All Activity

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager. A reader asks: My small business has had a recurring discussion regarding taking meetings with job seekers when we don’t have an open position. Someone will reach out, either by stopping by our office without an appointment or just sending an inquiry by email, and ask if they can meet with someone. In the past, we have taken these meetings as sort of informal interviews. From what I recall, we’ve never made a hire from these meetings when there’s no existing connection to our company or staff. Over the last few years, I’ve discouraged these meetings. They just take up time for our team when we don’t have an opening, and I also feel they can be misleading if we’re not clear enough that we don’t have a position. I’m more inclined to take these meetings if (1) the person has a connection to a current employee who gives a positive recommendation, and (2) we do have an idea of a need on our team that the candidate could be a good fit for. Otherwise, I’d prefer to say thanks for their interest in our company, and we’ll reach out should we have an open position that might be a good fit. I’ve had an inquiry recently from a woman who sent her resume and asked to meet even if we don’t have an opening to learn more about our company and how she can contribute. She’s sent a couple of emails and dropped by without an appointment. I told her we don’t have an opening and that I’d reach out if we do in the future. She followed up with a second email, again asking to meet. She does not have a connection to any of our existing staff, and it seems a bit presumptuous to ask a stranger to take time out of their workday essentially as a favor for some career advice. I’m really curious what your thoughts are on this topic. I answer this question over at Inc. today, where I’m revisiting letters that have been buried in the archives here from years ago (and sometimes updating/expanding my answers to them). You can read it here. View the full article

The IMF is trying to make sense of the unknowableView the full article

OpenAI’s ChatGPT search had 41.3 million average monthly users across the EU between October and March. That’s nearly 4x growth from the prior six-month stretch, when it reported having 11.2 million users. Why we care. Brands and businesses need to understand how (or whether) their content is being surfaced in AI-generated responses. ChatGPT search is nowhere near replacing Google Search, but it is an emerging channel for visibility and discoverability. What ChatGPT reported. According to OpenAI’s EU Digital Services Act (DSA) page: “For the six-month period ending 31 March 2025, ChatGPT search had in combination approximately 41.3 million average monthly active recipients in the European Union.” What is a recipient. The EU counts a “monthly active recipient” as the number of unique users who engage with an online platform at least once. Yes, but. Google still dominates search. According to Google’s DSA Disclosure report, Google Search had: 355.7 million average monthly signed-in recipients. 424.4 million average monthly signed-out recipients. That means, in the EU, Google Search (signed in and out) is nearly 20x bigger than ChatGPT search. Dig deeper. Google Search is 373x bigger than ChatGPT search What’s next for OpenAI. ChatGPT search is approaching the EU’s threshold for a “very large online platform” under the Digital Services Act (DSA). That milestone — 45 million monthly active users — would put ChatGPT search under increased scrutiny in the EU. View the full article

Five tasks for business development. By Martin Bissett Business Development on a Budget Go PRO for members-only access to more Martin Bissett. View the full article

Five tasks for business development. By Martin Bissett Business Development on a Budget Go PRO for members-only access to more Martin Bissett. View the full article

