TIME Tech

eBay’s Surprising Diversity Figures

The eBay headquarters seen in San Jose, Calif., in 2011.
The eBay headquarters seen in San Jose, Calif., in 2011. David Paul Morris—Bloomberg/Getty Images

The online auction site employs more women than its Silicon Valley peers. But men still dominate in technical and leadership positions

The tech industry is notoriously dominated by white and Asian men. But eBay’s first diversity report shows that it employs more women, blacks and Hispanics than its peers.

Forty-two percent of eBay’s staff of 33,000 workers is female, beating out LinkedIn’s 39%, Yahoo’s 37%, Facebook’s 31%, Twitter’s 30% and Google’s 30%.

eBay also reported that 7% of its U.S. employees are black and 5% are Hispanic.

But even though eBay as a whole may be more diverse than many other tech companies — it also had a female CEO, Meg Whitman, from 1998 through 2008 — there is still a huge gender gap in terms of tech jobs and leadership roles: only 24% of eBay’s tech workers are women.

And even though eBay says it has doubled the number of women promoted to leadership positions in the past three years, just 28% of those in leadership at eBay are women. (For comparison, 17% of Google’s engineers are women, and 21% of leaders are women.)

The same holds true for race. Of those working tech jobs, only 2% are black, 2% are Hispanic and 1% are multiracial. Meanwhile, 40% of those holding tech jobs are white, and 55% are Asian.

Similarly, only 5% of those in leadership positions are black, Hispanic or multiracial. A whopping 72% of the company’s leaders are white, and only 23% are Asian.

TIME facebook

Facebook’s New App Gives Free Internet Access in Developing World

So far, the app is only available in Zambia.

+ READ ARTICLE

Facebook is taking another big step toward fulfilling its vision of bringing the Internet to the entire world.

 

On Thursday, the company launched its first app for Internet.org, a partnership among tech giants to beam wireless service to developing markets. The new app, which is debuting first in Zambia to subscribers of local wireless carrier Airtel, will allow users to access a select number of services without racking up data charges. The sites and apps include Facebook, Messenger, Google Search, Wikipedia, a weather service and an app promoting women’s rights.

“By providing free basic services via the app, we hope to bring more people online and help them discover valuable services they might not have otherwise,” Facebook said in a blog post announcing the app.

Facebook seems serious about using Internet.org to spread Internet connectivity. Earlier this year the company unveiled a plan to use drones, satellites and lasers to provide Internet access in remote places. So far, Facebook says it has brought 3 million people online who previously had no Internet access.

There are obvious reasons for the altruism — Facebook’s growth rate is slowing in Western markets, so the company sees developing countries as its biggest opportunity for new users. But the company has to get people in those countries online before it can convince them to join Facebook. Google is implementing a similar strategy through Project Loon, a plan to provide Internet access in remote areas via balloons.

Facebook says it plans to bring the Internet.org app to other parts of the world in the future.

MONEY Savings

How to Thrive in Retirement After Falling Short of Goals

Turns out, many retirees don't need as much in savings as they once thought. They are surprisingly delighted with their downsized life and embrace a flexible budget.

Maybe the experts are wrong. Retirement planners say you will need at least 70% of pre-retirement income to enjoy your golden years. Some target as much as 80% or even 85%. Yet recent retirees with less say they are doing just fine, thank you.

Three years into retirement, the average replacement income of people with an IRA or 401(k) plan is just 66% of final pay, mutual fund company T. Rowe Price found. Yet more than half say they are living as well or better than when they were working, and 89% say they are somewhat or very satisfied with retirement so far.

Such findings belie our widely accepted retirement savings crisis. In aggregate, we are way under saved. The average 50-year-old has put away just $44,000. But clearly a large subset—those with either a 401(k) plan or IRA, or both—are doing pretty well. This is the group that T. Rowe Price surveyed by filtering for those retired less than five years or over 50 and still working.

This particular group of savers may want to let up on the handwringing. As recent research by EBRI and ICI show, consistent 401(k) investors (those who held accounts between 2007 and 2012) had balances 67% higher than overall plan participants, reaching an average $107,000.

For years a small band of economists led by Lawrence Kotlikoff, the Boston University economics professor, have been making the case that many people are over saving. Kotlikoff argues that the financial services industry is essentially scaring people into over saving in order to collect fees. The fright factor is evident in the T. Rowe Price survey, where those still at work expressed far more anxiety than those who have reached retirement and found it to be less financially challenging than they may have been led to believe.

