Search results

To explain the January 6, 2016 written guidance (the “New Guidance”) issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division of Investment Management on payments made by mutual funds to intermediaries for distribution and non-distribution-related services.

Explains the SEC’s earlier guidance in the 1998 “Supermarket Letter,” the provisions of Rule 12b-1, the practice termed “distribution in guise,” the emphasis in the “New Guidance” on the role of a fund board’s business judgment, how Rule 12b-1 compliance fits into Rule 38a-1 compliance programs, specific fund activities and arrangements with intermediaries that are of concern to the SEC staff, and the focus of the New Guidance on an adviser’s fiduciary duty to mitigate or eliminate conflicts of interest.

The New Guidance articulates clear expectations that fund boards will have a process to evaluate the nature of intermediary payments and that fund advisers will provide boards with information in the advisers’ possession that the boards need to carry out that evaluation. Another intent of the New Guidance is apparently to give the SEC a clearer basis to bring enforcement actions concerning the use of fund assets to pay intermediaries for distribution-related activities.

Practical guidance from experienced investment management lawyers.

To explain the guidance published on January 6, 2016 by the SEC’s Division of Investment Management containing its views and recommendations relating to mutual fund distribution and sub-accounting fees.

Explains the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations focus on “distribution in guise” payments, its 2013 “sweep exam,” an enforcement action against a fund’s adviser and affiliated distributor related to payments for distribution-related activities outside of a 12b-1 plan, lists SEC staff recommendations with respect to mutual fund distribution and sub-accounting fees, summarizes the SEC’s guidance on board oversight of sub-accounting fees, provides indicia that a payment may be for distribution-related activities, and points to the need for mutual funds to have policies and procedures designed to prevent violations of Section 12(b) and Rule 12b-1.

The guidance is an outgrowth of the staff’s observations from a three-year “distribution in guise” sweep exam of mutual fund complexes, investment advisers, broker-dealers and transfer agents conducted by the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations and other offices and divisions of the SEC to identify whether firms were using fund assets to directly or indirectly finance any activities primarily intended to result in the sale of fund shares outside of an approved Rule 12b-1 distribution plan.

Practical guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

To address “Conflicts, Conflicts Everywhere,” a speech at the recent IA Watch 17th Annual Compliance Conference by Julie M. Riewe, co-chief of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Enforcement Division’s Asset Management Unit (AMU).

Provide information on the AMU’s creation, the AMU’s 2015 priorities for each of the primary investment vehicles it polices –registered investment companies; private funds (both hedge funds and private equity funds); and other client accounts, such as separately managed accounts/retail accounts – and the AMU’s central concern across all of the investment vehicles it polices: conflicts of interest.

Conflicts of interest will be receiving much attention from the Commission in the coming months. In order to help avoid an SEC inquiry or, worse yet, an enforcement action, corporations and individuals should seek counsel.

Practical explanation and guidance from experienced securities and financial services lawyers.

This paper aims to analyze if and to what extent mechanical artificial intelligence (AI)-embedded in hotel service robots-influences customers’ evaluation of AI-enabled hotel service interactions. This study deploys online reviews (ORs) analytics to understand if the presence of mechanical AI-related text in ORs influences customers’ OR valence across 19 leading international hotels that have integrated mechanical AI – in the guise of service robots – into their operations.

First, the authors identified the 19 leading hotels across three continents that have pioneered the adoption of service robots. Second, by deploying big data techniques, the authors gathered the entire population of ORs hosted on TripAdvisor (almost 50,000 ORs) and generated OR analytics. Subsequently, the authors used ordered logistic regressions analyses to understand if and to what extent AI-enabled hospitality service interactions are evaluated by service customers.

The presence of mechanical AI-related text (text related to service robots) in ORs influences positively electronic word-of-mouth (e-WOM) valence. Hotel guests writing ORs explicitly mentioning their interactions with the service robots are more prone to associate high online ratings to their ORs. The presence of the robot’s proper name (e.g., Alina, Wally) in the OR moderates positively the positive effect of mechanical AI-related text on ORs ratings.

Hospitality practitioners should evaluate the possibility to introduce service robots into their operations and develop tailored strategies to name their robots (such as using human-like and short names). Moreover, hotel managers should communicate more explicitly their initiatives and investments in AI, monitor AI-related e-WOM and invest in educating their non-tech-savvy customers to understand and appreciate AI technology. Platform developers might create a robotic tag to be attached to ORs mentioning service robots to signal the presence of this specific element and might design and develop an additional service attribute that might be tentatively named “service robots.”

The current study represents the first attempt to understand if and to what extent mechanical AI in the guise of hotel service robots influences customers’ evaluation of AI-enabled hospitality service interactions.

Resource sharing or cooperative collection development among American libraries is not new; history reveals waves of cooperative spirit over many decades. Librarians in the United States—at least since librarianship became a serious professional enterprise around the turn of the century—have exhibited a democratic altruism about information and its distribution that has resulted in the world's richest and most extensive library collections and a tradition of library service unmatched anywhere else on the globe. Cooperative collection development in one guise or another has long been a part of both that spirit and that enterprise.

