

Thoughts, questions, advice? Send them to our advice line, tips@protocol.com. Have a good day, see you tomorrow.

]]>
NFL deal allows Kroenke to recoup part of St. Louis payments https://after-hours.org/nfl-deal-allows-kroenke-to-recoup-part-of-st-louis-payments/ Thu, 20 Oct 2022 23:39:36 +0000 https://after-hours.org/nfl-deal-allows-kroenke-to-recoup-part-of-st-louis-payments/ If you’re a little disappointed with the matchups in the NFL TV marquee windows in Week 7, blame an unfortunate streak of bye weeks. The Bills and Vikings (both 5-1), Rams (reigning Super Bowl champions) and undefeated Eagles are all absent in Week 7. Rams owner Stan Kroenke will be able to recoup nearly half […]]]>

If you’re a little disappointed with the matchups in the NFL TV marquee windows in Week 7, blame an unfortunate streak of bye weeks. The Bills and Vikings (both 5-1), Rams (reigning Super Bowl champions) and undefeated Eagles are all absent in Week 7.

Rams owner Stan Kroenke will be able to recoup nearly half of his tab for St. Louis settlement from the rest of the league under details of the deal approved Tuesday, sources said. These previously undisclosed terms mean that the rest of the league will ultimately assume more than double what it initially appeared.

The total involved is about $820 million: $790 million for St. Louis, plus an additional $30 million in interest and attorney fees. Kroenke has to pay around $600 million, with the other 31 owners having already paid around $220 million.

Kroenke’s roughly $600 million obligation is split into two tranches: $320 million due to the league in March and an additional $283 million due in five years. Here’s the important part: The Rams will be able to recoup this second game over 30 years by keeping SoFi Stadium ticket revenue that they would normally have to share — in the same way teams can already fund stadium upgrades.

This solution means that Kroenke’s liability is greatly reduced while still not requiring the other 31 teams to cut checks. The initial $220 million payout from the Others came in the form of $7 million per team deductions from the domestic revenue distribution this year. Their share of Kroenke’s sizable return on investment will be felt in incremental reductions to future SoFi Gate revenue distributions.


Jaguars owner Shad Khan told me he didn’t like the deal very much, but he voted for it, as did his 31 colleagues. “That’s right,” Khan said. “And I’m delighted to have him behind us. It’s an ideal solution — nobody likes it.

While many owners still thought Kroenke should pay in full, the deal reflects some acknowledgment of his arguments:

  1. SoFi Stadium makes them all richer and wouldn’t exist without Kroenke’s personal financial outlay.
  2. Missteps by the league office and some other teams increased the cost of the settlement with St. Louis.

Because the Rams are effectively taking an advance on future funding from the league’s G4 stadium funding program, Kroenke will not be eligible for league assistance for SoFi upgrades during the term of this arrangement.


The big market has been much easier due to the financial strength of the NFL, which is even stronger than it looks due to its ability to take on more debt in a crisis. While an unexpected $790 million settlement was not without consequence, the league’s low leverage and new media revenue stream gave them good options for a painless compromise, sources said.

Another part of the deal was a waiver for Kroenke to exceed the club’s usual $500 million debt limit to fund his share. Historically, the NFL has been conservative with club finances, limiting leverage to levels well below what banks would be willing to lend. While extraordinary debt waivers have already been issued to fund the construction of SoFi, there is still room to grow. One source speculated that the Rams, a big-market team in a state-of-the-art stadium, could easily get six times the debt limit at good rates.

Last December, Fitch Ratings, which rates NFL debt A or A+, calculated the debt ratio for NFL clubs at 1.8x – that’s less than 3.2x for the NBA and 2.4x for MLB (a lower number means you have more revenue secured by each dollar of debt). Even if Kroenke and the Rams borrowed every penny of their share of the St. Louis settlement, the Rams’ figure would be 3.9x, said Harry Flynn, head of sports at Fitch Ratings. It would be lowered in future years due to growing media revenues.


Al Michaels says Dan Snyder is no longer welcome in the NFL ownership fraternity. Then Jim Irsay said much, much more. And then Roger Goodell said he wasn’t disappointed with Irsay’s remarks (although he also said “speculation is not beneficial”).

All of this makes it tempting to say that Snyder’s departure from the NFL is only a matter of time — but that would be wrong.

My sources believe it’s still too early to say for sure how this ends, mainly because we don’t know exactly what facts will emerge from investigations by Mary Jo White, Congress, or a number of attorneys general. Snyder has given no public indication that he plans to go on his own. While many others fundamentally agree with Irsay, their reading of how cost-benefit of going to war can be very different.

