proposal

Page 1 of 612345...Last »

Web Design Help | Elance Job

I have created a website entitled alisonsmith.ca. I need some help finishing the layout. I have attached a list of the web design corrections I require (please refer to the attached PDF).

USA TODAY Sports Weekly

Please read the attached document. In your proposal, plea…

Category: Design & Multimedia > Other – Design
Type and Budget: Hourly ($10 – $15 / hr)
Time Left: 2 d, 22 h (Ends May 17, 2013 12:30 pm ET)
Start Date: May 14, 2013
Proposals: 5 (High $15 / hr, Low $10 / hr, Avg $13 / hr)
Client Info: 1 jobs posted, 0% awarded, $0 total purchased, Payment Method Verified
Client Location: Toronto, Canada
Preferred Job Location: Anywhere
Desired Skills: Web Design
Job ID: 41519308

View job

Develop Website To Provide Audio on a Subscription Basis | Elance Job

[Please do NOT respond to this proposal unless you have read the attached materials and are responding directly to them.]

The SmallBizCEOs.com Audio Advantage is a monthly collection of audio tracks (mp3 files) designed to provide education, ente…

Category: IT & Programming > Website Design
Type and Budget: Fixed price ( $500 – $1,000) Escrow
Time Left: 14 d, 23 h (Ends May 29, 2013 13:56 pm ET)
Start Date: May 14, 2013
Proposals: 0
Client Info: 17 jobs posted, 47% awarded, $3,485 total purchased, Payment Method Verified
Client Location: Austin, United States
Preferred Job Location: Anywhere
Desired Skills: CSS HTML PHP Web Programming WordPress
Job ID: 41522736

View job

Insurance website development | Elance Job

client looking to create a replica of this website, perhaps with some changes aesthetically:

Too Little, Too Late? ICOMP, Competitors Prepare To Fight Google’s European Antitrust Settlement Offer

Google The Giant

The European Commission today asked Google’s competitors and others working in the Internet industry in the region for feedback on proposals made by Google to settle its years-long antitrust investigation. Swiftly, ICOMP, one of the chief lobbying organizations fighting against the search giant, has already issued a preliminary response: Google’s commitments may be “too little, too late.”

“It is clear that mere labelling is not any kind of solution to the competition concerns that have been identified,” ICOMP notes in a statement. “Google should implement the same ranking policy to all websites. This should include their own vertical services which currently have their ranking unfairly manipulated to appear at or near the top of search results.” ICOMP includes companies like Microsoft, football’s Premier League as well as Streetmap, which is currently suing Google in the UK over its search practices.

Google, meanwhile, remains in a moving-ahead state: “We continue to work cooperatively with the European Commission,” a spokesperson told TechCrunch.

The European Commission notes that currently Google controls over 90% of the search market across the European Economic Area.

Although Google’s proposals had not been made public until today, there have been several reports over the last couple of weeks about what Google would be offering in the proposal. It appears that these were on target. The proposals cover a number of areas that have been investigated, from concerns from so-called “vertical search engines” (those specialising in certain areas like mapping, travel or comparative insurance quotes for example) to those of publishers. In a nutshell, here is what Google is offering to do over the next five years:

– label promoted links to its own specialised search services so that users can distinguish them from natural web search results,

– clearly separate these promoted links from other web search results by clear graphical features (such as a frame), and

– display links to three rival specialised search services close to its own services, in a place that is clearly visible to users;

– offer all websites the option to opt-out from the use of all their content in Google’s specialised search services, while ensuring that any opt-out does not unduly affect the ranking of those web sites in Google’s general web search results,

– offer all specialised search web sites that focus on product search or local search the option to mark certain categories of information in such a way that such information is not indexed or used by Google,

– provide newspaper publishers with a mechanism allowing them to control on a web page per web page basis the display of their content in Google News,

– no longer include in its agreements with publishers any written or unwritten obligations that would require them to source online search advertisements exclusively from Google, and

– no longer impose obligations that would prevent advertisers from managing search advertising campaigns across competing advertising platforms.

ICOMP’S response, so far, is a generic one but largely has to do with what Google is proposing in the area of search results, and its suggestion of labelling its own products more clearly. A source connected to one of the companies that is part of ICOMP told TechCrunch that the idea of relegating competitors to a special box featuring three results is not a good enough solution: “It takes attention away from the fact that Google is still putting more emphasis on its own products in its search results,” he said. “Google needs to give its own products the same weighting as those of others.”

He also takes issue with the timeframe of the current consultation. Competitors and others are being given a month to respond; effectively Google has had much longer to formulate its own proposals and technology for how it proposes to deal with the antitrust issue.

The Register, meanwhile, notes that Foundem, an ICOMP member that is one of the original companies bringing the case against Google to regulators, who is also suing Google in the UK, has also issued a preliminary statement criticising Google’s proposal.

“Instead of promising to end its abusive practices, Google’s proposal seems to offer a half-hearted attempt to dilute their anti-competitive effects, by labelling Google’s own services and throwing in some token links to competitors’ services alongside them,” said Shivaun Raff, CEO of Foundem.

The full statement from ICOMP is below. The EU’s memo asking for feedback can be found here. I have a feeling this is not the final chapter in this antitrust saga, which is already stretching into its third year.

Following weeks of speculation, we are pleased to see the publication of a market test notice and look forward to the opportunity to analyse and respond to Google’s proposal in a constructive manner. It is vital to ensure that the market test is thorough and robust and is not simply an exercise to “tick the boxes”.

As we have repeatedly said, it is very important to provide complainants and interested parties with the opportunity to review the proposals and offer their observations, including evidence to show how the proposals will play out in practice. Google has had some time to test the proposals and how they might affect user clicks. We believe complainants and others also have an important role to play not least because of the sectoral expertise they offer. However, they must be provided with enough information and time to make the detailed analysis that is required.

