1 Carlo Ancelotti will not be taking over at Manchester City, or any other club, as he plans to take a year’s sabbatical.It was announced on Monday that the Italian would be leaving Real Madrid at the end of the season after two years in charge.The 55-year-old’s departure had sparked speculation he could be set for the Etihad as pressure continues to mount on Manuel Pellegrini.However, Ancelotti’s agent, Ernesto Bronzetti, has revealed his client will not be joining anyone as he plans to take a year out from football.“He [Ancelotti] wants to take a year off,” Bronzetti told Rai Sport.“The team was concerned at the news, and some of the players cried when he announced his departure.” Carlo Ancelotti
Coffee sinks Smucker’s profit410 viewsCoffee sinks Smucker’s profit410 views00:00 / 00:00- 00:00:0000:00Coffee sinks Smucker’s profit410 viewsBusinessCoffee has become acidic for J.M. Smucker. Its retail coffee sales, primarily its Folgers brand, fell again in the latest quarter. As a result, the company’s sales and profit fell. It hiked pricesVentuno Web Player 4.50Coffee has become acidic for J.M. Smucker. Its retail coffee sales, primarily its Folgers brand, fell again in the latest quarter. As a result, the company’s sales and profit fell. It hiked prices
Rail minister Mujibul Haque said rail communications of the southern and northern parts of the country with the capital city may resume by Monday morning. He said this while talking to reporters on Sunday noon after visiting a damaged rail bridge in Kalihati upazila of Tangail.Earlier, rail communications of the southern and northern parts of the country with the capital city snapped due to a damaged rail bridge in Kalihati upazila of Tangail.Tangail railway stationmaster, Md Jalal Uddin, said the rail bridge over the Pauli river in the upazila was damaged by floodwaters.The authorities noticed the damage immediately after the Dhaka-bound Sundarban Express passed the area around 5:30am on Sunday, the railway official added.
Flag of IndiaThe Indian government on Thursday told the Supreme Court that Rohingya refugees were “a threat to national security”, pushing back against condemnation of its plans to deport them.India’s top court is hearing a challenge to prime minister Narendra Modi’s government’s decision to deport Rohingya Muslims, filed by two Rohingyas living in Delhi who fled their village in Myanmar’s western Rakhine State about six years ago.The decision to deport Rohingyas comes as Myanmar’s military crackdown in Rakhine has forced hundreds of thousands of Rohingyas to seek shelter in Bangladesh, in a process the UN has described as ethnic cleansing.Myanmar says its forces are carrying out their legitimate duty to restore order after guerrilla attacks on 25 August on security posts and an army camp in which about a dozen people were killed.Close to 40,000 Rohingya Muslims live in India after fleeing Myanmar over the past decade. Nearly 15,000 have received refugee documentation, according to the United Nations, but India wants to deport them all.Rohingyas are denied citizenship in Buddhist-majority Myanmar and regarded as illegal immigrants, despite claiming roots that date back centuries.Some groups allied to Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party have stepped up calls for Rohingyas to leave, and Modi said last week that India shared Myanmar’s concerns about “extremist violence” in Rakhine state.On Thursday, a senior lawyer representing India’s government told the Supreme Court that “the state considers that Rohingyas are a threat to national security.”Intelligence agencies suspect that Rohingya Muslim leaders in India are in touch with Pakistan-based militant groups, the lawyer said.The lawyer declined to be named because an affidavit the home ministry is preparing to file with the court has not yet been finalised.More than 400,000 Rohingyas have been living in Bangladesh after fleeing the persecution in Myanmar since the early 1990s. From Bangladesh, some Rohingyas have crossed into India.Aid groups and human rights activists have criticised the plans to expel Rohingyas, and some lawyers say deportation would violate India’s constitution.India’s Supreme Court is expected to start hearing the case on Monday.India this week sent 53 tonnes of relief materials to Bangladesh for Rohingyas fleeing Myanmar.
Demonstrators chanting during a #NoMuslimBanEver rally and march “to protest discriminatory policies that unlawfully target and hurt American Muslim and immigrant communities across the country” in Washington, DC. AFP file photoThe US Supreme Court said Monday that the government could fully enforce a revised ban on travelers from six mainly Muslim countries pending appeal, backing President Donald Trump in the year-long battle over the controversial measure.The court stayed October rulings from two lower courts that had blocked implementation of the ban on visitors from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen while legal challenges to it continued.The third version of Trump’s travel ban, unveiled in September, drew immediate challenges in federal appeals courts in Richmond, Virginia and San Francisco, California.Plaintiffs argued that the measure targets Muslims in violation of the US Constitution and did not advance security goals as the government claimed.The challengers convinced the lower courts to put implementation on hold while they and government lawyers fight out the legality of the policy.But the Trump administration, which says the ban is crucial to protect US national security and deter terror attacks, secured strong support from the Supreme Court in a 7-2 vote to let the government move ahead while the appeals continue.“We are not surprised by today’s Supreme Court decision permitting immediate enforcement of the President’s proclamation limiting travel from countries presenting heightened risks of terrorism,” the White House said.“The proclamation is lawful and essential to protecting our homeland. We look forward to presenting a fuller defense of the proclamation as the pending cases work their way through the courts,” it added.The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, criticized the ruling.“This decision ignores the very real human consequences to American citizens and their families abroad imposed by President Trump’s Muslim Ban 3.0,” said CAIR National Litigation Director Lena Masri.The Supreme Court justices said they expect the lower appeals courts to expedite their decisions, leaving open the possibility that the policy could return to the Supreme Court in yet another legal challenge to the White House.The San Francisco court will hear the case on Wednesday and the Richmond court on Friday.Open-ended banThe ban also covers people from North Korea and a selection of senior officials from Venezuela, but its main focus is travelers from the six mainly Muslim countries.Trump has battled to implement a travel ban since just after he became president on January 20, after having repeatedly promised during last year’s election campaign to ban all Muslims from entering the United States.Those promises have undermined the administration’s argument in a series of court challenges that its policy is not Muslim-focused but rather based on security needs.After Monday’s court ruling the Department of Homeland Security said: “the administration’s common sense travel restrictions on countries that do not meet basic security standards and do not share critical information with us about terrorists and criminals are designed to defend the homeland and keep Americans safe.”The initial ban was to be for 90 days, ostensibly to give the US and the targeted countries time to implement tougher and more thorough vetting procedures for visitors.After rolling court battles, the 90 day ban was finally allowed in June. Meanwhile, vetting for US-bound travelers from every country has intensified.But when the six-country ban expired in September, the administration sought to replace it with an open-ended ban, with Chad added to the list while Sudan was removed, and North Korea and Venezuela appended as well.Immigration and civil rights activists maintain it still essentially targets Muslims, which would violate the US Constitution’s guarantees of religious rights.When Trump last week retweeted three video clips from an extremist British group that vilified Muslims, his critics said it supported the idea that his immigration policies were anti-Muslim.“President Trump’s anti-Muslim prejudice is no secret-he has repeatedly confirmed it, including just last week on Twitter,” said Omar Jadwat, director of the Immigrants’ Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union.“It’s unfortunate that the full ban can move forward for now, but this order does not address the merits of our claims. We continue to stand for freedom, equality, and for those who are unfairly being separated from their loved ones.”
