Thursday, January 22, 2015

The Aging of Abercrombie & Fitch


The Aging of Abercrombie & Fitch
Photographer: Finlay MacKay for Bloomberg Businessweek; Prop Stylist: Shawn Patrick Anderson/Bridge; Grooming: Angela Di Carlo
On Sunday morning, Dec. 7, Michael Jeffries called some of the senior executives at Abercrombie & Fitch to discuss the holiday season. That was typical Jeffries. He was the creator and chief executive officer of the modern-day Abercrombie and had controlled virtually every aspect of the company for the past 22 years. He approved every piece of clothing and for a while every employee, too, including the clone army of beautiful young men who stood shirtless at store entrances. He instructed staff on how to present themselves, down to the length of their fingernails. He obsessed over the publication of catalogs filled with cavorting boys and girls that many called pornographic. For years it was sold sealed in plastic, and one had to be 18 years old to buy it. He had built an empire of cool based on preppy, well-made, expensive clothes, worn low and tight.
Jeffries, who is 70, tried to keep up appearances. He lifted weights, barefoot, in the company gym most mornings. He dyed his hair blond and regularly visited his plastic surgeon, according to former executives who spoke on the condition of anonymity. He wore torn Abercrombie jeans and flip-flops around the woodsy campus outside of Columbus, Ohio, though he used to put on his lucky Tod’s loafers to review the numbers every day.
The loafers had stopped working. Sales at established stores had fallen in five of the past seven years, and 2014 wasn’t looking good, either. Profits were expected to be about $106 million, less than half of what they had been in 2012. Jeffries’s pay had been cut by about 70 percent, he had lost his position as chairman of the board, and his employment contract was expiring in February 2015.
Behind this week’s cover.<br /> <br />Photographer: Finlay MacKay for Bloomberg Businessweek; Prop Stylist: Shawn Patrick Anderson/Bridge; Grooming: Angela Di CarloBehind this week’s cover.

Photographer: Finlay MacKay for Bloomberg Businessweek; Prop Stylist: Shawn Patrick Anderson/Bridge; Grooming: Angela Di Carlo

On Monday, Dec. 8, Jeffries didn’t arrive at work in his black Range Rover. He never showed up. Early the next morning, Arthur Martinez, the former CEO of Sears and the chairman of the Abercrombie board since early 2014, called the senior executives into a meeting. He told them that Jeffries was leaving and the company was looking for a new chief executive.
Abercrombie released an awkward final comment from Jeffries. The employee handbook conveys more emotion. “It has been an honor to lead this extraordinarily talented group of people,” Jeffries wrote. “I am extremely proud of your accomplishments. I believe now is the right time for new leadership to take the company forward in the next phase of its development.” No one saw Jeffries in the office again, and he couldn’t be reached for comment.
Martinez, along with the chief operating officer and two senior executives recently brought on, is in charge until the board selects Jeffries’s successor. “The feeling was that it would be difficult, socially and interpersonally, to choose a new CEO with Mike in the chair,” says Martinez. “He was the seminal person, he invested his whole life in the company, but he had to step aside. There is a certain sadness about it. It is the end of an era.”
Robin Lewis, a retail consultant who’s observed Jeffries for years, says Jeffries couldn’t make significant changes to Abercrombie. “Mike indelibly linked his entire persona, his soul, to this brand’s image. He even tried to make himself look like his customers. He used to run around in ripped jeans and a T-shirt. He had plastic surgery,” says Lewis. “For him to change the brand would have taken the greatest psychologist in the world.”


Abercrombie is a $4 billion company with three brands and about a thousand stores in 19 countries. A&F is for college-age men and women, Hollister is for 12- to 18-year-olds, and abercrombie—with a little “a”—is for those under 12. The Abercrombie look across the brands remained almost unchanged since Jeffries first defined it in the mid-1990s: sweatshirts and sweatpants and hoodies—until recently with huge A&F and moose logos—as well as graphic T-shirts, polo shirts, jeans, shorts, and flip-flops. Jeffries has called the style the “essence of privilege and casual luxury.” The A&F stores, mostly in malls, had dark wood shutters and played loud dance music. Black-and-white photos of young men and their abs adorned the walls and the shopping bags.
The attitude—conformist, sexy, exclusive—hadn’t evolved much, either. But teens have. They are shopping at fast-fashion chains such as Forever 21 and H&M, which are dirt cheap. Jeffries didn’t think A&F should discount. He wouldn’t sell clothes bigger than women’s size 10 until about a year ago. It wasn’t until last spring that he allowed the lights to be turned up in the Hollister mall stores and the shutters taken off the A&F ones. He lowered the music and reduced the amount of cologne sprayed in the stores by exactly 25 percent. And he agreed that the logos had to become less prominent, too.
When asked if Abercrombie could ever have the impact on teens it once did, Martinez is almost philosophical, saying, “The wonderful and terrible thing about retail is that occupying the peak is very perilous. Aspiring to and reaching that position puts you in a very vulnerable position. The world moved on, and the company has to move on.”

