вторник, 13 октября 2015 г.

uSan Francisco & L.A. Block App That Helped Drivers Dispute Parking Ticketsr


4 4 4 9
  • (Adam Fagen)
    Fixed is a smartphone app that tried to help drivers dispute parking tickets, but that aspect of the service is no longer usable in San Francisco, Los Angeles, or Oakland after those cities blocked the company’s access to their parking enforcement websites.

    The app worked by having real humans review photos of your ticket to look for common errors and review Google Street View images to check for signage problems. Fixed would then send a customized letter to parking authorities; if it got the ticket thrown out, you paid a fee of 25% of the original ticket. If the appeal didn’t work, you could still pay your ticket through Fixed.

    But San Francisco’s parking enforcement folks apparently didn’t want to hear from a company whose business model was based on overturning parking tickets.

    According to TechCrunch, first the city tried to stop Fixed from faxing the agency — going so far as to disconnect their fax machines.

    Then the city directed Xerox, which operates the parking ticket websites for San Francisco, L.A., and Oakland, to start blocking the company’s access to these sites.

    At first, it was a simple Captcha check and a block on Fixed’s IP addresses. Those were just speed bumps, but then Xerox hired yet another third party to bolster the blocking. Fixed says it could still get around these roadblocks, but it wasn’t worth the effort, especially since Xerox was now doing the blocking in all three of the markets for which it handled tickets.

    So last month, the company put a halt on the parking ticket service and transitioned to handling disputes over moving violations.

    “Parking Ticket Fines account for 15% of the SFMTA [San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency] operating budget,” Fixed founder David Hegarty tells TechCrunch, “and it looks like they objected to us providing some accountability to their process.”



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist


uRich People Can Get A $25K Tax Break On $100K Tesla Model Xr


4 4 4 9
  • modelxAre you a well-off small-business owner who really wants to buy an expensive electric SUV but don’t want to pay full price? Then you’re lucky that the Tesla Model X is so heavy that it qualifies for a $25,000 tax credit.

    Section 179 of the IRS Code allows for small-business owners to get a tax deduction of up to $25,000 for purchasing a passenger vehicle weighing more than 6,000 pounds.

    It’s a loophole that has previously been used on top-dollar hefty gas-guzzling vehicles like the Hummer and H2, but can be applied to the more eco-friendly Tesla SUV when it launches in the coming months.

    The company has yet to announce a sticker price for the Model X, but based on the average pricing for the current Model S from the company, it’s expected that buyers will pay anywhere from $80,000 to $130,000, depending on features.

    Unlike the $7,500 federal credit that can be immediately applied to the purchase price of the car, the $25,000 is deducted from the buyer’s taxable income on their tax return. Thus, it doesn’t have a 1:1 effect in terms of saving from the car’s face value.

    The L.A. Times estimates that a Model X buyer paying 33% of their income to the federal government would see a net savings of $8,250.

    While the savings are good for buyers’ bottom lines, some wonder if these buyers deserve a break at the expense of taxpayers.

    “This is a high-priced vehicle that only wealthy people can buy,” Karl Brauer of Kelley Blue Book tells the Times. “There are a lot of people who believe we have already done enough to help Tesla.”



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist


uAllegiant Airlines Plane Is Second To Catch Fire At Las Vegas Airport In Two Monthsr


4 4 4 9
  • (Brian Brodeur)

    For the second time in two months, a commercial airplane full of passengers caught fire at the Las Vegas airport. An Allegiant Airlines flight bound for Fresno was evacuated after a fire broke out in the plane’s engine.

    The Associated Press reports that Allegiant Air flight 516 was preparing to takeoff on Sunday when pilot aborted the maneuver and taxied the aircraft to a remote area of the airport.

    A spokesperson for the airport says firefighters met the plane and extinguished the fire within 30 seconds. The 160 passengers and six crew members on the flight were shuttled back to the terminal and placed on a different aircraft. No injuries were reported.

    The fire is the second in two months at the airport. Back in September, a British Airways flight heading to London with 159 passengers and 13 crew members on board, experienced engine failure resulting in an intense fire.

    Passengers and crew members utilized the plane’s emergency slides to escape the fire. In all, 14 people were taken to a local hospital after suffering minor injuries from sliding down the chutes after the fire broke out.

    Sunday’s fire is just the latest in a long line off issues for budget carrier Allegiant, which announced back in August that it would inspect its fleet of planes following an incident in which an aircraft had trouble during takeoff.

    Federal regulators said in July that they had stepped up scrutiny of the budget carrier after a string of in-flight disturbances and accusations from a pilot’s union of poor safety standards.

    At the time, a spokesperson for Allegiant said that the airline generally has a high number of diversions – although, he didn’t specify a number – because it doesn’t have mechanics in most cities it services.

