Recode.net : Uber’s autonomous cars drove 20,354 miles and had to be taken over

Uber’s autonomous cars drove 20,354 miles and had to be taken over at every mile, according to documents
A first look at Uber’s progress.


Some of Uber’s self-driving cars aren’t driving as smoothly as the company hoped they would. Documents circulated throughout the company’s self-driving group, which Recode obtained, gives us a first look at the progress of the ride-hail company’s robot cars in Pennsylvania, Arizona and California.
The top line: Uber’s robot cars are steadily increasing the number of miles driven autonomously. But the figures on rider experience — defined as a combination of how many times drivers have to take over and how smoothly the car drives — are still showing little progress.
It’s still early in Uber’s testing. Alphabet’s self-driving company, Waymo, has been working on its own autonomous tech since 2009, for instance, and while it has vastly improved year over year, the system still sees a handful of what are known as “disengagements”: Basically, when a driver has to take over for the computer.
We’ve reached out to Uber for comment.
Successfully creating self-driving technology has become a crucial factor to Uber’s profitability. It would allow Uber to generate higher sales per ride since it would keep all of the fare. Uber has currently suffered losses in some markets partly because of having to offer subsidies to attract drivers. Computers are cheaper in the long run.

As a whole, Uber’s self-driving system is putting on many more miles than it did in January. Last week, the company’s 43 active cars drove 20,354 miles autonomously, according to the documents. This is only the second time since late December 2016 that its cars have driven more than 20,000 miles in a week.
In January, the cars only drove 5,000 miles. At that point, however, the company only had about 20 active vehicles, mainly in Pittsburgh. By February, the company’s cars were driving themselves around 18,000 miles a week.


Uber passengers took around 930 rides in these autonomous cars in Pittsburgh last week and around 150 rides in Phoenix. To be clear, these vehicles still had a driver at the wheel to take over if needed.

In Pittsburgh, where Uber launched its commercial self-driving pilot in September, the company has been performing around 800 or more UberX trips per week in semi-autonomous mode since the middle of February.
Though Uber has more cars on the road this month than last month and has increased its weekly autonomous mileage — both good developments — the company’s human drivers are still taking over the system more times than they did in January.
Uber uses several different metrics to determine how its systems have progressed. Those include:
  • The average number of miles a car drives itself before a driver has to take over for any reason
  • The average number of miles between “critical” interventions — when a driver has to avoid causing harm, such as hitting pedestrians or causing material property damage
  • The average number of autonomous miles between “bad experiences” — things like jerky motions or hard braking, which are more likely to cause discomfort than damage
For example: During the week ending March 8, the 43 active cars on the road only drove an average of close to 0.8 miles before the safety driver had to take over for one reason or another.

This metric, called miles per intervention, includes all the times drivers have had to take back control from the system over the course of a week.
The reasons for these interventions can vary, but that can include navigating unclear lane markings, the system overshooting a turn or driving in inclement weather. The stat excludes “accidental disengagements, end-of-route disengagements and early takeovers.”
That’s a modest decline from earlier this year. At the end of January, the driver had to take over closer to once per 0.9 miles; Uber hit the one-mile mark the first week of February.


Then there’s what the company calls “critical” interventions. This is how many times a safety driver had to take over to avoid harmful events — incidents that would have resulted in a car hitting a person or causing more than around $5,000 in property damage if a driver didn’t take over.
The good news is the number of miles between these “critical” interventions has recently improved. Last week, the company’s cars drove an average of approximately 200 miles between those types of incidents that required a driver to take over.
While that’s an improvement from the prior week, which was about 114 miles between critical interventions, that progress hasn’t been steady. That means the cars aren’t yet necessarily getting increasingly safer.
At the end of January, drivers only needed to take over after an average of 125 miles driven, but that dropped to about once per 50 miles the first week of February. Those numbers then increased over the following two weeks but dropped again in the first week of March.
Part of that can be attributed to the cars being introduced in new places and on new routes, like parts of Arizona, or having to navigate around objects or road markings they don’t recognize. In short: The systems are still learning.


The cars have also had more “bad experiences” during the week ending on March 8 than in January. The miles driven between things like auto-detected hard decelerations or abrupt car jerks and movement has dropped from more than four miles in January to less than two miles as of last week.
In other words, cars only went an average of two miles without some sort of sudden movement or otherwise bad experience. These incidents have less to do with safety and more to do with the total rider experience and how smoothly the car is able to drive itself. Still.


