In other words, media as a "service" makes more money than media as a one-point sale. Why should they sell you a one-point solution when the service model makes more money for the shareholders? I love the shareholder economy; it makes all our lives better and makes us focus on what really matters at the end of the day, which is, of course, profits for people who already have too much money. :) very cool
test113
They have, but they are not in charge. Apple's goal is to make money; everything else comes as an afterthought.
Well, it's a bit surprising that Tesla is the worst-performing stock so far. I mean, the Boeing scandal was a disaster image-wise, and others are struggling real hard. But even with all that, Tesla is performing worse than the airplane manufacturer, who can't build secure and quality-controlled aircraft. The tide is turning for Tesla. Competition is getting stronger and starting to roll out strategies like the BMW 50% 2025 Plan, which means Tesla as an electric automobile manufacturer has dire times ahead if they don't start fixing things.
Tesla long stopped delivering on promises they, or rather Musk, made. They need something other than words and visions to sell, and fast, otherwise, the stock is going to normalize more and more, to a degree a mid-sized automobile manufacturer would be, as the shareholders slowly start losing faith and jumping ship, as long as the stock is overvalued and there are buyers.
It is a lot more complicated than that - since G/O media was bought out in 2019, it goes downhill. The new owner pretty much goes with the strategy of prioritizing advertisers and shareholders over workers.
So, they maximize revenue streams upwards to GHP, which is hard, but an easy way to do it is to minimize fixed costs like salaried workers and their benefits. If the revenue goes up or is stable but workers get laid off and salaries get squashed, and part-time or contract workers get hired to do the same job for even less, workers are not going to like this, especially workers who are organized in a union.
Looking at one revenue number as the sole indicator of "healthiness" is exactly the mistake that ends up with worker protests and dwindling quality.
In other words, the money for fair pay for all would be around, but the owners would rather have an even bigger piece of the pie.
History and context behind the situation:
G/O Media's leadership, introduced after the purchase from Univision, has been subject to frequent criticism by employees.[9] Complaints include closer advertiser relationships, a lack of diversity, and suppression of reporting about the company itself.[9] In October 2019 Deadspin's editor-in-chief, Barry Petchesky, was fired for refusing to adhere to a directive that the site "stick to sports."[15] Soon after, the entirety of Deadspin's staff resigned in protest, leaving the site inactive.[16] In January 2020 the GMG Union, which represents the staff of six G/O Media sites, announced a vote of no confidence in CEO Jim Spanfeller, citing, among other issues, a lack of willingness to negotiate for "functional editorial independence protections."[17]
On February 4, 2021, the Writers Guild of America East filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board alleging that G/O Media told employees it had fired Alex Cranz for labor activism.[18]
In mid-October 2021, G/O Media removed all images from stories published before 2019 from the 11 websites it owns, including Gizmodo, Jalopnik, Deadspin, The A.V. Club, The Onion, and Jezebel.[19]
In November 2021, Gawker reported on substantial staff resignations at Jezebel over the course of 2021, comprising around 75% of staff. The resignations were reportedly related to a "hostile work environment" created by G/O's management and the new deputy editorial director Lea Goldman.[20] In January 2022, another article detailed similar staff decline at The Root, with 15 out of 16 full-time staff having left throughout 2021 since Vanessa De Luca started as editor-in-chief.[21]
In January 2022, seven senior staff members at The A.V. Club left the site after management required them to move from Chicago to Los Angeles. According to the Chicago Tribune, the departing staffers cited a lack of salary increase to account for increased cost of living due to the transfer.[22]
On March 1, 2022, GMG Union members went on strike after failing to reach an agreement on a new contract.[23] The strike was resolved on March 6 with a new contract that included some of the members' terms.[24]
On June 29, 2023, G/O Media implemented a "modest test" of artificial intelligence-generated content on its websites, in a move similar to BuzzFeed and CNET. The move sparked backlash from GMG Union members, citing AI's track record of false statements and plagiarism from its training data.[25] The first AI generated articles on G/O Media sites appeared on July 5 and included a "chronological list" of Star Wars movies and television shows on Gizmodo's io9 section that wasn't in chronological order, omitted Andor and The Book of Boba Fett and stated that the events of the television series Star Wars: The Clone Wars came after those of The Rise of Skywalker; a list of the "best summer blockbusters of 2003" on The A.V. Club; and a list of "the most valuable professional sports franchises" on Deadspin.[26][27]
Again, none of the people at this talk have anything to do with selling a product or pushing an agenda or whatever you think. There is no press, there is no marketing, there is no product - it was basically a meetup of private equity firms that discussed the implementation and impact of purpose-trained AI in diverse fields, which affects the business structure of the big single-family office behemoths, like an industry summit for the private equity sector regarding the future of AI and how some plan to implement it (mainly big non-public SFOs).