Abercrombie’s $130 million headquarters is about 15 miles from downtown Columbus in New Albany. There are 12 buildings spread across 300 wooded acres. The guards at the gatehouse wear Abercrombie denim shirts and jeans. Visitors enter through the main building, past a black-and-white photo of a seminude couple making out. Employees get around on scooters. There’s an outdoor area with benches for meetings and a pit for bonfires. A fitness center takes up the floor below the cafeteria, which serves three meals a day. There’s a campus dog.
Jeffries has been reclusive for years. He never really joined retail groups or attended fashion shows, and he isn’t known for philanthropy. He sometimes skipped the company holiday party, and he rarely speaks with journalists. In late April, he agreed to a 15-minute interview on the campus to show how the company was evolving. It was his first face-to-face interview since 2006. Jeffries wouldn’t allow tape recorders or cameras, and his public-relations representative warned that he wouldn’t answer questions about any controversial matters.
Jeffries didn’t really keep an office. He spent most of his time looking over clothes in a room designed to look like a college lecture hall or in a nearby conference room. He sat there, wearing his usual cuffed jeans with a blue-and-white striped oxford shirt and brown flip-flops. Jeffries described the changes he was making in a way that seemed rehearsed: Abercrombie was introducing more fashionable clothes more quickly, taking away some of its logos, and collaborating with Keds on a collection of sneakers. He talked about having faux-fur salons in A&F stores this winter: “I so love that. Isn’t that cool?” (There are no faux-fur salons this winter.) He noted that Hollister dresses could be sold for less. “We feel we put a little more make into the garments than a 16-year-old would appreciate. Does a Hollister dress need to be lined? Probably not.”
When asked about his possible retirement, he said: “Succession planning is a big deal.” Then the 15 minutes were over. He stood up, offered a quick squeeze of the shoulder, and left.


Abercrombie & Fitch was a century old when Jeffries joined in 1992. It had been a sporting goods emporium for adventurers and the elite: It outfitted Teddy Roosevelt, Admiral Byrd, and Charles Lindbergh. Ernest Hemingway shopped there. After falling on hard times, it was bought by the Limited in 1988 for $47 million. A first attempt at reviving the brand failed, leaving Abercrombie to sell croquet sets and long skirts with whale appliqués. Les Wexner, the head of the Limited, hired Jeffries to start over.
Jeffries, then 48, had been at Federated Department Stores before opening Alcott & Andrews, a company aiming to be the Brooks Brothers for women. After six years it went bankrupt. He moved to Paul Harris, another women’s clothing line, which in 1991 also filed for bankruptcy.
When Jeffries arrived at Abercrombie, he wore khakis, oxford shirts, and loafers. He had been married and had a son, but at some point he separated from his wife and quietly came out. His partner, Matthew Smith, was around on social occasions. Leslee Herro, an executive who had been with Abercrombie before Jeffries joined, later recalled Jeffries’s first appearance at a Limited annual meeting: “It was kind of like a pep rally. We were all wearing our cargo shorts and plaid shirts. And all 15, 20 of us in the whole company we’re cheering. I will never forget the image of Mike in my mind, with his arms up in the air, saying, ‘We will be a world-known, fun, spirited brand!’ ”
Abercrombie & Fitch went public in 1996. It had about 125 stores, sales of $335 million, and profits of almost $25 million. Jeffries wrote a 29-page “Look Book” for the sales staff. Women weren’t allowed to wear makeup or colored nail polish. Most jewelry was forbidden. So were tattoos. Hair had to be natural and preferably long. Men couldn’t have beards or mustaches. The only greeting allowed was: “Hey, what’s going on?” Store managers spent one day a week at their local college campus recruiting kids with the right look. They started with the fraternities, sororities, and sports teams. Managers forwarded photos of potential employees to headquarters for approval.
Store Interior: Byron Company/Museum of the City of New York
Jeffries sent a weekly “time line” to each store, listing each task, including exactly how to arrange the clothes. One button had to be left undone if a blouse were hung, two if it were folded. Representatives from headquarters conducted what they called blitzes to make sure standards were met. Rehab teams were sent in if they weren’t. “This is very much a military operation,” Jeffries told the Wall Street Journal in 1997. “It is very disciplined and very controlled.” When Jeffries visited stores, he didn’t challenge managers about payroll or theft, says a former executive—he cared only that the stage was set properly and the staff looked the way he wanted.
In 1997, Jeffries started the A&F Quarterly, a magazine and catalog that sold for $6. Sales staff went on casting calls for the shoots with photographer Bruce Weber. Taylor Swift, Jennifer Lawrence, and Channing Tatum modeled. There were guides to group sex, getting it on in movie theaters, and drinking games. Abercrombie eventually agreed to check the age of potential buyers. When Jeffries shut down the magazine in 2003, he said it was because it was getting boring.
Alisa Durando joined the company in 1996 as a designer. “We could influence Mike about product but not marketing,” she says. “He was phenomenal. He was always creating the movie, the lifestyle story he wanted to project.”
Jeffries’s home looked like an Abercrombie store, with dark wood floors and arty skin pictures. Male models helped out around the house. Jeffries and Smith hosted parties for executives at bonus time or to celebrate a good quarter. Mostly, though, Jeffries worked. He once conducted an earnings call while he was recovering from plastic surgery, his voice hoarse, according to a former executive and an analyst on the call. He would return to work with his face still swollen from a procedure, former executives say. When he traveled, he sent an advance team to make sure his car and hotel looked and smelled the way he wanted. On West Coast trips, he’d call meetings in his hotel room at 5 a.m. Models in Abercrombie outfits were there serving coffee.


He created a fantasy world, and plenty of teens wanted to be part of it. For a decade straight, Abercrombie’s profit increased every year as it expanded to 600 stores. During the 2001 recession, Abercrombie’s sales started slowing, but Jeffries didn’t lower prices. He often waded into controversy. Abercrombie stocked T-shirts that said, “Wong Brothers Laundry Service: Two Wongs Can Make It White.” After Asian American students organized a boycott in 2002, the company pulled the shirts from its shelves. A month later, it introduced thongs for preteen girls printed with “Eye Candy” and “Wink Wink.” Parents protested, and Abercrombie stopped selling those as well.
At the end of 2002, an analyst asked Jeffries if the chain’s tight shirts and low-riding jeans might be unnecessarily excluding some teens from shopping there. “Does it exclude people? Absolutely. We are the cool brand,” Jeffries replied.
Billboard: Richard Levine/Alamy; Jeffries and Weber: Michael Loccisano/Filmmagic/Getty Images
“There was a brand filter that said everything needed to be cute and sexy,” says Durando. “It didn’t matter that we were becoming more narrow in terms of who was able to wear our clothes.”
Abercrombie sometimes seemed like code for something else. Asian American, African American, and Hispanic college students in California sued Abercrombie in 2003 for racial discrimination in its hiring practices. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission joined the case. The suits alleged that minorities were turned down for sales positions, shunted to stockrooms, and had their hours reduced, sometimes to zero, after managers got word that their staff didn’t look Abercrombie enough. The company said it didn’t tolerate discrimination and settled the suits for $50 million without admitting wrongdoing. As part of the deal, Abercrombie was subject to a consent decree that required it to hire a diversity officer and give progress reports to the district court. (This summer the diversity officer left, and Abercrombie gave the responsibilities to another executive.)
In the autumn of 2004, Jeffries introduced Ruehl No.925, a line of clothes for men and women in their mid- to late 20s. He described potential customers as having graduated from college in Indiana and moved to New York City. The Ruehl stores—located in malls—had real brick facades, wrought-iron fences, and antiqued windows to suggest a Greenwich Village town house owned by the fictitious Ruehl family. Ruehl was the only brand in the A&F portfolio allowed to sell black clothes. “He had such high standards. It was inspiring,” says Durando, who led the women’s design team for Ruehl.
Senior executives came and went, none able to exert any influence over Jeffries. If they had ideas different from his, it didn’t turn out well, says a former executive who worked on the business side. Jeffries talked of retiring one day but pushed out potential successors. The board of directors, composed mostly of local businesspeople, deferred to him in this matter, and most others.
In 2005, Jeffries opened a grand A&F store on Fifth Avenue, near Prada and Gucci. The shirtless models at the entrance were held to high standards: Amy Zehrer, the executive in charge of stores, later told investors that managers checked on each guy every 30 minutes to find out “how many photos are being taken with him and to see if it’s on track.”
When Abercrombie opened a store in 2007 around the corner from London’s Savile Row, Jeffries was filmed by the BBC walking down the street in flip-flops. “I believe we are going to be here 200 years from now, living in harmony with these businesses,” he said.
Jeffries introduced a lingerie brand, Gilly Hicks, in 2008. It had an elaborate back story about a woman named Gilly Hicks and her granddaughter who lived in a manor house in Australia. When Beverly House joined Abercrombie to develop Gilly Hicks, she visited Sydney to see what a manor house looked like. “At one point we tried a floor with antique Parisian stone, and it became too bulky,” she says. “So we jackhammered it up. We went way over budget, but that was Mike’s world.”
House says Jeffries hated the way hanging bras looked, so she put most in drawers. “He thought all those bras, with those two big mounds of foam coming at you, was offensive.”
In 2009, Abercrombie closed all 29 Ruehl stores. The brand had lost $58 million the year before. The Gilly Hicks stores survived until 2013; the underwear and bras are still available in Hollister stores and online.
Abercrombie’s same-store sales dropped 13 percent in 2008 and 23 percent in 2009, and though the company remained profitable, signs began to emerge that Jeffries’s personality might overwhelm the business, especially if it wasn’t growing. In 2010 the board limited his use of the company’s Gulfstream G550 to $200,000 annually, although it also gave him a $4 million travel stipend.
Shopping Bag: Jin Lee/Bloomberg
In 2010, Michael Bustin, 53, a pilot who flew the Abercrombie plane, filed an age discrimination lawsuit against the company. Abercrombie’s general counsel said the suit was without merit. The complaint included a 40-page “Aircraft Standards” manual. As Bustin put it in his deposition, “Every single aspect that you can imagine that affected the airplane or our behavior in it was controlled by Abercrombie & Fitch, specifically, Michael Jeffries and Matthew Smith.” The four male crew members (models provided to Abercrombie) had to wear jeans, boxers, polo shirts, and flip-flops. The manual specified the seating arrangements for Jeffries’s three dogs, the length of the spoon Smith required for his tea, and the proper way to respond to requests (“No problem”), fold washcloths, vacuum, dust, and present magazines. When Jeffries was called to give a second deposition in the winter of 2012, Abercrombie settled the case without admitting wrongdoing. The details weren’t made public.
In August 2014 a pension fund in Florida claimed the board breached its fiduciary duties by overpaying Jeffries and noted his partner was allowed to act like an executive. Lawyers obtained internal documents that showed Smith, who had no official role at Abercrombie, had made 170 unannounced visits to stores from August 2011 to November 2013, “providing reports on stores’ appearance, staffs, and atmosphere,” according to the complaint. He had a “direct role” in assessing store openings and closings outside the U.S. On the jet, he received sales reports. (Smith couldn’t be reached for comment.) Earlier this month, the company settled without admitting wrongdoing. In court filings, lawyers for the pension fund said Abercrombie had already improved its corporate governance and had agreed to appoint a chief ethics and compliance officer.


In the spring of 2013, Lewis, the retail expert, noted that the A&F brand didn’t carry large sizes because Jeffries wanted only thin, beautiful people to shop there. Comments to that effect he made in 2006 went viral. That caused new outrage. Soon people were spoofing A&F’s ads and protesting its standards. This time potential customers were complaining, not their parents. Jeffries issued an apology on Facebook. Benjamin O’Keefe, an 18-year-old, started a petition demanding A&F carry bigger sizes. Executives invited him to visit headquarters in May. “I think they realized what was happening, that A&F wasn’t speaking to its customers the right way. But they were afraid of Mike,” says O’Keefe. “My sense was they were like, ‘We appreciate you being here. We hear you. We wish there was something we could do.’ ” He didn’t think anything would come of the conversation. Six months later, A&F announced it would begin selling larger sizes, primarily online.
A Piper Jaffray survey in fall 2013 asked teen girls what brands they no longer wear: A&F and Hollister ranked second and third. (Aéropostale was first.) By the end of 2013, a year in which same-store sales dropped 11 percent at Abercrombie, the company had closed at least 220 mall stores. Another 120 stores in the U.S. would be gone within two years, it said.
“Does it exclude people? Absolutely. We are the cool brand”
Engaged Capital, a hedge fund that owns a small stake in Abercrombie, issued a public letter in December 2013 calling for Jeffries’s resignation and for the company to consider putting itself up for sale. Glenn Welling, the fund’s founder, noted that Jeffries’s total compensation since 2008 was $140 million, second only in his peer group to Ralph Lauren. Abercrombie’s total return to shareholders was far behind its peers’, though. Under pressure from shareholders, Abercrombie restructured Jeffries’s contract to tie his bonus to the company’s performance. The contract was for just one year. In January 2014 the board stripped Jeffries of his role as chairman and brought in four independent board members, including Martinez.
“It took a very dominant, controlling, detail-oriented visionary to build Abercrombie,” says Richard Jaffe, an analyst at Stifel Financial. “And those very same traits undermined the company, kept it from evolving.”
Martinez, who’s 75 and spoke by phone from New Albany, says that the Abercrombie campus will remain the same. But he will wear regular shoes. “I wear flip-flops at the beach,” he says. The Gulfstream has been grounded. The conference room that Jeffries had used as his office is now just a conference room. Martinez sits elsewhere.
He says the first changes will be to the stores. “Mike was very focused on the stagecraft of our stores,” he says. “I would say an inordinate amount of time was spent on shop keeping. We want customers to be first. We don’t have to turn the company and brands on their heads to do that.” The shirtless men are mostly gone, or at least wearing shirts now. The company wouldn’t say if it will continue to enforce the “Look Book.” The store closings in the U.S. will continue as planned. Martinez says that online revenue could account for as much as 40 percent of total sales in three years.
Then there’s the logos. Martinez says Jeffries went too far, so he will add some back, especially internationally, where Abercrombie gets about one-third of its revenue. Beyond that, Martinez can’t say what Abercrombie will look like without Jeffries. That’s for Christos Angelides and Fran Horowitz, the presidents of A&F and Hollister, respectively, and the new CEO to determine. Martinez wouldn’t give any indication of how the search is proceeding. But he did say that Angelides and Horowitz, as well as Jonathan Ramsden, the chief operating officer, are candidates.
It could be too late for Abercrombie to fully revive itself, though. “Getting around a tainted brand is the exception, not the rule,” says Jaffe. “Brands can be left standing for something that means nothing.”
Susan-berfield-photo-200x200
Berfield is a writer for Bloomberg Businessweek in New York. Follow her on Twitter @susanberfield.

Friday, October 21, 2011

Gaddafi family demands body; NATO ends Libya war


Related Topics

Men take pictures of Muammar Gaddafi's corpse displayed at a house in Misrata, October 20, 2011.      REUTERS-Thaier al-Sudani
People stand in line to see the body of former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in Misrata, October 21, 2011. REUTERS-Saad Shalash
Libyan Leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi holds out his hand during his speech at the Summit for the Non-aligned Countries in Belgrade, September 5, 1989.REUTERS-Stringer
MISRATA, Libya | Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:02pm EDT
MISRATA, Libya (Reuters) - NATO called an end to its air war in Libya, and the clan of Muammar Gaddafi demanded a chance to bury the body that lay on display in a meat locker after a death as brutal and chaotic as his 42-year rule.In a statement on a Syria-based pro-Gaddafi television station, the ousted dictator's family asked for the bodies of Gaddafi, his son Mo'tassim, and others who were killed on Thursday by fighters who overran his hometown Sirte.
"We call on the UN, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and Amnesty International to force the Transitional Council to hand over the martyrs' bodies to our tribe in Sirte and to allow them to perform their burial ceremony in accordance with Islamic customs and rules," the statement said.
At an understated and sparsely-attended news conference late on Friday, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said the Western alliance had taken a preliminary decision to call a halt to Operation Unified Protector on October 31.
Like other Western officials, Rasmussen expressed no regrets in public about the gruesome death of the deposed Libyan dictator, who was captured alive by the forces of the National Transitional Council but was brought dead to a hospital.
"We mounted a complex operation with unprecedented speed and conducted it with the greatest of care," Rasmussen said. "I'm very proud of what we have achieved."
The NATO operation, officially intended to protect civilians, effectively ended on Thursday with French warplanes blasting Gaddafi's convoy as he and others tried to escape a final stand in Sirte.
Gaddafi was captured wounded but alive hiding in a drain under a road. The world has since seen grainy film of him being roughed up by his captors while he pleads with them to respect his rights.
NTC officials have said Gaddafi later died of wounds in the ambulance, but the ambulance driver, Ali Jaghdoun, told Reuters that Gaddafi was already dead when he picked up the body.
"I didn't try to revive him because he was already dead," Jaghdoun said, in testimony that adds greater weight to the widespread assumption that Gaddafi was lynched.
The U.N. human rights arm said an investigation was needed to into whether he was summarily executed. The interim leaders have yet to decide what to do with the corpse.
BURIAL DISPUTE
In Misrata, a local commander, Addul-Salam Eleiwa, showed off the body, torso bare, on a mattress inside a metal-lined cold-store by a market on Friday. There was a bullet hole in his head.
"He will get his rights, like any Muslim. His body will be washed and treated with dignity. I expect he will be buried in a Muslim cemetery within 24 hours," he said.
Dozens of people, many with cellphone cameras, filed in to see that he was dead.
"There's something in our hearts we want to get out," said Abdullah al-Suweisi, 30, as he waited. "It is the injustice of 40 years. There is hatred inside. We want to see him."
In Tripoli, Gaddafi's death prompted a carnival-like celebration, with fireworks, a bouncy castle and candy floss for the children. "Muammar, bad," one small girl said to foreign journalists in English. "Boom boom."
"For some people from outside Libya it could look wrong that we are celebrating a death with our children," said one man with a child on his shoulders. "But it was 42 years with the devil."
RISKS OF DIVISION
Saif al-Islam, Gaddafi's son and heir-apparent remains at large, believed by NTC officials to have escaped from besieged Sirte and headed for a southern border.
Without the glue of hatred for Gaddafi and his tribe to unite the factions, some fear a descent into the kind of strife that bedevils Iraq after Saddam Hussein. Optimists say that so far Libya's new rulers have quarreled but not fought.
"Can an inclusive, effective national government be formed? Yes, if factions can avoid fighting," Jon Marks, chairman of Britain's Cross Border Information consultancy said.
In Washington, State Department spokesman Mark Toner said the NTC had promised to explain how Gaddafi was killed.
"They're dealing with the death itself as well as the aftermath in as transparent a way as I think they can," he said. "They've fought bravely to liberate their country from this dictator. And, you know, he met an ignominious end yesterday."
(Additional reporting by Taha Zargoun and Tim Gaynor in Sirte, Barry Malone, Yasmine Saleh and Jessica Donati in Tripoli, Brian Rohan in Benghazi, Jon Hemming and Andrew Hammond in Tunis, Samia Nakhoul in Amman, Christian Lowe in Algiers, Shaimaa Fayed in Cairo, Sami Aboudi in Dubai, Andrew Quinn in Islamabad, Paul Eckert in Washington and David Brunnstrom in Brussels; Writing by Peter Graff; Editing by Matthew Jones)

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Another Visionary Passes Through Our Time. What Is The Legacy You are Leaving?

Steve Jobs Has Passed Away

posted 2 hours ago
MG Siegler has been writing for TechCrunch since 2009. He covers the web, mobile, social, big companies, small companies, essentially everything. And Apple. A lot. Prior to TechCrunch, he covered various technology beats for VentureBeat. Originally from Ohio, MG attended the University of Michigan. He’s previously lived in Los Angeles where he worked in Hollywood and in San Diego where... → Learn More
Screen Shot 2011-10-06 at 12.59.24 AM
 
According to a statement just issued by Apple’s Board of Directors, company co-founder and longtime CEO Steve Jobs has passed away.
Apple has also put up the following website in memory. They’re asking for “thoughts, memories, and condolences” to be shared by way of this email address: rememberingsteve@apple.com
It was only a little over a month ago that Jobs stepped down as CEO saying at the time, “I have always said if there ever came a day when I could no longer meet my duties and expectations as Apple’s CEO, I would be the first to let you know. Unfortunately, that day has come.”
Jobs remained Chairman of the Board at the company, as well as director and an Apple employee. He recommended that company COO Tim Cook take his place as CEO. Yesterday, Cook gave his first keynote address as CEO, unveiling the new iPhone 4S.
While that device had been the focal point of Apple’s website for the past 24 hours, Apple.com is now simply dedicated to Jobs, using a famous picture of him (above) that will also grace the cover of his upcoming biography by Walter Isaacson due out next month.
Jobs had battled cancer, and in 2004 had an operation related to the disease. In recent years, illness had forced him to step back from his role as CEO of Apple on separate occasions. He also had a liver transplant in 2009 during one of those medical leaves.
But after each battle, he came back and continued his amazing work at Apple. In 2007, he unveiled the iPhone. In 2010, the iPad. His last appearance on stage was at Apple’s 2011 WWDC event in San Francisco. There, he laid the groundwork for Apple’s latest innovations including iOS 5, OS X Lion, and iCloud.
That performance as well has his announcement that he was stepping down as CEO of Apple for the final time, led to two of my favorite posts that I’ve ever written. Both were about Jobs:
“It Just Works.”
One More Thing…
Steve Jobs was 56 years old. Rest in peace, Steve.
The release from Apple:
Statement by Apple’s Board of Directors
CUPERTINO, Calif. — We are deeply saddened to announce that Steve Jobs passed away today.
Steve’s brilliance, passion and energy were the source of countless innovations that enrich and improve all of our lives. The world is immeasurably better because of Steve.
His greatest love was for his wife, Laurene, and his family. Our hearts go out to them and to all who were touched by his extraordinary gifts.
The statement from Jobs’ family:
Steve died peacefully today surrounded by his family.
In his public life, Steve was known as a visionary; in his private life, he cherished his family. We are thankful to the many people who have shared their wishes and prayers during the last year of Steve’s illness; a website will be provided for those who wish to offer tributes and memories.
We are grateful for the support and kindness of those who share our feelings for Steve. We know many of you will mourn with us, and we ask that you respect our privacy during our time of grief.
Tim Cook’s email to Apple employees:
Team,
I have some very sad news to share with all of you. Steve passed away earlier today.
Apple has lost a visionary and creative genius, and the world has lost an amazing
human being. Those of us who have been fortunate enough to know and work with Steve have lost a dear friend and an inspiring mentor. Steve leaves behind a company that only he could have built, and his spirit will forever be the foundation of Apple.
We are planning a celebration of Steve’s extraordinary life for Apple employees that will take place soon. If you would like to share your thoughts, memories and condolences in the interim, you can simply email rememberingsteve@apple.com.
No words can adequately express our sadness at Steve’s death or our gratitude for the opportunity to work with him. We will honor his memory by dedicating ourselves to continuing the work he loved so much.
Tim
The message on Apple’s website:

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

A MUST READ: Does Obama Plan to Tax $200,000 Fix The Economy?

Bloomberg

Obama Plan to Begin Taxing Health Insurance Stirs Opposition

September 14, 2011, 3:22 PM EDT
By Steven Sloan and Kathleen Hunter
(Updates with Hatch comment starting in 11th paragraph.)
Sept. 14 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama is asking lawmakers to tax the health insurance benefits of top earners, stirring opposition from congressional Democrats who fought a similar proposal in the 2010 health-care law.
The proposal, tucked deep inside the 155-page jobs legislation Obama submitted to Congress on Sept. 12, would make health plans provided by employers partially taxable for couples earning more than $250,000 a year and individuals earning more than $200,000.
For these taxpayers, the proposal is a dramatic departure from their current tax treatment, in which all of their health benefits are exempt from taxation. It also revives a debate among Democrats over whether taxing health insurance plans for the wealthy sets the stage for one day expanding the tax to lower-income brackets.
“I didn’t support taxing health-care plans when we debated the health-care bill,” said Representative Bill Pascrell, a New Jersey Democrat who is a member of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee. “If it was up today, I wouldn’t vote for it.”
The resistance from Obama’s fellow Democrats indicates the president’s plan may not survive intact, as leaders of the Republican-controlled House have said they oppose other tax provisions intended to offset the cost of cutting payroll tax rates and spending on infrastructure, schools and aid to states.
Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois, the chamber’s No. 2 Democrat, said the caucus isn’t united behind Obama’s proposals to cover the bill’s $447 billion cost. Some Democrats would again oppose taxing some health plans, he said.
Earlier Debate
House Democrats last year forced revisions to a tax on high-value insurance plans that was included in the health-care law. Labor unions, which have fought to increase benefits for members as companies resisted wage increases, objected to the levy and pushed successfully to increase the threshold and delay implementation.
Starting in 2018, a 40 percent tax will be levied on plans worth more than $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families. The tax will be paid by insurance companies, though opponents argue costs will be passed on to consumers.
The insurance proposal included in the jobs package would affect taxpayers in the top brackets starting in 2013. That year, under the administration’s assumption that lower tax rates for high earners passed under President George W. Bush are allowed to expire, someone in the 36 percent bracket with a $10,000 health insurance policy would be required to pay an additional $800. Someone in the 39.6 percent bracket with a $20,000 policy would pay an extra $2,320.
Little Notice
Obama didn’t mention the health-care proposal during a trip to Ohio yesterday to promote the jobs package. The administration’s summary doesn’t specifically mention it, and the administration hasn’t promoted the policy rationale.
“This administration that tries to boast about how transparent it is certainly did not make clear” that it was proposing to tax health insurance, said Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, the top Republican on the Finance Committee, at a panel hearing today.
Hatch said the administration’s position was “odd” given that it ran campaign ads in 2008 criticizing a proposal from Republican candidate John McCain that included taxation of health insurance.
‘Cadillac’ Plans
An administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said there was no comparison between taxing plans for the highest earners and the earlier debate over taxing high- value, so-called Cadillac, health plans. The official, who wasn’t authorized to speak on the record about the proposal, said it targets high-income taxpayers who get a greater benefit from the current tax structure than middle-income workers.
The official declined to comment on objections being raised by Democrats.
Senator Barbara Mikulski, a Maryland Democrat whose state includes some of the wealthiest counties in the U.S., said she didn’t support the health-care tax.
“I disagree with the president,” she said.
The proposal, she said, would be problematic for people with fluctuating incomes. Some of her constituents “might make one year $300,000 and the next year $30,000,” she said.
Democratic Skepticism
Representative Richard Neal, a Massachusetts Democrat who is on the Ways and Means panel, said “there is great skepticism” among party lawmakers about the ways Obama has proposed to pay for the jobs bill. He called the offsets “talking points.”
Representative Joe Courtney, a Connecticut Democrat, was one of the staunchest opponents in the House to the administration’s proposal to tax health insurance plans based on the size of their premiums. He said yesterday that the administration’s focus on income thresholds is better.
“To the extent that it’s limited to the highest of incomes, I think you could make some argument that that’s really not threatening employment-based benefits as a public policy,” he said. “This one is not really targeted at scope of benefits as much as it is means testing.”
Compared with the tax on high-cost plans included in the health-care overhaul, the new administration proposal would do less to encourage insurers and employers to rein in health care costs, said Paul van de Water, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a Washington-based group that advocates for low-income people.
Higher Taxes
“Its effect will be much more focused simply on raising taxes on upper-income people rather than changing behavior,” he said. “That’s not a bad thing.”
The health-care provision is part of a broader proposal from the administration to cap at 28 percent itemized deductions as well as limit other deductions, such as moving expenses, and some exclusions for high-income taxpayers. Interest earned on municipal bonds by wealthy individuals would be subject to the 28 percent threshold.
Capping the range of deductions and exclusions would generate about $400 billion in revenue over a decade, according to the administration’s estimates. Obama would also find revenue by taxing the carried interest, or profits-based compensation, of private equity managers, real estate investors and venture capitalists as ordinary income, instead of more lightly taxed capital gains.
Obama’s chief spokesman, Jay Carney, said yesterday the special 12-member congressional panel charged with cutting $1.5 trillion from the nation’s long-term deficit can modify the administration proposals, as long as the measures aimed at stimulating hiring are offset. The president wouldn’t veto legislation that enacted only part of his plan, he said.
Obama Would Sign
“He would sign it, and then he would return to press the Congress to get the rest of the job done,” Carney said.
Representative Rob Andrews, a New Jersey Democrat, said the health-care provision was “one of the least objectionable among a bunch of bad ideas.”
“I don’t relish anyone paying more or having to deduct less,” he said. “But given the fact that we’re borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we’re spending, and we need money to pay for this jobs bill, I think that’s a plausible and credible idea.”
--With assistance from Richard Rubin and Kate Andersen Brower in Washington. Editors: Jodi Schneider, Bob Drummond
To contact the reporters on this story: Steven Sloan in Washington at ssloan7@bloomberg.net; Kathleen Hunter in Washington at khunter9@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Silva at msilva34@bloomberg.net

Here Comes Apple's Real TV: APPLE WAR AGAINST CABLE?

Viewpoint September 13, 2011, 8:50 PM EDT

Here Comes Apple's Real TV

A bold, new Apple TV set would replace today’s cable systems, game consoles, and 3D goggles—and launch a war with cable providers

(Corrects 10th paragraph to show the Wii is from Nintendo, not Sony.)
Get ready, America, because by Christmas 2012 you will have an Apple TV in your living room. I don’t mean the cute little box now called “Apple TV” that plugs into your set to stream Netflix (NFLX), but the real deal—a flat-panel Apple (AAPL) television set tied to the company’s online ecosystem and designed as only Apple can do it.
There’s a $14 billion rationale for this prediction but first, let’s explore the rumors. This summer Piper Jaffray (PJC) analyst Gene Munster dug through component suppliers and found evidence that Apple is gearing up to produce a real TV set by late 2012. Venture capitalist Stewart Alsop, a former board member at TiVo (TIVO), has published rumors that Apple has a television coming. And Steve Jobs himself hinted last year that Apple might build a real television unit.
“The television industry … pretty much undermines innovation in the sector,” Jobs said at the All Things Digital Conference in July 2010. “The only way this is going to change is if you start from scratch, tear up the box, redesign, and get it to the consumer in a way that they want to buy it.”
Jobs’s quote is good advice for his successor as chief executive officer, Tim Cook, who needs a hit. The TV industry is changing more than at any time in the past 50 years, and billions of dollars are going into play for the winners. As Apple crests in the phone and tablet markets, its investors will want a new frontier.
TV is the future because it remains king of all media. While handsets get hyped, the typical U.S. consumer watches 5 hours and 9 minutes of TV a day, according to Nielsen (NLSN), and even younger adults 18 to 24 years old—the supposed digital generation—view 3 hours and 30 minutes on televisions daily, vs. only 49 minutes on the Web and 20 minutes on mobile. We all love to lean back. With so much of the consumer’s time, TV has become bloated with waste. The average U.S. home receives 130 cable channels but “tunes to”—or punches in the exact channel number on the remote—just 18 channels a year. Channel surfing has died. A whopping 86% of available channels are never used by an individual viewer.

Lots of Disenchanted TV Subscribers

Consumers pay a lot for all this video waste and they don’t like it. The average cable bill is $75 per month, which means that each year 83 million households pay $74 billion to the top eight TV-subscription services. This is why so-called “cord cutting,” by which consumers drop cable to watch videos on Roku, Hulu, or the Xbox 360 from Microsoft is (MSFT) accelerating; Comcast (CMCSA), the leading U.S. cable system, lost 238,000 subscribers in the second quarter. If Apple were to offer a better service, people might pay up for it.
A second lure for Apple is TV advertising. Unlike U.S. mobile-ad spending, which EMarketer says will barely break $1 billion in 2010 despite years of hype, the TV ad spend in the U.S. totaled $70 billion in 2010 and is forecast by Forrester Research (FORR) to reach $84 billion by 2015. If Apple could gain just 10% of the $74 billion in current video subscription fees and $70 billion in television ad media, it would take in more than $14 billion in additional annual, recurring revenue.
Apple faces plenty of hurdles. For one thing, TV sets are an infrequent purchase. Apple likes to sell products with built-in obsolescence that you “need” to replace every 18 months—iPhone 5, anyone?—and a flashy TV set doesn’t call for an aluminum upgrade next year. Apple also has struggled to get content providers to embrace its current Apple TV box. In August, Apple stopped renting TV shows for 99¢ on the gadget, claiming that consumers overwhelmingly prefer to buy TV shows. But it could be that Apple’s media partners considered 99¢ far too cheap. With billions of dollars at stake, media producers and cable giants will fiercely defend their video-distribution modes.


FULL STORY AT http://www.businessweek.com/technology/here-comes-apples-real-tv-09132011.html

Thursday, August 25, 2011

Steve Jobs: ‘Unfortunately, That Day Has Come’

Steve Jobs: ‘Unfortunately, That Day Has Come’

With his health uncertain, Jobs steps down as Apple’s CEO. Tim Cook takes over

Jim Wilson/The New York Times/Redux
Ever since his surgery for pancreatic cancer in 2004, Steve Jobs has dismissed questions about his health as irrelevant. In a manner both imperious and, given the circumstances, understandable, Jobs said that he would know if or when he was unable to fully execute his duties as Apple’s (AAPL) chief executive officer. “Unfortunately, that day has come,” wrote Jobs to the company’s board of directors and “the Apple Community” on Aug. 24.
On the day of the announcement, a person close to Jobs who was not authorized to speak about his health said the outgoing CEO was in Apple’s Cupertino (Calif.) office for the entire workday and attended a regularly scheduled board meeting. This person described Jobs’s condition as weak but added that his resignation was not indicative of a sudden downturn and that Jobs, while housebound in recent weeks, was up and about. Jobs gathered his senior executive team in an emotional meeting after the news broke. He also made clear he plans to be an active chairman, according to another source familiar with the transition. The market reaction was instantaneous: Apple shares fell as much as 7 percent in extended trading after the announcement.
Jobs’s past 14 years as CEO have been unprecedented—not merely in corporate history, but in the history of American life. Apple—the company he co-founded at the age of 21, was exiled from, and nurtured obsessively into the second-most-valuable corporation in the world after ExxonMobil (XOM) —dominates technology and popular culture. Rivals as diverse as Research In Motion (RIMM), Nokia (NOK), Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), Google (GOOG), and the entire music industry have been forced to change strategies or abandon once-thriving models in the face of its success. Yet each triumph has been accompanied by poignancy. Pictures of Jobs introducing iPhones and iPads over the last three years show a man disappearing before our eyes, leading some to wonder about his daily role. “He hasn’t been a driving force for the past two years,” says Daniel Genter, who oversees about $3.7 billion as president of RNC Genter Capital Management in Los Angeles.
Still, it’s a testament to his products that his obvious deterioration has done little to shake investors and only added to his legend. Apple stores are packed because the products are good, and sometimes even beautiful. But buying an iPhone while Steve Jobs is still alive is something to tell your kids about, like buying a Model T from Henry Ford.
As an oracle, Jobs, 56, is irreplaceable. His designated successor, Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook, who proved his ability to run Apple since Jobs’s first medical leave in 2004, has officially been guiding the company since January. Hired by Jobs in 1998 from Compaq, Cook, 50, quickly oversaw the creation of Apple’s online store and the rollout of its candy-colored iMacs (no more beige) and soon had Apple running with less inventory than even Dell (DELL). He also helped Apple to ramp up production of iPods, iPhones, and iPads at rates never before imagined—with only rare gaffes. He revamped Apple’s support, such that customer satisfaction ratings soared right along with volume.
While he lacks Jobs’s charisma and vision, Cook has endeared himself to Apple staff through sheer accumulation of work hours and unfailing loyalty. Despite overtures from HP and numerous other big tech companies, Cook hasn’t budged. Does he have the right stuff to lead Apple? “The good Lord created only one Steve Jobs,” says former Microsoft (MSFT) CFO John G. Connors, who sits on Nike’s (NKE) board with Cook, but “Apple will be wildly successful under his leadership.”
The bottom line: Protecting Apple’s position as the dominant force in tech falls to Tim Cook, an ace manager though not a showman of Jobs’s caliber.

Burrows is a senior writer for Bloomberg Businessweek, based in San Francisco. Tyrangiel is editor of Bloomberg Businessweek and an executive editor of Bloomberg News

Libya: Can It Become an Oil Superpower?

Libya: Can It Become an Oil Superpower?

Qaddafi’s ouster would present opportunities for oil companies, but Libya needs stability first

Benghazi rejoices at news that rebels have seized Qaddafi’s compound Benghazi rejoices at news that rebels have seized Qaddafi’s compound Gianluigi Guercia/AFP/Getty Images
The messiest part of war is how it ends. Even as Libyan rebels and their supporters fired rifles in the air and poured into Green Square to celebrate the downfall of Muammar Qaddafi, the scenes at the Mujama Aleiadat hospital in Misrata, 130 miles from Tripoli, told a grimmer story. The hospital’s corridors were jammed with the wounded, including a 3-year-old boy hit in the arms and abdomen by shrapnel from a shell that also killed his 6-year-old brother in neighboring Zlitan. One of the hospital’s own, a 20-year-old medic who crewed ambulances into the front lines since the start of the war, had been killed by a sniper bullet. “Qaddafi has lost, but people are still fighting,” says Dr. Mohammed Ahmed, who was caring for the wounded boy. “I don’t know why.”
The apparent end of the dictator’s brutal, often bizarre, 42-year rule was greeted with relief not just among ordinary Libyans, but also by leaders of the NATO countries who had launched a hastily arranged anti-Qaddafi military campaign that’s now lasted more than six months. The work of stabilizing post-Qaddafi Libya will take a lot longer than that. Basic services like water and electricity are barely functioning, and the country’s physical infrastructure is in ruins. The rebels, a coalition including longtime Qaddafi opponents and former regime figures, say they intend to establish a democracy, though Libya has neither a political party nor a constitution. Even Mustafa Abdel Jalil, head of the rebels’ National Transitional Council (NTC), warned on Aug. 22 that governing in the post-Qaddafi era will “not be a bed of roses.”
What Libya does have going for it, of course, is oil. With 47 billion barrels of reserves, the 74th-largest economy by gross domestic product possesses 3.4 percent of the world’s known supply. In normal times, oil and gas account for 95 percent of exports and 80 percent of government revenues. The civil war has sent production plummeting, from 1.6 million barrels a day in 2010 to 60,000 recently.
The emergence of a new set of leaders has already set oil companies hustling to grab a stake of a hugely lucrative market. Their prospects, as much as those of the Libyan people, depend on how quickly a group of disputatious opposition figures with no experience governing together can bring order to a devastated nation. “You can’t divorce the political transition from how fast oil is going to come online,” says Edward P. Djerejian, director of the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University in Houston and a former U.S. ambassador to Israel and Syria. “They have to move together; there has to be a strong sense of political stability.”

History says Libya is not a good bet to become an oil superpower anytime soon. Three decades after the Iranian revolution in 1979, production there has yet to be completely restored. Iraq needed four years to equal its output before the 2003 U.S. invasion, and the ex-Soviet Union countries required as much as a decade. “Libya is not as extreme a case as Iran, but it is not going to be easy,” says Peter Hutton, an analyst at RBC Capital Markets in London.
For centuries Libya has been divided along geographic and tribal lines with a weak central government in the middle. Over the last four decades, Qaddafi was the government, reserving all important decisions, including on key oil concessions, for himself. His talent as a global attention-hog may have been unique, but as a ruler he hewed to the dictator’s playbook: dispensing patronage to his loyalists, creating a cult of personality, and brutally persecuting his enemies. His sins against his citizens may dwarf his sins against the state, but he undermined the machinery of government and commerce at every chance. “Here is a country where the grand leader by design gutted all institutions of governance,” says Robert Danin, a senior fellow for the Middle East and Africa at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington. “When he leaves, there goes the state.”

FULL STORY AT http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/libya-can-it-become-an-oil-superpower-08242011.html