Even the tech industry lacks in some things. Diversity is one of them. Year after year, we see how lily white and male the tech industry often is. Thankfully, that’s starting to change. Apple makes progress in diversity.
As of August 2016, 32 percent of Apple’s US work force are women. Nine percent are Black. Twelve percent are Latino. In Apple’s global employment, 37% are women. They’re making strides in minority hiring. In the last year, 27% of hires represented a minority group. Apple has done several things to bridge the embarrassing lack of racial and gender diversity. They’re recruiting from historically black colleges and universities. Apple is investing in elementary schools to train future tech geniuses. Apple claims to bridge the economic pay gap for women and minority workers. Harvard professor Hannah Riley Bowles has openly criticized Silicon Valley for their lack of women and minorities. Bowles said, “…the numbers are encouraging.” But she wants to see increased improvement over time. Even civil rights leader Rev. Jesse Jackson praised Apple’s progress. Some complain the progress is only because of Apple’s retail stores. Their salaries are less. They could be true or fabricated. But Apple’s Black and Latino representation stands at eight percent. Despite Google and Facebook’s valiant efforts, Blacks and Latinos represent around 4 percent of their workforce.
This is a conversation that needs to continue. It started three years ago. If it didn’t start, we wouldn’t be making this much progress. More progress needs to be made. I applaud Apple’s efforts and results. I know Google and other companies still lack behind. But we can’t let them give up! It looks like they’re doing all they can to hire and attract more women and minorities. In the years to come, I hope to see their numbers rise. Think about the number of Blacks and Latinos who consume Google and Facebook products. I’m just saying. What can be done to increase diversity in the tech industry?
Apple stocks are soaring. Nintendo makes a comeback, thanks to Pokemon Go. Amazon has never been better. But one tech giant is downsizing. Microsoft plans 2,850 job cuts.
This adds to the 7,400 job cuts that occurred between July 2015 and June 2016. These new cuts began early this month. They will continue through 2017. You may think, “But it’s Microsoft. These numbers are nothing, right?” ?Not really. Microsoft employs 113,000 people. Over half those jobs belong to Americans. The majority of the 2,850 people have already been notified. It’s been announced COO Kevin Turner was leaving Microsoft for another company. We don’t know which company that is.
What’s to blame for these jobs cuts? Acquisitions and company restructure are to blame. Back in 2013, Microsoft acquired cell phone maker Nokia. That alone made the company take a 7.6 billion dollar write down. This doesn’t include restructuring costs, which run around $850 million. Many insiders and analysts call the Nokia/Microsoft merge the worst acquisition in tech history. In the months following this acquisition, 18,000 were laid off. However, this round of cuts will hit the hardware and global sales division especially hard. In a filing to the SEC, Microsoft wrote, “In connection with the restructuring plans, we incurred restructuring charges of $501 million in fiscal year 2016, including severance expenses and other ?costs. We do not expect to incur additional charges for these restructuring plans in subsequent years.”
But how do they know that? It seems this Microsoft/Nokia deal has caused far more harm than good. This could have created jobs. Instead, over 27,000 have been lost. This could have made Microsoft money. Instead, they’re hemorrhaging billions of dollars. I’ve never been a fan of huge acquisitions. I think it cuts out competition and paves the way for monopoly. But some acquisitions have gone well. This one has gone horribly. Do you think this is the end of Microsoft job cuts? When will this bleeding stop?
Xbox will allow virtual clubs. By the end of 2016, Microsoft will let Xbox users form their own virtual spaces called Clubs. This gives the player control over who comes in their club and form small gaming groups of their own.
This service will include Xbox Looking for Groups. This will help Xbox gamers look for like minded people to team up with or compete against. Such features will be discussed at the annual Electronic Entertainment Expo. Some call it E3. It’s part of Microsoft’s campaign called Gaming for Everyone. This campaign has two goals. One goal is to make gaming attractive to all segments of the population. Microsoft desperately wants to kill the idea of video gaming being just a ‘young white man’s sport’. They’ve come under fire for this issue. In March 2016, they were forced to apologize for throwing a raucous ‘boys party’ featuring scantily clad women. The second goal is to fight gaming harassment. Women gamers have complained often of bullying and sexual harassment while gaming online. African-Americans have complained of racial harassment while gaming online. Sometimes, it went beyond name calling. Sometimes, it escalated to death threats. Microsoft is giving people chances to form their own clubs. That way, they eliminate the bullies, trolls and hatemongers immediately. Plus, gamers play only with people they feel comfortable with.
I’m 80% for the Gaming for Everyone initiative. We need more diversity in gaming. There has been times where I’ve been the only black person in the gaming community. In 2016, that shouldn’t be. Nobody should be talked down to while playing video games. Nobody should be made to feel inferior. And nobody should be threatened with death or rape just because they want to play video games with the boys. But there’s the 20% of me that’s a bit cynical. How many will use these clubs to further discriminate against women and minorities? And how much of this is driven by political correctness and people being too sensitive?