Half of workers believe they will have to reduce their standard of living in retirement, compared to just 35% of recent retirees who think that way. More workers also believe they will run out of money (22% vs. 14%), and workers are much less likely to believe they will be able to afford health care (49% vs. 70%), the survey shows.

Recent retirees in this survey have median assets of $473,000. That includes investable assets plus home equity minus debt. Home equity is a big part of their holdings at $191,000. They have just 52% of investable assets in stocks and asset allocation mutual funds, and are playing it fairly safe with 31% in cash.

How are they managing on pre-retirement income that falls short of most planners’ models? A third are working at something or looking for work, and to augment Social Security and pension income they are drawing down their savings by an average of 4% a year, which is a rate that many planners consider reasonable.

But the real source of new retiree satisfaction may be their genuine appreciation for a downsized life: 85% say they do not need to spend as much in order to be happy and 65% feel relieved to no longer be trying to keep up with the Joneses. In addition, they embrace flexibility with 60% saying they would rather adjust their spending to maintain their portfolio than maintain their spending at the expense of their portfolio. With that attitude, almost any retiree can feel good about their life.

Related links:

 

TIME Companies

Target Announces New CEO To Lead Recovery After Data Breach

Brian Cornell, then president and CEO of Sam's Club, speaks during the Wal-Mart Stores Inc. shareholders' meeting in Fayetteville, Ark., in this June 4, 2010 file photo.
Brian Cornell, then president and CEO of Sam's Club, speaks during the Wal-Mart Stores Inc. shareholders' meeting in Fayetteville, Ark., in this June 4, 2010 file photo. April L. Brown—AP

Brian Cornell will help "bring vision, focus and a wealth of experience to Target’s transformation," the company said Thursday.

Target announced a new CEO Thursday as it looks to rebound from the damage wrought last year by a massive data breach that prompted former CEO Gregg Steinhafel’s resignation.

PepsiCo exec Brian Cornell, the former head of Sam’s Club, will take over at Target, replacing interim CEO John Mulligan, the company said in statement.

Steinhafel stepped down in May, months after an embarrassing data breach affected up to 110 million customers and cut into company profits. When he resigned, Target said Steinhafel had held himself “personally accountable” and “pledged that Target would emerge a better company.”

On Thursday, Target said Cornell, the former CEO of PepsiCO Americas Foods, would help “bring vision, focus and a wealth of experience to Target’s transformation.”

TIME Retail

Target Names Pepsi’s Cornell as Chairman, CEO

(MINNEAPOLIS) — Target has hired Pepsi executive Brian Cornell as its new chairman and CEO as it looks to recover from a huge data breach and troubles in Canada.

Cornell replaces interim CEO John Mulligan, who is chief financial officer for the Minneapolis company. Mulligan stepped into the interim CEO post in May when Target Corp.’s Gregg Steinhafel resigned following a large data breach in the runup to Christmas.

Cornell, 55, most recently served as CEO of PepsiCo Americas Foods. Prior to that, he was CEO and president of Sam’s Club of Wal-Mart International and CEO of Michaels Stores Inc.

PepsiCo Inc. said in a statement Thursday that it expects to announce Cornell’s successor soon.

Cornell is set to become Target’s CEO on Aug. 12.

TIME mergers

Why Big Mergers Are Bad for Consumers

When big companies merge, it’s good for the bankers—but not so good for the rest of us

Rupert Murdoch’s 21st century Fox wants to take over Time Warner. Comcast wants to buy Time Warner Cable. AT&T and DirecTV may hook up to compete against them. T-Mobile and Sprint are looking to connect, as are any number of other large communications firms, not to mention technology and pharma giants. We are in a new golden age of mergers and acquisitions–M&A activity was up sharply in 2014 and is already at pre-financial-crisis levels. Now bankers are salivating at the billions of dollars in fees such deals generate. The question is, Will the deals be any good for the rest of us?

Since the early 1980s, antitrust regulators like the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission have tried to answer that question by asking another: Will a given merger bring down prices and improve services for consumers? If the answer was even remotely yes, then the merger–no matter how big–was likely to go through. But voices on all sides of the antitrust debate are beginning to question whether that rationale is actually working anymore.