Stores selling secondhand clothes, shoes and accessories are poised to benefit from President Donald The President’s trade war even as businesses the world over race to avert potential damage, according to industry experts. American styles carry international influence, but nearly all of the clothing sold domestically is made elsewhere. The Yale University Budget Lab last week estimated short-term consumer price increases of 65% for clothes and 87% for leather goods, noting U.S. tariffs “disproportionately affect” those goods. Such price hikes may drive cost-conscious shoppers to online resale sites, consignment boutiques and thrift stores in search of bargains or a way to turn their wardrobes into cash. Used items cost less than their new equivalents and only would be subject to tariffs if they come from outside the country. “I think resale is going to grow in a market that is declining,” said Kristen Classi-Zummo, an apparel industry analyst at market research firm Circana. “What I think is going to continue to win in this chaotic environment are channels that bring value.” The outlook for pre-owned fashion nevertheless comes with unknowns, including whether the president’s tariffs will stay long enough to pinch consumers and change their behavior. It’s also unclear whether secondhand purveyors will increase their own prices, either to mirror the overall market or in response to shopper demand. A new audience courtesy of sticker shock Jan Genovese, a retired fashion executive, sells her unwanted designer clothes through customer-to-customer marketplaces like Mercari. If tariffs cause retail prices to rise, she would consider high-end secondhand sites. “Until I see it and really have that sticker shock, I can’t say exclusively that I’ll be pushed into another direction,” Genovese, 75, said. “I think that the tariff part of it is that you definitely rethink things. And maybe I will start looking at alternative venues.” The secondhand clothing market already was flourishing before the specter of tariffs bedeviled the U.S. fashion industry. Management consulting firm McKinsey and Co. predicted after the COVID-19 pandemic that global revenue from pre-owned fashion would grow 11 times faster than retail apparel sales by this year as shoppers looked to save money or spend it in a more environmentally conscious way. While millennials and members of Generation Z were known as the primary buyers of used clothing, data from market research firm Sensor Tower shows the audience may be expanding. The number of mobile app downloads for nine resale marketplaces the firm tracks — eBay, OfferUp, Poshmark, Mercari, Craigslist, Depop, ThredUp, TheRealReal and Vinted — increased by 3% between January and the end of March, the first quarterly gain in three years, Sensor Tower said. The firm estimates downloads of the apps for eBay, Depop, ThredUp and The RealReal also surged compared to a year earlier for the week of March 31, which was when The President unveiled since-paused punitive tariffs on dozens of countries. Circana’s Classi-Zummo said that while customers used to seek out collectible or unusual vintage pieces to supplement their wardrobes, she has noticed more shoppers turning to secondhand sites to replace regular fashion items. “It’s still a cheaper option” than buying new, even though retailers offer discounts, she said. A tariff-free gold mine lurking in closets and warehouses Poshmark, a digital platform where users buy and sell pre-owned clothing, has yet to see sales pick up under the tariff schedule The President unveiled but is prepared to capitalize on the moment, CEO Manish Chandra said. Companies operating e-commerce marketplaces upgrade their technology to make it easier to find items. A visual search tool and other improvements to the Poshmark experience will “pay long dividends in terms of disruption that happens in the market” from the tariffs, Chandra said. Archive, a San Francisco-based technology company that builds and manages online and in-store resale programs for brands including Dr. Martens, The North Face and Lululemon, has noticed clothing labels expressing more urgency to team up, CEO Emily Gittins said. “Tapping into all of the inventory that is already sitting in the U.S., either in people’s closets or in warehouses not being used,” offers a revenue source while brands limit or suspend orders from foreign manufacturers, she said. “There’s a huge amount of uncertainty,” Gittins said. “Everyone believes that this is going to be hugely damaging to consumer goods brands that sell in the U.S. So resale is basically where everyone’s head is going.” Stock analysts have predicted off-price retailers like TJ Maxx and Burlington Stores will weather tariffs more easily than regular apparel chains and department stores because they carry leftover merchandise in the U.S. Priced out of the previously owned market Still, resale vendors aren’t immune from tariff-induced upheavals, said Rachel Kibbe, founder and CEO of Circular Services Group, a firm that advises brands and retailers on reducing the fashion industry’s environmental impact. U.S. sellers that import secondhand inventory from European Union countries would have to pay a 20% duty if The President moves forward with instituting “reciprocal” tariffs on most trading partners and eliminates an import tax exception for parcels worth less than $800, Kibbe said. A circular fashion coalition she leads is seeking a tariff exemption for used and recycled goods that will be offered for resale, Kibbe said. The President already ended the duty-free provision for low-value parcels from China, a move that may benefit sellers of secondhand clothing by making low-priced Chinese fashions pricier, she said. James Reinhart, co-founder and CEO of the online consignment marketplace ThredUp, said the removal of the “de minimis” provision and the 145% tariff The President put on products made in China would benefit businesses like his. He doubts creating resale channels would make a big difference for individual brands. “Brands will explore this and they may do more, but I don’t see them massively changing their operations,” Reinhart said. “I think they’re going to be figuring out how to survive. And I don’t think resale helps you survive.” Rebag, an online marketplace and retail chain that sells used designer handbags priced from $500 to tens of thousands of dollars, expects tariffs to help drive new customers and plans to open more physical stores, CEO Charles Gorra said. Gorra said the company would analyze prices for new luxury goods and adjust what Rebag charges accordingly. The two historically rose in tandem, but Rebag could not match Chanel’s 10% price increase last year because of lower resale demand, Gorra said. “That has nothing to do with the tariffs,” he said. “Consumers are feeling priced out.” Norah Brotman, 22, a senior at the University of Minnesota, buys most of her own clothes on eBay. She also thrifts fashions from the 1990s and early 2000s at Goodwill stores and resells them on Depop. If tariffs upend the economics of fast fashion and discourage mindless consumption, Brotman would count that as a plus. “I would love if this would steer people in a different direction,” she said. —Anne D’Innocenzio, AP retail writer View the full article

As any investor will tell you, the past month has been absolutely brutal when it comes to the markets. In the past 30 days alone, the Nasdaq is down 9.5%, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is down 7.8%, and the S&P 500 is down 7.8%. But in the same period, one asset has surged: gold. As of the time of this writing, the price of an ounce of gold has surged over the past 30 days by a remarkable 14.4%. And gold isn’t just surging—it’s hitting all-time highs. This morning, gold peaked above $3,506 per ounce—a record for the precious metal. As of the time of this writing, the commodity has pulled back slightly to around $3,453 an ounce, according to Yahoo Finance data. However, even that price is still striking. That’s nearly $800 an ounce higher than gold was at the beginning of 2025. Since then, the metal has surged 32%. Gold’s biggest jump has happened in the past five days alone. During that period, it has surged 7.78% But why? Gold is a historic safe haven during chaotic economic times When the economy is in turmoil or investors fear an economic downturn is coming, they tend to park their money in what are known as economic “safe havens”—assets that have historically been less likely to decrease in value during greater economic downturns. As Investopedia notes, historic safe havens include cash; some currencies like the Swiss franc, the U.S. dollar and Japanese yen; U.S. Treasury bills; and precious metals, most notably, gold. However, investors of late seem to feel that some of these historic safe havens—the U.S. dollar in particular—aren’t as reliable now as in past times. Instead, they seem to be throwing their money into gold, hence the recent rapid surge in price. As for why investors are turning to safe havens—and sending gold surging in recent weeks—it mainly comes down to two President The President-related reasons, notes the Wall Street Journal. The President’s chaotic tariffs The first reason is no surprise. Ever since The President announced his new chaotic “Liberation Day” tariff policies on April 2, investor confidence has plummeted as the tariffs—and their implementation—have spread uncertainty throughout the economy and business world. While many of the tariffs are now paused for 90 days, the ones The President levied against China are still active, as are China’s retaliatory tariffs against the U.S. These tariffs mean that Americans are paying more for many common goods, and they are impacting the volume of goods that American businesses export to customers in China. And given the The President administration’s chaotic implementation of the tariffs, its mixed messaging surrounding them, and the lingering uncertainty of whether deals can actually be reached with other nations before the 90-day pause expires, people are beginning to lose faith in the U.S. economy, and recession fears are rising. If a full-blown recession does hit, it’s likely stocks and other assets may continue to fall, which is why many investors are now seeking safe havens like gold. The President’s attacks on Fed Chairman Jerome Powell But maybe even worse than The President’s chaotic tariffs is his recent and increasing attacks on Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. The President wants Powell, who oversees America’s independent central bank, the Federal Reserve, to lower interest rates. The reason The President wants power to do this is that The President’s tariffs have pummeled the stock markets and consumer confidence. When the Federal Reserve chooses to lower interest rates, the stock markets generally rise and consumer spending increases, as MSNBC points out. That’s because it’s cheaper to borrow money for things like homes and cars. It can also lower credit-card interest rates, further boosting spending. But Powell has so far refused to acquiesce to The President’s demands—and for good reason. While lower rates can help the economy in the short term, they can have a negative impact in the long term by giving it a temporary artificial boost. As MSNBC notes, if rates are already lowered, and things do get worse with the economy in the future, the Federal Reserve will have one less tool in its arsenal to help fight the economic downturn because it has already lowered rates. But The President seems to care more about the short term. That’s likely why he has increased his attacks on Powell, whom he has threatened to fire, which most legal experts agree the president can’t do anyway. As a matter of fact, the central banks of most countries, including the United States, are set up to be independent of the government precisely so that leaders can’t pressure the banks to do something that is beneficial for political reasons instead of being rational for economic ones. Still, The President’s very public beef with Powell is enough to make some investors leery that The President may indeed be willing to undermine what is seen as a critical pillar of the U.S.’s economic credibility. That beef is leading to uncertainty, which is leading to some investors now looking for more stable, safe-haven assets like gold. View the full article

