Germany's Federal Statistical Office (Destatis) on Friday said 5,209 companies filed for bankruptcy in Germany in the first three months of 2024 -- with the trend expected to continue. From a report: Experts think the number of corporate insolvencies in Germany will increase to about 20,000 cases this year as part of a longer-term pattern. The latest figure means corporate insolvencies are up 26.5% compared with the first quarter of 2023. They are also 11.2% more than in the first quarter of 2020 when 4,683 corporate insolvencies were filed before the COVID-19 pandemic had its full impact. The coronavirus pandemic period itself saw special, temporary regulations introduced and low insolvency rates. The transport and warehousing sector accounted for most insolvencies per 10,000 companies, with 29.6 cases at the start of 2024. This was followed by the construction industry with 23.5 cases, and other economic services such as employment agencies on 23 cases. Manufacturing saw 20.3 insolvencies per 10,000 companies. Local courts estimated the creditors' claims from the corporate insolvencies until the end of March was about $12.07 billion compared with $7.16 billion last year. There were also 17,478 consumer bankruptcies in the first quarter of 2024 â" an increase of 4.8% compared to the period in 2023.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Amazon says that it will commit up to $230 million to startups building generative AI-powered applications. The investment, roughly $80 million of which will fund Amazon's second AWS Generative AI Accelerator program, aims to position AWS as an attractive cloud infrastructure choice for startups developing generative AI models to power their products, apps and services. Much of the new tranche -- including the entire portion set aside for the accelerator program -- comes in the form of compute credits for AWS infrastructure, meaning that it can't be transferred to other cloud service providers like Google Cloud and Microsoft Azure. To sweeten the pot, Amazon is pledging that startups in this year's Generative AI Accelerator cohort will gain access to experts and tech from Nvidia, the program's presenting partner. They will also be invited to join the Nvidia Inception program, which provides companies opportunities to connect with potential investors and additional consulting resources. The Generative AI Accelerator program has also grown substantially. Last year's cohort, which had 21 startups, received only up to $300,000 in AWS compute credits, amounting to around a combined $6.3 million investment. "With this new effort, we will help startups launch and scale world-class businesses, providing the building blocks they need to unleash new AI applications that will impact all facets of how the world learns, connects, and does business," Matt Wood, VP of AI products at AWS, said in a statement. Further reading: How Amazon Blew Alexa's Shot To Dominate AI

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Wells Fargo fired more than a dozen employees last month after investigating claims that they were faking work. From a report: The staffers, all in the firm's wealth- and investment-management unit, were "discharged after review of allegations involving simulation of keyboard activity creating impression of active work," according to disclosures filed with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. "Wells Fargo holds employees to the highest standards and does not tolerate unethical behavior," a company spokesperson said in a statement. Devices and software to imitate employee activity, sometimes known as "mouse movers" or "mouse jigglers," took off during the pandemic-spurred work-from-home era, with people swapping tips for using them on social-media sites Reddit and TikTok. Such gadgets are available on Amazon.com for less than $20.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

T-Mobile's recent price hikes of up to $5 per line on older smartphone plans have left many customers shocked due to the company's previous "Un-contract" promise. Announced in 2017, T-Mobile pledged never to change the price customers pay for their plans. However, a now-removed FAQ revealed that the guarantee only ensured T-Mobile would pay the final month's charges if prices increased and customers chose to leave within 60 days. The price increases affect various plans, despite T-Mobile's earlier promises of "no crazy strings, no hoops to jump through, no hidden fees, no BS."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

According to The Verge, Best Buy conducted another round of layoffs and job restructurings to "right size" the business in response to declining sales post-pandemic. Further layoffs and changes are expected throughout the year. From the report: The layoffs appeared to have mostly targeted in-home sales roles called designers, who would go to customers' homes to help identify products that would work in their space. It's not clear how many were let go, but designers who weren't laid off have been moved into a different, largely in-store role. Also, pay scales for a similar, existing in-store "consultant" position were revamped. Best Buy confirmed the layoffs in an email to The Verge but declined to share how many people were let go or how pay was changing. "Many of our team members were moved to new areas or roles where our customers need it most," Best Buy spokesperson Ryan Furlong told The Verge. He said some employees in Best Buy's "Design and Consult workforce" -- the collection of roles with in-store workers (called consultants) and in-home field sales positions (called designers) -- will be transitioned into a new "Premium Designer role." Best Buy has been drastically restructuring in recent months, responding to factors like falling sales after the pandemic spiked consumer electronics spending. Best Buy CEO Corie Barry told investors in February that they should expect layoffs this year, and two months ago, mass layoffs of Geek Squad employees were reported. Barry repeated similar things during the company's first quarter earnings call in May, saying that many of Best Buy's moves to "right size" its business "are being implemented throughout this year."