• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Компании2026
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации42
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы394
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
13 января, 18:12

Фондовые индексы США растут в пятницу на статданных, отчетности компаний

Американские фондовые индексы слабо повышаются в ходе торгов в пятницу после публикации первых финансовых отчетов крупнейших банков Уолл-стрит и данных о розничных продажах и ценах производителей.

Выбор редакции
Выбор редакции
13 января, 17:02

Kellogg names Fareed Khan CFO effective Feb. 17, replacing Ron Dissinger

This is a Real-time headline. These are breaking news, delivered the minute it happens, delivered ticker-tape style. Visit www.marketwatch.com or the quote page for more information about this breaking news.

12 января, 15:00

Trump Thanks L.L. Bean, the Latest Retailer Caught Between Him and His Critics

The world of retail boycotts in a divided United States

11 января, 15:38

Will the New Product Lineup Help Kellogg (K) Revive Sales?

Kellogg Company (K) will be launching more than 50 new cereals, snacks and frozen food products this month.

11 января, 15:00

An Inside View of How LVMH Makes Luxury More Sustainable

The companies that are most vocal about environmental and social issues tend to be big, mass-market brands — well-known retailers, consumer products giants, and tech firms that are telling a new story to consumers who increasingly care about sustainability. It might seem that luxury goods companies would not feel the same pressure, but the high-end brands face important questions about the way their businesses impact the world. These companies can’t ignore sustainability. One luxury leader, LVMH, provides a great example of how to build a robust sustainability program. The company is a €36 billion decentralized collection of valuable brands — which they call houses (or maisons) — covering fashion, wine and spirits, cosmetics, and jewelry. To understand its sustainability journey better, I spoke with the company’s head of environment, Sylvie Benard, and the CEOs of two of its wine and spirits brands. The center of the corporate program is a framework it calls LIFE (LVMH Initiatives for the Environment), a “strategic backbone” for programs that address nine environmental challenges. LIFE focuses attention on the full life cycle of products, from supply chain to production excellence to designing longer-lasting and repairable products. Each brand’s strategic business plans now include a LIFE plan, with actions and targets laid out for the next five years. Looking at LVMH’s efforts, I’ll highlight three areas where I see great impact and innovation: managing carbon and energy, building a connection with customers around brand purpose, and working closely with suppliers. I’ll then discuss some of LVMH’s challenges. Managing Carbon and Energy Since 2001 LVMH has studied its life cycle carbon footprint, focusing on both the obvious energy hogs — its stores and distribution — and brand-specific issues, such as packaging in spirits and personal care. The company has aggressively reduced its own energy demand and ramped up the use of clean energy. By the end of this year, 100% of the electricity for LVMH facilities in France will be renewable. Belvedere Vodka, a brand with sales in 120 countries, has pursued many large-scale projects to reduce its CO2 footprint. Belvedere’s distillery in Poland shifted from oil to gas for energy generation and added heat recovery systems to capture wasted energy. Charles Gibb, Belvedere’s CEO, says it made a strategic choice to invest in this project, even though it had a longer payback period than normal. It was part of a larger overhaul that included automating some distillery operations, which gave it better data and helped slash energy and water use. As a result, Belvedere’s greenhouse gas emissions have dropped by 40%. The most innovative part of LVMH’s carbon strategy is the use of an internal carbon fund. Dozens of the world’s largest companies use “shadow prices” to model how a carbon tax would affect their investment decisions. But only a few big companies actually collect real money from their divisions or brands (Disney and Microsoft were early leaders). LVMH’s approach is somewhat unique. Where others have collected funds internally to create a central pool of money for carbon-reducing projects, LVMH instead requires every maison to spend €15 for every ton of carbon emissions (either on-site or from grid-based electricity) on efficiency and energy reduction, clean energy, or research to understand that brand’s greenhouse gas emissions better. Like its carbon-taxing peers, LVMH has created a powerful virtuous circle of emissions reductions. In total, LVMH has invested about €6 million in the first year of the program. Brand-Building and Customer Connection The LVMH leaders I spoke with believe strongly that Millennials, more so than previous generations, care about sustainability. As Gibb puts it, “Until recently, marketing would focus mainly on product and brand image. But now people look for whether you’re both socially and environmentally responsible. People look at brands and ask what they do for the world. If you don’t do this stuff, you’re not a modern brand.” One of the ways the company is telling a more sustainable story to customers is through the use of the “Butterfly Mark,” a symbol — a first in the luxury industry — that “at a glance helps people identify brands committed to social and environmental sustainability.” (Disclosure: I’m an unpaid advisor to Positive Luxury, the company behind the mark.) The Butterfly Mark will soon appear on Krug’s Champagne. Krug also uses a fun, innovative tracking system to share information with consumers. Every bottle has a unique six-digit number, which you can input on its website to get that bottle’s story. Supply Chain Partnerships Maggie Henriquez, CEO of Krug Champagne, says that its focus on environmental and social impacts, and the story the company tells about it, stems from looking inward at its own history. Like many luxury brands, Krug was struggling after the 2008 financial crisis. Henriquez says there was a deeper problem than just economic conditions: It had lost its connection to the founder’s 19th-century ideals about craftsmanship, humility, and quality. A critical part of going back to its roots, Henriquez says, required connecting in a deeper way to growers. The quality of the crops, and the care of the growers, are key to the success of the business. Henriquez started a program to work with growers on sustainability and quality, going plot by plot to review harvest times and implement modern best practices. Together they reduce waste and agricultural inputs (such as fertilizer and water) to get better yields, which reduces the overall footprint. Some of LVMH’s other businesses, such as jewelry brand Bulgari, have also implemented supply chain tracing programs for critical inputs with potentially troubled histories (like some metals and diamonds). In one sense, none of this is surprising or cutting edge. Most large companies with agricultural supply chains, like Kellogg and General Mills, have developed elaborate, robust supplier programs to improve yields and cut water use and greenhouse gas emissions. And on the jewelry side, companies like Tiffany employ extensive tracking programs to avoid conflict minerals and blood diamonds. But LVMH does some unusual things. Henriquez decided that growers were so important to the Krug story that she wanted them engaged in a deeper way. Hernandez, growers, and the winemaking team enjoy product tastings together, allowing growers to enjoy the end results of their work and their crops. It sounds so simple, but Henriquez says, “It’s not normal in our business, and it’s such a moment of connection.” The Challenges The sustainability and operating execs at LVMH talk openly about some of the challenges they face. As usual, short-term pressures on financial performance are a concern, and change takes time. Environmental exec Sylvie Benard comments that changing behavior can take a few years, and you have to keep hammering home the message and “find the right moment” to act. However, it’s a bit easier for the brand CEOs to stay focused on the long term when some of the maisons are three centuries old. They have to plant trees today, for example, to have the right wood for casks 150 years from now. As Gibb puts it, “If you’re not thinking about the brand over a 10-year period, you’re not doing your job.” Perhaps the biggest hurdle is more existential: Can luxury goods ever be sustainable? On one level, probably not, since these products almost by definition are not an inherent human need. But while it would be easy for sustainability people to assert that “none of these products should exist,” that’s more than just unrealistic — it’s probably counterproductive. Everyone has different definitions of what makes for a thriving life; for many, it can easily include some wants, or things that provide fun and beauty. The challenge, then, is to make sure sustainability and beauty are inseparable. LVMH is on the right track, talking about sustainability as core to excellence, quality, and brand image — and central to how the company operates. As Sylvie Benard says, when “the marketing director, financial director, logistics director, and so on take the environment into account when making a decision, then life will be beautiful.”

