Actually, SEC rules require that all key supplier and customer relationships be disclosed on Form 10-K (and their identities). You'll notice that most consumer products companies disclose Wal-Mart as a key customer (most do about 1/3 of their business with them). The distinction here is whether or not the customer is material (i.e., makes a difference to the average reader). Given that Gator only has about 45 advertisers, I'd be willing to bet that they've got a few that contribute a lot of money to their sales that will have to be disclosed with the SEC.
Although it makes sense not to compete with your customers - most of IBM/HP/Dell's customers are not making a choice between buying a PC and an Xbox. They're two completely different products with different functions.
I know that this will sound quite polemical in the slashdot environment, but why should we continue to funnel billions upon billions of dollars into a space program when there are so many other (more important) causes the government could be spending that money? (I know many of you will reply the Iraq war is another waste - but lets stick to space for now).
I agree that the data we have collected from Mars is interesting from a scientific point of view, but is this really going to change the face of science? It seems like we launch all of these space missions for marginal scientific benefit at best. Putting human lives in danger to send them to a planet we are pretty darn sure is devoid of life seems quite silly to me. We keep going there and basically find out that Mars is red, has some rocks and soil, and may have had water eons ago. This info does not lead me to a conclusion that further investigatory efforts are necessary.
Instead, politicians (some well-intentioned, some filled with hubris) want to pour more money in the space program. Granted, this may help the job market and the economy, but there are a myriad of other "terrestrial" issues that need to be taken care of first - Health Care, Welfare Reform, Free Speech, etc.
While I don't believe that a lawsuit is the appropriate response to this...I can at least understand where this guy is coming from. As a CPA myself, having your clients (and potential clients) being able to trust you and that your credentials are on the up and up is absolutely critical. As the use of google has become more and more ubiquitous, typing in a local CPAs name and turning up results alleging misdeeds, fraud, etc. certainly does not help to give "warm and fuzzy" feelings to clients.
An IT director/manager or HR manager should be concerned with hiring the best person for the job, period. If that person happens to be 14, 24, or 64, so be it.
That being said, the comment that this guy wants to hire younger coders, admins, whatever, shouldn't necessarily be dismissed as ageism. Younger people are certainly less experienced, but they may bring fresh ideas with them when they are hired, which can only help to promote creativity and innovation among everyone, including the more senior members of the IT team.
If, as an IT director, you feel that your department is suffering from the same kinds of solutions from the same types of people, than perhaps biasing your searches to younger candidates isn't necessarily a bad idea. Same idea applies if you have a primarily YOUNG workforce - it may be time to get an experienced member on the team.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, SEC rules require that all key supplier and customer relationships be disclosed on Form 10-K (and their identities). You'll notice that most consumer products companies disclose Wal-Mart as a key customer (most do about 1/3 of their business with them). The distinction here is whether or not the customer is material (i.e., makes a difference to the average reader). Given that Gator only has about 45 advertisers, I'd be willing to bet that they've got a few that contribute a lot of money to their sales that will have to be disclosed with the SEC.
Although it makes sense not to compete with your customers - most of IBM/HP/Dell's customers are not making a choice between buying a PC and an Xbox. They're two completely different products with different functions.
I know that this will sound quite polemical in the slashdot environment, but why should we continue to funnel billions upon billions of dollars into a space program when there are so many other (more important) causes the government could be spending that money? (I know many of you will reply the Iraq war is another waste - but lets stick to space for now).
I agree that the data we have collected from Mars is interesting from a scientific point of view, but is this really going to change the face of science? It seems like we launch all of these space missions for marginal scientific benefit at best. Putting human lives in danger to send them to a planet we are pretty darn sure is devoid of life seems quite silly to me. We keep going there and basically find out that Mars is red, has some rocks and soil, and may have had water eons ago. This info does not lead me to a conclusion that further investigatory efforts are necessary.
Instead, politicians (some well-intentioned, some filled with hubris) want to pour more money in the space program. Granted, this may help the job market and the economy, but there are a myriad of other "terrestrial" issues that need to be taken care of first - Health Care, Welfare Reform, Free Speech, etc.
While I don't believe that a lawsuit is the appropriate response to this...I can at least understand where this guy is coming from. As a CPA myself, having your clients (and potential clients) being able to trust you and that your credentials are on the up and up is absolutely critical. As the use of google has become more and more ubiquitous, typing in a local CPAs name and turning up results alleging misdeeds, fraud, etc. certainly does not help to give "warm and fuzzy" feelings to clients.
Companies actually get MORE of a tax benefit for keeping work in the US.
Example:
Joe X in US gets paid $10/hr for 10 hours = $100
Bob Y in India gets paid $1/hr for 10 hrs = $10
Company A's tax rate is 30%:
- They get a $30 tax deduction for Joe X
- They get a $1 tax deduction for Bob Y
Although companies certainly have several other tax advantages to moving things offshore, this isn't one of them.
An IT director/manager or HR manager should be concerned with hiring the best person for the job, period. If that person happens to be 14, 24, or 64, so be it.
That being said, the comment that this guy wants to hire younger coders, admins, whatever, shouldn't necessarily be dismissed as ageism. Younger people are certainly less experienced, but they may bring fresh ideas with them when they are hired, which can only help to promote creativity and innovation among everyone, including the more senior members of the IT team.
If, as an IT director, you feel that your department is suffering from the same kinds of solutions from the same types of people, than perhaps biasing your searches to younger candidates isn't necessarily a bad idea. Same idea applies if you have a primarily YOUNG workforce - it may be time to get an experienced member on the team.