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Mercury News: Krista DeWeese has been laid off four times in the last eight years. She wakes up every morning feeling anxious. Will I lose my job today -- again? Will I have enough to pay the rent? Even though she's an educated, experienced marketing professional, worrisome thoughts trail the 47-year-old Fremont native's every waking moment. Currently a contract worker at a health science company, she has been struggling to find secure work that pays enough to keep up with the exorbitant cost of living in the Bay Area. She has a lot of company. The past year has been tough for the Bay Area, as thousands of layoffs skittered across the region. Even workers at Silicon Valley's tech titans -- including Meta, Apple and Google -- have faced job cuts. Since 2022, tech companies in the region have slashed roughly 40,000 jobs. And with each layoff, workers are entering a market that is less friendly to job seekers than it used to be. New research from tech advocacy organization Women Impact Tech, which examined job and salary data nationwide from 2020 to 2023, affirmed what many people already know: companies are tightening their belts -- slicing jobs and salaries alike -- and many people are struggling to find work that pays enough to live comfortably in the Bay Area. Despite having the highest tech salaries in the country, Silicon Valley has experienced the biggest drop in pay compared to other tech hubs, falling 15% from 2022 to 2023, according to Women Impact Tech. And with inflation, DeWeese and others are watching their spending power shrink. More than 10 years ago, she was earning over $100,000 in total compensation. That amount has dropped 15% since she was laid off from Yahoo in 2016, and has not increased since. "I feel like my career has been frozen in time," DeWeese said. "Things have been at a standstill." Paula Bratcher Ratliff, president of New York-based Women Impact Tech, said that the shrinking pay hits especially hard for women, given the continuing gender pay gap. "The Bay Area took one of the largest hits," Ratliff said. "Women make up about 28% of the entire workforce in tech. When you're seeing an overall decline at 15%, and for pay equity, women have not made much traction." [...] Despite the trend of shrinking salaries in the world's tech capital, Ratliff, with Women Impact Tech, doesn't believe it's necessarily a race to the bottom. "Today, about every company is a tech company, whether they're in retail, consumer goods or hospitality," Ratliff said. "There's so many opportunities in tech without having to focus on those jobs with the tech organizations alone. We're seeing great companies emerge." While it's still unclear where the light is at the end of the tunnel for DeWeese, she remains hopeful her situation will improve. "You have to have hope or else you're just going to live in fear of being let go, again and again," she said.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Who would have thought that Raspberry Pi, the maker of the tiny, cheap, single-board computers, would become a public company? Yet, this is exactly what's happening: Raspberry Pi priced its IPO on the London Stock Exchange on Tuesday morning at $3.56 per share, valuing it at $689 million. Shortly after that, the company's shares jumped a nice 32% to $4.70. It means that Raspberry Pi could end up raising more than $200 million during its IPO process. Raspberry Pi has sold 60 million units since its inception. In 2023 alone, Raspberry Pi generated $266 million in revenue and $66 million in gross profit. Raspberry Pi Ltd, the public company, is the commercial subsidiary of the Raspberry Pi Foundation. The Foundation says it wants to make it easier for people to learn coding through a low-cost, programmable computer. It also remains the main shareholder of Raspberry Pi Ltd.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Register: A study claims to have proof of what some have suspected: return to office mandates are just back-channel layoffs and post-COVID work culture is making everyone miserable. HR software biz BambooHR surveyed more than 1,500 employees, a third of whom work in HR. The findings suggest the return to office movement has been a poorly-executed failure, but one particular figure stands out -- a quarter of executives and a fifth of HR professionals hoped RTO mandates would result in staff leaving. While that statistic essentially admits the quiet part out loud, there was some merit to that belief. People did quit when RTO mandates were enforced at many of the largest companies, but it wasn't enough, the study reports. More than a third (37 percent) of respondents in leadership roles believed their employers had undertaken layoffs in the past 12 months as a result of too few people quitting in protest of RTO