5 min read April 12, 2016 If you are an entrepreneur, the Information Technology industry is a wonderful place to make your living. No matter how large and well financed your competition may be, they all have the same Achilles heel: new ideas and the drive to make them a reality. The innovator’s dilemma is alive and well in high tech.Moore’s Laws govern the field of innovation.All new IT offerings I have experienced over my four decades in the business have followed Geoffrey Moore’s technology adoption curve. The early adopters like to lead the pack in testing the usefulness of new things. Then, assuming these pioneers prove the worth of the new idea, the early majority jump on the bandwagon to ensure that they are benefiting from the innovation, and finally the rest come in when it is no longer deemed safe for one’s career to stay with the dinosaurs. Eventually, even the real laggards have no choice but to move over – typically when their supplier will no longer support the old solutions. And, of course, the process repeats with every crank of the innovation cycle, which is getting shorter with every generation.There is no law that says that the current market leader cannot be the innovator. In fact most new tech inventions are discovered in the labs of the major players. However, their business model constrains their willingness to pursue the innovation with the single-mindedness of a start up.IT inventions typically also share Gordon Moore’s law – they deliver two times the performance at a half of the cost of the generation of technology they replace.The impact of the second Moore’s law is that new technology offerings must generate 2 to 4 times the volume of sales to maintain the revenue stream from the previous generation. This makes it very hard for established players to aggressively drive innovation into the market – it hurts their own income statement, at least in the early part of the cycle. It is a hardy business leader indeed who has the fortitude to cannibalize his/her own business in the hot pursuit of innovation.Related: Is This The Revival Of Artificial Technology?Entrepreneurial advantage and acceptance of risk.Here is where the opportunity for a start-up comes in. The new entrepreneur has no business that can be cannibalized. They have no public shareholders who demand a predictable profit performance curve quarter after quarter. They are backed by venture capital that is used to make large bets on uncertain outcomes. They have the advantage of knowing that the market wants a solution to a business problem if it can be produced at a quarter of the current cost. And with the exception of the microchip technology, the tech industry requires little capital equipment to deliver a new solution. One only needs a great idea, an innovative and imaginative engineer, a financial backer and the energy to call on countless prospects to make them share your vision.It usually takes the established players two or more years and several significant customer losses to recognize the threat of the innovation and begin to respond. Even then, given the lead-time needed to catch up, they often have no alternative but to acquire the innovator’s business.Related: An Opportunity For Growth: Defining Failure In The Context Of EntrepreneurshipSeizing the right opportunity.My own company, Visier, is an interesting case in point. Visier is a cloud-based provider of workforce intelligence solutions, in essence providing insight for management about their workforce and optimization models for their future organization success.Historically, such insight was provided (if at all) by a locally developed set of queries and reports using spreadsheets or data warehouses and business intelligence (BI) tools. The market for spreadsheets and BI tools has developed over 20 years of hard work by a handful of large companies, such as Business Objects (now SAP), Cognos (now IBM), Hyperion (now Oracle) and Microsoft. The total product revenue in this market is about $15B annually, with perhaps another $40B in custom services that are necessary to make the BI technology work.The challenge with this approach is a very high cost (often $10M or more), very long lead-times (often more than 2 years), and a high risk of project failure due to technical complexity. In addition, BI tools require a significant degree of technical competence from the user, which most business people do not possess.We saw an opportunity to approach the problem differently, eliminating the services cost, complexity and the business risk. We developed a solution that delivers accurate business insights and plan alternatives to the hands of the business user, virtually instantly, with no dependency on any user technical skill. Cloud technology, coupled with in-memory and map-reduce processing, a deep knowledge of the application domain, the semantic linking of business terms and big data, and modern custom-designed graphics made the traditional BI tools based approach very vulnerable.In Visier’s case, the combination of these new techniques actually produces a 20:1 cost advantage and significantly reduced time to success over BI, a virtually unassailable advantage.With this kind of economic efficiency, which established player will have the appetite to jump in with both feet?Time will tell. Register Now » Free Webinar | Sept. 9: The Entrepreneur’s Playbook for Going Global Growing a business sometimes requires thinking outside the box. Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.