A commercial airliner was on final approach to San Francisco’s international airport in November when the crew spotted a drone outside the cockpit window. By then it was too late “to take evasive action,” the pilots reported, and the quadcopter passed by their windshield, not 300 feet away. A month earlier, a jetliner was flying at an altitude of 4,000 feet near Miami’s international airport when its pilots reported a “close encounter” with a drone. In August, a drone came within 50 feet of clipping the left wing of a passenger jet as it departed Newark International Airport. The incidents were all classified as “near midair collisions” — any one of which could have had catastrophic consequences, according to aviation safety experts. They were also not isolated encounters. An Associated Press analysis of an aviation safety database reveals that drones last year accounted for nearly two-thirds of reported near midair collisions involving commercial passenger planes taking off and landing at the country’s top 30 busiest airports. That was the highest percentage of such near misses since 2020, when air traffic dropped during the COVID-19 pandemic. The first reports of near misses involving drones were logged in 2014, the AP found. The number of such encounters spiked the following year. Over the last decade, drones accounted for 51% — 122 of 240 — of reported near misses, according to AP’s analysis. Passenger jets have long been subject to risks around airports — whether from bird strikes or congested airspace — as was made clear by the January collision between a military helicopter and commercial jet near Washington, D.C., that killed 67 people. The threat has become more dire The threat from drones has become more acute in the last decade as the use of quadcopters and remote-controlled planes has exploded in popularity. The FAA estimates that Americans are operating more than a million drones for recreational and commercial purposes. “If you have the money, you can go on the internet and buy a pretty sophisticated drone that can reach altitudes they really have no business being at,” said William Waldock, a professor of safety science at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. The risk is most acute near airports because that is where the flight paths of drones and airplanes most overlap, experts said. The incidents represent only a portion of such close calls because the database — NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System — relies on voluntary submissions from pilots and other aviation workers. A separate FAA program, which includes reports from the public, tallied at least 160 sightings last month of drones flying near airports. “The FAA recognizes that urgency, and we all know additional changes need to be made to allow the airports to go out and detect and mitigate where necessary,” said Hannah Thach, executive director of the partnership, known as Alliance for System Safety of UAS through Research Excellence. FAA says it is taking steps to improve safety The FAA said it has taken steps to mitigate the risks of drones. It has prohibited nearly all drones from flying near airports without prior authorization, though such rules are difficult to enforce, and recreational users may not be aware of restrictions. The agency requires registrations for drones weighing more than 250 grams (0.55 pounds), and such drones are required to carry a radio transponder that identifies the drone’s owner and broadcasts its position to help avert collisions. Additional rules govern commercial drone use. The agency has also been testing systems to detect and counter drones near airports. Among the methods being examined: Using radio signals to jam drones or force them to land. Authorities are also weighing whether to deploy high-powered microwaves or laser beams to disable the machines. Experts said the FAA and other authorities could do more. They suggested creating a system similar to speed cameras on roadways that could capture a drone’s transponder code and send its pilots a ticket in the mail. They also said the FAA should consider regulations that require all manufacturers to program a drone’s GPS unit to prevent it from flying near airports and other sensitive areas, a method called “geofencing.” Drone manufacturer ends mandatory ‘geofencing’ DJI, a leading drone maker, used such geofencing restrictions for years. However, it eliminated the feature in January, replacing it with an alert to drone pilots when they approach restricted areas. Adam Welsh, head of global policy at DJI, said managing requests from authorized users to temporarily disable the geofencing became an increasingly time-consuming task. More than one million such requests were processed last year. “We had around-the-clock service, but the number of applications coming in were becoming really hard to handle,” Welsh said. “They all had to be reviewed individually.” With no other manufacturers enabling geofencing, and without government rules requiring it, DJI decided to end the practice, he said. The FAA declined to say if it is considering whether to mandate geofencing. Drone users can face consequences Experts said authorities should take more aggressive action to hold drone users accountable for violating restricted airspace — to highlight the problem and deter others from breaking the rules, pointing to recent arrests that they hoped might send such a message. In December, for example, Boston police arrested two men who operated a drone that flew dangerously close to Logan International Airport. Police reported that they were able to find the drone flyers, in part, by tracking the aircraft thanks to its FAA-mandated transponder signal. A month later, a small drone collided with a “Super Scooper” plane that was fighting wildfires raging through Southern California. The drone punched a hole in the plane’s left wing, causing enough damage that officials grounded the aircraft for several days to make repairs. Authorities tracked down the 56-year-old drone operator, who pleaded guilty to a federal charge of recklessly flying his aircraft. The man, who has yet to be sentenced, admitted he launched his DJI quadcopter to observe fire damage over the Pacific Palisades neighborhood, despite the FAA having restricted drone flying in the area, according to court records. The operator lost sight of the drone after it flew about 1.5 miles from where he had launched it. And that’s when it struck the “Super Scooper.” —Aaron Kessler and Michael Biesecker, Associated Press View the full article