“On its current path, American democratic capitalism is, I believe, heading for an ugly fall.” So warns Roger L. Martin in his new book, When More is Not Better: Overcoming America’s Obsession with Economic Efficiency. Professor Martin has been concerned for some time now about the capability of the American capitalistic model in its current guise to deliver continued prosperity for the many and keep the American democratic dream alive.

Martin sees a serious problem in how the benefits of the American economy and its corporations are distributed; this has been shifting for some time now from a largely Gaussian (widely spread) to an increasingly Pareto (narrowly spread) pattern.

The shape of this distribution is getting ever more extreme, leading to a situation in which the richest families in the country are reaping a wildly disproportionate share of the benefits of economic growth. This kind of distribution tends to be self-reinforcing and that is not consistent with a well-functioning democratic capitalist system.

The actors within the system will keep adjusting to any change in the rules of engagement, and the tendency for them to keep “gaming” the system should be anticipated as both natural and inevitable and provided for accordingly. Breaking the company into subject-matter siloes has little chance of helping the company prosper. It tends to cause independent pursuits of efficiency that don’t add up to effectiveness.

The author of 11 books, Professor Martin has been ranked at the top of numerous lists of the world’s best strategic thinkers, and is a seminal contributor to the design thinking and integrative thinking movements. In his writings he seeks “to develop a new understanding of the broader public conversation around shared and sustainable prosperity, an essential piece of democratic capitalism.” A long-time consultant to major global firms, he offers insights for corporate executives.

An important aspect of the impact of the economic crisis is how pay in the public sector responds – in the face not only of the evolution of pay in the private sector but also extreme pressure on public spending (of which pay is a very large proportion) as fiscal deficits soar. What are the effects on the income distribution of cutting public sector pay rates or alternative strategies to reduce the public sector pay bill? This chapter investigates these issues using data and a tax–benefit simulation model for Ireland, a country which faces a particularly severe fiscal crisis and where innovative measures have already been implemented to claw back pay from public sector workers in the guise of a ‘pension levy’, followed by a significant cut in nominal pay rates. The SWITCH (Simulating Welfare and Income Tax Changes) tax–benefit model first allows the distributional effects of these measures, which achieved a substantial reduction in the net public sector pay bill, to be teased out. The overall impact on the income distribution is assessed. This provides empirical evidence relevant to policy choices in relation to a key aspect of household income over which governments have direct influence, while at the same time illustrating methodologically how a tax–benefit model can serve as the base for such investigation.

Capitalism is fundamentally an economics of producers that has always served the cause of producers. Its special concern for economizing the production process in the guise of economic efficiency went always in favor of producers at the cost of interests of workers and consumers thereby creating a strong sense of economic deprivation in the conscience of workers and low‐income consumers who generally constitute the majority of the population in almost all the developed countries including the United States of America. It is this growing sense of economic deprivation that can be easily observed, especially in the big cities of the United States of America, as a catalyst for Marxist reaction. The Marxist fruit of Capitalist international economics appeared in the form of cold war within the global economy between the rich and the poor countries. Keeping in view the historical dynamics of Marxist movement, twentieth century Capitalist economists have consciously started to counter the threat of Marxism by incorporating in economics the extensive analysis of issues such as social welfare function, interdependent utility functions, intertemporal utility functions, equity in distribution, unemployment insurance, economic development, labor unionism, full‐employment of labor, economic rents, consumer protectionism etc. in the form of labor economics, public sector economics and development economics. It was no doubt a Capitalists' cleverish attempt to redress the grievances, mainly resulting from market failures, of the economically depressed classes within the Capitalist system. So far problems of the depressed classes could not be solved and are not at all expected to be fully solved within the original Capitalistic framework due to its inherent exploitative tendencies.

The final chapter of the book titled ‘Beyond multi-channel marketing: Critical Issues in Dual Marketing’ aims at summarising issues related to the concept of dual marketing (DM). Starting from the analysis of a structured literature review on the selected subject, spread across three decades and reflecting on the different contributions of the research showed in the present book, the chapter tries to open the path to giving to the topic a new guise. In order to fulfil this duty, not only works on DM and multichannel marketing were taken into account, but also other research paths that share several features with the main topic were under scrutiny.

Rawls, most visibly in A Theory of Justice, made numerous references to various topics in economics, and footnoted a significant number of economists. This paper will argue that Rawls made use of the ideal theory of markets as a reference point and as an analytical tool. In their ideal form, markets represent attributes Rawls intended to describe his system, and in their real-world guise embody certain sorts of striving – for instance, after power – that were central to Rawls’s justification of the original position. Markets also serve in Theory as a benchmark against which political forms can be criticized. Additionally, markets in Theory are approved of as allocative and wealth-producing mechanisms, but criticized for their final distributional results. The paper suggests that these assessments in Rawls likely originate in early essays by economist Frank Knight. Knight was, according to Pogge, the probable source for an early version of Rawls’s original position, and is footnoted in key spots in Theory. But the similarities between Knight’s reasoning and Rawls’s appear more significant still. Using Rawls’s extensively annotated copy of Knight’s Ethics of Competition, that supposition is explored.