10 января, 15:56

Will Kellogg's Pringles LOUD Help Revive Snack Business?

Pringles, one of the major brands of Kellogg Company (K), recently introduced Pringles LOUD -- a corn grain & veggie-based crisps.

Выбор редакции
10 января, 08:33

Best classical music recordings of 2016

I found it to be a remarkably deep year for recordings, against all economic odds.  I could easily go twenty deep with little loss of quality, but these are the few that stood out for me: The Complete Songs of Virgil Thomson for Voice and Piano, by the Florestan Recital Project.  This release wins the […] The post Best classical music recordings of 2016 appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

09 января, 23:39

If You Think Algorithms Help Your Brand, Think Again!

In response to consumer pressure, some companies such as Kellogg's, BMW, Warby Parker and Allstate have issued guidelines not to allow their digital advertising to appear on Breitbart News. The site, famous for its invective-filled headlines like "Birth Control Makes Women Unattractive and Crazy,"is the largest and therefore the symbolic epicenter of controversy over inflammatory fake news. In a report entitled "How to Destroy the Business Model of Breitbart and Fake News," The New York Times tells the story of an ad hoc Twitter group called "Sleeping Giants [which] became the hub of the new movement. The Giants and their followers have communicated with more than 1,000 companies and nonprofit groups whose ads appeared on Breitbart, and about 400 of those organizations have promised to remove the site from future ad buys." As reported by The New York Times, Sleeping Giants has focused solely on Breitbart to begin with, but hopes to expand its focus. Breitbart responded with an article titled "Fake News Plus Fascism: New York Times Urges Boycott of Breitbart" and accused the famously liberal New York Times of trying to limit free speech, of being ignorant of how Internet advertising really works and of manufacturing their own fake news as well. My readers know that I am adamant about holding all news media sources (as opposed to distribution platforms) accountable for their words. Sadly, famed and trusted publications like Rolling Stone and even The New York Times have been less than scrupulous in their own self-policing. See more recently Glenn Greenwald's criticism of false stories published by The Washington Post: In the past six weeks, the Washington Post published two blockbuster stories about the Russian threat that went viral: one on how Russia is behind a massive explosion of "fake news," the other on how it invaded the U.S. electric grid. Both articles were fundamentally false. Each now bears a humiliating editor's note grudgingly acknowledging that the core claims of the story were fiction: The first note was posted a full two weeks later to the top of the original article; the other was buried the following day at the bottom... ...But while these debacles are embarrassing for the paper, they are also richly rewarding. That's because journalists -- including those at the Post -- aggressively hype and promote the original, sensationalistic false stories, ensuring that they go viral, generating massive traffic for the Post (the paper's executive editor, Marty Baron, recently boasted about how profitable the paper has become). After spreading the falsehoods far and wide, raising fear levels and manipulating U.S. political discourse in the process (both Russia stories were widely hyped on cable news), journalists who spread the false claims subsequently note the retraction or corrections only in the most muted way possible, and often not at all. As a result, only a tiny fraction of people who were exposed to the original false story end up learning of the retractions. But frankly, that's not my issue today--so hold the thought about media's own accountability for another time. My focus is on brands and brands alone. You see, it's fascinating to click on the Brietbart story I reference and see which ads follow you. I won't embarrass the brands in question. Suffice it to say I am being served the same irrelevance (for the most part) that clogs up my New York Times pages, slows down my load times across a myriad of sites I view and otherwise fades from my memory before I even leave the page. And that's the point, no? The trade publication eMarketer expects U.S. programmatic display ad spending to have reached $22.1 billion in 2016, accounting for 67 percent of all display ad spending. Through 2017, that could rise to $27.47 billion, or 72 percent. Now let's be clear: we have always had a form of programmatic buying, even back in the pre-digital days of big in-house ad agency media buying. The buying group would put out a call for a certain amount of Gross Rating Points (GRPs) determined by multiplying reach by frequency and the media representatives would respond, a few hours later, with a Cost Per Thousand (CPM) based on the targets in question. After a negotiation about fixing the price, the secondary negotiation began about placement--broadcast or print--it made no difference. The issue was where the ads would appear, in what shows, across from what kind of editorial in a magazine, in what time slots and so on. Often, brands would then pay a specific premium to upgrade a placement and, back in my day, every one of my clients had very, very strict guidelines as to what shows they would never, ever appear in and what type of editorial was not suitable for adjacency to their adverts. In fact, context was an often discussed and debated concept back in the day, and for a while it did seem to be a driver in digital as we hailed native advertising and touted the ability to interact in meaningful and consumer-relevant ways. As Computerworld stated in its 2004 article "Defending Boundaries": But there's no denying the fact that the online world has established distinctly different (and uncomfortably cozy) editorial/advertising adjacency standards. Online ads are sold by matching desired keywords with related content, making sure that an ad about storage, for example, will pop up near stories about storage. And the latest technology developments in online "contextual" advertising now let an advertising link be embedded inside the actual story. Yet today we seem to be hiding behind algorithms and, worse, and context seems less important than cheap reach. Ergo, I follow the audience I bought without a sense of purpose, understanding or insight as to their motivation or reason for being where they are. In other words, brands looking for me will follow me from The New York Times to Breitbart, without any thought, even though I might find Breitbart horrific and go there only to document my view of their incitement. On the other hand, people who frequent those sites are--we are led to believe by the ad tech folks--the right audience for the brands that follow them there as well...a conundrum as it seems that more people are clicking (click bait is as old as "Free Sex!" on DM envelopes) on Fake News and than on whatever passes for real these days. iMedia makes the point, most succinctly, in a recent post, "Will 'fake news' have real impact on digital advertising?" For all the reasons above, brand has been decoupled from context. In the quest to manage risk in the form of costs -- costs of inventory, costs of managing it -- advertising was untethered from place. Machines somewhere in the ether-sphere exchange data and inputs, and turn them into outputs. So long as those outputs are consistent with a numerical objective, that is all that mattered. And that would be all that mattered if the concern were only machines and the numbers they crunch. But