mandates, the study found. Nearly the same number thought their management wanted employees back in the office to monitor them more closely. The end result has been the growth of a different office culture, one that's even more performative, suspicious, and divisive than before the COVID pandemic, the study concludes. According to the report, most employees working remotely and in-person both feel the need to demonstrate productivity, which for more than a third of employees means being seen socializing and moving around the office. That intense need to be visible may actually be harming productivity, study author and BambooHR's own head of HR Anita Grantham concluded in her findings. A full 42 percent of employees who responded to the Bamboo survey said they show up solely to be seen by bosses and managers. If bosses think their presence in the office is making any difference to the amount of work getting done, the results indicate that's not the case. Remote employees and in-office employees both report spending around two hours of every day not working. Those in-office ones, of course, are probably spending those ten hours a week looking as busy as possible. Away from the office, employees feel the need to demonstrate presence by being hyper-available and never going offline -- the so-called "green status effect," the data suggests. "The distrusting and performative cultures some companies are cultivating are harmful to bottom-line growth," Grantham said, adding that RTO policies are okay, but not if they don't consider individual employee needs. "The conversation around work modes is one of the most important things to address and get clear on as a business," Grantham said. "It often gets reduced to just RTO, but it's actually a much bigger conversation."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader shares a report: A study claims to have proof of what some have suspected: return to office mandates are just back-channel layoffs and post-COVID work culture is making everyone miserable. HR software biz BambooHR surveyed more than 1,500 employees, a third of whom work in HR. The findings suggest the return to office movement has been a poorly-executed failure, but one particular figure stands out - a quarter of executives and a fifth of HR professionals hoped RTO mandates would result in staff leaving. While that statistic essentially admits the quiet part out loud, there was some merit to that belief. People did quit when RTO mandates were enforced at many of the largest companies, but it wasn't enough, the study reports. More than a third (37 percent) of respondents in leadership roles believed their employers had undertaken layoffs in the past 12 months as a result of too few people quitting in protest of RTO mandates, the study found. Nearly the same number thought their management wanted employees back in the office to monitor them more closely. The end result has been the growth of a different office culture, one that's even more performative, suspicious, and divisive than before the COVID pandemic, the study concludes.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Victoria Song reports via The Verge: Samsung Electronics workers went on a strike on Friday for the very first time in the company's history. The move comes at a time when the Korean corporation faces increased competition from other chipmakers, particularly as demand for AI chips grows. The National Samsung Electronics Union (NSEU), the largest of the company's several unions, called for the one-day strike at Samsung's Seoul office building as negotiations over pay bonuses and time off hit a standstill. The New York Times reports that the majority of striking workers come from Samsung's chip division. (Samsung Electronics is technically only a subsidiary comprising its consumer tech, appliances, and semiconductor divisions; Samsung itself is a conglomerate that controls real estate, retail, insurance, food production, hotels, and a whole lot more.) It's unclear how many of the NSEU's roughly 28,400 members participated in the walkout. Even so, multiple outlets are reporting that the walkout is unlikely to affect chip production or trigger shortages. Union leaders told Bloomberg that further actions are planned if management refuses to engage. That said, the fact that it's happening at all is awkward timing for Samsung, particularly due to tensions with the chipmaking portion of its business. Last year, the division reported a 15 trillion won ($11 billion) loss, leading to a 15-year low in operating profits. The current AI boom played a big role in the massive loss. Samsung has historically been the world leader in making high-bandwidth memory chips â" the kind that are in demand right now to power next-gen generative AI features. However, last year's decline was partly because Samsung wasn't prepared for increased demand, allowing local rival SK Hynix to take the top spot.