Sometimes people just meet to discuss strategy; no one at these talks is interested in selling you anything or buying anything - they are essentially top management and/or members of large single-family offices and other private equity firms. They are not interested in selling or marketing something to the public; they are not public companies.
It's weird how you guys react; not everything is a conspiracy or a marketing thing. It's pretty normal in private equity to have these closed talks about global phenomena and how to deal with it.
These talks are more to keep the industry informed. I get that you do not like it when essentially the big SFOs have a meeting where they discuss their future plans on a certain topic, but it's pretty normal that the elite will arrange themselves to coordinate some investments. It's essentially just the offices of the big billionaire families coming together to put heads together to discuss a topic that might influence their business structure. But, in no way is it a marketing strategy; it would, on the contrary, be negatively viewed in the public eye that big finance is already coordinating to implement AI into their strategy.
But feelings don't change facts. My point is if the actual non public big players are looking at AI in a serious matter, then so should you.
Haha, lol, whats happening why do you hate me, just sharing an experience, an opinion?
- it's not NVIDIA or AMD or any chip manufacturer, or someone who has a product to sell to you. Most of them are not even publicly traded but are organized in family office structures. They don't care about the B2C market at all; they are essentially private equity firms. You guys interpret anything to fit your screwed-up vision of this world. They don't even have a product to sell to you or me; it was a closed talk with top industry leaders and their managers where they discussed their view of AI and how they will implement purpose-trained AI into manufacturing, etc. It has nothing to do with selling to the public.
I have already said too much - just let me tell you if you think LLMs are the pinnacle of AI, you are very mistaken, and depending on your position in the market, you need to take AI into account. You can only dismiss AI if you have a position/job with no real responsibility.
So weird how you guys think everything is to sell you something or a conspiracy - this was a closed talk to discuss how the leaders in certain industries will adapt to the coming changes. They give zero cares about the B2C market, aka you as an individual.
Again, none of the people at this talk have anything to do with selling a product or pushing an agenda or whatever you think. There is no press, there is no marketing - it was basically a meetup of private equity firms that discussed the implementation and impact of purpose-trained AI in diverse fields, which affects the business structure of the big single-family office behemoths.
Nope, it's not possible. The only way it wouldn't be treason is if all states agree, or if they start a revolution and are successful; every other attempt would simply be treason. Hence, one nation indivisible. I'm sure they know that; they just want to push as far as they can to make the political situation even more absurd in America. They want to widen the gap between the people. I don't know who exactly profits from this situation, but it's not the American people.
Here's a video that explains it quite well: [Legal Egal] (https://youtu.be/1dhvry6E0jA?si=H62qIoiHzaLdJHQF)
Oh, thanks for the information sir! I forgot that I tried that option to see what would happen, now I know. xd
If I'm interpreting the CEOs Post post correctly, the severance package is only applicable if your contract gets canceled prematurely or if you are being laid off. If your contract ends and is not renewed, all obligations are fulfilled, so there is no severance package since the contract simply ends. (Timel/Project based contract). I could be wrong though. It would make sense to have project or time-based contracts - these layoffs mainly affect the "permanent employees."
Some would say this is an analogy on how Israel looks at Palestine, even though they already have the better side with the help of top-notch (ACME) weapons from outside (a sling, maybe because of the implications of the David and Goliath story?). Others say he's horny and wants to fling himself directly onto the other. I'm with the horny camp 100%.
I never argued that I was in IT/Tech; I deal with investments and PE. I have nothing to do with IT or tech. My point is we, in the PE/FO sector, are going to invest in AI businesses in 24/25, not only in the "B2C market" but mainly in the B2B market and for internal applications. Whether you believe it or not, it's gonna happen anyway.