Equifax Inc.'s first-quarter profit beat estimates, although the credit-reporting agency declined to raise its guidance, citing the tariff-induced uncertainty in the economy and falling consumer confidence. View the full article

ChatGPT can now personalize searches using your memories. Memory with Search is a new addition to ChatGPT search, and was quietly added as an update in its changelog. What is Memory with Search. ChatGPT said it can “use memories to inform search queries when ChatGPT searches the web using their-party search providers.” Not a lot of detail there. But OpenAI’s ChatGPT search page offers more information: ‘If you have ‘Memory’ enabled, when ChatGPT search rewrites your prompt into a search query it may also leverage relevant information from memories to make the query better and more useful. For example, if the user has ‘Memory’ turned on and asks ChatGPT ‘what are some restaurants near me that I’d like,’ and has memories is that the user is vegan and lives in San Francisco, then ChatGPT may rewrite the user’s prompt to ‘good vegan restaurants San Francisco.’ You can learn more here about Memory, including how to disable it or control individual memories. ChatGPT Memory. OpenAI announced the official launch of Memory on April 11. ChatGPT Memory consists of saved memories (memories users ask ChatGPT to remember) and chat history (insights gathered from past chats to improve future ones). Access to ChatGPT Memory is still rolling out now. Why we care. ChatGPT’s use of memories and rewriting prompts into search queries (to be more nuanced, contextual, and user-specific) means AI search is shifting toward being more deeply personalized. This could impact how and when your brand or business appears in AI-generated answers. Opt out. Users who don’t want to use Memory can head to Settings > Personalization and turn off the Memory slider. The announcement. ChatGPT – Release Notes (April 16) View the full article

Google has rolled out a new feature for Google Business Profile verifications. When you verify using video verification, you can now preview that video before you submit the video for review. Google is calling this “Video Previews.” Video Previews. Video Previews give you the option to review the video you are about to submit to the Google Business Profile team. This will allow you to ensure that video includes all the necessary elements before you submit it to Google. Here is what it looks like: What Google said. Google’s Lisa Landsman wrote on LinkedIn, “Now, you can review your recordings before submitting, ensuring clarity and accuracy – saving you valuable time and reducing the need for resubmissions.” Why we care. All too often, a business will submit a verification requirement but leave out some important detail. With video previews, you can now preview the video before you submit it, to give you one more chance to ensure that the video you are submitting meets all the requirments you need to verify your business in Google Business Profiles. View the full article

Arborists are turning vacant land on Detroit’s eastside into a small urban forest, not of elms, oaks and red maples indigenous to the city but giant sequoias, the world’s largest trees that can live for thousands of years. The project on four lots will not only replace long-standing blight with majestic trees, but could also improve air quality and help preserve the trees that are native to California’s Sierra Nevada, where they are threatened by ever-hotter wildfires. Detroit is the pilot city for the Giant Sequoia Filter Forest. The nonprofit Archangel Ancient Tree Archive is donating dozens of sequoia saplings that will be planted by staff and volunteers from Arboretum Detroit, another nonprofit, to mark Earth Day on April 22. Co-founder David Milarch says Archangel also plans to plant sequoias in Los Angeles, Oakland, California, and London. What are giant sequoias? The massive conifers can grow to more than 300 feet (90 meters) tall with a more than 30-foot (9-meter) circumference at the base. They can live for more than 3,000 years. “Here’s a tree that is bigger than your house when it’s mature, taller than your buildings, and lives longer than you can comprehend,” said Andrew “Birch” Kemp, Arboretum Detroit’s executive director. The sequoias will eventually provide a full canopy that protects everything beneath, he said. “It may be sad to call these .5- and 1-acre treescapes forests,” Kemp said. “We are expanding on this and shading our neighborhood in the only way possible, planting lots of trees.” Giant sequoias are resilient against disease and insects, and are usually well-adapted to fire. Thick bark protects their trunks and their canopies tend to be too high for flames to reach. But climate change is making the big trees more vulnerable to wildfires out West, Kemp said. “The fires are getting so hot that its even threatening them,” he said. Descendants of Stagg and Waterfall Archangel, based in Copemish, Michigan, preserves the genetics of old-growth trees for research and reforestation. The sequoia saplings destined for Detroit are clones of two giants known as Stagg — the world’s fifth-largest tree — and Waterfall, of the Alder Creek grove, about 150 miles (240 kilometers) north of Los Angeles. In 2010, Archangel began gathering cones and climbers scaled high into the trees to gather new-growth clippings from which they were able to develop and grow saplings. A decade later, a wildfire burned through the grove. Waterfall was destroyed but Stagg survived. They will both live on in the Motor City. Why Detroit? Sequoias need space, and metropolitan Detroit has plenty of it. In the 1950s, 1.8 million people called Detroit home, but the city’s population has since shrunk to about one-third of that number. Tens of thousands of homes were left empty and neglected. While the city has demolished at least 24,000 vacant structures since it emerged from bankruptcy in 2014, thousands of empty lots remain. Kemp estimates that only about 10-15% of the original houses remain in the neighborhood where the sequoias will grow. “There’s not another urban area I know of that has the kind of potential that we do to reforest,” he said. “We could all live in shady, fresh air beauty. It’s like no reason we can’t be the greenest city in the world.” Within the last decade, 11 sequoias were planted on vacant lots owned by Arboretum Detroit and nine others were planted on private properties around the neighborhood. Each now reaches 12 to 15 feet (3.6 to 4.5 meters) tall. Arboretum Detroit has another 200 in its nursery. Kemp believes the trees will thrive in Detroit. “They’re safer here … we don’t have wildfires like (California). The soil stays pretty moist, even in the summer,” he said. “They like to have that winter irrigation, so when the snow melts they can get a good drink.” How will the sequoias impact Detroit? Caring for the sequoias will fall to future generations, so Milarch has instigated what he calls “tree school” to teach Detroit’s youth how and why to look after the new trees. “We empower our kids to teach them how to do this and give them the materials and the way to do this themselves,” Milarch said. “They take ownership. They grow them in the classrooms and plant them around the schools. They know we’re in environmental trouble.” Some of them may never have even walked in a forest, Kemp said. “How can we expect children who have never seen a forest to care about deforestation on the other side of the world?” Kemp said. “It is our responsibility to offer them their birthright.” City residents are exposed to extreme air pollution and have high rates of asthma. The Detroit sequoias will grow near a heavily industrial area, a former incinerator and two interstates, he said. Kemp’s nonprofit has already planted about 650 trees — comprising around 80 species — in some 40 lots in the area. But he believes the sequoias will have the greatest impact. “Because these trees grow so fast, so large and they’re evergreen they’ll do amazing work filtering the air here,” Kemp said. “We live in pretty much a pollution hot spot. We’re trying to combat that. We’re trying to breathe clean air. We’re trying to create shade. We’re trying to soak up the stormwater, and I think sequoias — among all the trees we plant — may be the strongest, best candidates for that.” —Corey Williams, Associated Press View the full article