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: After acquiring VMware, Broadcom swiftly enacted widespread changes that resulted in strong public backlash. A new survey of 300 director-level IT workers at companies that are customers of North American VMware provides insight into the customer reaction to Broadcom's overhaul. The survey released Thursday doesn't provide feedback from every VMware customer, but it's the first time we've seen responses from IT decision-makers working for companies paying for VMware products. It echos concerns expressed at the announcement of some of Broadcom's more controversial changes to VMware, like the end of perpetual licenses and growing costs. [...] Every person surveyed said that they expect VMware prices to rise under Broadcom. In a March "User Group Town Hall," attendees complained about "price rises of 500 and 600 percent," according to The Register. We heard in February from ServeTheHome that "smaller" cloud service providers were claiming to see costs grow tenfold. In this week's survey, 73 percent of respondents said they expect VMware prices to more than double. Twelve percent of respondents expect a price hike of 301 to 500 percent. Only 1 percent anticipate price hikes of 501 to 1,000 percent. "At this juncture post-acquisition, most larger enterprises seem to have a clear understanding of how their next procurement cycle with Broadcom will be impacted from a pricing and packaging standpoint," the report noted. Further, 95 percent of survey respondents said they view Broadcom buying VMware as disruptive to their IT strategy, with 46 percent considering it extremely or very disruptive. Widespread concerns about cost and IT strategy help explain why 99 percent of the 300 respondents said they are concerned about Broadcom owning VMware, with 46 percent being "very concerned" and 30 percent "extremely concerned." Despite widespread anxiety over Broadcom's VMware, most of the respondents said they will likely stay with VMware either partially (43 percent of respondents) or fully (40 percent). A smaller percentage of respondents said they would move more workloads to the public cloud (38 percent) or a different hypervisor (34 percent) or move entirely to the public cloud (33 percent). This is with 69 percent of respondents having at least one contract expiring with VMware within the next 12 months. [...] Top reasons cited for considering abandoning VMware partially or totally were uncertainty about Broadcom's plans, concerns about support quality under Broadcom, and changes to relationships with channel partners (each named by 36 percent of respondents). Following closely was the shift to subscription licensing (34 percent), expected price bumps (33 percent), and personal negative experiences with Broadcom (33 percent). Broadcom's history with big buys like Symantec and CA Technologies also has 32 percent of people surveyed considering leaving VMware. "The emotional shock has started to metabolize inside of the Broadcom customer base, but it's metabolized in the form of strong commitment to mitigating the negative impacts of the Broadcom VMware acquisition," said Kyle Campos, CTPO for CloudBolt Software, the company that commissioned the study. He warned that Broadcom could see backlash continue "for months and even years to come."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Online marketplace behemoth eBay said it plans to no longer accept American Express, citing what the company says are "unacceptably high fees." CNBC: It's a notable blow to American Express, whose customers are often the most attractive among merchants and spend the most money per month on their cards. But it's not the first time merchants have voiced opposition to AmEx's business practices by walking away, most notably the warehouse chain Costco nearly a decade ago. [...] Overland said that eBay customers have become aware of new ways to pay for items, making payments more competitive than ever before, and AmEx was no longer a necessary partner for eBay. eBay has increasingly been offering customers buy now, pay later options on purchases through Apple Pay, PayPal and other companies like Klarna and Affirm as well.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader writes: It emerged recently that Humane was trying to sell itself for as much as $1 billion after its confuddling, expensive and ultimately pretty useless AI Pin flopped. A New York Times report that dropped on Thursday shed a little more light on the company's sales figures and, like the wearable AI assistant itself, the details are not good. By early April, around the time that many devastating reviews of the AI Pin were published, Humane is said to have received around 10,000 orders for the device. That's a far cry from the 100,000 it was hoping to ship this year, and about 9,000 more than I thought it might get. It's hard to think it picked up many more orders beyond those initial 10,000 after critics slaughtered the AI Pin. One of the companies that Humane has engaged with for the sale is HP, the Times reported.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Cailey Gleeson reports via Forbes: A group backed by more than two dozen investors -- including Citadel Securities and BlackRock -- is planning to start its own stock exchange in Texas, it said Wednesday, in an attempt to compete with the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq. The Texas Stock Exchange (TXSE) -- owned by TXSE Group Inc. and founded in 2023, per its LinkedIn -- will be a "fully electronic national securities exchange" that seeks to expand access to markets for all investors and those seeking access to public capital, according to Wednesday's press release. The TXSE aims to have primary listings, dual listings and exchange-traded products, according to The Wall Street Journal, which first reported the news. The stock exchange has raised $120 million in capital and plans to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission later this year, according to the press release, while it will also have a physical headquarters in Dallas, and the company will employ about 100 people, The Dallas Morning News reported. It plans to start facilitating trades in 2025 and host its first listing the following year, multiple outlets reported. The Wall Street Journal notes that past attempts at regional stock exchanges have failed, such as the Chicago Stock Exchange and Philadelphia Stock Exchange -- both of which combined with the NYSE and Nasdaq. "The NYSE considered relocating its electronic trading systems to the Dallas-Fort Worth area in late 2020, amid a proposed financial transaction tax on stocks in New York," adds Forbes. "But the move did not go through, nor the proposed tax,."