ºÝºÝߣshows by User: TricPark / http://www.slideshare.net/images/logo.gif ºÝºÝߣshows by User: TricPark / Thu, 08 Oct 2015 19:55:19 GMT ºÝºÝߣShare feed for ºÝºÝߣshows by User: TricPark William Gross Sues Pimco for Hundreds of Millions /slideshow/william-gross-sues-pimco-for-hundreds-of-millions/53711030 williamgross-pimco-lawsuit-151008195520-lva1-app6892
William Gross filed a lawsuit against Pimco and parent company Allianz SE for $200 million.]]>
William Gross filed a lawsuit against Pimco and parent company Allianz SE for $200 million.]]> Thu, 08 Oct 2015 19:55:19 GMT /slideshow/william-gross-sues-pimco-for-hundreds-of-millions/53711030 TricPark@slideshare.net(TricPark) William Gross Sues Pimco for Hundreds of Millions TricPark William Gross filed a lawsuit against Pimco and parent company Allianz SE for $200 million. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/williamgross-pimco-lawsuit-151008195520-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> William Gross filed a lawsuit against Pimco and parent company Allianz SE for $200 million.
William Gross Sues Pimco for Hundreds of Millions from Tric Park
]]> 46145 54 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/williamgross-pimco-lawsuit-151008195520-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 California Says Uber Drivers Are Employees, Not Contractors /slideshow/california-says-uber-drivers-are-employees-not-contractors/49515418 uber-filing-driversareemployeesnotcontractors-150617162854-lva1-app6892
In California, Uber drivers are now considered employees, not contractors, according to a ruling by the California Labor Commission.]]>
In California, Uber drivers are now considered employees, not contractors, according to a ruling by the California Labor Commission.]]> Wed, 17 Jun 2015 16:28:53 GMT /slideshow/california-says-uber-drivers-are-employees-not-contractors/49515418 TricPark@slideshare.net(TricPark) California Says Uber Drivers Are Employees, Not Contractors TricPark In California, Uber drivers are now considered employees, not contractors, according to a ruling by the California Labor Commission. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/uber-filing-driversareemployeesnotcontractors-150617162854-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> In California, Uber drivers are now considered employees, not contractors, according to a ruling by the California Labor Commission.
California Says Uber Drivers Are Employees, Not Contractors from Tric Park
]]> 6034 26 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/uber-filing-driversareemployeesnotcontractors-150617162854-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Twitter's Q1 2015 Earnings Report /slideshow/2015-q1-earningsslidestwitter/49289945 2015q1earningsslidestwitter-150611223054-lva1-app6891
Twitter Reports First Quarter 2015 Results; Lowers Full-Year 2015 Expectations]]>
Twitter Reports First Quarter 2015 Results; Lowers Full-Year 2015 Expectations]]> Thu, 11 Jun 2015 22:30:54 GMT /slideshow/2015-q1-earningsslidestwitter/49289945 TricPark@slideshare.net(TricPark) Twitter's Q1 2015 Earnings Report TricPark Twitter Reports First Quarter 2015 Results; Lowers Full-Year 2015 Expectations <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/2015q1earningsslidestwitter-150611223054-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Twitter Reports First Quarter 2015 Results; Lowers Full-Year 2015 Expectations
Twitter's Q1 2015 Earnings Report from Tric Park
]]> 527 2 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/2015q1earningsslidestwitter-150611223054-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Yahoo's Lawsuit Against Former Employee for Leaking Information to Press /slideshow/yahoo-lawsuit/47930717 yahoo-lawsuit-150508233624-lva1-app6891
Yahoo filed a lawsuit against Cecile Lal, who it identified as a former chief of staff to a senior vice president at the company, in Santa Clara County superior court. The claim alleges breach of contract and breach of a fiduciary duty of loyalty by Lal, who it says leaks confidential information to author and journalist Nicholas Carlson.]]>
Yahoo filed a lawsuit against Cecile Lal, who it identified as a former chief of staff to a senior vice president at the company, in Santa Clara County superior court. The claim alleges breach of contract and breach of a fiduciary duty of loyalty by Lal, who it says leaks confidential information to author and journalist Nicholas Carlson.]]> Fri, 08 May 2015 23:36:24 GMT /slideshow/yahoo-lawsuit/47930717 TricPark@slideshare.net(TricPark) Yahoo's Lawsuit Against Former Employee for Leaking Information to Press TricPark Yahoo filed a lawsuit against Cecile Lal, who it identified as a former chief of staff to a senior vice president at the company, in Santa Clara County superior court. The claim alleges breach of contract and breach of a fiduciary duty of loyalty by Lal, who it says leaks confidential information to author and journalist Nicholas Carlson. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/yahoo-lawsuit-150508233624-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Yahoo filed a lawsuit against Cecile Lal, who it identified as a former chief of staff to a senior vice president at the company, in Santa Clara County superior court. The claim alleges breach of contract and breach of a fiduciary duty of loyalty by Lal, who it says leaks confidential information to author and journalist Nicholas Carlson.