Tesla investors are anxious to know if plans to roll out a cheaper car and a robotaxi service this year are on track, and whether CEO Elon Musk is ready to ditch his role in the The President administration soon and get back to managing the company more closely. The electric vehicle maker is scheduled after market close on Tuesday to provide what is likely to be its most important update on operations since the launch of its Model 3 vehicle in 2017. Tesla said earlier this month that it would “hold a live company update” along with its results and the question and answer webcast, sparking speculation on social media that it might make a major announcement. Analysts are expecting a bad first quarter, based on recent indicators. Deliveries in the January-March period slid 13%, as the company lost ground to Chinese rivals, and Musk’s political actions as a close adviser to U.S. President Donald The President have damaged the brand. Tesla has faced protests, vandalism, and consumer calls for boycotts in several markets, and sales in China and California — its largest U.S. market — have fallen sharply as well. Some investors have taken a more sour view of the one-time Wall Street darling. The company’s stock, which closed at $227.42 on Monday, has nearly halved from its December peak. Tesla’s key automotive gross margin, excluding regulatory credits, likely fell to 11.8% in the period, according to 21 analysts polled by Visible Alpha, down from 13.6% in the fourth quarter. Analysts expect the downward trend to continue if Tesla continues to prioritize volume growth over profitability. “Tesla comes into results as arguably the most scrutinized company in the world,” said Matt Britzman, senior equity analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown. “That’s not really a position investors want to be in, and there’ll be a lot of focus on whether Elon Musk gives any indication of when he might be stepping back from DOGE,” said Britzman, who personally holds Tesla stock. DOGE is short for the Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency. The EV maker scrapped plans for a brand-new, low-cost model last year, opting instead to produce cheaper variants using existing platforms and assembly lines. Reuters reported exclusively on Friday that Tesla delayed plans to start production of a more affordable Model Y crossover by at least a few months. Musk promised driverless ride-hailing services to the public in Texas by June, and in California for later this year. To that end, Tesla has been seeking regulatory approvals, but there are serious concerns about safety and related litigation risks that could come with deploying unproven driverless technology on public streets. Analysts expect a second straight annual decline in Tesla deliveries in 2025, despite efforts to boost sales through incentives like free charging and Full Self-Driving features. Revenue was likely flat from a year ago at $21.35 billion, supported by gains in regulatory credits and growth in Tesla’s energy storage business. Tesla also recalled all Cybertrucks delivered since late 2023 and launched a lower-priced $70,000 version of the vehicle. It has been discounting unsold inventory of the electric pickup truck in recent weeks. Tariff tensions add further uncertainty. Tesla has paused some China-sourced component imports after U.S. tariffs on the Asian country rose to 145%, Reuters reported. China has responded with tariffs of its own, leading Tesla to suspend new Model S and X orders in the country. —Akash Sriram and Abhirup Roy, Reuters View the full article

The FHFA director, who's posted numerous updates on social media, has yet to hint at a potential Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac exit from conservatorship. View the full article

US activist investor tells energy company that its strategic pivot back to oil and gas does not go far enough View the full article

The Fed chair is determined to see out his term, and lawyers at the central bank think he has good grounds to do soView the full article

