среда, 1 июля 2015 г.

u7-Eleven Testing Delivery Service Because Fetching Your Own Microwaved Burritos Is So 2014r


4 4 4 9
  • Sometimes the Slurpee machine is just… too… far… away. Am I right? Sure, because otherwise why would 7-Eleven be testing a delivery service? Yes, that is a thing that is happening, as we have become a people who can’t even be bothered to microwave our own burritos.

    The company announced the news today in a press release, saying the new service is a partnership with Postmates, a technology business out of San Francisco that also teamed up with Chipotle recently to offer delivery in some cities.

    Select stores in San Francisco and Oakland, CA will have the on-demand delivery service starting now through Postmate’s app for iOS devices or online, with a variety of 7-Eleven products available. From the sound of it, that could include Slurpees and burritos (though it’s unclear), as an assortment of items “from hot foods and snacks to cold beverages and other convenience items” are on the table.

    Deliveries will arrive in an hour or less, 7-Eleven says.

    “7‑Eleven’s founder, Joe C. Thompson Jr., used to say 7‑Eleven’s mission was to ‘give customers what they want, when and where they want it’,” said Raja Doddala, 7‑Eleven’s vice president of innovation and omnichannel strategy in the press release. “Through the modern-day technology that Postmates provides, we can fulfill that promise in a way we haven’t done before.”

    Doddala adds that the company plans to expand delivery later this year to other areas with a high density of 7-Eleven stores, including Austin, New York, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C. and Chicago.

    You might just never leave your couch again. Well, if you have a butler. Because someone’s got to answer the door or the Slurpees will melt.



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uChicago Residents Now Stuck With A New 9% “Cloud Tax” On Netflix And Other Streaming Servicesr


4 4 4 9

  • There used to be a whole world of brick-and-mortar retail stores and transactions a city could gather some sales tax from and build into a revenue stream. As more and more goods instead become online services, though, those streams have dried up. Now one city wants to go back to gathering its cash… from your transactions in the cloud.

    The Verge reports that residents of the Windy City are about to have to start paying a premium on Netflix and their other streaming services, as a new “cloud tax” takes effect in Chicago today.

    The logic goes something like this: In the long-gone ancient era of “twenty whole years ago,” when you went down to your corner video store for some rentals and some popcorn, you’d leave a few cents of sales tax behind with your purchase. Those nickels and pennies added up, and your town, city, or county got some revenue out of it.

    But now, you’re streaming all your media, not buying it, and as a result there’s no sales tax going anywhere. Worse: record stores, video stores, and bookstores are in large part going the way of the dodo, and cities can’t collect business or property taxes on businesses that don’t exist. So this, then, is Chicago’s attempt to recoup some of those losses.

    As The Verge explains, the new tax is actually a pair of rules put together. One covers “electronically delivered amusements” and the other, “nonpossessory computer leases.” The former targets your streaming video and radio sites, and the latter is meant to cover remote computing platforms like Amazon Web Services.

    The rules take existing tax law and extend them to add another 9% onto the cost of using those services from a Chicago address — so that $8.99 Netflix subscription is $9.80 for an unfortunate Chicagoan.

    The web services businesses, of course, can avoid this tax entirely (and probably get lower rents) by moving out of the city limits entirely. Consumers subscribing to streaming services have fewer ways out, since the tax could be based both on their billing address and also on the IP addresses to which content is streamed.

    At least one lawyer is already arguing that Chicago’s new rules violate federal statutes, including the Communications Act and the Internet Tax Freedom Act. For the time being, however, the rules are in place and Chicagoans must pay.

    Chicago’s ‘cloud tax’ makes Netflix and other streaming services more expensive [The Verge]



ribbi
  • by Kate Cox
  • via Consumerist


uDept. Of Justice Investigating Alleged Collusion By Airlines To Keep Ticket Prices Highr


4 4 4 9
  • (Rachel)

    (Rachel)

    Just weeks after a legislator voiced concern that a shrinking airline industry has perpetuated potential anti-competitive behavior aimed at keeping the price of airfare high, the Department of Justice revealed it is looking into the possibility of collusion between airlines.

    The Associated Press reports that the Dept. of Justice opened an antitrust investigation into whether airlines are colluding to grow at a slower pace in an attempt to keep ticket prices high.

    A document obtained by the AP shows that the DOJ has requested information from airlines as part of the investigation.

    A spokesperson for the Department confirmed that the agency was investigating potential “unlawful coordination” among some airlines, but declined to specify which ones.

    According to the AP, American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Southwest Airlines and United Airlines currently control more than 80% of the airline industry’s seating capacity.

    News of the antitrust investigation comes about two weeks after Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal sent a letter [PDF] to Assistant U.S. Attorney General William Baer urging the DOJ to investigate possible collusion and anti-competitive actions in the airline industry that could result in higher airfares for consumers.