In another document that specifically analyzed cars in Arizona, Uber’s self-driving team wrote that the rider experience in one part of the state, Scottsdale Road, was “not great.” The cars only drove 0.67 miles between interventions and two miles between so-called bad events.
The company has yet to let riders into vehicles along that route and said they would have to re-evaluate whether that route is ready after the autonomy team worked on some of the bugs, according to the email.
While Uber has yet to publicly report its self-driving miles and disengagements, all the other companies operating in California have had to submit their reports for the last two years.
However, it’s not exactly fruitful to compare the reports side by side. That’s primarily because each company is at a different stage in its self-driving development and has performed different levels of testing on public roads.

Recode.net : Uber’s autonomous cars drove 20,354 miles and had to be taken over

Uber’s autonomous cars drove 20,354 miles and had to be taken over at every mile, according to documents
A first look at Uber’s progress.

Uber’s semi-autonomous Volvos getting ready to be shipped to Arizona
Uber
Some of Uber’s self-driving cars aren’t driving as smoothly as the company hoped they would. Documents circulated throughout the company’s self-driving group, which Recode obtained, gives us a first look at the progress of the ride-hail company’s robot cars in Pennsylvania, Arizona and California.
The top line: Uber’s robot cars are steadily increasing the number of miles driven autonomously. But the figures on rider experience — defined as a combination of how many times drivers have to take over and how smoothly the car drives — are still showing little progress.
It’s still early in Uber’s testing. Alphabet’s self-driving company, Waymo, has been working on its own autonomous tech since 2009, for instance, and while it has vastly improved year over year, the system still sees a handful of what are known as “disengagements”: Basically, when a driver has to take over for the computer.
We’ve reached out to Uber for comment.
Successfully creating self-driving technology has become a crucial factor to Uber’s profitability. It would allow Uber to generate higher sales per ride since it would keep all of the fare. Uber has currently suffered losses in some markets partly because of having to offer subsidies to attract drivers. Computers are cheaper in the long run.

As a whole, Uber’s self-driving system is putting on many more miles than it did in January. Last week, the company’s 43 active cars drove 20,354 miles autonomously, according to the documents. This is only the second time since late December 2016 that its cars have driven more than 20,000 miles in a week.
In January, the cars only drove 5,000 miles. At that point, however, the company only had about 20 active vehicles, mainly in Pittsburgh. By February, the company’s cars were driving themselves around 18,000 miles a week.


Uber passengers took around 930 rides in these autonomous cars in Pittsburgh last week and around 150 rides in Phoenix. To be clear, these vehicles still had a driver at the wheel to take over if needed.

In Pittsburgh, where Uber launched its commercial self-driving pilot in September, the company has been performing around 800 or more UberX trips per week in semi-autonomous mode since the middle of February.
Though Uber has more cars on the road this month than last month and has increased its weekly autonomous mileage — both good developments — the company’s human drivers are still taking over the system more times than they did in January.
Uber uses several different metrics to determine how its systems have progressed. Those include:
  • The average number of miles a car drives itself before a driver has to take over for any reason
  • The average number of miles between “critical” interventions — when a driver has to avoid causing harm, such as hitting pedestrians or causing material property damage
  • The average number of autonomous miles between “bad experiences” — things like jerky motions or hard braking, which are more likely to cause discomfort than damage
For example: During the week ending March 8, the 43 active cars on the road only drove an average of close to 0.8 miles before the safety driver had to take over for one reason or another.

This metric, called miles per intervention, includes all the times drivers have had to take back control from the system over the course of a week.
The reasons for these interventions can vary, but that can include navigating unclear lane markings, the system overshooting a turn or driving in inclement weather. The stat excludes “accidental disengagements, end-of-route disengagements and early takeovers.”
That’s a modest decline from earlier this year. At the end of January, the driver had to take over closer to once per 0.9 miles; Uber hit the one-mile mark the first week of February.