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager. A reader writes: I took over as the director of my former team about a year ago. I inherited an ongoing HR issue between one of my direct reports (Tammy) and her direct report (Beth). Beth hates Tammy. Beth had applied for the promotion to Tammy’s position when it was last open but my predecessor hired Tammy from the outside, and Beth had strong feelings about being passed over. Tammy was not the best hire; she is not a strong manager. But we are a government agency, and while Tammy isn’t my best employee, she is not so bad that there would be any chance I could fire her. I have worked on coaching her around some specific behaviors that I know bother her staff and she is doing a little better there, and her relationship with her other direct reports has started to improve. But not Beth. Beth came in hot at me from day one in this role that I needed to “fix” Tammy. She went around the chain of command to me constantly for every small nitpicky complaint she had about everything Tammy does. And ultimately, Beth just doesn’t like Tammy on a personal level, which she’s told me very plainly. We had a come-to-Jesus type conversation with all three of us a few months ago to get to some basic agreement on how they would work together (who would cc who on emails, how leave request would be handled, all really basic stuff that shouldn’t need to even be said for two management level staff, but we laid it all out). The nitpicky complaints to me stopped. But it seems like Beth has now just given up. She looks absolutely miserable in every meeting. If she’s not talking, which she virtually never does unprompted now, she stares into space with a look on her face like we’re torturing her. She was always a bit of a negative person, but that has just exploded — while she rarely talks at all, virtually everything she does say has a complaint attached to it or a deep sigh involved. Beth also supervises other staff and I’m really worried that she’s not only becoming incredibly negative herself, but that at least one of her direct reports is following her lead in complaining a lot about other staff. I feel like I have some idea of how to deal with the negative comments. I’m less sure what, if anything, I can do about her showing up at every meeting looking like it’s sheer torture. I’m thinking of pulling her aside and she saying, “I’m concerned about you, our last three team meetings you looked really miserable to me.” At the end of the day, though, she’s made it really clear that nothing will resolve her issue except not reporting to Tammy, which is not an option I have available. And while Beth’s behavior also isn’t great now and her performance has slipped down to pretty mediocre, in the space we work in it doesn’t begin to approach fireable. Are we all just stuck? I’m feeling stuck. And I know Beth feels stuck. And I know Tammy feels stuck that much of Beth’s hostility is rooted in personal dislike and a history of hiring decisions that Tammy didn’t have anything to do with. I’m going to keep coaching Tammy to improve. Can I do anything else here? We can’t talk about this without saying that not being able to do anything about someone whose behavior “isn’t great” and whose performance “has slipped down to pretty mediocre” is … well, Not Good. So first and foremost, I strongly recommend that you question that as much as you can! Can you really not do anything about those things, or is it more that it’s a massive pain with a ridiculous number of bureaucratic hoops to jump through? Sometimes people say “we can’t fire in our organization” when what it really means is “it’s a huge pain to fire here, but it can be done.” (And yes, I know government is its own thing, but even there, there are things you can do if you’re willing to put in the time.) Plus, even if you can’t fire a problem performer, that doesn’t mean you can’t lay out stronger performance standards and keep pushing her toward them. Of course, it’s possible that you’ve thought through how much time and effort it would take and determined that your energy would pay off more if spent on other things. But if there’s any chance that you haven’t fully thought through all the options available, please do — not just for Beth, but for all the other people Tammy manages, too. Just because they’re not as vocal about it as Beth is doesn’t mean that they’re not deeply frustrated by reporting to her, too. Okay, with that behind us… The next step is to separate your concerns about Beth into two buckets: the concern about her being so obviously miserable and the concern about what effect that might be having on the people she manages, since those require two different approaches. If it were just that she looked miserable, I’d say you should have a very up-front conversation with her where you say, “You’ve looked really unhappy lately, and I want to talk about what’s going on. I know you’re unhappy reporting to Tammy, and you have serious concerns about her as a manager. Realistically, XYZ is not going to change because of ____ (reasons). You should assume XYZ will still be that way a year from now, or even a few years from now. I want to be up-front with you about that because I want you to be able to make good decisions for yourself, and my strong advice is to be honest with yourself about whether you can find a way to be reasonably happy within that reality, or whether this is just not a good match for you long-term. I’d hate to lose you, but I’d hate more for you to spend years being this unhappy in your job.” In many ways, this is similar to last week’s letter about the young employees struggling with the realities of work; the situations are different but part of the solution to both is to say, “Let me give you really transparent info about what will and won’t change so you can decide for yourself if this will work for you.” But while ultimately Beth’s feelings about work are her own to manage, there’s also a point where it can become a work issue for others — like if she’s shutting down to the point that she won’t engage in meetings or if she manages people who are getting that doom and gloom splattered all over them. Both sound like the case here, and those are things you have standing to take on not just as a fellow human concerned about her happiness but also as a manager concerned about the way it’s impacting her actual work What to do about that depends on the specifics of how it’s affecting Beth’s staff — but it sounds like you’ve seen enough to have real concern that it is. So the conversation needs to include something like, “Ultimately, your feelings toward Tammy are your private business as long as they’re not disruptive at work, but I’m seeing it affect your team in XYZ ways.” Then offer clear statements of what, specifically, you need her to change in that regard. Crucially, though, you don’t want to get into a situation where Beth is being held to a higher standard than Tammy … because that’s just going to make the problems with Beth worse. If you’re going to take a stronger hand in managing the Beth situation (and you should), you’ve got to take a stronger hand in managing the Tammy situation too. But if you can say honestly to Beth that you’re working closely with Tammy on the issues that concern her, then you’re on much more solid ground in saying, “I’ve heard your complaints, I’m actively working on them, but this is the reality we’re in and your responsibility is to do XYZ on your own end of this.” View the full article

Previous management team had begun consultation on roles after Chinese owner turned down taxpayer funds View the full article

