It is discussed in this Forbes article. Will we see this kind of direct activism from more companies? What will be the reaction from customers who use their product but don't necessarily agree with the tactic or the subject matter?
Article source, the CBC.
"Steyn, at the moment, is effectively being tried, by a quasi-judicial panel in Vancouver, for insulting Islam.
Currently, it is hearing a complaint about Steyn's book from Mohamed Elmasry, head of the Canadian Islamic Congress."
I'll see your remote T'au and raise you a Tristan da Cunha.
That's a good assessment of credit unions in general. A few clarifications from your post and others.
Quick background: I'm on the board of one of the largest credit unions in the country. The vast majority of credit union boards are volunteer. No pay. There are a handful of credit unions that pay the board, but it's rare.
You didn't say specifically about profits, but there is a misconception that credit unions don't care about profit. Like any other business we need to retain a portion of earnings. If we didn't, we'd be shut down by regulators. That's the "net worth" ratio that is publicly available at ncua.gov. Typical safe zones are 8% to 12%. Lower and you'll have trouble absorbing the impact of a severe or prolonged recession. That happened in the '08 crash. No one lost money. Higher and you'll be questioned for not returning more profit to members in the form of services (e.g., investing in technology) or lower loan rates or higher dividends.
I could go on for pages about the differences between credit unions and banks and even the various types within the credit union system. And there's no excuse for not doing due diligence with any bank or credit union. There are bad credit unions, but you're not going to lose your savings if it's protected by the NCUA. Some credit unions are not protected by the NCUA. They are part of American Share Insurance, a private entity. Stick with your standard NCUA insured version unless you know what you're doing.
Sometimes outsourcing to lower cost countries might work, but often it just doesn't work as expected. My employer tried India outsourcing 10 years ago and it was a failure. First, while the direct employment costs are cheaper, there is overhead that is complicated and expensive: protecting intellectual property, management from 12 hours away, project planning, code culture and standards.
IT and software engineering pay well especially in Silicon Valley and other major areas because it's worth it to pay that. Proximity has its own intrinsic value. I work with 50% Indian workers, but they are here in SV and paid well, most 100k+ because that's what the work is worth.
I wouldn't even concern myself with the top of the top. It could be arguable whether they are worth the cost, but it's the next level and next level of 6 figure administrators that suck the life out of the UC system. And remember there's a pension to be spiked along with post-retirement healthcare that's sucking the life out of the system.
Go here Transparent California and enjoy your weekend.
I've wondered, but never to the point of taking the time, have Gartner prognostications ever been tracked?
I was going to post about that line and decided to check if my sentiment was covered. Spot on. Wrong metaphor, but not the first time.
As a 45 year old, perhaps I'm
It happens all the time. I now ignore that reroute unless I have a second source confirming something like an accident.
Speed bumps. Waze has done some strange rerouting taking me into the Bay Area. Instead of keeping me on US101 through the admittedly heavy slog by San Jose airport, it wants me to get in a long line of metered traffic to get on 85, then get on the heavily congested 87 freeway and then get in another massive line of metered traffic to rejoin US 101 right at the end of the runway.
I think Waze will improve, but for now, I only depend on it for rerouting around accidents.
I assume the agreement explicitly gives the employer free will to undo the arrangement. That's how mine reads. My employer can make me switch back to in office work whenever they want to.
I second that. Also on Netflix streaming: Walking the Line about 4 American defectors into NK (with primary focus on one).
Then go to the North Korea travel series, done in 3 parts posted on YouTube by Vice.com (search Vice Guide to North Korea).
My employer, a Silicon Valley financial technology company, has had a simple PTO policy that treats a missed day as a missed day from the day it started in the 90's. You get 20 days a year. After 5 years, 25; after 9 years capped at 30, where I am.
Over the years various benefits have come, gone, come back (e.g., 401k match). But that one policy has never changed because everyone likes it. You can bank up to 240 hours but that caps so everyone is supposed to take time off. (Of course, there are always the workaholics who max out and just keep working. But most make reasonable use, especially given than half of the engineers are H1B or green card. They like to take 3-5 weeks at a time.)
Zuck cannot lose control of the company unless he chooses to. His interest is majority and fully controlling. The board is advisory at best, impotent otherwise.
The following are crucial snips from the S-1 filing:
Our CEO has control over key decision making as a result of his control of a majority of our voting stock.
As a result of voting agreements with certain stockholders, together with the shares he holds, Mark Zuckerberg, our founder, Chairman, and CEO, will be able to exercise voting rights with respect to an aggregate of xxx shares of common stock, representing a majority of the voting power of our outstanding capital stock following our initial public offering. As a result, Mr.ÂZuckerberg has the ability to control the outcome of matters submitted to our stockholders for approval, including the election of directors and any merger, consolidation, or sale of all or substantially all of our assets. In addition, Mr.ÂZuckerberg has the ability to control the management and affairs of our company as a result of his position as our CEO and his ability to control the election of our directors. Additionally, in the event that Mr. Zuckerberg controls our company at the time of his death, control may be transferred to a person or entity that he designates as his successor. As a board member and officer, Mr.ÂZuckerberg owes a fiduciary duty to our stockholders and must act in good faith in a manner he reasonably believes to be in the best interests of our stockholders. As a stockholder, even a controlling stockholder, Mr.ÂZuckerberg is entitled to vote his shares, and shares over which he has voting control as a result of voting agreements, in his own interests, which may not always be in the interests of our stockholders generally. For a description of these voting agreements, see "Description of Capital Stock-Voting Agreements."
Because Mr.ÂZuckerberg controls a majority of our outstanding voting power, we are a "controlled company" under the corporate governance rules for publicly-listed companies. Therefore, we are not required to have a majority of our board of directors be independent, nor are we required to have a compensation committee or an independent nominating function. In light of our status as a controlled company, our board of directors has determined not to have an independent nominating function and to have the full board of directors be directly responsible for nominating members of our board. Additionally, as described in the section entitled "Description of Capital Stock-Anti-Takeover Provisions-Restated Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaw Provisions," so long as the outstanding shares of our Class B common stock represent a majority of the combined voting power of our common stock, Mr.ÂZuckerberg will be able to effectively control all matters submitted to our stockholders for a vote, as well as the overall management and direction of our company.
They wrote down a turd whose asset value wasn't worth what they paid. Look at the cash flows. They continue to generate billions of cash.
No amount of careful planning will ever replace dumb luck.