Yahoo's Lawsuit Against Former Employee for Leaking Information to Press from Tric Park
]]> 7698 40 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/yahoo-lawsuit-150508233624-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Full 2012 FTC report into suspected antitrust by Google (via WSJ) /slideshow/ftc-ocrwatermark/46286752 ftc-ocr-watermark-150325151738-conversion-gate01
[the] effect ofGoogle's conduct is to diminish the incentives of vertical websites to invest in, and to develop, new and innovative content. In the alternative, Googlc's conduct may be condemned as a stand-alone violation of Section 5. Google has presented no efficiency justifi cation for its conduct. Third, Staff has investigated whether Google has employed ru1ticompetifve contractual restrictions on the a· utomated cross-management of advertising camp,l aigns. . Google's main rival (Microsoft) has alleged that Googlc is denying Microsoft c ·tical scale by employing these restrictions, and thus impairing Microsoft's ability to compe e effectively in the markets for general search and search advertising. We conclude that thes restrictions should be condemned under Section 2 because they limit the ability of advertisers to make use of their own data, and as such, have reduced innovation and increased transaction costs among advertisers and third-party businesses, and also degraded the quality ofGoogle's rivals in search and search advertising. Google 's proffered efficiency justification for these restrictions appears to be pretextual. Fourth, Staff has investigated whether Google has entered into anticomprtive, exclusionary agreements with websites for syndicated search and search advcrtisrng services. We conclude that Google's agreements should be condemned under Section 2 because they foreclose some p01tion of the market, and, although the agreements result in only modest anticompetitive effects on publishers, the impact of the agreements in denying scale to competitors is both competitively significant to its main rival (Microsoft) today, as well as a significant barrier to entry for potential entrants in the longer term. While Googe presents efficiency justifications for these agreements, on balance, Staff finds them to be nonpersuasive]]>
[the] effect ofGoogle's conduct is to diminish the incentives of vertical websites to invest in, and to develop, new and innovative content. In the alternative, Googlc's conduct may be condemned as a stand-alone violation of Section 5. Google has presented no efficiency justifi cation for its conduct. Third, Staff has investigated whether Google has employed ru1ticompetifve contractual restrictions on the a· utomated cross-management of advertising camp,l aigns. . Google's main rival (Microsoft) has alleged that Googlc is denying Microsoft c ·tical scale by employing these restrictions, and thus impairing Microsoft's ability to compe e effectively in the markets for general search and search advertising. We conclude that thes restrictions should be condemned under Section 2 because they limit the ability of advertisers to make use of their own data, and as such, have reduced innovation and increased transaction costs among advertisers and third-party businesses, and also degraded the quality ofGoogle's rivals in search and search advertising. Google 's proffered efficiency justification for these restrictions appears to be pretextual. Fourth, Staff has investigated whether Google has entered into anticomprtive, exclusionary agreements with websites for syndicated search and search advcrtisrng services. We conclude that Google's agreements should be condemned under Section 2 because they foreclose some p01tion of the market, and, although the agreements result in only modest anticompetitive effects on publishers, the impact of the agreements in denying scale to competitors is both competitively significant to its main rival (Microsoft) today, as well as a significant barrier to entry for potential entrants in the longer term. While Googe presents efficiency justifications for these agreements, on balance, Staff finds them to be nonpersuasive]]> Wed, 25 Mar 2015 15:17:38 GMT /slideshow/ftc-ocrwatermark/46286752 TricPark@slideshare.net(TricPark) Full 2012 FTC report into suspected antitrust by Google (via WSJ) TricPark [the] effect ofGoogle's conduct is to diminish the incentives of vertical websites to invest in, and to develop, new and innovative content. In the alternative, Googlc's conduct may be condemned as a stand-alone violation of Section 5. Google has presented no efficiency justifi cation for its conduct. Third, Staff has investigated whether Google has employed ru1ticompetifve contractual restrictions on the a· utomated cross-management of advertising camp,l aigns. . Google's main rival (Microsoft) has alleged that Googlc is denying Microsoft c ·tical scale by employing these restrictions, and thus impairing