where a brand appears does matter when humans get involved. Not all human behavior and human reaction can be rendered into machine-readable form. We feel things. We react. We are irrational, only to rationalize later. Environment is something we feel, react, and can be irrational about. Editorial adjacency used to be a default setting on all advertising. This was true in the early stages of digital, too, when planning online was a lot like planning print. But when the data got more voluminous and the technology to manage it all got both better and more complex, thinking shifted to a place where a machine-construct of who you were talking to mattered most. Maybe this is the inevitable conclusion of data saturation running into a faith in one-to-one marketing. The implication being that all that data seems focused on one outcome...the cheapest way to blanket to a message as opposed to the best way to target...context and content, which seems to me to be the lesson of recent elections, around the world, lost and won--data in and of itself without thought and insight is mere bits and bytes. Another interesting and, I would argue, disturbing piece of information is about the ad tech present on the fake news sites. It would seem that, in fact, they are light on tech and have fewer data points to share, which must makes one wonder how then they can compete in bids against very data-rich sites. And just how good and close is their targeting? Hmm. According to a Digiday study: A new study shows that in fact, mainstream media sites are far bigger users of ad tech, which is blamed for eroding the user experience and ultimately contributing to ad blocking. Mezzobit, a tool that lets publishers audit ad tech on websites, found that mainstream news sites have almost twice as much third-party technology as the fake or misleading news sites. For the study, Mezzobit took a list of 96 so-called propaganda sites compiled by researcher Jonathan Albright (Mezzobit calls them "opinionated news sites" to avoid being polarizing) and compared them to an equal number of mainstream sites from the Alexa top 100 and analyzed the ad and marketing tech used on them, including ad units, analytics beacons and tracking pixels. Publishers on Albright's list included sites associated with fake, misleading or ideological news. They often have legit-sounding names like ABCnews.com.co and The Political Insider but have published false stories claiming the Pope endorsed Donald Trump for president and that President Obama banned the Pledge of Allegiance. Because they're light on ad tech, the fake news sites actually have some attributes that are thought of as positive: The fake news sites tend to have lighter pages, so they ran 8 percent faster. The mainstream sites do more tracking, and dropped 129 percent more cookies (a median of 167 cookies per page), resulting in 19 percent more tracking, per the Mezzobit report. And again, let me be clear, the issue of targeting and adjacency is not new, but we seem to have lost our way, at least since 2004. The following is an outtake from a Computerworld post: First, an apology to our readers. We screwed up last week in the placement of an advertisement from the Harvard Business School Press promoting Nick Carr's new book, Does IT Matter? The ad ended up directly opposite the lead story in our management section ["Follow, Don't Lead," QuickLink 46432], which featured excerpts from that book and an interview with the intrepid Mr. Carr. That never should have happened. An editorial/advertising adjacency like that is an embarrassment and a serious concern to the editors of Computerworld. We have a checks-and-balances process (clearly, not a flawless one) that is supposed to ensure that a story about, say, Microsoft doesn't end up sitting next to an ad hawking Windows products. The same goes for book reviews, Q&As and any other stories that we write. Does ad placement really matter so much? Editors think so, believing that such pairings signal to readers that the independence or objectivity of the editorial content is suspect. It raises the concern that we've struck some unholy alliance with the advertiser -- even when we most definitely have not. But I've been talking here about print publications only. The whole advertising adjacency issue changes dramatically -- and much more disturbingly -- in the online world. Ads are sold online by linking them to certain keywords in stories, thus enabling more accurate "targeting" of relevant editorial content by the advertisers. The technique is called contextual advertising. That same Windows story that we would whisk away to another page in order to avoid a Microsoft ad would actually be sold online with the promise of greater adjacency to a story about Windows. This has always bothered me. We follow one set of journalistic practices in print but disregard them online, as though the change of media channel wiped away a quaint little tradition. But as the Web exploded onto the publishing scene, it was deemed a radically different media "experience." The technology enabled new advertising tactics, and editors' concerns were brushed aside by marketers with pop-up ads to sell. What once disturbed us--because it went against the narrative of where we were saying the digital world was going--has collapsed into a morass of yes-we-target-better and yes-we-blanket-broadcast in ways that make old-fashioned TV buying seem more accurate and thoughtful. To be fair...this is not about Breitbart alone or even fake news, but includes hate sites and other unsavory places where advertising ends up because people are there. So as not to confuse myself, let me recap: Brands need to be more accountable for where their ads appear Whatever happened to context? It appears that our algorithmic targeting is not quite what it seems- as in using heavy data feeds to precisely target The consumer you are cutting off is the consumer who buys your goods...no? What is the implication? Is it a full on moral issue as The New York Times writes? In the zeal to follow consumers wherever they may roam on the internet, advertisers now risk bankrolling sites that are toxic to society, whether by amplifying manufactured political stories or by spreading conspiracy theories virulent enough to drive a man to walk into a Washington pizzeria with a gun. That has inserted a new ethical cost into the automated advertising equation, which promises companies large, desired audiences at low prices with little need for human intervention. And is the solution a return to the future? From Mashable: Victor Wong, CEO of ad tech firm Thunder Industries, which handles creative work for programmatic ads, said he says the programmatic industry is already moving toward more directly negotiated deals between advertisers and sites and away from anonymous large-scale auctions. "That's the minority in programmatic right now, but many people think it will reach the majority of the industry in the next year or two," Wong said. Irving Babbit, an American academic who spanned the 19th and 20th centuries posited: "The industrial revolution has tended to produce everywhere great urban masses that seem to be increasingly careless of ethical standards." Is our corollary that the digital revolution has spawned great masses of data that seem to make us increasingly careless of ethical standards? How would you answer my four questions? Or add to them? I put it to you. What's your view? P.S. the ads are not native to Breitbart, they follow YOU...so watch what you search. Read more at The Weekly Ramble Follow David Sable on Twitter: www.twitter.com/DavidSable -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