Nobody would argue that the megamergers that have taken place over the past 30 years in pharmaceuticals, for example, have brought down drug prices. Or that the tie-ups between big airlines have made flying more enjoyable. Or that conglomerate banks have made our financial system more robust. “Merging companies always say that they’ll save money and bring down prices,” says Albert Foer, president of the American Antitrust Institute, a think tank devoted to studying competition. “But the reality is that they often end up with monopoly power that allows them to exert incredible pressure in whatever way they like.” That can include squeezing not only customers but also smaller suppliers way down the food chain.

Take the book business, for example. Though publishing is minuscule as a percentage of the economy, it has recently become a focal point in the debate over how our antitrust system works (or doesn’t), mostly because it illustrates the incredible power of one corporation: Amazon. In 2012, the Department of Justice went after tech giant Apple and a group of five major book publishers for collusion, winning a case against them for attempting to fix the prices of e-books. The publishers argued their actions were a response to anticompetitive monopoly pricing by Amazon. Apple is appealing.

Did the verdict serve the public? Many people, including star trial attorney David Boies, say no. Boies, who’s been representing large firms on both sides of the antitrust issue as well as the DOJ over the past several decades, says the verdict is “a failure of common sense and analysis.” Regulators often bring collusion cases, for example, because they are relatively easy to prove. Yet in this case, argues Boies, it led to an outcome in which the entrenched market participant, Amazon, was strengthened, and new participants–Apple and the book publishers–that hoped to create a competing platform in the e-book industry were shot down. “The result is that Amazon gets bigger, and eventually regulators will have to go after them,” says Boies. “We really need a more realistic, commonsense view of antitrust enforcement.” Amazon declined to comment.

The “Bigger Is Better” ethos of the 1980s and 1990s grew not only out of conservative, markets-know-best thinking. It was also fueled by a belief on the left that antitrust enforcement was wasteful and that regulating big companies was preferable to trying to stop them from becoming too big in the first place. Neither side got it right. Big companies aren’t always concerned first about the welfare of their customers–or particularly easy to regulate. The idea of letting companies do whatever they want as long as they can prove that they are decreasing prices may be far too simplistic a logic to serve the public–or even the corporate–good. Amazon shares have tumbled as investors worry about the future of a company that has so successfully compressed prices that it generates as much as $20 billion in revenue a quarter but no profit.

How to fix things? We need a rethink of antitrust logic that takes into consideration a more complex, global landscape in which megamergers have unpredictable ripple effects. We also need a new definition of consumer good that encompasses not only price but choice and the kind of marketplace diversity that encourages innovation and growth. Tech and communications firms today are like the railroads of old: it will take a strong hand to rein them in. That’s a task not for regulators but for Congress and a new Administration. Until then, with corporate coffers full and markets flying high, the big are only likely to get bigger.

MONEY Shopping

12 Iconic Stores and Restaurants That Are Rapidly Disappearing

RadioShack store in downtown Cincinnati
Al Behrman—AP

A dozen once-ubiquitous retailers and restaurants—places where you probably shopped and dined at as a kid—may soon be shutting their doors.

Moody’s Investors Service said in a report this week that RadioShack is in danger of running out of cash by autumn of 2015, according to Bloomberg News. It’s the latest indication that the struggling chain is doomed, following news in the spring that it planned to close up to 1,100 stores. (Those plans were scaled back to around 200 store closures, but still…) The electronics chain’s difficulties probably shouldn’t come as much of a surprise given the times we live in today. After all, the word “radio” is in the name. Who buys radios anymore?

RadioShack is hardly the only well-known national chain that is flummoxed by the ultra-competitive, rapidly changing modern-day marketplace and shutting locations, among other steps, as a survival tactic. Here are 11 others.

Albertsons
Amid toughening competition in the grocery space—low-cost upstarts, dollar stores, big box all-purpose stores, and online sellers have all stepped up their game—the Albertsons supermarket chain announced earlier this year it would be closing 26 stores, most of them in California. In late July, Albertsons bought Safeway, and the merger is expected to bring about more store closures, most likely ones operating under the Albertsons or Vons brand.