Then there’s what the company calls “critical” interventions. This is how many times a safety driver had to take over to avoid harmful events — incidents that would have resulted in a car hitting a person or causing more than around $5,000 in property damage if a driver didn’t take over.
The good news is the number of miles between these “critical” interventions has recently improved. Last week, the company’s cars drove an average of approximately 200 miles between those types of incidents that required a driver to take over.
While that’s an improvement from the prior week, which was about 114 miles between critical interventions, that progress hasn’t been steady. That means the cars aren’t yet necessarily getting increasingly safer.
At the end of January, drivers only needed to take over after an average of 125 miles driven, but that dropped to about once per 50 miles the first week of February. Those numbers then increased over the following two weeks but dropped again in the first week of March.
Part of that can be attributed to the cars being introduced in new places and on new routes, like parts of Arizona, or having to navigate around objects or road markings they don’t recognize. In short: The systems are still learning.


The cars have also had more “bad experiences” during the week ending on March 8 than in January. The miles driven between things like auto-detected hard decelerations or abrupt car jerks and movement has dropped from more than four miles in January to less than two miles as of last week.
In other words, cars only went an average of two miles without some sort of sudden movement or otherwise bad experience. These incidents have less to do with safety and more to do with the total rider experience and how smoothly the car is able to drive itself. Still.


In another document that specifically analyzed cars in Arizona, Uber’s self-driving team wrote that the rider experience in one part of the state, Scottsdale Road, was “not great.” The cars only drove 0.67 miles between interventions and two miles between so-called bad events.
The company has yet to let riders into vehicles along that route and said they would have to re-evaluate whether that route is ready after the autonomy team worked on some of the bugs, according to the email.
While Uber has yet to publicly report its self-driving miles and disengagements, all the other companies operating in California have had to submit their reports for the last two years.
However, it’s not exactly fruitful to compare the reports side by side. That’s primarily because each company is at a different stage in its self-driving development and has performed different levels of testing on public roads.

>>> Tiffany & Co beats by $0.07, reports revs in-line; guides FY18 towards high

--> TIF +1.36% low volume
Tiffany & Co beats by $0.07, reports revs in-line; guides FY18 towards high end of expectations
  • Reports Q4 (Jan) earnings of $1.45 per share, excluding non-recurring items, $0.07 better than the Capital IQ Consensus of $1.38; revenues rose 1.3% year/year to $1.23 bln vs the $1.22 bln Capital IQ Consensus.
  • Comparable store sales were unchanged from the prior year. On a constant-exchange-rate basis, worldwide net sales rose 2% and comparable store sales were unchanged from the prior year.
  • Reported holiday comps down 2% on Jan 17.
    • In the Americas, total sales declined 5% to $1.8 billion in the full year and 3% in the fourth quarter to $587 million, and comparable store sales declined 6% and 2%, respectively.
    • In the Asia-Pacific region, total sales of $1 billion in the full year were ~equal to the prior year and total sales of $284 million in the fourth quarter were 9% above the prior year, benefitting from the opening of new stores, with comparable store sales declining 9% and 2%, respectively.
    • In Japan, total sales rose 12% to $604 million in the full year and 15% to $185 million in the fourth quarter; comparable store sales increased 16% and 19%, respectively, while wholesale sales declined in both periods.
    • In Europe, total sales of $458 million in the full year and $146 million in the fourth quarter were 10% and 7%, respectively, below the prior year and comparable store sales declined 14% and 9%, respectively.
  • Mgmt's FY17 outlook calls for: (i) worldwide net sales increasing over the prior year by a low-single-digit percentage (consensus +1.9%) and by a mid-single-digit percentage on a constant-exchange-rate basis and (ii) net earnings per diluted share increasing by a high-single-digit percentage over 2016's earnings per diluted share of $3.55 and by a mid-single-digit-percentage over 2016's earnings per diluted share (excluding charges) of $3.75 (+5% to $3.94 vs. $3.86 consensus). These expectations are approximations and are based on the Company's plans and assumptions, including: (i) worldwide gross retail square footage increasing 3%, net through 11 store openings, nine relocations and six closings; (ii) operating margin above the prior year entirely due to an expected increase in gross margin, with SG&A expenses increasing slightly faster than sales growth; (iii) interest and other expenses, net of ~$40 million; (iv) an effective income tax rate consistent with the prior year; (v) the U.S. dollar in 2017 stronger overall than other foreign currencies on a year-over-year basis; and (vi) minimal benefit to net earnings per diluted share from share repurchases..