    Blumenthal cited a recent report which found some airlines plan to cut back on the number of seats offered on certain routes in an attempt to boost profits.

    “In light of the recent unprecedented level of consolidation in the airline industry, this public display of strategic coordination is highly troubling,” Blumenthal stated in the letter.

    Justice Department investigating potential airline collusion [The Associated Press]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uIf You Buy The Stuff No One Else Likes, You Just May Be A “Harbinger Of Failure”r


4 4 4 9
  • If you’re still crying into your pillow at night over the demise of the Zune MP3 player or Crystal Pepsi, take a long, hard look into the mirror: Your shopping habits might have foretold the doom of your favorite, discontinued products. At least, according to a group of researchers pointing the finger at certain early adopters.

    In a study published in the Journal of Marketing Research, researchers identified particular kinds of consumers whose preferences can predict products that will flop, calling those folks “harbingers of failure,” reports the Chicago Tribune.

    “Certain customers systematically purchase new products that prove unsuccessful,” wrote the study authors. “Their early adoption of a new product is a strong signal that a product will fail.”

    Researchers looked at retail purchases made by about 130,000 consumers at a national convenience store chain, and found that 13% of them had buying habits that predicted failure of a new product. Failure in this case means surviving less than three years. About half or more of the products they bought were doomed to die before they had a chance to make it big.

    This means if you’re the kind of person who liked the Zune, you probably also liked Frito Lay Lemonade, which apparently was a thing.

    And “the more they buy, the less likely the product will succeed,” the researchers wrote.

    This is because harbingers of failure are more likely to consistently buy things that other customers won’t, for whatever reason. Maybe they like to be different, or maybe they just have a soft spot for the things no one else likes.

    For companies, this means that they’d need to be careful not to just focus on how many people are buying a new product, but who it is that’s doing the buying. If you’ve got a boatload of these harbingers of failure on board, your ship is sure to sink.

    There’s a reason all your favorite products are always being discontinued [Chicago Tribune]



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uNo, New York Times, No One Wants To Put Peas In Their Guacamoler


4 4 4 9
  • Screen Shot 2015-07-01 at 3.44.23 PMThe Twitter account for the New York Times learned a very important lesson today: Avocados are sacred, and as such, guacamole should not be despoiled by the likes of the pea, a food reviled by any kid ever forced to finish their vegetables before they could leave the table. Any suggestion otherwise is outright HERESY, according to the denizens of the Internet. The responses are numerous, the ire is intense, and discontent reigns. [@NYTimes]



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


u10 Things We Learned About The University Of Phoenix’s Alleged Military Marketing Strategyr


4 4 4 9
  • uopx-horix-logo-black-large-highqual-whitebgIt’s no secret that for-profit colleges receive a large chunk of their revenue from military education benefits. To deter unscrupulous for-profit colleges from unfairly targeting these prospective students, the government has imposed several limitations on just how these companies can recruit servicemembers. But a new report shows that one of the nation’s largest proprietary education institutions – The University of Phoenix – spends millions of dollars to allegedly skirt those rules.

    While for-profit schools often provide a convenient avenue for former and current military members and their families to receive higher education, several reports over the past few years have shown that in many cases these students are receiving a useless piece of paper in exchange for thousands of dollars in taxpayer-funded military benefits such as the Post 9/11 GI Bill.

    Because of this, President Obama signed a 2012 executive order intended to prevent for-profit colleges from gaining preferential access to the military, such as freely dispatching recruiters to bases. While these rules have helped to hamper aggressive recruitment tactics of some schools, the report by Reveal with the Center for Investigative Reporting shows the University of Phoenix might not be one of them.

    The University of Phoenix has never appeared to be one to hold its purse strings tightly – allegedly spending millions of dollars each year on marketing events and sponsorships to gain the attention of prospective students. The company famously paid $155 million for the naming rights of a monstrous football stadium, even though the school has no athletic teams.

    But, according to Reveal, the school may just spend the most money covertly recruiting servicemembers.

    We really recommend that you head over and read the entire report on Reveal, but here are the 10 things that we learned from the exposé, which relied on statements from officials with the Department of Defense, former servicemembers recruited by the school, University of Phoenix staff, lawsuits against the school and internal documentations from the company.

    1. The University of Phoenix allegedly regularly sponsors events – such as a $25,000 concert at Fort Campbell – for servicemembers as a way to sidestep an executive order that bans “inducements, including any gratuity, favor, discount, (or) entertainment” for the “purpose of securing enrollments of Service members.”

    2. Internal company documents suggest that such events are part of the school’s “deliberate effort” to create the impression that it is sanctioned and even recommended by the armed forces.