If the proposals don’t clearly set out non-discrimination principles and the means to deal with the restoration of effective competition, plus effective enforcement and compliance, it’s very difficult to see how they can be satisfactory. Commissioner Almunia has himself stated that returning competition to markets effectively destroyed by Google’s dominance and abuse of that position is the main aim of this investigation.

We will comment further once we have had an opportunity to evaluate the proposals in more detail but it is clear that mere labelling is not any kind of solution to the competition concerns that have been identified. Google should implement the same ranking policy to all websites. This should include their own vertical services which currently have their ranking unfairly manipulated to appear at or near the top of search results.

Read more from the original source: Too Little, Too Late? ICOMP, Competitors Prepare To Fight Google’s European Antitrust Settlement Offer

With Alternative Offers From Blackstone & Icahn On The Table, Dell Filing Shows It Will Push Ahead With $24.4B Silver Lake Merger

Screen shot 2013-03-29 at 5.15.25 PM

Dell announced today that it has filed its initial proxy materials with the SEC in connection with a merger agreement between Dell, its Chairman and CEO Michael Dell and Silver Lake Partners. Under the terms of the deal, shareholders would received $13.65 in cash for each share of stock, which would be valued at about $24.4 billion.

In the rather lengthy filing, some of Dell’s biggest shareholders like activist billionaire Carl Icahn have urged the company to turn down the deal proposed by Dell and Silver Lake and allow shareholders to stay on as active investors, according to the New York Times.

The company has essentially been publicly shopping itself around to private-equity firms as part of its negotiated agreement with Silver Lake, during which it received “two non-binding alternative acquisition proposals,” including one from The Blackstone Group and one from investors affiliated with Icahn. Blackstone’s offer would allow portions of the computer maker to remain a publicly traded company, and Icahn (and JPMorgan’s supporting review) necessarily indicate that that this agreement would limit Dell’s financial flexibility and would not be the optimal road to take.

In its letter to shareholders, Dell said that it will continue to work with Silver Lake and Icahn towards what would constitute a more appealing offer for the company and its shareholders, but the letter basically signals that the company will look to move forward with its agreement to merge with Silver Lake. It has yet to see a better alternative.

The letter to shareholders from The Special Committee of Dell’s board of directors, which was included along with Dell’s filing today, is included below.

March 29, 2013
Dear Shareholders,

Today, at the direction of the Special Committee of the Board of Directors of Dell Inc., the company filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission a preliminary proxy statement relating to the proposed acquisition of Dell by affiliates of Silver Lake Partners and Michael S. Dell.

Full Range of Alternatives Evaluated
When the Special Committee was formed last August, we set out to evaluate the full range of strategic and financial alternatives available to the company, including a potential going-private transaction. To assist us in this effort, we hired an experienced group of independent legal and financial advisors and, in addition, retained a top management consulting firm to help us evaluate the risks and opportunities in both the PC business and the company’s effort to transform itself into a more enterprise-centric business. That process, which included more than 25 Special Committee meetings over a period of approximately five and a half months, has highlighted to all of us the significant risks and uncertainties that the company faces as a stand-alone public company. As a result, we as a Committee believe strongly that a transaction that shifts to the buyer the risks associated with Dell’s business, at an acceptable valuation, would be beneficial for Dell’s shareholders.

Silver Lake/Michael Dell Transaction Shifts Risks While Providing Attractive and Certain Cash Premium
The current Silver Lake and Michael Dell transaction delivers $13.65 per share in cash – a 37% premium to Dell’s 90-day average price and a 25% premium to the unaffected price prior to reports in the media about the proposed deal. We believe that this significant, immediate and certain premium offers superior value to owning Dell as a stand-alone entity today.

As part of our agreement with Silver Lake and Michael Dell, we negotiated a robust “go shop” process, which included a 45-day period during which the Special Committee actively sought alternative acquisition proposals as well as a period thereafter in which interested parties can assemble and negotiate acquisition proposals. We are pleased to report that our process has generated two non-binding alternative acquisition proposals, one from a group affiliated with Blackstone Management Partners, L.L.C. (“Blackstone”) and the other from entities affiliated with Carl C. Icahn (“Icahn”). We intend to work diligently with both of them to assist them in their respective due diligence reviews of the company and to seek definitive proposals that would constitute a superior proposal to the current Silver Lake and Michael Dell transaction. Michael Dell has confirmed his willingness to explore participating in alternative acquisition proposals. However, there can be no assurance that either non-binding alternative acquisition proposal will ultimately lead to a superior proposal.

Seeking the Best Outcome for Dell Shareholders
Having conducted a thorough review of Dell’s challenges and opportunities, we remain convinced that the risks and uncertainties of a stand-alone public company are high. While we continue to recommend the current Silver Lake/Michael Dell transaction, and to work toward completion of that transaction, we will also work with Blackstone and Icahn to seek to develop a definitive alternative proposal that provides an even more compelling value proposition for Dell’s shareholders. Our goal was, and remains, to ensure that whatever transaction is consummated is the best possible outcome for Dell’s shareholders.

We are pleased to be serving the Dell shareholders during this important process and we urge you to carefully consider the materials in the preliminary proxy statement.

Sincerely yours,

THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF DELL INC.

Read more here: With Alternative Offers From Blackstone & Icahn On The Table, Dell Filing Shows It Will Push Ahead With $24.4B Silver Lake Merger

Page 1 of 612345...Last »

Preview A Theme Template

Your Shopping Cart

You have 0 items in your shopping cart. View Cart