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Nvidia has reached a market cap of $3 trillion, surpassing Apple to become the second-largest public company behind Microsoft. CNBC reports: Nvidia's milestone is the latest stunning mark in a run that has seen the stock soar more than 3,224% over the past five years. The company will split its stock 100-for-1 later this month. Apple was the first U.S. company to reach a $3 trillion market cap during intraday trading in January 2022. Microsoft hit $3 trillion in market value in January 2024. Nvidia, which was founded in 1993, passed the $2 trillion valuation in February, and it only took roughly three months from there for it to pass $3 trillion. Nvidia's surge in recent years has been powered by the tech industry's need for its chips, which are used to develop and deploy big AI models such as the one at the heart of OpenAI's ChatGPT. Companies such as Google, Microsoft, Meta, Amazon and OpenAI are buying billions of dollars worth of Nvidia's GPUs.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

La créatrice du Women’s Forum et de Sistemic, entrepreneure passionnée, a toujours été engagée du côté des femmes. À 73 ans, elle a été retrouvée grièvement blessée, le lundi 4 juin, au côté du corps sans vie de son mari Hubert Zieseniss.

© Stephane Grangier - Corbis / Corbis via Getty Images

Apollo Global announced today that it will acquire a 49% equity interest in Intel's manufacturing facility in Ireland for $11 billion, in a deal expected to close in the second quarter. The deal "would allow Intel to redeploy parts of its investment in the project to other parts of its business," reports Reuters. "Intel has invested $18.4 billion in the facility till date." From the report: Apollo will acquire the stake in the Fab 34 facility in Leixlip, Ireland, the U.S. chipmaker's first high-volume location for its Intel 4 manufacturing process using extreme ultraviolet lithography machines. The company announced plans in 2022 to build chip factories in Ireland and France as it seeks to benefit from easier European Commission funding rules and subsidies as the bloc looks to cut its dependence on U.S. and Asian supply. Intel will retain full ownership and operational control of Fab 34 and its assets.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Private-equity investors have poured billions into healthcare but often game the system, hurting both doctors and patients. From a report: Consolidation is as American as apple pie. When a business gets bigger, it forces mom-and-pop players out of the market, but it can boost profits and bring down costs, too. Think about the pros and cons of Walmart and "Every Day Low Prices." In a complex, multitrillion-dollar system like America's healthcare market, though, that principle has turned into a harmful arms race that has helped drive prices increasingly higher without improving care. Years of dealmaking has led to sprawling hospital systems, vertically integrated health insurance companies, and highly concentrated private equity-owned practices resulting in diminished competition and even the closure of vital health facilities. As this three-part Heard on the Street series will show, the rich rewards and lax oversight ultimately create pain for both patients and the doctors who treat them. Belatedly, state and federal regulators and lawmakers are zeroing in on consolidation, creating uncertainty for the investors who have long profited from the healthcare merger boom. Consider the impact of massive private-equity investment in medical practices. When a patient with employer-based insurance goes under for surgery, the anesthesiologist's fee is supposed to be determined by market forces. But what happens if one firm quietly buys out several anesthesiologists in the same city and then hikes the price of the procedure? Such a scheme was allegedly implemented by the private-equity firm Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe and the company it created in 2012, U.S. Anesthesia Partners, according to a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit filed last year. It started by buying the largest practice in Houston and then making three further acquisitions, eventually expanding into other cities throughout the state of Texas. In each location, the lawsuit alleges, USAP pursued an aggressive strategy of eliminating competitors by either acquiring them or conspiring with them to weaken competition. As one insurance executive put it in the FTC lawsuit, USAP and Welsh Carson used acquisitions to "take the highest rate of all ... and then peanut butter spread that across the entire state of Texas." In May, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt dismissed the FTC's unusual step of charging the private-equity investor, Welsh Carson, but allowed the case against USAP to proceed.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.