09 января, 21:29

Separate and Unequal, That's America for Our Kids, says Robert Putnam

America has become two separate and unequal societies, especially when it comes to opportunities for our kids. Yet this can and must be reversed, for hope to be restored, and for America to keep its place in the global economy. These themes were conveyed by Harvard Professor Robert Putnam, advisor to three US Presidents, who gave a series of lectures in New Mexico, one of the nation's poorest states, on January 5, 2017. Putnam is the author of two landmark books on America's changing social landscape, "Our Kids: The American Dream in Crisis" (Simon and Schuster, 2016), and "Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community" (Simon and Schuster, 2001). To an audience of community members at Los Poblanos Historic Inn, Putnam began with an example of his own hometown, Port Clinton, Ohio, where in the 1950's, "success was dependent on your own skills, not your parents' income." Putnam became a college professor. Joe, also from Port Clinton, chose to work, rather than attend college, as did members of Joe's family. For years, the income of Joe's family exceeded the Putnam's. Then the local economy collapsed, and jobs were lost. The opportunity gap can be illustrated by two children of Port Clinton today, Miriam and Mary Sue. Miriam, his own granddaughter, finished high school and attended college at Haverford. On the other hand, Joe's granddaughter, Mary Sue, was abandoned by her mother when her parents divorced. According to Putnam, working class children like Mary Sue no longer have the stability of family, schools, coaches or preachers, and are left with "No air bag." Mary Sue has said, "Love hurts. Trust kills." Mary Sue has sold marijuana. On the other hand, if Miriam were engaged with drugs, "I'd call a lawyer," Putnam said. Mary Sue's situation exemplifies "a huge talent waste." The collapse of social institutions and safety nets are responsible for a large part of the growing economic and opportunity gaps in America. "D-U-M-B in the international talent race" is one of the results of opportunity gaps in an increasingly segregated America, said Putnam. "It's setting our country on a very dangerous path." Putnam, however, ended on an optimistic note. "America has been here before," he said. He spoke of the "Gilded Age" at the end of the 19th century, as portrayed in F. Scott Fitzgerald's novel, "The Great Gatsby." The gap between rich and poor resulted in high political tension. Jacob Riis' expose of the tenements of lower Manhattan, "How the Other Half Lives", exposed squalid living conditions. President Theodore Roosevelt enacted policy changes. Importantly, high schools were invented by American citizens. During the "High School Movement" between 1910 and 1940, high schools were built across the country. Whereas about one-fifth of kids attended high school in 1910, the percentage increased to approximately three-fourths of Americans by 1940. "Shared investment in everyone's kids was key to American growth and fairness in the past and it is key to restoring the American Dream today," Putnam concluded. Solutions include the encouragement of stable, caring families through boosting jobs and wages for low-income workers, along with criminal justice reforms. High quality early childhood education and help for parents is important. Investment in public education should include paying top teachers more to teach in low-income schools, and ending "pay to play" actions. More intensive mentoring of youth should occur, along with "on-ramps" to opportunities such as community colleges and apprenticeships. Putnam's appearance in New Mexico was arranged by Mala Htun, Professor of Political Science at the University of New Mexico, and a former student of Putnam's at Harvard. Sponsors included the New Mexico Business Roundtable, the Kellogg Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Keeler Foundation, and the Thornburg Foundation. In attendance, were members of New Mexico's educational, business and political communities including State Representative Sarah Maestas Barnes, former Lieutenant Governor Diane Denish, microfinancier and ACCION New Mexico CEO Anne Haines Yatskowitz, New Mexico Business Roundtable Chairman Doug Turner, UNM President Robert Frank, Deborah Helitzer, founding Dean of UNM's new School of Population Health, along with influential physicians Mark Unruh, Loretta Cordova de Ortega, and David Rakel, chairs of the UNM Departments of Internal Medicine, Pediatrics, and Family and Community Medicine, respectively. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Выбор редакции
09 января, 17:13

Gasoline Price Uncertainty and the Design of Fuel Economy Standards -- by Ryan Kellogg

What are the implications of gasoline price volatility for the design of fuel economy policies? I show that this problem has a strong parallel to Weitzman's (1974) classic model of using price or quantity controls to regulate an externality. Changes in fuel prices act as shocks to the marginal cost of complying with the standard. Assuming constant marginal damages from fuel consumption, an application of Weitzman (1974) implies that a fixed fuel economy standard reduces expected welfare relative to a "price" policy such as a feebate or, equivalently, a fuel economy standard that is indexed to the price of gasoline. When the regulator is constrained to use a fixed standard, I show that the usual approach to setting the standard--equate expected marginal compliance cost to marginal damage--is likely to be sub-optimal because the standard may not bind if the realized gasoline price is sufficiently high. Instead, the optimal fixed standard will be relatively relaxed and may be non-binding even at the expected gasoline price. Finally, I show that although an attribute-based standard allows vehicle choices to flexibly respond to gasoline price shocks, the resulting distortions imply that the optimal fuel economy standard is not attribute-based.

Выбор редакции
07 января, 11:00

How to stop swearing this year: 'I always realise a millisecond too late'

I try to find alternative curses. ‘Sausage bacon egg and chips’ is actually endearing• From being happier to volunteering – how to achieve your goalWhen my son was born, I drew a line in the sand. “No more swearing for me,” I declared. “This boy shall not be tainted by my foul language.” Then I went outside, pointed at a loud aeroplane flying overhead and involuntarily said the word “fucking”.He’s nearly two now, and picking up new words at a staggering rate. He said “hippo” for the first time yesterday, just because someone said it within earshot of him once. And I swear far more than I say the word “hippo”. Either I stop now, or I face being judged in Tesco because the kid in my trolley keeps calling the Kellogg’s cockerel a wanker. Continue reading...

Выбор редакции
07 января, 11:00

How to quit sugar this year: 'It's a lifestyle change, not a diet'

Week four is when most people experience a crash, and mine is monumental. But by week six, I’ve come through the other side• From getting stronger to writing that novel – how to achieve your goalIt’s Monday night, and I’m clutching an eight-pack of mini Kellogg’s cereals in the queue of my local corner shop, hoping I don’t see anyone I know. This is the next best thing to the full box of Coco Pops I’ve been craving all day.Call it a regression to the simpler snap, crackle and pop of childhood, but there’s refuge in a bowl of something sweet and crunchy, topped with ice-cold milk. And during a particularly trying few months (I’m about to get married, my mother’s been diagnosed with cancer), it has become a welcome part of my evening routine. Continue reading...

