(TheVerge) Apple pushing music labels to kill free Spotify streaming ahead of Be

Link to article : http://bit.ly/1DPdPl8

Apple pushing music labels to kill free Spotify streaming ahead of Beats relaunch

Aggressive tactics from the music giant have garnered scrutiny from the Department of Justice

The Department of Justice is looking closely into Apple’s business practices in relation to its upcoming music streaming service, according to multiple sources. The Verge has learned that Apple has been pushing major music labels to force streaming services like Spotify to abandon their free tiers, which will dramatically reduce the competition for Apple’s upcoming offering. DOJ officials have already interviewed high-ranking music industry executives about Apple’s business habits.

Apple has been using its considerable power in the music industry to stop the music labels from renewing Spotify’s license to stream music through its free tier. Spotify currently has 60 million listeners, but only 15 million of them are paid users. Getting the music labels to kill the freemium tiers from Spotify and others could put Apple in prime position to grab a large swath of new users when it launches its own streaming service, which is widely expected to feature a considerable amount of exclusive content. "All the way up to Tim Cook, these guys are cutthroat," one music industry source said.


Sources also indicated that Apple offered to pay YouTube’s music licensing fee to Universal Music Group if the label stopped allowing its songs on YouTube. Apple is seemingly trying to clear a path before its streaming service launches, which is expected to debut at WWDC in June. If Apple convinces the labels to stop licensing freemium services from Spotify and YouTube, it could take out a significant portion of business from its two largest music competitors.


Apple has an antitrust monitor on its campus, courtesy of the DOJ after Apple was found guilty in an ebook antitrust case last year (Apple is appealing the decision), but it's not clear if that monitor is involved in this latest situation. The DOJ isn’t the only entity looking into Apple’s dealings with the music industry, either. According to the New York Post, Apple is being probed by the European Union’s Competition Commission to find out if the company is working with the labels to rid the industry of freemium services.

Apple declined to comment.

WWD : Can Elio Leoni Sceti Rebuild Coty?

Financial analysts and retailers await the first moves by Coty’s newly minted chief executive officer, Elio Leoni Sceti. Will he be the one who can restore the company to its former prominence in the fragrance and beauty industries, they ask?

Sceti, who will join Coty in July, was most recently ceo of Iglo Group, Europe’s leading frozen-brand food company (the company behind the Birds Eye brand), raising some eyebrows if there’s synergy between frozen foods, fragrance and foundations.

Wall Street’s View: Although noting Sceti is light in beauty experience, financial analysts think he has the right vision. “He’s known for implementing change to better align in the digital era by emphasizing digital marketing initiatives and brand investment productivity,” said Stephanie S. Wissink, senior research analyst, Piper Jaffray & Co. It doesn’t hurt that he knows his way around acquisitions — something the street expects from Coty on the horizon. On the day his new position was announced, Iglo was sold to Nomad Holdings Ltd.

Reestablishing Retail Connections: Retailers said Sceti’s first chore should be repairing ruptured buyer-seller relations. He also has to convince chain executives he’s the right man for the job. “Have they ever thought of getting someone from the industry to do the job,” one buyer questioned upon his appointment.

The trade’s major lament is that its Coty brands are “slow to go to market” in a business where flankers are not enough to move the sales needle. That said, they are willing to give him a chance, noting his ties to the music industry that bode well for further celebrity scent launches and his past experience at Procter & Gamble and Reckitt Benckiser.

FT : Warren Buffett versus the hedge funds

Warren Buffett versus the hedge funds

Investors locked in to lower expectations and declining returns

With three years to go, Warren Buffett is comfortably winning his charity bet that a low-cost index tracker would trounce a portfolio of hedge funds over ten years.
Returns from the S&P 500 index fund is beating a portfolio of funds assembled by hedge fund manager Protégé Partners by 63.5 per cent to 19.6 per cent, according to a slide Mr Buffett presented at Berkshire Hathaway’s annual meeting at the weekend.

“The hedge fund managers have done very well over that period,” Mr Buffett said, noting that, on a notional $1bn portfolio, they would have made $20m in management fees “just for coming to the office. The investors in the hedge funds have paid a very big price.”
So why is money still pouring into the hedge fund industry? The answer is that investors do not think of hedge funds as an alternative to stocks, but more often now as an alternative to bonds. Mr Buffett’s comparison is no longer a fair one — and the consequence is that the industry’s meagre returns will not improve any time soon.
The latest big name investor to tout hedge funds as an alternative to bonds is Ben Inker, co-head of asset allocation at GMO in Boston.
GMO despairs of finding value in fixed income, now that even the longest dated government bonds yield less than expected inflation in Europe, Japan and UK, and barely match inflation in the US. With yields so low and prices so high, bonds no longer fit the bill as the low-risk cushion in an investment portfolio. Conservative hedge funds are a “superior anchor” for a portfolio, Mr Inker wrote.
For an industry in something of an existential crisis after years of weak returns, this is not a particularly edifying justification for its existence: “Why buy hedge funds? Because everything else sucks.”
Nonetheless, another $18bn flowed into hedge funds globally in the first quarter of 2015, according to research group HFR, taking the industry’s total assets to $2.94tn. This despite investors telling surveys that hedge fund returns have missed expectations almost every year since the financial crisis.
With a few exceptions, notably Californian pension fund Calpers, which axed its allocation to hedge funds, investors have responded instead by lowering expectations.
This makes sense if they are thinking about hedge funds as an alternative to bonds, where the outlook for future returns is poor to downright scary.
The phenomenon has an interesting mirror in the retail investment space, and the rise of so-called “unconstrained” bond funds, which are being marketed as an alternative to traditional fixed income funds whose value may be dented by rising interest rates. These mutual funds give managers wide flexibility to make bets, including negative bets, across the financial markets, making them, in effect, mini-hedge funds.
The marketing pitch of the hedge fund industry urges investors to look through the current malaise and promises that absolute return strategies will come into their own when equity markets stumble and rising interest rates roil the bond market. Commercial real estate and infrastructure may be more obvious substitutes for bonds, since they typically yield cash from rents and fees, but these are illiquid assets that are much harder to access than hedge funds.
Hedge funds seem to be becoming more “bond-like”. An intriguing piece from JPMorgan last week outlined the declining volatility of returns at the average hedge fund.
At 3.2 per cent, the rolling average three-year volatility of the HFRI and Credit Suisse Tremont hedge fund indices has fallen to the same level as that of the Barclays Aggregate index of the US bond market.
What might explain such a development? Certainly the increasing institutionalisation of the industry. Hedge funds cater now largely to institutional investors, such as pension funds, whose officers all have nervous trustees to answer to, and they win or lose business at the whim of consultants, who are notoriously intolerant of periods of poor performance.
And then there is the question of hedge funds as a fixed income substitute. Hedge fund managers respond to supply and demand just like everybody else. If investors are looking to them to provide the kind of conservative portfolio cushion that used to be provided by bonds, then they are likely to invest more conservatively in order to win and to keep business.
The result is that hedge funds and their investors are locked in a downward spiral of lower expectations and declining returns. Mr Buffett’s bet looks safe.

>>> Tyson Foods on call --> Stock opened +1.4%

Tyson Foods on call

Domestic demand for protein remains strong. Consumers are spending more on food (less on fuel).
  • Prepared food segment seeing top and bottom line growth
  • Co saw $20 mln operating income impact from West Cost ports/Avian Flu; port impact should abate. Turkey and table eggs impacted by Avian (bird) flu; loss of exports, leg quarters
  • Have seen bottom in beef supply cycle
  • Pork demand has been soft
  • Sees 10% EPS growth next year