    3. An investigation by Reveal found that the University of Phoenix paid five military bases more than $1 million over the past five years to sponsor events for servicemembers such as concerts, Super Bowl parties, father-daughter dances, festivals, fashion shows and résumé workshops.

    4. According to Dept. of Education records, these covert recruitment strategies likely paid off, as the school brought in $345 million in GI Bill funding to educate 50,000 veterans in 2014. The school also received $20 million from the Pentagon for the education of some 10,000 active duty servicemebers last year, Reveal reports.

    5. The University of Phoenix’s online program enrolled 24,000 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans last year. The graduation rate for that program sits at about 7.3%, with nearly one in five students eventually defaulting on their loans within three years.

    6. The University of Phoenix has been partnering with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation to host employment workshops at Hiring Our Heroes job fairs. The school has allegedly worked out a deal to be the only institution of higher learning showcased at the fairs. Officials say that the school is prohibited from marketing itself at these events. But…

    7. A servicemember wearing a camera recorded representatives of the company marketing its services to military personnel. In one case, a workshop trainer repeatedly encouraged those in attendance to visit the college’s website. Additionally, the trainer used an example of a “good” resume featuring the University of Phoenix under education, while a “bad” resume did not.

    8. A recent lawsuit filed by former University of Phoenix employees allege the school required them to “operate stealthily” in order to “utilize job fairs as a vehicle for recruitment.” The two employees allege they were fired for not recruiting enough servicemembers.

    9. Internal documents show the college has placed recruiters in leadership positions at a plethora of veterans groups such as local chapters of AMVETS, the Navy League of the United States and the Association of the United States Army. The company has also allegedly courted leaders of the American Legion, which once backed legislation to forbid for-profit colleges from spending taxpayer money on marketing and recruitment.

    10. The University of Phoenix allegedly uses military insignia without proper licenses. In an effort to better ingrain itself in military culture, Reveal reports, the company purportedly hands out a custom engraved coin on military bases. The coin, which features the school’s logo on one side and the emblems of all military branches on the other, is similar to a “challenge coin” given to military personnel by officers to mark major accomplishments.

    Reveal reports that reps for the University of Phoenix declined to be interviewed for their report, but a senior vice president for the school’s parent company, Apollo Education, says the school plays an important role in offering degrees to servicemembers and that the company supports the executive order to “rein in bad actors from all sectors of higher education.”

    Following the release of Reveal’s report, Illinois Senator Dick Durbin called on the Department of Defense to investigate the University of Phoenix’s marketing practices.

    “I am astonished at the Department’s willingness to accept payment for access, in violation of the spirit of Executive Order 13607, and disappointed in the conduct of its personnel, shielding the company from public scrutiny,” Durbin wrote in a letter to Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter. “I urge you to investigate these allegations swiftly and take immediate steps to bar the company from further access to service members until these issues are resolved.”

    “The University of Phoenix is a for-profit company that makes much of its money off of service members and veterans, including $1.2 billion in GI Bill benefits alone since 2009. In return, the company offers degrees of questionable value, below-average graduation rates, and a student loan default rate almost forty percent higher than the national average.”

    University of Phoenix sidesteps Obama order on recruiting veterans [Reveal: from the Center For Investigative Reporting]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uReport: AT&T, DirecTV Merger Likely To Be Approved By Justice Dept. With No Conditionsr


4 4 4 9
  • ATT-logo
    It’s been over a year since AT&T and DirecTV publicly announced their intention to become one big happy mega-media company, and the two are clearly getting a little restless waiting for their approvals. However, it looks like they are about to get the green light they so badly want.

    Bloomberg News has the scoop (as they did for the Comcast/TWC merger), and the business news site is reporting that the Department of Justice is ready to give this one the go-ahead.

    Media mega-mergers have to be approved by two agencies: the Antitrust Division at DoJ, which scrutinizes them for competitive concerns, and the FCC, which scrutinizes whether they are going to harm or to promote the public interest.

    According to Bloomberg, this merger’s now officially cleared one of those hurdles, as DoJ officials have closed their investigation without even demanding any conditions be applied to the merger.

    The final decision over whether or not to approve the merger has not yet been made, and representatives for the DoJ declined to comment to Bloomberg about the matter.

    Just because the Justice Department is not imposing conditions, however, does not mean none will be imposed. The FCC still has to do its work, and AT&T has made a massive pile of promises to that agency about benefits the merger could deliver, including increasing their GigaPower footprint, increasing competition with Comcast, and increasing broadband penetration in underserved, rural areas.

    AT&T Said to Win Antitrust Approval for DirecTV With FCC Pending [Bloomberg]



ribbi
  • by Kate Cox
  • via Consumerist