Bottles and bags, food wrappers and straws. Piping, packaging, toys and trays. Plastic is everywhere — and yet some people may be surprised at how much they actually wear. A typical closet is loaded with plastic, woven into polyester activewear, acrylic sweaters, nylon swimsuits and stretchy socks — and it’s shedding into the environment nonstop. When garments are worn, washed and put through the dryer, they shed plastic fiber fragments. A single load of laundry can release millions that are so tiny wastewater treatment plants can’t capture them all. They wind up in local waterways that connect to the ocean. Marine animals eat them, and that can pass plastic to larger animals and humans. Even natural fabrics shed fibers and have chemicals that can leach into the environment. But polyester is the most widely used fiber on Earth, and along with other synthetic fibers accounts for about two-thirds of production worldwide. Tuesday is Earth Day, when people worldwide contemplate ways to reduce their impact on the planet. “Everyone who wears and launders clothing is part of this problem but everyone who wears and launders clothing can be part of the solutions,” said Rachael Z. Miller, founder of Vermont-based Rozalia Project for a Clean Ocean. Simple changes like washing clothes less and using cold water instead of hot can help reduce the shedding of fibers. More challenging is that textiles need to be produced and used in a more sustainable way, said Elisa Tonda at the UN Environment Programme. For example, designing clothes that shed fewer microfibers and are high-quality to last longer, said Tonda, who leads the resources and markets branch. What to do? Start by changing habits The easiest solution is to wash clothes less often, making for less of the friction that breaks fibers apart, said Anja Brandon, director of plastics policy at Ocean Conservancy. “They get tumbled and tossed around with a bunch of soaps, really designed to shake things up to get out dirt and stains,” Brandon said. Miller uses a stain stick to spot-clean. Both say that when clothes are washed, they shed less when put in cold water in full loads to reduce friction, on a shorter cycle, then hung to dry. Inspired by the way coral filters the ocean, Miller invented the Cora Ball, a laundry ball that can be tossed into the washer to cut down on clothes banging into each other. It also catches microfibers. (A portion of the proceeds goes to the Rozalia Project.) Another option is to put synthetic fabrics in a washing bag that captures fibers. Which clothes shed the most? To find out, press a strip of clear packing tape to a garment, then stick it to white paper to check for fibers, Miller said. Garments that are loosely knit or woven tend to shed more, such as fleece. Miller said people don’t need to rush to throw out clothing that’s more likely to shed. She owns fleece jackets herself. Instead, she suggested such clothing can be worn indoors only or outside with a layer on top, and it’s worth thinking twice about acquiring more garments like that. “I try not to guilt or panic people because a lot of this information is very new,” Miller said. “And so we might as well just say, ‘OK, I got it. How can I be strategic about what I’ve got?'” A push to require filters Filters can be added to washers to capture microfibers. Samsung Electronics collaborated with Patagonia and the global conservation organization Ocean Wise to launch one in 2023. It’s now sold in more than 20 countries for front-load washers. Bosch recently launched a microfiber filter in Europe for washers. France was first to adopt a law to mandate that new washing machines sold in the country have a microfiber filter, though implementation has been delayed. In the U.S., efforts to mandate filters in states have failed. California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill in 2023, saying he was concerned about the cost to consumers and he wants to incentivize, not mandate, technologies to remove microfibers in wastewater. In Oregon, state Sen. Deb Patterson proposed a bill this year requiring microfiber filters on new washers sold in that state after she came across the technology in Canada. Patterson said the bill doesn’t have enough support yet but she’ll keep trying. The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers opposes the proposals, saying it’s concerned about consumer costs and filter effectiveness. Changing textiles Some big brands are testing their fabrics to help researchers understand fiber fragmentation, including Adidas, Nike, Patagonia and Under Armour. They’re among more than 90 brands, retailers and manufacturers to partner with The Microfibre Consortium in the United Kingdom, founded in 2018 to do research and offer solutions to transform textile production — including reducing fiber breakup. Nearly 1,500 fabrics have been tested. None are the same, making it a tough problem to solve, consortium CEO Kelly Sheridan said. Patagonia has been a leader in trying to stop the spread of synthetic fiber waste into air and water, saying it’s up to garment brands to prevent it at the source since cleaning up microplastics in the environment is not yet possible. It paid for its own research starting a decade ago on the implication of its clothes. The company worked with suppliers to choose fabrics and dyes and to finish their clothing in ways that reduce shedding. They collaborated on new filtration technologies for washers, textile mills and municipal systems. One of their best-known styles is something called the “better sweater” that shifts from virgin polyester to recycled polyester to cut shedding by about 40%, said Matt Dwyer, vice president of global product footprint. And at textile mills, there’s a prewash at the factory that can capture that first big shed, he added. Dwyer is optimistic about progress. “There’s a whole lot of smart people, not just understanding the problem and the scope of the problem, but also looking for solutions all the way through the manufacturing cycle and use phase,” he said. “Compared to 10 years ago, it’s a whole new world.” The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org. —Jennifer McDermott, Associated Press View the full article

Google’s 2024 Ads Safety Report reveals stricter enforcement, AI crackdowns, and key policy shifts every marketer should pay attention to. The post Google Ads 2024 Safety Report Unveils AI Protections appeared first on Search Engine Journal. View the full article

But what exactly is llms.txt, who’s using it, and—more importantly—should you care? llms.txt is a proposed standard for helping LLMs access and interpret structured content from websites. You can read the full proposal on llmstext.org. In a nutshell, it’s a…Read more ›View the full article

We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication. If you’re trying to avoid Microsoft 365’s monthly fees but still want the full suite of tools for work or school, this one-time purchase of Office Professional Plus 2019 might be worth a look. It’s currently on sale for $29.97 on StackSocial, which is a fraction of what you’d usually pay. Just to be clear—this isn’t a trial or a cloud-based subscription. It's a lifetime license for one Windows PC, and you get full offline access to Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, OneNote, Publisher, and Access. There are some limitations you’ll want to keep in mind. This deal is strictly for the 2019 version, not 2021, and doesn’t include Microsoft Teams. It also won’t tie to your Microsoft account, which might throw off those used to syncing documents between devices. But for a lot of people, that’s not a dealbreaker. It runs on Windows 10 or 11—so no luck if you’re still using an older machine—and you’ll need at least 1GB of RAM and 4GB of disk space. Installation is straightforward and instant. You get your license key and download link right after purchase, and that’s it. No hoops, no waiting. In terms of actual features, you’re getting a robust productivity suite. Excel has improved data analysis tools, PowerPoint brings in new transitions and a zoom feature for dynamic slides, and Outlook makes email and calendar management a bit more efficient. Word is Word—it just works, and it works well. You can’t collaborate in real-time like in Office 365, but if you mostly work solo or on one device, this version gets the job done. All that said, $30 for a fully licensed, download-now Office suite isn’t a bad move—especially if you just need a stable toolkit that works. View the full article

Voice search marketing is optimizing content with the intention of it appearing in voice search results. View the full article

Learn the key differences between Google Local Finder and Google Maps—and how to optimize for both. View the full article