    Allegiant Air’s problems continue with engine fire in Las Vegas [The Associated Press]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uPicture Vs. Reality: Shelf-Stable Breakfast Editionr


4 4 4 9
ribbi
  • by Laura Northrup
  • via Consumerist


uBudweiser & Miller Inch Closer To Altar With Agreement On $104.2B Dealr


4 4 4 9
  • (bluwmongoose)
    Last week, leadership at beer giant SABMiller was not thrilled with Anheuser-Busch InBev’s official marriage proposal, saying it “substantially” undervalued the company. But today Miller announced that the boards of both companies had reached an agreement on principle for a merger valued at $104.2 billion.

    Perhaps nudged by shareholders at tobacco giant Altria, which owns about a quarter of Miller shares, the board of SABMiller said today it would unanimously recommend acceptance of InBev’s all-cash offer of around $67/share — a 50% premium over the stock price as of a month ago when the possible deal was first announced.

    Altria and Miller’s other large shareholder, the Santo Domingo family of Colombia, will receive slightly less per share for their 41% of the company, but they will also receive some stock in the merged entity in return.

    If the deal falls apart, AB InBev would be on the hook for a $3 billion “reverse break fee” payable to Miller.

    That’s a substantial risk, given the regulatory hurdles this merger will face in the U.S. and abroad.

    Stateside, both companies will likely have to sell off a number of brands to win over antitrust investigators. If AB InBev and SABMiller were allowed to combine without divesting any of their U.S. brands, the combined company would control around 70% of the American beer market.

    As we’ve mentioned previously, the two companies appear to be okay with giving up some business in the U.S. and other markets where they both dominate store shelves. Instead, the idea is to create a truly global beer company — acquiring SABMiller’s African business gives AB InBev access to a market it has not dominated, while Miller brands could flow into AB InBev markets like South America, Central Europe, and Canada.



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist


uStarbucks Launches “Green Apron Delivery” Pilot At Empire State Buildingr


4 4 4 9
  • (Ron G)

    After months of will-they-won’t-they, Starbucks has officially begun tests of what it’s called the most-asked-for service: coffee delivery. About 12,000 coffee-lovers in Manhattan’s Empire State Building will have the opportunity to have cups of java dropped off at their workplace with the launch of a pilot program called Green Apron Delivery.

    Starbucks announced the pilot project on Tuesday, about seven months after it was first reported that the coffee chain was eying the iconic building as testing grounds for its service.

    Through the pilot, employees of the 150 tenants in the skyscraper can place orders from a pared down drink and food menu through a dedicated website. Delivery, which is capped at 15 items and comes with a $2 fee, will take place within 30 minutes of the order being processed.

    A green-aproned barista then meets the customers with the delivery at a designated drop-off point, like a reception desk or common area.

    While tourists visiting the building can stop by the company’s express store and cafe in the lobby, delivery is only available for those actually working in the 102-story office building.

    The company says that the Empire State Building was the perfect choice for its tests, as the building-specific environment has a dense population of employees.

    “New York City has always inspired us to consider new ways to innovate for our growing store portfolio and I cannot think of a better location to launch one of the most frequently requested services,” Cliff Burrows, group president, U.S. and Americas, said in a statement. “With Starbucks Green Apron Delivery, we’ve simply moved that moment of connection between our customer and the barista from our place to theirs.”

    Starbucks, which first announced it was looking to get into the delivery game last fall, said back in March that it would begin two distinct approaches to testing such a service.

    At the time, the second approach included delivery via a third-party service in Seattle. There was no word on Tuesday whether that approach was still in the works.



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uPlayboy Learns Internet Exists, Getting Rid Of Nude Photosr


4 4 4 9
  • The cover of a braille edition of Playboy. (Photo: Adam Fagen)
    Playboy magazine, for all its fame as a purveyor of airbrushed breasts and well-lit derrieres, has never really had much in the way of nudity compared to competitors. Now that just about any innocent search on the Internet will eventually bring up more bared flesh than a full issue of Playboy, the magazine has decided it’s about time to put some clothes on.

    The New York Times reports that, starting next spring, Playboy — which has seen its monthly circulation drop from 5.6 million to around 800,000 over the last four decades — will no longer feature nude pictorials in print. There will still be attractive models in alluring poses, but nary a nipple will be seen.

    “That battle has been fought and won,” explains Playboy CEO Scott Flanders. “You’re now one click away from every sex act imaginable for free. And so it’s just passé at this juncture.”

    The magazine is apparently hoping that the lack of nudity will increases its availability to the wider market.

    While the nude photo shoots were always the public focus of Playboy, the periodical has frequently included short fiction by some of literature’s biggest names and the “Playboy Interview” has wrangled in everyone from Hollywood movie stars to civil rights leaders and U.S. presidents.

    “Don’t get me wrong,” Cory Jones, an editor at the magazine, tells the Times, “12-year-old me is very disappointed in current me. But it’s the right thing to do.”



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist