Business

No Image

Nevada Shuts Down Daily Fantasy Sports Sites

Nevada regulators have ordered daily fantasy sports sites like FanDuel and DraftKings to shut down, saying the businesses can’t operate in the state without a gambling license.

The sites, which claim they operate under a chance-based wagering model — not skill-based — and therefore should not be subject to gambling regulations, have soared in popularity over the last year, the Associated Press reports. But recently, increased scrutiny by regulators have dampened some of the excitement surrounding the sites.

In fact, Nevada’s order comes just one day after it was reported that federal authorities had begun questioning the practices of daily fantasy sites, according to The New York Times.

The FBI reportedly asked daily fantasy sports players whether the sites accepted bets from states where the practice is prohibited and if daily fantasy site employees benefited improperly from insider knowledge.

The questioning began shortly after a DraftKings employee accidentally released data showing which NFL players were started in the most fantasy lineups — before some games had started.

As we reported at the time, that same employee won $350,000 in a contest on rival site FanDuel, which prompted New York state to open an investigation.

The incident also spurred DraftKings and FanDuel to issue a joint statement saying that they valued “the integrity of the games” and were temporarily barring their employees from participating in either site’s contest.

It remains to be seen if the growing backlash against the sites will interrupt their meteoric rise. As Sports Business Daily reported, investors and participants alike quickly embraced the daily fantasy sports model.

“In 2014, 1.5 million Americans paid more than $1 billion in tournament entry fees and FanDuel grew 300 percent in active customers. Yahoo announced on July 8 that it will join the fray. KKR,Comcast/NBC and others have invested in FanDuel, whose valuation now exceeds $1 billion. DraftKings’ exclusive advertising deal with Disney reportedly guarantees $250 million in advertising on ESPN. With sponsorships in every U.S. major league, DFS advertising will soon exceed the levels of online poker sites PokerStars and FullTilt during the pre-2011 poker boom.”

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Fact Check: Did Glass-Steagall Cause The 2008 Financial Crisis?

Some Democratic candidates have blamed the 1999 scaling back of the Glass-Steagall Act for the financial collapse. That's arguably only partially true.

Some Democratic candidates have blamed the 1999 scaling back of the Glass-Steagall Act for the financial collapse. That’s arguably only partially true. Mary Altaffer/AP hide caption

itoggle caption Mary Altaffer/AP

Taking on Wall Street makes for good politics in the Democratic Party. And several of the candidates at Tuesday night’s debate had tough words about big banks. That was particularly true of former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Although he didn’t say so directly, O’Malley suggested several times that consolidation in the banking business was a big factor in the 2008 financial crash and that the U.S. economy remains vulnerable because of it.

His solution: Bring back Glass-Steagall, the Depression-era law that barred commercial banks from engaging in investment banking that was scaled back in the Clinton administration. We decided to look at O’Malley’s claim about the risks of bank consolidation.

The Claim:

“[T]he big banks — I mean, once we repealed Glass-Steagall back in the late 1999s, the big banks, the six of them, went from controlling, what, the equivalent of 15 percent of our GDP to now 65 percent of our GDP.”

The Big Question:

How much bigger have the largest banks gotten, what did Glass-Steagall have to do with it and, most important, did the scaling back of Glass-Steagall lead to the 2008 financial collapse?

The Broader Context:

Despite what O’Malley and many other people believe, Glass-Steagall was not technically repealed in 1999, but it was effectively neutered. Legislation was passed that year that allowed bank holding companies to engage in previously forbidden commercial activities, such as insurance and investment banking.

The change in the law opened the floodgates for giant mergers, such as the $33 billion deal between J.P. Morgan and Chase Manhattan in September of 2000. During the darkest days of the financial crisis, Bank of America acquired two troubled financial companies — Countrywide Financial Services and Merrill Lynch, deals that wouldn’t have been possible before 1999.

The Long Answer:

The biggest banks are a lot bigger than they once were, mostly because of mergers and acquisitions. What’s not in dispute is that changes to Glass-Steagall allowed the biggest banks to grow bigger, which has raised new concerns about risks to the financial system.

At issue is the “too big to fail” problem: Will the federal government once again be forced to come to the aid of federally insured megabanks that have taken outsize risks with their money?

Since 2008, regulatory changes in the U.S. and abroad have supposedly mitigated that danger. The Dodd-Frank financial overhaul bill contains complicated provisions that would allow regulators to step in and take over failing banks, if necessary.

But there’s plenty of skepticism that the changes have gone far enough.

Some critics, such as Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, have long seen the changes to Glass-Steagall as a major factor in the 2008 crash. By bringing “investment and commercial banks together, the investment bank culture came out on top,” Stiglitz wrote in 2009. “There was a demand for the kind of high returns that could be obtained only through high leverage and big risk-taking.”

But others, like former Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, have said the focus on Glass-Steagall is misguided. They argue other factors were more important in causing the 2008 crisis, such as bad mortgage underwriting, poor work by the ratings agencies and a securitization market gone crazy. All of that would have happened no matter the size of the big banks.

In fact, some of the financial institutions that fared the worst, such as Bear Stearns, AIG, Lehman Brothers and Washington Mutual, weren’t part of large bank holding companies at all.

“I have often posed the following question to critics who claim that repealing Glass-Steagall was a major cause of the financial crisis: What bad practices would have been prevented if Glass-Steagall was still on the books?” wrote former Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Alan Blinder. “I’ve yet to hear a good answer.”

Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona teamed up to sponsor a bill that would bring back Glass-Steagall-type restrictions.

It was never allowed to come up for a vote.

The Short Answer:

The 1999 changes to Glass-Steagall led to much bigger banks, but that was, at best, just one factor in the 2008 financial crisis.

Sources:

  • Hearing before the Joint Economic Committee, “Financial Regulatory Reform: Protecting Taxpayers and the Economy,” Nov 19, 2009
  • Stiglitz, Joseph, “Capitalist Fools,” Vanity Fair, January 2009
  • Blinder, Alan, “It’s Broke, Let’s Fix It: Rethinking Financial Regulation,” Prepared for the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Oct. 23, 2009
  • Sens. Warren, McCain, Cantwell and King, “We Need to Rein In ‘Too Big To Fail’ Banks,” U.S. Senate documents, July 17, 2014
  • Phone interview with Karen Shaw Petrou, Federal Financial Analytics

This story is part of NPR’s fact-checking series, “Break It Down,” in which we try to cut through the spin and put things in context. Have something you want us to fact check? Put it in the comments section or send us an email at nprpolitics@npr.org.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Twitter's Suspension of Sports Media Revives Debate Over Fair Use

Heath Miller of the Pittsburgh Steelers makes a reception at the 1-yard line while defended by Brandon Flowers of the San Diego Chargers at Monday's game in San Diego, Calif.
2:31

Download

Heath Miller of the Pittsburgh Steelers makes a reception at the 1-yard line while defended by Brandon Flowers of the San Diego Chargers at Monday’s game in San Diego, Calif. Donald Miralle/Donald Miralle/Getty Images hide caption

itoggle caption Donald Miralle/Donald Miralle/Getty Images

Football’s popularity has made it among one of the most lucrative business franchises. So it should come as no surprise that the NFL and other organizations holding the broadcasting rights to games felt very strongly about Deadspin and SB Nation, popular sports publications, attracting readers by posting highlights on Twitter.

What came next were complaints of copyright violations. Then came Twitter’s suspension of the accounts. Now comes the question: Do GIFs of sports highlights qualify as fair use?

Parker Higgins, director of copyright activism at civil liberties non-profit Electronic Frontier Foundation, says that may be the case.

“It’s a very small portion of the original,” he says. “It’s in a different context, because there’s no sound. It’s not surrounded by game footage. It does seem like some of these could be fair use.”

Fair use, or “fair dealing” as it’s known in other countries, allows people to reproduce copyrighted material for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching or research. The U.S. test for fair use involves four steps that evaluate:

  1. the purposes of the use (is it commercial?),
  2. the nature of the copyrighted work,
  3. how big of a portion is being reproduced,
  4. and how the reproduction will impact the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Disputed uses are often settled in court, and Twitter’s own policies say fair use cases are determined on a case-by-case basis. Its transparency reports show that in the majority of the cases, the company does remove material from its website.

In the instance of complaints from the NFL, the Southeastern Conference, the Big 12 Conference and the Ultimate Fighting Championship, Deadspin’s Twitter account was quickly restored, while the SBNationGIF account remained suspended as of Tuesday evening.

Vox Media, which owns SB Nation, says it’s working with Twitter to resolve the issues. Vox’s statement also said the company always tries to “keep our use of unlicensed third party footage within the bounds of fair use.”

Both publications should have known better, says Forrester Research analyst (and football fan) Nate Elliott.

“I don’t know if it’s the exact wording, but if you’re like me, every Sunday at least twice you heard, ‘Images, pictures and descriptions may not be used without the express written consent of the National Football League,’ ” Elliot says.

Nu Wexler, a Twitter spokesman, says the company does not comment on individual accounts, though he shared links to the individual complaints involved, which have now been posted in the Chilling Effects database that tracks requests to remove online content.

The media companies theoretically could dispute the sports organizations’ complaints. Deadspin’s owners at Gawker Media don’t plan to sue the NFL “at this time,” says acting executive editor John Cook, and adds:

“But its contempt for its fans—and Twitter’s contempt for its users—is baffling to us.”

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Behind The Rise In Hotel Rates — And How It's Benefitting Airbnb

3:12

Download

The cost of a hotel room is up — a lot. Recently, prices have leapt nationwide at triple the rate of inflation. Even some business travelers are turning to peer-to-peer rentals to escape the prices.

Transcript

KELLY MCEVERS, HOST:

The cost of a hotel room is going up a lot. In big cities like Boston, Seattle and San Francisco, a regular room is nearly 40 percent more expensive than it was in 2011. From member station WSHU, Charles Lane explains why the economic downturn made room prices go up.

CHARLES LANE, BYLINE: This is another headache you can blame on the recession.

ALAN WEISSMAN: It was as if someone turned a valve off on the money.

LANE: Alan Weissman is a hotel developer, and he says you need money to build hotels. And back during the recession…

WEISSMAN: Literally, overnight, the credit market dried up. This is where you’ll come in. This will be the front door here.

LANE: Weissman is showing off his latest, a five-story Hilton in Westchester just north of New York City. Framers have the walls studded out, and Weissman hopes to get windows in before winter so they can have rooms ready by summer. And travelers will be glad to have them.

WEISSMAN: I think there was an absolute stop in new construction, so there’s kind of a back log.

LANE: The recession-induced lag in construction lasted until 2012. Once money started flowing again, developers raced to catch up. But it takes time to build a hotel. Today, some 132,000 hotel rooms are being built. Until they’re done, there simply aren’t enough beds to go around. And right now, demand is huge from business travelers. Coleen Clark is managing editor of Jet Setter, an online magazine and hotel booking site.

COLEEN CLARK: The economy’s good. People are traveling more. Gas prices have gone down, so it’s even cheaper to get around now. So people are on the road more.

LANE: It’s a double whammy – short supply and high demand with business travelers. But then there’s this third whammy – vacationers. Clark says social media is rewiring what people value in life.

CLARK: These amazing vacation shots of – people are taking all the time might be the one vacation they take every year. But when you look at a feed, you’re seeing these pictures every day. And so I think a lot of times, vacation’s just top of mind now.

LANE: The bottom line is sticker shock. In some cities, run of the mill hotel rooms are renting for $400 to $500 a night.

CLARK: And as demand has gone up, prices have gone up as well.

LANE: That can be tough on business travelers whose budgets are sometimes capped by company per diem policies.

MARC MCCABE: We say that business trips are the trips you have to take, not necessarily the ones that you want to take.

LANE: Marc McCabe runs the business travel division for Airbnb, the home-sharing website. When hotel rates first started going up, McCabe says travel managers for large companies reached out to him for ways to cut costs. Airbnb will soon add more features aimed at more comfortable business travel.

MCCABE: Airbnb has the opportunity, I think, to make business travelers feel a little bit more at home and to give a traveler who’s on, you know – in the same location for two or three weeks that extra space to cook some food, to wash their own clothes.

LANE: McCabe says the hotel shortage and the recession catapulted Airbnb to where they are now. The company plans to sell stock and says they’re worth $24 billion. Still, even McCabe says traditional hotels won’t be replaced. He sees peer-to-peer rentals more like a safety valve for when sporting events or conventions bring to town more heads than beds. For NPR News, I’m Charles Lane.

Copyright © 2015 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Scrubbing A Trade Deal: Translators Get Behind The Ears Of The TPP

President Barack Obama speaks about the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, at the Agriculture Department in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 6.
3:56

Download

President Barack Obama speaks about the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, at the Agriculture Department in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 6. Nicholas Kamm /AFP/Getty Images hide caption

itoggle caption Nicholas Kamm /AFP/Getty Images

Ever since the Obama administration announced last week it had agreed to a massive trade deal, called the Trans-Pacific Partnership, lawmakers have been saying they must review the agreement’s specific language before passing judgment.

“Without having read it … I’m going to reserve my time to read it,” Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, told NPR when asked whether TPP would win support in Congress.

So, why don’t members of Congress just take a look at the TPP? If the administration has signed off on the trade agreement involving the U.S. and 11 other Pacific Rim countries, then where is the document?

For now, it is indisposed while getting cleaned up.

But it’s not taking a shower. Rather, the TPP is getting a “legal scrub.”

That’s the term used by the U.S. Trade Representative’s office to describe the process that follows a handshake deal. Lawyers, translators and other staffers have to come up with the final, detailed language that ensures the deal is clear in each country.

That’s not easy. TPP includes Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam. So documents have to line up precisely in English, Japanese, Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Malay and more.

The deal was closed on Monday, and later in the week, U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman told reporters that scrubbing all of the words in a document covering 30 chapters may take about a month.

Then, the TPP will be made available online. Congress will have at least 90 legislative days to review it. Both the House and Senate must approve implementing legislation for TPP to take effect.

For now, everyone can see overview material posted by the USTR office.

Deciding whether to approve the TPP will be difficult for many lawmakers. Most business groups strongly support it, but labor groups, environmentalists and others — including many Tea Partiers — are fiercely opposed.

As long as the “scrubbing” goes on, the lawmakers can keep their hands clean of the TPP. But at some point in 2016, they will be pushed to make a decision. Most analysts are predicting the vote will happen between Easter and Memorial Day.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Some Cars Ads Taking Shots At Older Drivers

3:56

Download

Car ads don’t seem keen on aging consumers. NPR’s Scott Simon and national desk correspondent Ina Jaffe discuss exactly how ads are becoming Boomer-averse and why.

Transcript

SCOTT SIMON, HOST:

A recent magazine ad for Buick said, we engineered all the grandma out of it. NPR’s Ina Jaffe covers aging and noticed this ad seems to be part of a trend in car advertising. Ina, thanks so much for being with us.

INA JAFFE, BYLINE: Oh, my pleasure, Scott.

SIMON: And where’d you see the ad?

JAFFE: It was in last month’s issue of Bon Appetit magazine. For people who aren’t familiar, it’s a cooking magazine. Almost three quarters of the subscribers are women, and I’m one of them. But I wondered about this ad placement because I just bet a lot of Bon Appetit subscribers are grandmothers.

SIMON: Is it possibly just some advertising copywriter playing off the old it’s not your father’s Oldsmobile line?

JAFFE: Well, they’re definitely re-launching the Buick brand. But in this case, it wasn’t dad’s car. It was grandma’s. And I think I noticed it because of some other car commercials on TV that are using grandmas to make their point.

SIMON: I mean, I think of the three older women who are test-driving a Volkswagen.

JAFFE: Exactly, exactly. They’re known as the Golden Sisters. And they really are sisters, two in their 70s and one is over 80. In at least a couple of the Volkswagen spots, they appear to be sexually harassing much-younger men. There’s one with a blue jean-wearing guy bending over to inspect something on a car in the showroom. And he does not go unnoticed by the sisters.

(SOUNDBITE OF VOLKSWAGEN ADVERTISEMENT)

UNIDENTIFIED ACTRESS #1: You like the color? It’s silver fox.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTRESS #2: Terse, stop it right now. You’re both trying to pick him up.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTRESS #1: You are gorgeous.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR #1: Thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTRESS #3: Do you have junk in your trunk?

SIMON: Oh, my, now, some people would find that funny. Some people would find it offensive.

JAFFE: You know, you’re right, there are bunch of online comments and articles in the trades by people who think these commercials are hilarious, though one column I read thought the ads were so disrespectful, it called them elder abuse. But, you know, you also see the same kind of divide when it comes to a campaign for a BMW SUV. They’re touting the cars three tiers of seats. Mom and dad are sitting in front, brother and sister in the second row. And way in the back with her little face just visible above the seat in front of her is grandma.

(SOUNDBITE OF BMW ADVERTISEMENT)

UNIDENTIFIED ACTRESS #3: Make a left at the drug store.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR #2: Thanks, mom. It’s all right here on the head-up display.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTRESS #3: My mom used to yell heads up when she spotted a twister coming across the plains. (Shouting) Heads up.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR #2: OK, that’s loud, mom.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTRESS #3: That’s how we did it on the plains. We’re plains people.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR #2: You’re from Queens, mom.

JAFFE: And I should mention that grandma’s son, the dad, looks so pained during these exchanges.

SIMON: So is this sexist? Is it ageist, a little of both, or just demeaning?

JAFFE: Well, one of the people I call when I have those questions is Ashton Applewhite. She writes about aging on a blog called This Chair Rocks. And those BMW spots – don’t get her started.

ASHTON APPLEWHITE: I mean, what do we put in the way back of our cars? Groceries, maybe the golden retriever. You know, also, she’s annoying. She’s sort of generally clueless. And those are cliches that we just accept about older people because it hasn’t gone challenged.

JAFFE: And she says the women in the VW commercials are also annoying and clueless. But she gives the ads props for at least acknowledging that the three sisters are sexual beings, which is rare in portrayals of older people.

SIMON: But do you reach women of a certain age by defaming grandmothers?

JAFFE: Well, the head of the Buick brand, Duncan Aldred, told Automotive News that they’re consciously attacking the image of Buick as an old-person’s brand. But you know Scott, maybe he’s on to something. Everyone knows that boomers don’t ever want to get old, right? So maybe even older women don’t want a car that says grandma.

SIMON: NPR’s Ina Jaffe, thanks so much.

JAFFE: Oh, my pleasure.

Copyright © 2015 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Volkswagen Faces Uphill Battle In Repairing Tarnished Reputation

3:54

Download

Volkswagen faces two enormous repair jobs: fixing its polluting diesel cars and its battered reputation. Both may be much harder to fix than anything other scandal-plagued car companies have faced.

Transcript

KELLY MCEVERS, HOST:

Volkswagen now faces two enormously difficult repair jobs. First, fixing millions of polluting VW diesel vehicles, and second, fixing Volkswagen’s reputation after the company was found cheating on emissions tests. Car companies have patched their battered brands before, but, as NPR’s Sonari Glinton reports, the scandal at Volkswagen is different.

SONARI GLINTON, BYLINE: Some practices on Capitol Hill get repeated so often, they become rituals. Every year or so a car CEO gets taken to the woodshed by Congress. It’s kind of like an annual rite – the shaming of the car executives.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

UNIDENTIFIED MAN #1: I don’t see here in GM they’re just whistleblowers.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN #2: You would also be insane if the top executives from the three automakers came here on private jets.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: You just can’t say now, now, and forget the past because people died.

GLINTON: Those were from car hearings past – General Motors’ ignition switch, the auto bailout, Takata air bags, et cetera. And I don’t have to play you a montage to give you a sense of how Congress feels about Volkswagen this week – this bit of tape from Illinois Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky does the trick.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

JAN SCHAKOWSKY: The company’s word isn’t worth a dime. The only thing I want to hear today is exactly how will Volkswagen make this right by consumers.

REBECCA LINDLAND: It’s just another black mark against an industry that, to some extent, people love to hate.

GLINTON: Rebecca Lindland is senior auto analyst with KBB.com. She says the backlash against Volkswagen is different. Beyond the inherent deception, Lindland says the cheat feels personal to people in the U.S. who specifically sought out VW, especially Gen Xers, who are most loyal to the brand.

GLINTON: We went out on a limb. You know, we didn’t go with the obvious choices of a Chevrolet or a Honda. We went with a Volkswagen, and that’s a statement.

GLINTON: Lindland says fixing that relationship will take years, and so will fixing the actual cars.

LINDLAND: The reason that the fix is going to take so long over time is that there’s a number of different generations that are involved and there’s a number of different fixes. So not all vehicles can be fixed through a software upgrade.

GLINTON: Lindland and others say as bad as it may seem for Volkswagen, the company could actually improve its relationship with customers by handling the fix quickly and well. Jack Fitzgerald has been a car dealer since 1966, and he’s had two VW dealerships since the ’90s. He says when it comes to the VW fix, speed matters.

JACK FITZGERALD: Well, the most important thing they can do is to get the matter resolved quickly, get whatever the fix is going to be, and get it installed. And the sooner they do that the sooner the interest in the media will calm down.

GLINTON: Fitzgerald says the anger people feel about Volkswagen is anger he’s felt many times before about other big car companies.

FITZGERALD: Is it cheating to knowingly put out a car with a defective emissions switch that you could fix for a buck or less? How about air bags that you were told by your own employees, it’s going to blow up. But you do it anyway. Isn’t that cheating?

GLINTON: Fitzgerald says customers have a right to be angry, but he’s not surprised.

FITZGERALD: These manufacturers do so many things like this so I suspect that we will periodically run into things like this forever.

GLINTON: Fitzgerald says the real fix would be if consumers paid more attention to recalls, and regulators found the problems and caught the cheaters sooner. Sonari Glinton, NPR News.

Copyright © 2015 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Amazon Takes Aim At Etsy With A New Craft Site, Handmade

Valerie Nethery's LilyEmme Jewelry is among the first artisanal stores to be featured on Handmade, Amazon's new marketplace.
2:25

Download

Valerie Nethery’s LilyEmme Jewelry is among the first artisanal stores to be featured on Handmade, Amazon’s new marketplace. LilyEmme Jewelry hide caption

itoggle caption LilyEmme Jewelry

Amazon is firing yet another shot at a competitor. This time it’s a mega-artisanal shot, at Etsy — the popular craft site. The e-commerce giant on Thursday launched Handmade, a new marketplace for, well, handmade goods. This could be wonderful news for the artisan movement, or terrible news for Etsy, its staunchest supporter to date.

Valerie Nethery got a message out of the blue, from Amazon. “They emailed me directly. I’m not sure how they found me.”

She’s runs a little shop called LilyEmme, and guesses “maybe they found my Instagram, or maybe word of mouth.”

Or maybe through her page on Etsy.

Nethery sells 14-karat gold jewelry that’s handmade and ethical, using eco-friendly stones such as moissanites and ethically sourced conflict-free diamonds.

She’s sold enough on Etsy (and through her own advertising) to make this her full-time job. And like many small-business owners, she wants to grow. So she couldn’t ignore that email.

“Well, it’s Amazon,” she says. “It’s such a big company. I really am passionate about what I do, so — I wanted to be at the forefront of something that I knew was going to be really big.”

Amazon Handmade went live Thursday and Nethery was among the first artisans showcased on it. She says so far, she hasn’t seen a flood of orders but a few inquiries asking how quickly LilyEmme can get items out and what options are available for custom orders.

Amazon is giving artisans a very seductive offer: a chance to reach more than 240 million Amazon customers globally. The store debuts with about 80,000 items from 5,000 sellers.

Amazon’s definition of definition of handmade is quite strict. Items have to be completely factory-free — no help at all from manufacturers or a kit.