Francesco Ferretti had a problem. His research expedition to track white sharks in the Mediterranean was suddenly adrift—the boat he’d arranged had vanished into the pandemic’s chaos of canceled plans and family emergencies. With scientific equipment packed and a team of seven researchers ready, the marine biologist found himself scanning the horizon for solutions. It was then that Ferretti turned to six-year-old Yachts for Science, a matchmaking service linking wealthy boat owners with cash-strapped researchers. Soon, an owner of a private yacht offered to help. Though weather conditions limited their time on the water and forced a relocation between countries, the expedition pressed on, with the yacht’s crew eagerly assisting with scientific operations. The unusual collaboration—luxury yacht meets marine research—proved successful despite the compromise of working on a vessel not specifically designed for scientific work. “Whenever the crew was there, and we were actually doing science, they were available to help,” says Ferretti. “Sometimes you need hands, or you need other people to do stuff for you, to facilitate even the most trivial things, like organizing buckets or helping with sampling.” Ferretti’s experience represents a growing movement in marine research, where luxury meets necessity. There are dozens of research vessels registered in the U.S., far more than any other country, including NOAA’s fleet of 15 research and survey ships, but availiablity can be scarce, and they aren’t cheap. Renting one of those vessels for an oceanographic expedition like this can cost upwards of $50,000 per day, according to Ferretti, a huge sum to raise for many scientists facing budget constraints. Meanwhile, the world’s ultra-wealthy use their multimillion-dollar yachts just a few weeks each year, with vessels sitting idle while still incurring substantial crew and maintenance costs. Organizations like Yachts for Science, the International SeaKeepers Society, and the Pink Flamingo Society aim to bridge this gap, turning underutilized pleasure craft into platforms for discovery, whether by donating full research expeditions or simply collecting ocean data during regular voyages. For scientists, these collaborations provide vital access to remote, understudied regions; for yacht owners, they offer tax benefits, meaningful engagement for crew, and the satisfaction of contributing to ocean conservation without necessarily sacrificing privacy or comfort. Rob McCallum, who helps facilitate these matchmaking arrangements through Yachts for Science, describes his organization as “the Tinder of the seas.” McCallum says they are on track to make about a dozen matches this year—amounting to about $1.4 million in vessel time for researchers—with plans to ramp up to hundreds of collaborations over the next few years, generating about $15 million in vessel time per year. “We’re just approaching some of our funders at the moment asking for $600,000 a year for three years to actually fund taking the brakes off,” says McCallum. “My belief is that it’ll grow almost to an infinite extent, because once you have yachts getting out there and doing science, it will become the thing discussed at cocktail parties.” The yacht owner who answered Ferretti’s call was Frank Peeters, a Belgian businessman whose vessel, Blue Titan, is what he calls “an adventure yacht” built for crossing oceans rather than hosting parties. “The boat is not fit for that many people,” says Peeters of the 27-meter (88-foot) yacht. “Normally we sail with 6 people and the crew, and here we were sometimes 12, 13, 14 people.” The expedition quickly faced challenges. After two days off the Tunisian coast, military officials intercepted the craft, claiming the research team lacked proper permissions. What followed was a bureaucratic struggle that lasted two weeks, with permits granted then mysteriously revoked. At one point, the boat was even briefly confiscated. Despite complications costing Peeters between 10,000 and 20,000 euros (about $11,000 to $22,000) out of pocket, he has no regrets. “Would I do it again? Yes, I would do it again immediately,” he says. “I know they have to work on very small budgets, and we could help there.” The scientists eventually redirected their shark-tracking expedition to Italian waters near Lampedusa, where they continued their research. While the team didn’t directly observe white sharks, they detected white shark environmental DNA (eDNA) at multiple sites, confirming the species’ presence in the area. This helped identify one of the last strongholds of the Mediterranean white shark population and marked a key step in launching a multi-institutional conservation program. Peeters, who describes himself as “kind of retired” and sails Blue Titan with his wife about 16 weeks a year, now follows the researchers on Instagram, occasionally receiving video updates about their work. He was also acknowledged in the scientific paper that resulted from the expedition—a form of compensation he finds “definitely worthwhile.” For researchers like Ferretti, these collaborations involve compromise. Scientists must adapt their methodologies for yacht environments, working carefully in spaces designed for luxury rather than research. But with U.K. research grant success rates dipping below 10% and U.S. government funding for the sciences increasingly uncertain, these adaptations reflect a persistent reality. Beyond donating entire vessels for expeditions, yacht owners can contribute to science with minimal effort by installing simple data collection technology on their luxury vessels, which often venture into remote, understudied areas where scientific data is scarce. “A lot of these boats are going into data-poor regions where there isn’t a lot of information,” says Roman Chiporukha, who co-runs Roman & Erica, a travel company for ultra-wealthy clients. “They could be mapping ocean floors where it hasn’t been done in the past.” For yacht owners, these donations can also yield financial benefits. “When you’re donating the boat, it acts as a donation from a philanthropic institution,” says Chiporukha. “If I charter my boat for half a million dollars a week, I just wrote off half a million dollars [in taxes].” Yachts are, of course, not typically associated with ocean protection or environmental stewardship: A 2018 study found that the world’s top 20 billionaires emitted around 8,000 metric tons of CO2 annually, compared to the average citizen’s carbon footprint of around 4 tons, or 15 tons in the United States; and that a staggering two-thirds of these emissions were created by their superyachts. And not all ocean inhabitants welcome the presence of luxury vessels: See the Iberian orcas that have taken to ramming yachts off the Spanish coast since 2020. Researchers have used eyewitness reports to study these encounters—another way yacht owners can contribute to marine science—and have speculated that the behavior may be juvenile whales using boat rudders as target practice for bluefin tuna.) The luxury vessels participating in this scientific matchmaking vary widely. Turkey-based international company Bering Yachts found an opportunity not just in donating yacht time but in experiencing extraordinary research firsthand. “I felt very privileged to be there,” says Bering Yachts founder Alexei Mikhailov, who joined an expedition last year to Silver Banks in the Dominican Republic, a whale sanctuary that permits only about 500 visitors annually. “When you’re surrounded by thousands of whales and mothers with babies, action around you 360 degrees, 24/7, it’s insane.” The research trip utilized a customer’s 30-meter steel-and-aluminum yacht, positioning scientists 80 miles offshore in consistently rough seas. Despite 5- to 7-foot waves that would typically cause severe discomfort, the vessel’s dual stabilization systems created a comfortable platform for the researchers and their sensitive equipment. For Mikhailov, whose early career was dedicated to environmental protection, the expedition reconnected him with scientific pursuit in a profound way that he hopes he can help replicate with Yachts for Science again. “It was very interesting to talk to these people and share stories,” says Mikhailov. “I hope we’ll have another chance to visit a place like this in the future.” View the full article