06 января, 17:30

The Zacks Analyst Blog Highlights: Johnson & Johnson, Barclays, Procter & Gamble, Kellogg and Medtronic

The Zacks Analyst Blog Highlights: Johnson & Johnson, Barclays, Procter & Gamble, Kellogg and Medtronic

06 января, 01:48

Top Research Reports for J&J, Barclays and P&G

Top Research Reports for J&J, Barclays and P&G

05 января, 22:42

Ugh: The Motherhood Penalty Starts Before Women Even Get Pregnant

James Cabot and Julia Cabot seem like the kind of law school students high-paying law firms like to recruit. Their resumes and work experience are nearly identical. Both of them attend respected institutions and have worked their way to the top 1 percent of their classes. Their schools aren’t among the very top-tier institutions where the big firms do most of their recruiting ― Harvard, Yale, et al. ― but they’re still well-regarded. What’s more, James and Julia clearly come from economically advantaged backgrounds, the kind that firms admit make candidates a strong “cultural fit.” On their resumes, James and Julia each note their interest in classical music and polo. They both mention their experience on their college sailing teams. When people talk about “elites,” they’re talking about people like James and Julia Cabot. Yet when law firms looked at their resumes ― which, again, were totally the same but for their gender ― recruiters were three times more likely to call James in for an interview, according to a study first published last year in American Sociological Review and recently written up in Harvard Business Review. In a follow-up survey and interviews, the researchers learned that lawyers discounted Julia Cabot’s credentials ― indeed, the credentials of any economically advantaged woman ― because of a belief that she would eventually leave the workforce to become a stay-at-home mom. In other words, for some women, there’s a “motherhood penalty” before they’re even thinking about becoming a mother. This old-fashioned notion exists even though a majority of mothers are now in the workforce. And the stereotype, according to this study, clings mainly to economically advantaged women. As you may have already guessed, James and Julia Cabot aren’t real people. They were invented for the purposes of the above study. And while it may be hard to conjure much sympathy for the polo-playing Julias of the world, this kind of stereotyping is likely part of the reason why, despite achieving relative equality in education, women have largely failed to reach the uppermost ranks of power in the business world. “This is a key mechanism that is keeping women out of high-paying occupations,” Lauren Rivera, a professor at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management and a co-author of the study, told The Huffington Post.  Firms are screening out high-performing women not because of something they’ve done or haven’t done, but because of the firms’ own speculation about what they might someday do. The reasons for doing this “are completely in the heads of organizations,” Rivera said. It’s already well-known that women’s careers and incomes suffer when they become moms. Female employees who become mothers see their salaries decline by 4 percent, according to one survey. Men who become fathers, by contrast, see their salaries rise by 6 percent. But there’s less hard evidence of a pre-motherhood penalty. Indeed, the wage gap between women and men is at its smallest when women are first out of college and haven’t yet married or had children. Yet any woman who’s thought twice about wearing a wedding ring to a job interview would probably not be shocked to learn a pre-motherhood penalty exists. Even at progressive companies that say they value hiring and promoting women, the default assumption is still that a woman will want to downshift her career once she becomes a mother, if she can afford it.  Women make up a majority of law school students in the United States, but only around 20 percent of law firm partners. Most firms are quick to speak of the need to hire and retain more women, to diversify.  The researchers devised a second pair of candidates to go along with the Cabots ― James Clark and Julia Clark, who both hailed from less well-off families. Or at least, that’s the impression their resumes, which mention their interests in country music, pickup soccer and track and field, were calculated to give off. The researchers didn’t choose these characteristics because of any data that shows law firms tend to hire expert sailors or discriminate against country music fans. They were simply trying to signal that a person did or didn’t come from money. They even conducted an online survey to make sure their choices sent the right message. Polo signaled fancy elite rich kid; pickup soccer, not so much. It’s standard practice to include extracurriculars and outside interests in law school applications. You might not even get considered for a job without including such things.  