Etsy, the incumbent, lets its artisans use that extra help to scale up. Vanessa Haim, a business owner who sells on Etsy, says it’s unclear which business will woo and retain more sellers — and buyers — over time. She asks, “Well, are people going to now just want to go to Amazon for these kind of products?”

It’s an open question.

Etsy went public in April and is under pressure from investors to grow. This move by Amazon could cut into Etsy’s bottom line.

Or, Haim says optimistically, the money Amazon pumps into marketing could make the pie bigger for the handmade industry — bringing in customers who didn’t know to look before. “Maybe instead of, you know, buying this product new, I can get this maybe handmade,” she says.

Etsy says in a statement that it has spent a decade learning how to support artisans and sellers in a way that “no other marketplace can.”

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Fiat Chrysler And United Auto Workers Reach New Tentative Agreement

From left, United Auto Workers President Dennis Williams, Ford Motor Company President and CEO Mark Fields and Ford Executive Chairman William Clay Ford, Jr., at the opening of contract negotiations last July in Detroit.

From left, United Auto Workers President Dennis Williams, Ford Motor Company President and CEO Mark Fields and Ford Executive Chairman William Clay Ford, Jr., at the opening of contract negotiations last July in Detroit. Paul Sancya/AP hide caption

itoggle caption Paul Sancya/AP

Avoiding a possible strike, the United Autoworkers Union and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles have reached a tentative agreement on a new contract.

According to a statement from UAW:

After a lengthy bargaining process, your UAW FCA National Bargaining Committee has secured significant gains in a proposed Tentative Agreement with FCA announced today.

The bargaining committee unanimously voted to send the proposed Tentative Agreement to local union leaders who make up the union’s UAW National Chrysler Council.

The statement adds that the UAW Chrysler Council will meet in Detroit at 11 a.m. on Friday to vote on the agreement.

Union members rejected a tentative deal with Fiat Chrysler last week, apparently angered that the company had failed to restore benefits lost in previous contracts. Members objected to a two-tier pay structure that pays senior employees significantly more, and Fiat Chrysler’s failure to offer workers cost-of-living pay increases.

The UAW represents approximately 40,000 Fiat Chrysler workers in the U.S. The UAW has not struck U.S. auto makers since since 2007.

UAW’s contract with Fiat Chrysler expired last month.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Feds May Order Financial Firms To Allow Class Action Lawsuits

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director Richard Cordray, center, participates in a panel discussion in March. His agency is considering banning financial companies from routinely requiring consumers to sign away the right to sue.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director Richard Cordray, center, participates in a panel discussion in March. His agency is considering banning financial companies from routinely requiring consumers to sign away the right to sue. Steve Helber/AP hide caption

itoggle caption Steve Helber/AP

New federal rules could be in the works to make it easier once again for Americans to seek relief through class action lawsuits. That’s the latest word out just this morning from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The CFPB is considering a ban on so-called forced arbitration clauses, which require customers to submit their claims to arbitration and stay out of court. Consumer rights attorneys complain that they see many people harmed by banks or other financial firms. But those customers, often unknowingly, have signed, for example, a credit card agreement that included a clause that blocks them from joining a class action suit.

CFPB Director Richard Cordray spoke to NPR last night:

“Under this proposed approach, consumers would again get their day in court to hold companies accountable for potential wrongdoing,” Cordary said. “We think that’s quite important.”

Financial industry trade groups are lobbying against such a move by the CFPB. They say the rule would hurt financial firms and wouldn’t help consumers.

But under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act, Congress required the CFPB to study this issue. And it gave the bureau the power to craft new regulations to protect consumers, if it sees a need. The CFPB is now moving in that direction.

“Consumers should not be asked to sign away their legal rights when they open a bank account or credit card,” said Cordray.

All this might create some political fireworks in the near future. Just a few months ago, a group of more than 80 House Republicans sent a letter to Cordray asking the CFPB to re-open the study it did which concluded that consumers were being harmed by arbitration clauses. The letter said the study was “fatally flawed.”

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.