Staples
Quite a lot is riding on the current back-to-school shopping season for Staples. After a subpar fourth quarter last year, it announced it would close as many as 225 stores in 2014, after closing 42 throughout North American in 2013. Declining sales have continued into the first half of 2014, largely due to the widespread consumer “shift to e-retailers, mass merchants and drugstores to buy their office supplies,” as Reuters put it. More closures are inevitable if sales during the all-important back-to-school period aren’t up to snuff—and maybe even if they’re decent, as Staples seems increasingly focused on online sales.

Family Dollar
In April, after yet another report of declining store sales, Family Dollar said it would be shutting 370 locations. Now that rival Dollar Tree is buying Family Dollar, it’s likely that more stores—from one or both of these brands, which often have locations in very close proximity to each other—will disappear.

Quiznos
The toasted sandwich chain peaked sometime in the early ’00s, when it boasted some 5,000 stores around the U.S. Quiznos closed around 2,000 locations during the Great Recession years, not only because household spending budgets shrunk, but also because of increased competition from highly successful Subway and all manner of trendy fast-casual restaurants. The more positive economic climate of recent years hasn’t brought Quiznos back from the brink. The company filed for bankruptcy earlier this year. While Quiznos wants to put this all in the past, a trickling of closures continues, such as one planned to take place in Austin in August.

Aeropostale
24/7 Wall Street put Aeropostale on its list of “10 Brands That Will Disappear in 2015,” and some 125 of its stores are set to disappear by the end of the current fiscal year. The company’s sales and stock price have been cratering due to what’s described as a “seismic shift” in teens’ fashion taste.

Abercrombie & Fitch
Similar to Aeropostale, the much-higher priced Abercrombie & Fitch has cited a “challenging retail environment,” especially among teens, as a prime reason for declining sales—and why it is being forced to close dozens of stores. The overpriced merchandise and the fat-shaming comments of its CEO probably haven’t helped either.

Toys R Us
The continued shift to online shopping, combined with a shift among consumers away from toys and more toward gadgets, has had the toy store giant in a funk for years. To cope with declining sales, there have been thousands of layoffs at the retail and administrative levels, and some expect store closures at any moment. Overall, things look grim. “There is a 50-50 chance the company can survive,” Howard Davidowitz, chairman of the retail consulting firm Davidowitz & Associates, told the The Record in New Jersey, home of Toys R Us’s headquarters. “I’m not saying they are finished. I would not say that. But there is a limited time, given the debt level they have, for this business to get fixed.”

TCBY
Once 1,500 franchises strong, TCBY has closed two-thirds of its locations over the years. TCBY has tried many things to kickstart the business—Greek fro-yo, sharing space with sister brand Mrs. Fields Cookies—but some think that TCBY is likely to suffer the same fate as Crumbs, the trendy cupcake chain that recently shut down.

Barnes & Noble, J.C. Penney, Sears
The decline, and perhaps impending death, of these three iconic, old-timey retailers has been discussed for so long that it’s almost surprising they’re still around. Barnes & Noble has closed 10% of its stores over the last five years, despite the fact that its long-time book-selling rival, Borders, is no longer in the picture, and despite relentless pressure from Amazon.com. J.C. Penney is routinely described as being in a “death spiral” and “at death’s door.” As for Sears, when CEO Edward Lampert was speaking to investors this past spring, he offered a brutally honest vision of what’s to come. “Closing stores is going to be part of our future,” he said.

Read More:
10 Things Americans Have Suddenly Stopped Buying
10 Things Millennials Won’t Spend Money On

MONEY 401(k)s

Are You a Saver or an Investor? It Matters in a 401(k)

Close-up piggy bank
Fuse—Getty Images

Most 401(k) participants see themselves as savers, new research shows. And it's holding them back.

The venerable 401(k) plan has many failings and is ill suited as a primary retirement savings vehicle. Yet it could do so much more if only workers understood how to best use it.

The vast majority of 401(k) plan participants view themselves as savers, not investors, according to new research. As such, they are less likely to allocate money to 401(k) plan options that will provide the long-term growth they need to retire in comfort.

Only 22% of workers in a 401(k) plan in the U.S., U.K. and Ireland say they are knowledgeable about investing, State Street Global Advisors found. This translates into a low tolerance for risk: only 27% in the U.S., 15% in the U.K., and 10% in Ireland say they are willing to take greater risk to achieve better returns.