Microsoft's ability to compe e effectively in the markets for general search and search advertising. We conclude that thes restrictions should be condemned under Section 2 because they limit the ability of advertisers to make use of their own data, and as such, have reduced innovation and increased transaction costs among advertisers and third-party businesses, and also degraded the quality ofGoogle's rivals in search and search advertising. Google 's proffered efficiency justification for these restrictions appears to be pretextual. Fourth, Staff has investigated whether Google has entered into anticomprtive, exclusionary agreements with websites for syndicated search and search advcrtisrng services. We conclude that Google's agreements should be condemned under Section 2 because they foreclose some p01tion of the market, and, although the agreements result in only modest anticompetitive effects on publishers, the impact of the agreements in denying scale to competitors is both competitively significant to its main rival (Microsoft) today, as well as a significant barrier to entry for potential entrants in the longer term. While Googe presents efficiency justifications for these agreements, on balance, Staff finds them to be nonpersuasive <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/ftc-ocr-watermark-150325151738-conversion-gate01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> [the] effect ofGoogle&#39;s conduct is to diminish the incentives of vertical websites to invest in, and to develop, new and innovative content. In the alternative, Googlc&#39;s conduct may be condemned as a stand-alone violation of Section 5. Google has presented no efficiency justifi cation for its conduct. Third, Staff has investigated whether Google has employed ru1ticompetifve contractual restrictions on the a· utomated cross-management of advertising camp,l aigns. . Google&#39;s main rival (Microsoft) has alleged that Googlc is denying Microsoft c ·tical scale by employing these restrictions, and thus impairing Microsoft&#39;s ability to compe e effectively in the markets for general search and search advertising. We conclude that thes restrictions should be condemned under Section 2 because they limit the ability of advertisers to make use of their own data, and as such, have reduced innovation and increased transaction costs among advertisers and third-party businesses, and also degraded the quality ofGoogle&#39;s rivals in search and search advertising. Google &#39;s proffered efficiency justification for these restrictions appears to be pretextual. Fourth, Staff has investigated whether Google has entered into anticomprtive, exclusionary agreements with websites for syndicated search and search advcrtisrng services. We conclude that Google&#39;s agreements should be condemned under Section 2 because they foreclose some p01tion of the market, and, although the agreements result in only modest anticompetitive effects on publishers, the impact of the agreements in denying scale to competitors is both competitively significant to its main rival (Microsoft) today, as well as a significant barrier to entry for potential entrants in the longer term. While Googe presents efficiency justifications for these agreements, on balance, Staff finds them to be nonpersuasive
Full 2012 FTC report into suspected antitrust by Google (via WSJ) from Tric Park
]]> 839 3 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/ftc-ocr-watermark-150325151738-conversion-gate01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Michael Brown Case (Ferguson, Mo.): Grand Jury Testimony /slideshow/michael-brown-case-grand-jury-testimony/41985454 grand-jury-testimony-141125003221-conversion-gate02
A grand jury decided on Nov. 24, 2014 not to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting of teen Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Here is a transcript of the testimony.]]>
A grand jury decided on Nov. 24, 2014 not to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting of teen Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Here is a transcript of the testimony.]]> Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:32:21 GMT /slideshow/michael-brown-case-grand-jury-testimony/41985454 TricPark@slideshare.net(TricPark) Michael Brown Case (Ferguson, Mo.): Grand Jury Testimony TricPark A grand jury decided on Nov. 24, 2014 not to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting of teen Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Here is a transcript of the testimony. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/grand-jury-testimony-141125003221-conversion-gate02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> A grand jury decided on Nov. 24, 2014 not to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting of teen Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Here is a transcript of the testimony.