WWD : Aspesi CEO Charts New Course

Aspesi CEO Charts New Course
A more structured company and digital investments will contribute to the expansion of the brand around the world.

MILAN — “We want to switch on the light,” said Aspesi chief executive officer Fabio Gnocchi about bringing attention to the Italian brand and expanding it globally.
Italian private equity fund Armònia SGR in December acquired a majority stake in Aspesi, which will celebrate its 50th anniversary in 2019, and the closing is expected at the end of April. Founder Alberto Aspesi maintains a 10 percent stake in the company, which is known for its understated collections and, in particular, its classic lightweight down jackets.
Sitting in the expansive yet unpretentious 8,640-square-foot store on Milan’s Via Montenapoleone, Gnocchi attributed the acquisition and his own arrival at the company to a shared passion for the Aspesi product.
Armònia, which made the investment through the Armònia Italy fund, was founded in 2015 by Sigieri Diaz Pallavicini, Alessandro Grimaldi, Luca Rovati, Francesco Chiappetta and Fabrizio Di Amato. This is Armònia’s first acquisition and Gnocchi said the investors all appreciate Aspesi’s expertise with and research into fabrics and his sophisticated taste. Gnocchi, previously commercial director at Brunello Cucinelli and, before that, a longtime executive at Etro, talked about a web of longstanding friendly relations between himself, Aspesi and patriarch Gimmo Etro. “On Saturday morning, you can find them both here in the store discussing materials and designs,” said Gnocchi, in his affable way.
Etro and Aspesi also share a strong interest for the arts, evidenced, in the case of the latter, by pieces by Mimmo Paladino and Mario Merz in the flagship. The boutique also carries pieces by another friend of Aspesi’s, former Moschino creative director Rossella Jardini, and “divertissements [distractions], whatever Alberto likes,” said Gnocchi, such as Aesop products.
Speaking of Moschino, Gnocchi reminisced that the late Franco Moschino designed for the Aspesi brand in the Seventies. “The first Aspesi down jacket was called the Moschino model because Alberto designed it for Franco,” said Gnocchi.

Fabio Gnocchi Courtesy Image

After selling a 50 percent stake of the company in 2003 to 2G Investimenti, succeeded by Investitori Associati in 2008, Aspesi bought back his company in 2013. Aspesi was not looking at opening up to another fund until Armònia and Gnocchi came along. Without a second generation in the company to ensure its future, Aspesi, who is 72, is allowing Gnocchi to create a structure to support the international expansion of the brand.
The founder is still actively involved in the product design, supported by longtime collaborator Lawrence Steele.
Aspesi sales in 2015 totaled 42 million euros, or $46.6 million at average exchange rates, and Gnocchi’s goal is to double revenues in three to five years. “It’s doable and without stretching the brand,” said Gnocchi, who emphasized the integrity, consistency and focus of the label through the years. “It’s very recognizable. With so much product in the market, if you are not consistent, you are not interesting.”

Italy is the brand’s main market, representing 70 percent of total sales. While acknowledging the importance of building Aspesi’s business outside the country, Gnocchi saw this in a positive way. “If it works in Italy, it works outside, too,” he said. The company’s headquarters is in Legnano, a one-hour drive from Milan.
Gnocchi is tasked with developing an expanded supply chain, merchandising, logistics, communication and technology. For fall 2017, he will launch a new e-store with The Level Group, which partnered with Aspesi six years ago, strengthening the brand online and establishing an omnichannel service.
The executive plans to first grow Aspesi’s wholesale channel, which accounts for 60 percent of revenues, and its retail division around the world. There are eight stores in Italy and three in Madrid, Munich and Berlin.
Women’s wear accounts for 65 percent of revenues.
The target is more mature markets first, more prone to appreciate “a no-logo, sophisticated, Milanese product,” said Gnocchi.

(BofA-ML) The Flow Show - Fed Lady just clearing her throat

Fed Lady just clearing her throat

Great Rotation flows: 1st bond outflows in 12 weeks ($0.1bn), led by largest HY bond redemptions more than 2 years ($5.7bn); contrast with strong inflows equities ($14.5bn this week); YTD equity inflows of $97bn top bond inflows of $79bn.