Their competitors will be local supermarkets. Not many British tech companies or franchisers deliver groceries. Amazon Fresh offers delivery to over 130,000 homes in the greater London area. These include fresh produce, fresh bakery, and fresh dairy items. This is Amazon Fresh’s first grocery delivery service outside the US. Customers must be British Amazon Prime customers. The service will cost them an additional seven pounds a month (that’s about $10 US). The groceries have to cost over 40 pounds (that’s roughly $58 US). Amazon wants the grocery delivered in one hour of the order. Amazon VP Ajah Kavan is cautiously optimistic. Kavan knows UK has one of the most discriminating customer bases in the world. The bar is extremely high. Local British brand produce will be delivered. So will major global brands like Nestle, Kellogg’s and Coca-Cola. Deliveries will be made in paper-bags and chill-boxes. United Kingdom supermarket chains face pressure from online shoppers and dissatisfied customers. Have you heard the jokes and complaints about British food? British discount stores are doing well. That spells more competition for UK supermarkets. Amazon Fresh delivery services are in two UK cities: London and Manchester. Could it spread?
The supermarket chains better hope not. Amazon Fresh is great for elderly and disabled customers, and their caretakers. These are individuals who could use this service. But what about the rest of the people? Let’s say I were in the UK. Let’s say I were offered Amazon Fresh service. I wouldn’t accept it. That’s because I would want my local supermarket to do well. Yes, there are dissatisfied customers out there. Competition from Amazon Fresh should light a fire under grocers to do better. I hope it does. Besides, London has some of the world’s worst traffic. Good luck getting there in an hour. Besides, don’t we give Amazon enough money already?
Jawbone, a major player in fitness tracking production for well over a decade, has announced it will stop making UP fitness trackers. Not only that, but inventory will be sold to a third party company, whomever that may be. It seems like Jawbone is washing their hands of the UP fitness tracker altogether.
Due to incredibly low revenue numbers, Jawbone ceases to make UP2, UP3, and UP4 fitness products. The sales numbers were so disappointing that they’re not even going to try to sale the rest to consumers. Instead, they’re selling the rest to a third party retailer for a price so low they may as well be giving them away. They had to do this just to stay in business. We don’t even know if Jawbone will ever even attempt to make UP fitness trackers again. Nobody from Jawbone wants to talk about it. Yes, consumers can still buy the UP tracker. But Jawbone won’t be the one selling it to you. Third parties will. Jawbone will also discontinue it’s Bluetooth speakers. They’re looking for a new third party seller for those too. Despite this major setback, Jawbone raised $165 million in January 2016. Jawbone wants to dedicate that money to build clinical fitness trackers. My question is: If Jawbone is having a hard time selling UP trackers, what makes me want a clinical tracker?
That’s the dilemma. Jawbone had a good start. But recently, as in the last several years, they haven’t been able to compete with Fitbit and Apple’s wearable technology products. There may not be anymore Jawbone had they not raised $165 million in capitol. If I were Jawbone, I would invest it in promoting the products I have and doing whatever it takes to sale the UP products before I even think about moving to something else. Why do I want what they’re making if they can’t even sale what they have?
The middle class is shrinking in the USA. This isn’t a conspiracy theory. Statistics prove this as a sad fact. Silicon Valley, America’s tech hub, is no exception.
The Silicon Valley consists of San Francisco, Santa Clara and San Mateo ?counties. It’s home to Facebook, Google, Apple, Yahoo, and dozens of other tech corporations. During the Great Recession of the late 2000s, Silicon Valley was one of the few regions of America that remained profitable. Unfortunately, it came at an unfair costs. Today, these three counties have one of the biggest economic gaps in the country. In 1989, Silicon Valley’s top 1% owned 13.3% of county income. By 2013, Silicon Valley’s top 1% owned 28.3% of all county income. In 1989, the number of middle class households in Silicon Valley were 56%. By 2013, the number of middle class households in Silicon Valley was 45%. In San Francisco, the top 1% earns 43 times that of the 99%. Low income households are doing worse. While Silicon Valley’s one percent boomed in the 2010s, the low income worker’s situation was at stagnant as ever. And with rising housing expenses, and poor public transit in much of the area, it gets harder and harder for the low and middle class to improve their financial situation. The good news, and only good news, is Silicon Valley has enough to invest in affordable and reasonable housing, transportation and good jobs. But will they?
They need to. A thriving middle class and healthy working class are paramount for any town, county, state, region or nation to succeed. If this gap widens, the work pool will likely be forced out of Silicon Valley. If the super rich has everything and the 99% have nothing, that region is setting itself up for failure. Let’s not forget our history. Some Silicon Valley leaders agree. Budget Center executive Chris?Hoene says, “We don?t want to turn around 25 years now and wonder why Silicon Valley didn?t turn out to continue being the engine of growth it had been.? They have great potential and tools to turn this crises around. Will they?