This in turn leads to sinking retirement confidence. Only 31% in the U.S., 26% in the U.K., and 16% in Ireland feel they will save enough in their 401(k) plan to fund a comfortable retirement, the survey shows.

The faults of 401(k) plans are well documented and range from uncertain returns to high fees to failing to provide guaranteed lifetime income. Economic activists like Teresa Ghilarducci, a professor of economics at the New School and author of When I’m Sixty-Four, have been arguing for years that we need to return to something like the traditional pension.

But the switch to 401(k) plans from traditional pensions has taken more than three decades. A broad reversal will be slow too, if it comes at all. In the meantime, workers need to understand how to best use their 401(k) or other employer-sponsored defined contribution plan. Like it or not, these plans have become our de facto primary retirement savings vehicles.

At a basic level, plan participants of all ages must begin to embrace higher risk in return for higher rewards. The State Street survey reveals broad under-exposure to stocks, which historically have provided the highest long-term returns. A popular rule of thumb is to subtract your age from 110 to determine your allocation to stocks. But the latest research suggests that even just a few years from retirement you are better off holding more stocks.

There is much more to making the most of your 401(k) plan than just adding risk. You need to contribute enough to capture the full employer match and be well diversified, among other things. But it all starts with understanding that saving in a secure fixed-income product is not investing, and it is not enough to get you to the promised land.

Yes, the financial crisis is still fresh and the market’s deep plunge is an all-too-real reminder that stocks have risk. But just five years later the market has fully recovered, and 401(k) balances have never been plumper. Fixate on the recovery, not the downturn. A diversified stock portfolio almost never loses money over a 10-year period. It took the Great Depression and then the Great Recession to produce 10-year losses, which were less than 5% and disappeared quickly in the recovery.

If you feel nervous about investing in stocks, consider opting for a target-date retirement fund, which will give you an asset mix that shifts to become more conservative as you near retirement. While they may not suit everyone, target-date funds tend to outperform most do-it-yourselfers, research shows. With your asset mix on cruise control, you can focus on saving, which is enough of a challenge.

TIME Amazon

Amazon Will Pay You to Accept Slower Deliveries

Amazon.com Warehouse Tour
A worker watches as boxed merchandise moves along a conveyor belt to a waiting truck for delivery at the Amazon.com Phoenix Fulfillment Center in Goodyear, Arizona, U.S., on Monday, Nov. 16, 2009. Bloomberg—Bloomberg via Getty Images

Possibly in an attempt to drive down costs

Amazon really wants its Prime members to stop using its speedy shipping service, so much so that the company is willing to pay customers to accept slower deliveries.

The online retail giant is now offering a $1 credit toward Prime Video to customers who choose “No-Rush” shipping for their deliveries. Instead of arriving in two days, items are delivered in five to seven days. The credit can be used for TV shows and videos on Amazon’s download service, though certain Prime Instant Video titles are excluded, including HBO titles. The offer will be available for a limited time.

The deal may be an effort by Amazon to lower expenses after the company posted a larger-than-expected loss of $126 million in the second quarter. The company spent $2.4 billion fulfilling deliveries during the quarter, up from $1.8 billion in the same period a year ago. Allowing for a longer lead-time on shipments could help drive down costs, while the company still gets to keep the extra revenue it’s generating by boosting the price of an Amazon Prime subscription from $79 to $99 in March.

Of course, since Prime subscribers are primarily paying for free, fast shipping, it’s not clear whether the offer of discounted movies will appeal to a large number of them. But Amazon is in the midst of turning Prime into a broader entertainment service with features like the Netflix competitor Prime Instant Video and an on-demand music streaming service Prime Music.

TIME celebrities

How I Made My First Million: Richard Branson

The tycoon's journey to a million started from an unlikely source: The Exorcist

+ READ ARTICLE

British business tycoon Richard Branson is living proof that with enough money, the sky’s the limit. And sometimes not even the sky: his Virgin Group launched a business called Virgin Galactic, which plans to carry wealthy “space tourists” all the way into orbit.

Worth an estimated $5 billion, Branson has used his fortune not just to indulge in expensive hobbies but also to fund a host of humanitarian initiatives.

So how did he make his first million way back when? Believe it or not, there’s a connection to the 1973 horror film The Exorcist.

Your browser, Internet Explorer 8 or below, is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites.

Learn how to update your browser