Michael Brown Case (Ferguson, Mo.): Grand Jury Testimony from Tric Park
]]> 8532 12 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/grand-jury-testimony-141125003221-conversion-gate02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document White http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Actor Robin Williams' Death: Police Press Release /slideshow/actor-robin-williams/37890706 236531258-marin-pd-on-williams-140811180707-phpapp02
The Marin County Sheriff's Office released this statement on the death of famed actor Robin Williams. Williams died on Aug. 11, 2014 in an apparent suicide.]]>
The Marin County Sheriff's Office released this statement on the death of famed actor Robin Williams. Williams died on Aug. 11, 2014 in an apparent suicide.]]> Mon, 11 Aug 2014 18:07:07 GMT /slideshow/actor-robin-williams/37890706 TricPark@slideshare.net(TricPark) Actor Robin Williams' Death: Police Press Release TricPark The Marin County Sheriff's Office released this statement on the death of famed actor Robin Williams. Williams died on Aug. 11, 2014 in an apparent suicide. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/236531258-marin-pd-on-williams-140811180707-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> The Marin County Sheriff&#39;s Office released this statement on the death of famed actor Robin Williams. Williams died on Aug. 11, 2014 in an apparent suicide.
Actor Robin Williams' Death: Police Press Release from Tric Park
]]> 7952 16 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/236531258-marin-pd-on-williams-140811180707-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Manage Like Messi: This Quiz Tells You What Football Star You Most Resemble at Work /slideshow/quiz-what-football-star-leader-are-you/37340025 footballstarleaders-140724200133-phpapp01
Take this quiz and see which football star's leadership style you embody. Are you like Beckham, Pele, Xavi Hernandez, Messi, Ronaldinho or Neymar?]]>
Take this quiz and see which football star's leadership style you embody. Are you like Beckham, Pele, Xavi Hernandez, Messi, Ronaldinho or Neymar?]]> Thu, 24 Jul 2014 20:01:32 GMT /slideshow/quiz-what-football-star-leader-are-you/37340025 TricPark@slideshare.net(TricPark) Manage Like Messi: This Quiz Tells You What Football Star You Most Resemble at Work TricPark Take this quiz and see which football star's leadership style you embody. Are you like Beckham, Pele, Xavi Hernandez, Messi, Ronaldinho or Neymar? <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/footballstarleaders-140724200133-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Take this quiz and see which football star&#39;s leadership style you embody. Are you like Beckham, Pele, Xavi Hernandez, Messi, Ronaldinho or Neymar?
Manage Like Messi: This Quiz Tells You What Football Star You Most Resemble at Work from Tric Park
]]> 14257 23 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/footballstarleaders-140724200133-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation White http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 https://public.slidesharecdn.com/v2/images/profile-picture.png https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/williamgross-pimco-lawsuit-151008195520-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/william-gross-sues-pimco-for-hundreds-of-millions/53711030 William Gross Sues Pim... https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/uber-filing-driversareemployeesnotcontractors-150617162854-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/california-says-uber-drivers-are-employees-not-contractors/49515418 California Says Uber D... https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/2015q1earningsslidestwitter-150611223054-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/2015-q1-earningsslidestwitter/49289945 Twitter&#39;s Q1 2015 Earn...