>>> Asset Class Flows
- Bonds: first outflows in 12 weeks ($0.1bn)
- Equities: 11 straight weeks of inflows ($14.5bn);the largest ETF inflows YTD ($19.7bn) vs $5.1bn mutual fund outflows
- Precious metals: $0.3bn outflows, the largest in 9 weeks

>>> Equity Flows
- EM: largest outflow in 11 weeks ($1bn)
- US: largest inflow in 13 weeks ($12bn)
- Japan: 10 straight weeks of inflows ($1.2bn)
- Europe: modest $0.2bn outflow
- By sector: largest inflows to US value funds in 16 weeks ($2.8bn) vs $0.3bn outflows from US growth funds; inflows to
materials ($0.4bn, 9 of last 10 weeks), utilities ($0.4bn), tech ($0.3bn) and energy ($0.2bn); outflows from financials ($0.1bn), real estate ($1bn, largest in 11 weeks), consumer ($0.1bn), and healthcare ($0.2bn).

>>> Fixed Income Flows
- Largest HY bond fund outflows in more than 2 years ($5.7bn)
- 12 straight weeks of IG bond inflows ($3.1bn)
- 7 straight weeks of inflows to EM debt funds ($0.7bn)
- 18 straight weeks of inflows to bank loan funds ($0.9bn)
- 14 straight weeks of inflows to TIPS funds ($0.2bn)
- First inflows to govt/tsy funds in 7 weeks ($0.1bn)

(BFM) Safran se donne un mois pour revoir son offre sur Zodiac

Safran se donne un mois pour revoir son offre sur Zodiac - http://bit.ly/2mze1Ux

Le groupe lance une étude approfondie des comptes de Zodiac. Le prix du rachat devrait être revu à la baisse fin avril.

La tension est à son comble. L’avertissement sur résultats lancé mardi par Zodiac a jeté un pavé dans la mare. La société est en négociations exclusives depuis deux mois avec Safran qui souhaite la racheter. La direction de Safran ne décolère pas de cette dixième révision des profits en deux ans. "Après des mois de déni, Zodiac avait reconnu ses problèmes industriels en novembre dernier, explique un proche du groupe. On pensait qu’ils avaient enfin purgé le problème".

La confiance établie entre la direction des deux groupes a été sérieusement écornée. D’autant que cette alerte sur résultat est lourde. En novembre, Zodiac prévoyait que son bénéfice opérationnel progresserait d’au moins 10% en 2017. Désormais, il assure qu’il baissera de 10%... Dans ces conditions, Safran a indiqué qu’il "intégrera dans ses discussions les conséquences de ces faits nouveaux". L’offre de 10 milliards, à 29,5 euros par action, sera donc revue à la baisse. De combien? Personne ne le sait mais les marchés ont fixé le cours à 23 euros… La baisse du prix sera forte.

Pas de décision avant le 20 avril

Selon les informations de BFM Business, elle devrait intervenir fin avril, avant de signer avec les syndicats les procédures sociales de l’opération qui sont engageantes. Et en tout cas, rien ne se fera avant les résultats semestriels de Zodiac, le 20 avril, qui seront déterminants. D’ici là, Safran ne va pas traîner. Dès aujourd’hui est lancée une étude approfondie des comptes de Zodiac. Un exercice périlleux pour une société cotée qui n’a pas le droit de donner plus d’informations à une société qu’à une autre. Par avocats interposés, Safran posera une multitude de questions pour tenter d’avoir une idée plus claire de la situation de Zodiac. "On va en savoir plus alors que jusqu’ici, la direction de Zodiac n’était pas très transparente", ajoute une source proche de Safran.

Les discussions se limitaient au président du directoire Olivier Zarrouati et au président du conseil de surveillance Didier Domange. Les familles actionnaires de Zodiac qui détiennent 24% de Zodiac, semblent tout aussi choquées par les mauvaises nouvelles de sa direction. "Ils ont enfin touché le fond, rassure un proche de l’opération. Ils deviendront actionnaires de Safran et n’ont pas intérêt à ce que cela tourne mal". Mais désormais, le rapport de force est clairement en faveur de Safran qui va avoir toute la latitude pour négocier. Le groupe a réitéré sa volonté stratégique de racheter Zodiac. "Nous répétons aussi qu’on ne fera pas cette opération à n’importe quel prix, explique un proche du groupe. Et là, on a une excellente occasion de revenir dessus". Les actionnaires de Zodiac vont payer la facture de leurs déboires.