The point of the study was to drill down and see what effect social class has on hiring at high-end firms. Rivera, who has written a book on how elite investment banks and consulting and law firms favor entry-level workers from upper-class backgrounds, wanted to do more strictly quantitative work on this issue ― to try and isolate class as a factor in the hiring process. “It was hard to know from interviews if employers were truly discriminating or just picking the best and brightest,” she said. A lot of the research on class assumes that education is a great equalizer ― that once you’ve got a degree from a top school, your background doesn’t matter that much to potential employers. But “it does matter,” Rivera said. “It matters quite a bit.” The study doesn’t even get into the ways that race and ethnicity intersect with class in employers’ minds. The resumes in this study were presumed to be from white candidates. Black, Hispanic and Asian women and men face different sets of stereotypes and biases, and Rivera wants to do further research there. For the study, the resumes from James and Julia Cabot and James and Julia Clark were sent to 316 offices of 147 leading law firms around the U.S. The goal was to apply for summer associate positions ― internships at law firms that pay around $3,000 a week and typically lead to full-time job offers once the candidate finishes school. Those entry-level positions pay a stunning $150,000 a year (not counting the bonus) and offer a fast track to the 1 percent. The researchers expected that the upper-class candidates would get called back at higher rates than the candidates whose personal info telegraphed “lower-to-middle-class.” That’s not exactly what happened. James Cabot, the upper-class man, was offered an interview at 16.25 percent of the firms, a rate that far outstripped everyone else. Polo-playing Julia Cabot saw a 3.8 percent callback rate, while country music-loving Julia Clark got a 6.3 percent callback rate. The lower-class male candidate, James Clark, only got a 1.3 percent callback rate. The researchers say the differences between the women and the lower-class man were not statistically significant. It’s worth noting, Rivera said, that law firm recruiters skew male and tend to be a little older ― factors that may have had some bearing here. Still, she was surprised to find class offered no advantage to women. In a follow-up survey, Rivera and her colleagues asked 200 lawyers around the country to look at the four mocked-up resumes and give their feedback. In that survey, the upper-class man was again viewed as the most favorable candidate. The authors then personally interviewed 20 lawyers for their thoughts on the resumes. Those interviews yielded a gold mine of various stereotypes about white men and women of different economic standings. There was concern that neither James nor Julia Clark would fit in at a high-end law firm. Some of the lawyers even suggested the lower-class candidates would be better suited to public interest law.     James and Julia Cabot, with their privileged backgrounds, were seen as a good fit for a law firm. “If you look at the interests, it’s classic cultural capital,” one lawyer told the researchers. However, the lawyers questioned Julia’s commitment, wondering if she “really wanted to be a lawyer,” the researchers write in their paper. Some declared she was “biding her time” until she could become a “stay-at-home mom.” James Cabot, on the other hand, was seen as a good long-term bet. “An upper-class man is always going to be working,” a lawyer named Betsy said. “He’s always gonna stay in the workforce, and chances are he’s well connected, and that might be a good person to have at your firm.” The important thing to note here, Rivera said, is that men and women both tend to leave big law firms after their first three or four years working there. Firms hire far more associates than they could ever hope to bring on as partners. In other words, even if a firm hired Julia Cabot and Julia Clark and they both left after a couple years, it wouldn’t actually make much difference to the firm. “[Firms] expect most people to leave,” Rivera said. “It’s a pyramid organization. A tournament predicated on the fact that lots of people are going to leave.” Interestingly, the gender bias wasn’t an issue for Julia Clark. Coming from a less advantaged background, she was viewed as “hungry” for work. She would have “mouths to feed” and “law school debt to pay,” the lawyers told the researchers. Perhaps this is a sign that hiring managers can overcome some gender stereotypes. But it’s probably best not to wait around for that day. Rivera says if we want to avoid this kind of stereotyping, law firms should stop asking candidates to put extracurriculars and interests on their resumes. The idea is that you can use the information to judge a person’s leadership, she said. But “it is strange that these things carry so much weight.” -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Выбор редакции
05 января, 05:00