As Goodell said, “We’ll see what the results of the next survey are and we’ll go from there.”


  • While certain inevitable legal and political maneuvers remain, the Titans could inaugurate a new stadium “as early as the fall of 2023 and be complete by the 2026 NFL season”, notes the Tennessean.
  • The Marchand & Ourand Sports Media podcast this week looked at Amazon’s Black Friday NFL game and where the NFL Sunday Ticket talks stand. Check out the full episode here.
  • Bills-Chiefs in the national Sunday window drew 25.4 million viewers on CBS, marking the NFL’s third-best game this season to date and CBS’ best Week 6 viewership in 15 years. SBJ’s Austin Karp broke down the rest of the Week 6 issues here.
]]>
The return on investment of corporate gifts linked to thoughtfulness https://after-hours.org/the-return-on-investment-of-corporate-gifts-linked-to-thoughtfulness/ Tue, 18 Oct 2022 11:26:15 +0000 https://after-hours.org/the-return-on-investment-of-corporate-gifts-linked-to-thoughtfulness/ It’s corporate gifting season, and companies large and small are once again closing their books under a cloud of uncertainty as they make this annual decision about how best to thank their customers, suppliers and most important employees. The effort and expense of figuring out how much to spend and what to give can not […]]]>

It’s corporate gifting season, and companies large and small are once again closing their books under a cloud of uncertainty as they make this annual decision about how best to thank their customers, suppliers and most important employees.

The effort and expense of figuring out how much to spend and what to give can not only overshadow the spirit of the gesture, but can also become a stressful and time-consuming cost center that carries an inordinate risk of backfire if mismanaged.

“The corporate culture has kind of sucked the soul out of the gift. It’s become transactional. Everything exists on Excel [spreadsheets] and in doing so has rendered it quite thoughtless and worthless,” Jonathan Legge, co-founder and CEO of Ireland-based global corporate gifting company &Open, told PYMNTS.

What’s worse, Legge said, is the fact that most corporate gifts end up in a landfill, a painful and poorly kept secret in an industry he says has traditionally been super wasteful.

In short, corporate giveaways are broken, Legge said, and badly need a reboot.

“So our manifesto, and what we’re looking to fix, is to bring thought and attention back to corporate gifts and make them joyful and easy for both sender and receiver again,” he said. he declares.

You should not have

At the heart of this overhaul, Legge said, is choice — as in making donation decisions easy for businesses and the financial commitment that comes with them simple and justifiable. It’s a change, especially for SMEs, that means allowing companies to make ad-hoc decisions rather than year-round contracts.

This gift choice and flexibility, if you will, also involves increasingly important ESG considerations so that the values ​​of the giver and recipient are not compromised or in conflict. In some cases, this literally includes giving a recipient the option to say, “You shouldn’t have,” and turning their gift into a donation to charity.

To accommodate all of these nuances and complexities inherent in this process while reflecting the current economic climate, &Open has launched On-Demand, its new self-service platform that facilitates B2B gift giving for the holidays and beyond.

“What’s interesting about the economic headwinds you’re talking about is that we’ve seen a kind of reluctance to overcommit,” Legge said. Instead of committing for a year, he said, companies are looking for ways to be more punctual in their approach.

“[Businesses are] begin to understand what it is [gifting] role could be for their business because each brand has different relationships they seek to nurture,” he added. “A key part of why &Open’s on-demand service is coming out now is to navigate this shift in mindset,” which he characterized as a desire to experience freebies and find out for themselves- same.

Math

As much as the donation is ideally supposed to be devoid of financial and other considerations, it is actually a business decision, and very much subject to the same return on investment (ROI) measures as any other business expense.

While the calculations, so to speak, or cost-benefit analysis of gifts vary widely, Legge has many examples of clients whose gifts have given back, such as a 12% increase in revenue after six months of giving, or a 200% ROI increase on the back of a European furniture company then sent flowers to customers who had made a purchase within a month. Although the results differ, Legge tends to take a more holistic view of the give-and-take aspect of the process.

“Donations work,” he said. “It takes time to build ROI because we need to have long-term relationships in place, and they need to be comfortable sharing metrics with us,” he said.

“I think everyone intuitively understands that giveaways work,” he added, noting that by “works” he means “creating loyalty and, yes, improving the bottom line.”

We are always looking for partnership opportunities with innovators and disruptors.

Learn more

https://www.pymnts.com/news/security-and-risk/2022/linkedin-faces-flood-of-ai-generated-fake-profiles/partial/

]]>