The Elite Are Pushing For "Russian Hacking" Propaganda

Putin the Great ran out the CIA backed ISIS out of Aleppo. President Trump will take out the Shadow Government and the CIA in Washington. They are the biggest threat against America. They manage ISIS in all aspects of the terrorist organization. Trump just appointed General Kellogg to his Chief of... [[ This is a content summary only. Visit http://FinanceArmageddon.blogspot.com or http://www.figanews.com/ or http://goldbasics.blogspot.com for full links, other content, and more! ]]

02 января, 16:48

Kellogg's (K) Strategic Initiatives Look Good, Sales a Drag

Although the company's shares have been trading below the Zacks categorized Food-Miscellaneous/Diversified industry in the last one year period, its cost saving initiatives are a godsend.

28 декабря 2016, 00:57

New York Subway Station Features Gay Couple In Groundbreaking Mural

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); New York subway art is about to get a bit more inclusive.  When the city’s long-awaited Second Avenue subway line opens New Year’s Day, commuters will get a first look at a series of life-size, mural portraits adorning the new 72nd Street station ― including a depiction of two married gay men holding hands. Artist Vik Muniz told the Associated Press that he opted to include New York married couple Thor Stockman and Patrick Kellogg in his “Perfect Strangers” mural project because “they are just people you would expect to see” riding the city’s subway. ”You would expect to see men holding hands,” the artist, who divides his time between the U.S. and Brazil, said.   Kellogg said he and Stockman posed for the photograph on which their “Perfect Strangers” mural is based while meeting up with a friend who was working with Muniz three years ago in Brooklyn. Earlier this year, they learned that their image would be among those that the artist had selected for replication in the subway station project. Although the news felt like “winning the lottery,” Stockman said the men were asked to keep it under wraps until specifics of the installations were made public by the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) earlier this month.  The couple is particularly proud of their participation in the project, which is believed to be New York’s first permanent, non-political LGBTQ piece of public art, because they see themselves as the type of same-sex couple not normally represented in popular culture. “Our friends were even happier that this is gay representation that is not incredibly beautiful and skinny,” Kellogg told the AP.  Among those to praise the Second Avenue subway works was New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who called it the “largest public art installation” in the state’s history, according to Gothamist.  “Public works projects are not just about function—they’re an expression of who we are and what we believe,” Cuomo, who will take the Second Avenue subway’s inaugural ride on New Year’s Eve, said. “Any child who has never walked into a museum or an art gallery can walk the streets of New York and be exposed to art and education simply by being a New Yorker. That is where we came from and that is what makes New York special.” What a beautiful way to honor the city’s diversity and embrace of all people!  -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

27 декабря 2016, 18:28

When Women Run Companies

What happens to employees under female leadership?

02 сентября 2014, 04:21

10 компаний контролирующих мировую пищевую индустрию

  В сельском хозяйстве и пищевой промышленности занято более одного миллиарда человек в мире или треть всей рабочей силы. И хоть данный сектор играет ключевую роль в жизни человечества, как это ни парадоксально, его контролируют крайне небольшое число транснациональных компаний. Согласно докладу компании Oxfam International, 10 компаний, специализирующихся на производстве продуктов питания и напитков, могут формировать продуктовую корзину большей части населения планеты, влиять на их условия труда, а также окружающую среду.  Associated British Foods Выручка: $21,1 млрд Расходы на рекламу: неизвестно Прибыль: $837 млн Сотрудники: 112,6 тыс. Штаб-квартира: Лондон, Великобритания  Associated British Foods – это британская компания-производитель продуктов питания, которой удалось выстроить глобальную сеть с помощью приобретений. В результате постоянного прироста за счет покупки новых компаний, Associated British Foods производит практически все виды продовольствия, начиная от сахара, заканчивая кукурузным маслом и чаем. ABF один из основных поставщиков важных пищевых ингредиентов, в том числе эмульгаторов, ферментов и лактозы.   Coca-Cola Сo. Выручка: $46,9 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $3,0 млрд Прибыль: $8,6 млрд Сотрудники: 130,6 тыс. Штаб-квартира: тланта, Джорджия, США  Coca-Cola является одним из самых дорогих брендов в мире. Совокупный объем продаж в 2013 финансовом году в стоимостном выражении превысил отметку $47 млрд. Coca-Cola Сo. крупнейший мировой производитель и поставщик концентратов, сиропов и безалкогольных напитков. Крупнейшим акционером этой компании является фонд Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (8,61%), контролируемый легендарным инвестором Уорреном Баффетом.   Groupe Danone Выручка: $29,3 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $1,2 млрд Прибыль: $2,0 млрд Сотрудники: 104,6 тыс. Штаб-квартира: Париж, Франция  Французская компания Groupe Danone имеет обладает колоссальным присутствием в во всем мире. Его крупнейшим рынком, по объемам продаж, является Россия, далее следуют Франция, США, Китай и Индонезия. Компания является крупнейшим в мире продавцом свежих молочных продуктов, больше половины от всего объема продаж данной продукции в мире в 2013 году пришлось на Groupe Danone.   General Mills Выручка: $17,9 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $1,1 млрд Прибыль: $1,8 млрд Сотрудники: 43 тыс./LI] Штаб-квартира: Голден-Вэлли, Миннесота, США  Компания General Mills владеет рядом одних из наиболее известных американских брендов, таких как Pillsbury, Colombo Yogurt, Betty Crocker, «Зеленный великан». Производственные мощности компании размещены в 15 странах, однако, продукция реализуется более чем в 100. Полоска продукции компании невероятно широкая : хлопья для завтрака, йогурт, замороженное тесто, консервированные супы, пицца, мороженое, соевые продукты, овощи, мука и др.   Kellogg Выручка: $14,8 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $1,1 млрд Прибыль: $1,8 млрд Сотрудники: 30,2 тысячи Штаб-квартира: Батл-Крик, Мичиган, США  Американская компания Kellogg зарабатывает меньше всех среди пищевых гигантов, по итогам 2013 года объем выручки составил лишь $15 млрд. Kellogg является одним из крупнейших в мире хлебообработчиков и производителей печенья. Компания специализируется на производстве сухих завтраков и продуктов питания быстрого приготовления.   Mars Выручка: $33,0 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $2,2 млрд Прибыль: нет данных Сотрудники: 75 тыс. Штаб-квартира: Маклин, Виргиния, США  Из всех компаний, представленных в данном списке, Mars –единственная, которая находится в частной собственности. Mars владеет такими "шоколадными" брендами, как M&Ms, Milky Way, Snickers и Twix. Компания владеет продовольственными брендами, такими как Uncle Ben's, а также производителем жевательных резинок и конфет Wrigley.   Mondelez Выручка: $35,3 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $1,9 млрд Прибыль: $3,9 млрд Сотрудники: 107 тысяч Штаб-квартира: Дирфилд, Иллинойс, США  Компания Mondelez появилась в результате разделения пищевого гиганта Kraft Foods. Во время разделения мировые бренды (Oreo, TUC, Cadbury, Milka, Alpen Gold, Jacobs) достались Mondelez, вто время как американские - Kraft Foods Group. По итогам прошлого года, выручка компании составила $35 млрд выручки при капитализации более чем $72 млрд.   Nestle Выручка: $103,5 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $3,0 млрд Прибыль: $11,2 млрд Сотрудники: 333 тыс. Штаб-квартира: Веве, Швейцария  Nestle по всем показателям является крупнейшей пищевой компанией в мире. Выручка компании за прошлый год составила 92 млрд швейцарских франков. Компания производит растворимый кофе, минеральную воду, шоколад, мороженое, бульоны, молочные продукты, детское питание, корм для домашних животных, фармацевтическую продукцию и косметику. Более 2000 товарных знаков на 461 фабрике в 83 странах мира.   PepsiCo Выручка: $66,4 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $2,5 млрд Прибыль: $6,7 млрд Сотрудники: 274 тыс. Штаб-квартира: Пёрчейз, Нью-Йорк, США  Помимо известных "содовых" брендов, PepsiCo владеет рядом продуктовых торговых марок, таких как Tostitos, Doritos, Quaker. Более того, компания является крупнейшим рекламодателем в мире, расходы компании в этой области в 2012 году превысили $2,5 млрд.   История вопроса Выручка: $68,5 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $7,4 млрд Прибыль: $6,7 млрд Сотрудники: 174,3 тысячи Штаб-квартира: Лондон, Великобритания и Роттердам, Голландия  Unilever трудно назвать пищевой компанией, так как большую часть ее прдуктовой линейки представляют средства личной гигиены и бытовая химия. Однако, на еду и напитки проходится более трети выручки. По итогом прошлого года выручка компании составила 50 млрд евро. Компания владеет такими брендами, как Lipton, Brooke Bond, Calve, Rama, Creme Bonjour и другие.